"Libya rejoices as Khadafy meets with a violent end" by Kareem Fahim and Rick Gladstone New York Times / October 21, 2011
Moammar Gadhafi, the former Libyan strongman who fled into hiding after an armed uprising toppled his regime two months ago, met a violent and vengeful death Thursday in the hands of rebel fighters who stormed his final stronghold in Sirte, his Mediterranean hometown. At least one of his sons was also killed.
--nomore--"
"Khadafy, architect of a reign of terror, defiant to the end" by Neil MacFarquhar New York Times / October 21, 2011
Moammar Khadafy, the erratic, provocative dictator who ruled Libya for 42 years, crushing opponents at home while cultivating the wardrobe and looks befitting a rock star, met a vengeful and violent death yesterday in the hands of the Libyan forces that drove him from power.
In death, as in life, his circumstances proved startling, with jerky video images showing him captured, bloody, and disheveled, but alive. A separate clip showed his half-naked upper body, with eyes staring vacantly and what appeared to be a gunshot wound to the head, as jubilant fighters fired into the air. In a third video, posted on YouTube, excited fighters hovered around his lifeless-looking body, posing for photographs and yanking his limp head up and down by the hair.
Throughout his rule, Khadafy, 69, sanctioned grisly violence and frequent bedlam, even as he sought to leverage his nation’s immense oil wealth into an outsize role on the world stage....
As his dominion over Libya crumbled with surprising speed, Khadafy refused to countenance the fact that most Libyans despised him. He placed blame for the uprising on foreign intervention....
I certainly believe that in this case.
After the US-led invasion of Iraq, Khadafy announced that Libya was abandoning its pursuit of unconventional weapons, including a covert nascent nuclear program, ushering in a new era of relations with the West.
Lot of good that did him.
But in Libya, he ruled through an ever smaller circle of advisers, including his sons, destroying any institution that might challenge him.
By the time he was done, Libya had no parliament, no unified military command, no political parties, no unions, no civil society, and no nongovernmental organizations. His ministries were hollow, with the notable exception of the state oil company....
Yes, having the highest standard of living on the continent and bringing water to the desert meant nothing.
At least once a decade, Khadafy fomented shocking violence that terrorized Libyans.
In the late 1970s and early ’80s, he eliminated even mild critics through public trials and executions. Kangaroo courts were staged on soccer fields or basketball courts, where the accused were interrogated, often begging for their lives. The events were televised, so that no Libyan would miss the point.
The bodies of one group of students hanged in downtown Tripoli’s main square were left to rot for a week, opposition figures said, and traffic was rerouted to force cars to pass by.
“He deliberately tried to create a campaign that would terrorize the population, that would traumatize them to such an extent that they would never think of expressing their thoughts politically or socially,’’ said Hisham Matar, author of “In the Country of Men,’’ a novel that depicts devastation of life under Khadafy.
9/11, Americans, 9/11.
In the 1990s, faced with growing Islamist opposition, Khadafy bombed towns in eastern Libya, and his henchmen were widely believed to have opened fire on prisoners in Tripoli’s Abu Salim prison, killing about 1,200.
Khadafy survived countless coup and assassination attempts and cracked down harshly afterward, alienating important Libyan tribes. He imported soldiers from his misadventures in places like Sudan, Chad, and Liberia....
--more--"
Let's hear from a different voice:
"Gaddafi’s biggest crime was a government-issued value-based currency, the gold dinar, which is a major threat to the power and wealth of private central bankers who love to loan out the public currency at interest.
Oddly enough, the United States fought a revolution to free itself from that very system when the private Bank of England lobbied King George III to pass the Currency Act, which ordered all commerce in the colonies to use bank notes borrowed at interest from the Bank of England. The resulting stripping of wealth from the people for the bankers is the major reason for the American Revolution.
"[It was] the poverty caused by the bad influence of the English bankers on the Parliament which has caused in the colonies hatred of the English and . . . the Revolutionary War." -- Benjamin Franklin
Of course, the reason that our schools frame the history of the American Revolution in terms of the Stamp act and Tea Party and scarcely mention the Currency Act is that in 1913 a corrupt Congress and corrupt President sold Americans back into the clutches of a private central bank issuing the public currency as a loan at interest; the very same system we had fought the Revolution to be free of! . It is called the Federal Reserve and the authority to create money was illegally transferred (such a drastic change in basic structure requires a Constitutional Amendment) from the civilian government to the newly created Federal Reserve over the Christmas holiday of 1913 (the same year the 16th Amendment for the personal income tax was falsely claimed to have been ratified.)
