Libya, another Iraq another lie

this is not an argument, i watched the news, flicking between bbc and russiatoday for about 3 hours and i am disgusted at the reporting of the bbc, at least the russians try to keep a non biased view

Oh please enlighten me, what is the secret agenda this time?

im not a conspiracy theorist, what a ridiculous use of words btw. I am a truth'er, i believe in the truth. it angers me to see lies and i want evidence of things that are presented to me that may be false.

i have never said that those pilots never had those orders, but they did not actually do it did they, and that they are all supposedly french....


most of these bombings have not been verified and these media outlets stressed that.

The Russians try to keep a non biased view??? This statement just shows your lack of intelligence and knowledge. Russia's media system is heavily censored by the government, incredibly biased and nr 153 on the freedom of press index.

Do some research first before spouting utter bs. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_the_press_in_the_Russian_Federation


the best source would be al jazeera, certainly not russia. how laughable.

Of course intervening in Libya serves an ulterior motive for the West because had it not, they would've intervened to stop this in Bahrain. Either way, Gaddafi is insane and he should've ended this along time ago. He could've kept his billions, didn't have a looming ICC warrant on his head and most of all spared Libyan lives.

i don't believe it is our place to get involved. we've already made stupid decisions when it comes to Libya (Blair being a hypocrite...) so now we're surprised that they're going crazy with the **** that we sold them.
we're all friendly when it benefits us and not when it doesn't. wading in and killing them won't help. it's not our place and we shouldn't be there.
i will not support our evolvement in this because sometimes countries need to sort themselves out...

people are being killed all over the world. we can't go in everywhere!!

if you read my post originale you would see that i was referring to RT news, in particular their reporting over the last few days on libya. not the entirity of the russian media. i watched rt and they had views from both sides good journalism.
the bbc had very bad journalism according to them spurious reports were facts.

also consider that when saddam invaded kuwait, the pricess of kuwait who lived in washington appeared on the bbc acting pretending she was a kuwait nurse in kuwait , she lied by saying that iraq troops killed babies by smashing them off of walls.A complete LIE.

You're not a "truth'er", you're just some retard with a delusion of grandeur who is searching for conspiracies that don't exist

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8350862/Western-arms-helping-Libyan-forces-massacre-anti-regime-rebels-EU-documents-reveal.html

How come all of this weaponry was authorised to go to Gaddafi in 2009?

Had we not worked out in the past 40 years what he was like? Did we think he was going to use this weaponry for peace-keeping missions?

Well you said " the russians." But RT news is still far from unbiased, you really need to do your research, it is known for propaganda, false reporting and being influenced by the government. So your claims are hereby dismissed.

I dont see how the bbc was responsible for someone else lying. It isnt unusual that people fool journalists and lie and has most certainly happened to every single news outlet. If a news outlet intentionally spreads false information that is a different issue.

I dont watch BBC news and havent paid attention to their Libya reporting although i am pretty sure that it will be more truthful than that of RT, since they have higher standards and less regulations.

As i said before though Al Jazeera is the best one though.

Funny how you seem to focus on the lies by western governments but refuse to acknowledge the lies and delusions by the Gaddafi regimes, lying about cease fires, al qaida attacking his country and the rebels having had drugs in their drinks.

.

Libya another country with oil.

since when does a no-fly zone involve destroying tanks?

where is the evidence of the apparent massacres of unarmed civilians, where are the videos of libyan bombs dropped from jets killing people, why did i only find out today than the rebels also have jets, where are all the pictures of the government jets,why is the news so biased, why did france recognise basically the libyan version of the ira as a government,where is all the journalistic evidence???.

And why did the SAS land in a mi6 agents back garden in a helicopter dressed in black with a bag full of explosives and then claim that it was a diplomatic mission when they were captured?


Also why all the focus on libya, what about all the other countries like bahrain and saudi arabia.

This is clearly a plan to take out libya no matter the cost in lives, while they still can.

I'm fed up with people saying that it is inconsistent to attack Gadaffi but not the other fascists in the East and therefore we shouldn't intervene. But this is absolute bull****. The inconsistency isn't an argument against intervening in Libya but for intervening in those other fascist states. Unfortunately The West is already overstretched and so we must pick our battles carefully.

Because the no fly zone is to protect civilians, destroying tanks does this. Idiot.

was that verified?

i doubt they would get jets to fire on unarmed protestors, they can barely get a plane off the ground without it blowing up.

gadaffi may be crazy and he may order terrible things but did the paratroopers not kill 14 brittish protestors in the 70s, i am complaining about the lies the governments like the uk and france usa etc spout just so they can invade places or change dictators.

look you moron, "no-fly zone" means no flying. it does not mean killing libyans. in a civil war libya has every right to use tanks on rebels.

who are we to decide that the rebels are in the right, and then bomb libyan tanks killing people.