Reply #20: That's a good word 'humaniterrorism'!

[sabrina 1]

They have to destroy everything because then they have to bring in all those 'conractors' to profit from 'rebuilding', like KB&R and Halliburton who are already there. I guess this is how they calmed Halliburton, who complained about the interference with the contracts they already had. Probably told them 'not to worry, we're going to make some more work for you'.

Same formula as Iraq. First you destroy it, then rather than give the work to the people who live there you contract it out to Western contractors. Then, those contractors will need 'protection'. That is where Blackwater and Caci come in. Not 'boots on the ground' in the real sense of the ward but a sneaky way to keep control over the 'democracies' we are creating.

NATO never KILLS anyone, get real. There is sometimes, unfortunately what is known as 'collateral damage' but they 'don't do body counts' as everyone should remember. These are not people to them. And if they are killed by NATO's humanitarian bombs, they will simply slap the label 'terorist' on them. I saw enough photos of those 'terrorists' from Iraq, thanks to people like Dahr Jamail, many of whom were babies. Tiny terrorists.

I was looking at some video of Libya last night before NATO bombed it. It was a pretty nice place. And it seems that in Libya under Qadaffi owning a home was a 'right'. So when a couple got married, the state gave them part of the money to buy a house. Healthcare was free, education also. And when they got married Libyans were given money by the state.

I have a feeling Libyans will not be getting all that good stuff anymore. From now, they will live the way we do. No HC, no money to buy a home, no education unless you're rich. Just like Iraq.

We have given democracy a bad name. I remember when Egyptian protesters were asked what kind of government they wanted, assuming the answer would be 'democracy' and they said 'we do not want a US style democracy, like Iraq.