This was done even though the two previous attempts at allowing a private central bank to issue the public currency as a loan at interest, the First and Second Banks of the United States, had almost destroyed the nation.
"Gentlemen, I have had men watching you for a long time and I am convinced that you have used the funds of the bank to speculate in the breadstuffs of the country. When you won, you divided the profits amongst you, and when you lost, you charged it to the bank. You tell me that if I take the deposits from the bank and annul its charter, I shall ruin ten thousand families. That may be true, gentlemen, but that is your sin! Should I let you go on, you will ruin fifty thousand families, and that would be my sin! You are a den of vipers and thieves. I intend to rout you out, and by the Eternal God, I will rout you out." -- Andrew Jackson
Following WW1, Germany had been forced to accept a private central bank as a means to keep Germans poor and helpless. It led to the runaway inflation abuses of the Weimar Republic. One reason the Nazis were so popular was that they scrapped the private central bank and returned to a system of government-issued value-based currency that allowed Germany to become prosperous. So great was the change it was called the “German miracle” and Hitler was TIME Magazine’s Man of the Year for the obvious improvements in German life.
But bankers are terrified of the rest of the world realizing that there are better ways to run an economy for the public than by forcing them to borrow all currency from a private bank at interest. So in 1933, the international banks staged a global boycott against Germany to destroy that government-issued value-based currency before the debt-slaves in other nations (like the United States) started getting uppity ideas!
This financial “attack” on Germany set the stage for WW2.
So, if you are wondering what this so-called “clash of civilizations” is all about, it is actually a war between banking systems. The United States is attacking nations that refuse to allow private central banks to take control of the nation’s wealth, or nations that avoid western-style banking. Your money is being spent, and your children are dying horrible deaths in, what is it now, 12 wars? And all to make the world safe for Compound Interest. To keep the world enslaved to private central banks printing up and issuing the public currency as loans at interest; a system which by design always produces more debt than available money, to make the slavery permanent.
"This is the very essence of the banking system, to keep us all, whether we be nations or individuals, slaves to debt. You control the debt, you control everything! " – "The International"
"It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning." -- Henry Ford
This is why we are at war across the globe. Because bankers will gladly see a billion people die if it keeps the surviving billion under their control.
Crash of 1907 -> WW1
Crash of 1929 -> WW2
Crash of 2008 -> WW3
Follow the money.
Follow the bankers." -- Wake the Flock Up
I read their paper.
"Even those opposed to US role hail Khadafy’s death" by Bobby Caina Calvan | Globe Staff, October 21, 2011
WASHINGTON — Critics of US airstrikes in Libya found themselves in the awkward position of joining backers to cheer the death of North Africa’s most enduring strongman, Moammar Khadafy.
I find that odd, morbid, and macabre.
‘‘Good,’’ was the terse reaction of Representative Barney Frank, among seven members of the all-Democratic Massachusetts House delegation who voted against a resolution in June to support the US role in the NATO campaign.
Another opponent of the NATO-led strikes, Representative Jim McGovern, declined to be interviewed but issued a statement: “The Libyan people, in their struggle to regain control over their own lives and destiny, have reason to celebrate.”
Across Washington, news of Khadafy’s death was hailed as a positive development, although officials expressed concern about the country’s ability to transition to a democratic and stable government.
Well, it is a LITTLE LATE for CONCERN now!!!
Senator John Kerry, one of the earliest and most forceful supporters in Congress for military intervention in Libya, was hardly in a mood to gloat.
‘‘Now the hard work begins,’’ Kerry, who chairs the Foreign Relations Committee, said in an interview. ‘‘This chapter of Moammar Khadafy being completely removed from the scene is a critical benchmark.’’
That's an alarm bell for propaganda.
The Massachusetts Democrat was even ahead of the Obama administration in his support of persuading NATO to provide air support to anti-Khadafy rebels. With Khadafy gone, it was uncertain how quickly NATO would call a formal halt to the strikes.
‘‘We have to let the dust settle,’’ said Kerry, who took a break as a member of the deficit-reduction ‘‘super committee’’ to discuss the developments in Libya.
NATO's contribution.
“The good thing about Libya is that it has enormous resources,” Kerry said, referring to the country’s oil reserves. “The bottom line is that (Libya) is not going to be Iraq or Afghanistan,” Kerry said.
WRONG!
See: Libya Looking Like Iraq
You just are not being told about it, American, because the conventional myth is mission accomplished.
Massachusetts’ other senator, Republican Scott Brown, also supported US military action. Yesterday, he said no tears should be shed for Khadafy.
‘‘He was an international terrorist who had American blood on his hands, and who attempted to slaughter thousands of his own people in order to keep a grip on power,’’ said Brown, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee. ‘‘I hope that with Khadafy now gone, the Libyan people will be able to finally choose their leaders through free and fair elections.’’
I wish we could have a free and fair election here.
Senator John McCain, a Republican of Arizona, joined the Massachusetts senators in applauding Khadafy’s death but said in an interview with CNN that he would have wanted to see the former Libyan dictator handed over to a court of law.
Still, Khadafy’s killing ‘‘marks an end to the first phase of the Libyan revolution. While some final fighting continues, the Libyan people have liberated their country,’’ said McCain, who had supported Obama’s actions. ‘‘The United States, along with our European allies and Arab partners, must now deepen our support for the Libyan people.’’
Yeah, the women have been liberated right into Islamic law.
Khadafy’s death in the streets of his hometown hideout of Surt ends a regime that had largely been a US adversary for decades. It could rekindle debate on Capitol Hill about how deeply the United States should commit to helping Libya develop a democratic regime. It is unlikely the United States will open wide its purse strings, according to some analysts, partly because of Libya’s vast oil deposits and the $31 billion in assets seized from Khadafy — some already in use to fund the transitional government.
Why are they getting anything when we have a deficit and social services are being cut?
“The important assistance is not big ticket,” but relatively low-cost “advice and technical assistance” on helping the new Libyan government conduct elections, said Thomas Carothers of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
Why any cost?
Some Massachusetts lawmakers, while hailing Khadafy’s death, refused to step back from their criticism of how Obama handled the intervention.
‘‘For me, the issues surrounding Libya were never about whether Khadafy was a bad guy — he was,’’ said Representative Michael Capuano, Democrat of Somerville. ‘‘For me, this was simply about the role of Congress in declaring war.’’
Then impeach.
He added, ‘‘I still firmly believe the Constitution entrusts Congress — not the president acting alone — to decide when to use America’s military might. I don’t believe the president fulfilled his obligation to seek Congress’s approval with respect to military operations in Libya.’’
Then it's impeachable. And if you don't impeach over war.... sieg heil!
Capuano said he would not be opposed to providing aid to the Libyans, particularly humanitarian aid. ‘‘But there are limits. We’re in the middle of massive debt,’’ Capuano said.
Congresswoman Niki Tsongas, a member of the House Armed Services Committee, praised the work of NATO in Libya, despite her objections to how Obama sidestepped Congress.
‘‘The result of this effort also demonstrates the powerful effect that multilateral intervention and international cooperation can have,’’ she said. ‘‘While I believe that President Obama should have come to Congress before acting in Libya, he should be commended for avoiding a prolonged military commitment, forming a strong international coalition, and for keeping US boots off the ground.’’
Actually, they were on the ground in the form of CIA sneakers, but who wants to argue about footwear?
--more--"
More mouth from political pukes:
"Romney credits Obama with foreign policy victory" by Michael Levenson and Matt Viser
COUNCIL BLUFFS, Iowa — Mitt Romney, after months of chastising President Obama’s actions in Libya, lauded the death of longtime dictator Moammar Khadafy yesterday, and even offered the president a rare — although limited — compliment.
“It’s about time,’’ Romney said during a campaign swing through Iowa. “Khadafy: a terrible tyrant that killed his own people and murdered Americans and others in the tragedy at Lockerbie. The world is a better place with Khadafy gone.’’
Related: Lieberman Gets Last Word on Lockerbie
Asked at a later event in Council Bluffs whether Obama deserved credit for the killing, he said: “Yes, yes. Absolutely.’’
How about blame?
Republicans have been wary of crediting Obama with a foreign policy victory that could bolster his national security credentials. The killing of Khadafy, along with the deaths of Osama bin Laden in Pakistan and cleric Anwar al-Awlaki in Yemen, ranks as one of the milestones of the Obama presidency.
Related: AmeriKan Missiles Keep Things All in the Family in Yemen
Bin Laden Stories Show AmeriKan Media Not to be Believed
It's a lot more than just that.
The president seized the opportunity to hail the turn of events.
“Without putting a single US service member on the ground, we achieved our objectives, and our NATO mission will soon come to an end,’’ he said. “This comes at a time when we see the strength of American leadership across the world.’’
********************
Ron Paul, the Texas congressman who is critical of America’s military presence overseas, did not respond to requests for comment. Paul has denounced the US involvement in Libya as costly and unconstitutional.
The lone decent human being running for president.
--more--"
Even the paper is piling on:
"US helps defeat a dictator, without losing a soldier" October 21, 2011
The defeat of this bloody dictator was achieved without the loss of a single American soldier. It cost relatively little in dollars, either for military expenses or foreign aid.
Yeah, billions don't mean much to a country trillions in debt.
It didn’t spark a backlash against America. It didn’t alienate allies, who, from Europe to the Arab League, were partners. And it didn’t commit the United States to a nation-building exercise.
It should thus be considered a striking victory....
We smashed a nation and divided its people -- and they called it victory!
Libya isn’t the only instance where a low-key, targeted approach achieved far more than a loud, complicated one. In Yemen, home to many anti-American extremists, the administration chose to work with an objectionable government to isolate the extremists. A new CIA base on the Arabian Peninsula is the result....
That's why the US is soft on Saleh.
See: US Waitin' On Saleh
He ain't leaving now.
Can America handle a smarter, quieter foreign policy? The evidence is yes. Will Obama get proper credit for successes like the defeat of Khadafy and the dismantling of Al Qaeda? Maybe not — if only because a policy that doesn’t advertise itself doesn’t get applauded.
But there was nothing quiet about the celebrations on the streets of Tripoli yesterday, and nothing minimal about the sense of satisfaction among the millions of people who recall the horror of Pan Am Flight 103.
--more--"
Maybe it's just me, but I find the paper's applause more sickening than the politicians.
Also see: Libyan Leaders Appear to Wrangle Over Qaddafi Burial
Times is still talking?
"In last days, Khadafy was at turns defiant, delusional" October 23, 2011|By Kareem Fahim, New York Times
MISURATA, Libya - After 42 years of absolute power in Libya, Moammar Khadafy spent his last days hovering between defiance, anger, and delusion, surviving on rice and pasta his guards scrounged from the emptied civilian houses he moved between every few days, according to an aide captured with him.
Under siege by the former rebels for weeks, Khadafy grew impatient with life on the run in the city of Surt, said the aide, Mansour Dhao Ibrahim, the leader of the country’s People Guard, a network of loyalist volunteers and informants. “He would say: ‘Why is there no electricity? Why is there no water?’ ’’
Dhao, who stayed close to Khadafy throughout the siege, said that he and other aides repeatedly counseled him to leave power or the country, but that Khadafy and one of his sons, Muatassim, would not even consider the option.
Still, though some of the Khadafy’s supporters portrayed him as bellicose to the end, armed at the front lines, he actually did not take part in the fighting, Dhao said, instead preferring to read or make calls on his satellite phone....
If he was making calls then western intelligence knew where he was.
Khadafy traveled with about 10 people, including close aides and guards. Muatassim, who commanded the loyalist forces, traveled separately from his father, fearing that his satellite phone was being tracked.
Apart from the phone, which Khadafy used to make frequent statements to a Syrian television station that became his official outlet, he was largely “cut off from the world,’’ Dhao said. He did not have a computer, and in any case, there was rarely any electricity.
Khadafy, who was fond of framing the revolution as a religious war between devout Muslims and the rebel’s Western backers, spent his time reading the Koran, Dhao said.
He refused to hear pleas to give up power. He would say, according to Dhao: “This is my country. I handed over power in 1977,’’ referring to his oft-repeated assertion that power was actually in the hands of the Libyan people. “We tried for a time, and then the door was shut,’’ the aide said, saying that Khadafy seemed more open to the idea of giving up power than his sons did.
For weeks, the former rebels fired heavy weapons indiscriminately at the city. “Random shelling was everywhere,’’ said Dhao, adding that a rocket or a mortar shell struck one of the houses where Khadafy was staying, injuring more of his guards. A chef who was traveling with the group was also hurt, so everyone started cooking, Dhao said.
That means INNOCENT CIVILIANS DIED!
About two weeks ago, as the former rebels stormed the city center, Khadafy and his sons were trapped in two houses in a residential area called District No. 2. Khadafy decided it was time to leave and planned to flee to one of his houses nearby, where he had been born.
--more--"
"Libya agrees to investigate how Khadafy was killed" October 25, 2011|By Mary Beth Sheridan and William Branigin, Washington Post
BENGHAZI, Libya - Libya’s interim government, under mounting international pressure, said yesterday that it will conduct an investigation into the death of Moammar Khadafy, but authorities continued to insist that the former leader was not executed by revolutionary forces.
I dunno then. What would you call it?
Speaking a day after declaring the country officially liberated from Khadafy’s four-decade rule, Mustafa Abdel Jalil, head of the National Transitional Council, raised the possibility that Khadafy was killed by loyalists to prevent him from being put on trial and implicating them.
A wounded Khadafy was captured Thursday while trying to hide in a drainage pipe a few miles west of his final stronghold in Surt. His body turned up hours later with a fatal gunshot to the head.
The saga of Khadafy’s body may finally be coming to an end, after days in which it was displayed in a refrigerated meat locker in the city of Misurata, as thousands of people filed by to gape. A military spokesman in the city said the body had been moved in anticipation of burial, which could occur today in a secret location.
One of Khadafy’s sons, Muatassim, was also captured in Surt and killed, apparently while in custody.
Because Khadafy’s death was so welcomed in Libya, an impartial investigation of it is considered highly unlikely....
By about half the population, if that.
The New York-based group Human Rights Watch said yesterday that 53 apparent Khadafy supporters appeared to have been executed on the lawn of an abandoned hotel in Surt last week. It said some had their hands tied behind their backs when they were killed, apparently between Oct. 15 and 19.
“This latest massacre seems part of a trend of killings, looting, and other abuses committed by armed anti-Khadafy fighters who consider themselves above the law,’’ said Peter Bouckaert, emergencies director at Human Rights Watch, who investigated the killings.
The group called on the National Transitional Council to “conduct an immediate and transparent investigation into the apparent mass execution and to bring those responsible to justice.’’
Ever notice when it is OUR GUYS doing such things it is NO BIG DEAL?
--more--"
"Khadafy given secret burial; Grave reported ‘somewhere in the desert’" October 26, 2011|By Mary Beth Sheridan, Washington Post
TRIPOLI, Libya - Former Libyan strongman Moammar Khadafy was secretly buried in a desert grave yesterday, officials said, ending a four-day spectacle in which his bloody body was displayed to a public largely overjoyed about his ignominious end after decades of repressive rule.
Are you sure they didn't slide him into the sea like that other guy?
Like other leaders toppled in the Arab Spring uprisings, Khadafy was despised as a corrupt authoritarian ruler. But he was viewed here as more cruel and capricious than the presidents of Egypt or Tunisia, a man who would suddenly nationalize companies or hang dissident students, and force their classmates to watch.
That explains why most Libyans have been unfazed by cellphone videos showing a blood-spattered Khadafy punched, kicked, and possibly even sodomized by revolutionaries before he died in captivity. Human rights groups have said the brutality surrounding Khadafy’s death marked a troubling beginning for the new democracy emerging from an eight-month, US-backed war. But many Libyans saw it as a fitting end for a tyrant.
“Have you seen the mass graves they discovered? Did you know we had more than 50,000 people die during this revolution?’’ asked Muhammad al-Jady, 53, an engineer walking near Tripoli’s downtown Martyrs Square, citing a widely quoted estimate.
Jady described a litany of abuses his family suffered under the Khadafy regime. The government seized four of his father’s villas after passing a law banning ownership of more than one home. Then, in 1984, Jady was jailed for six months without explanation upon returning from college in Oregon, he said.
“We are still hurting,’’ said the gray-bearded engineer. “I am still feeling that six months of my life. Yes, they should kill him.’’
Under Khadafy, Libyans suffered some of the strictest curbs on freedom of expression in the Middle East. Munir Abdusalem Kridig, 25, said his brother was shot by security forces in June simply for complaining about Khadafy as he sat in his car in a long line at a gas station. “They heard him and opened fire,’’ he said.
“Now that Khadafy’s buried, I don’t think even Satan would accept him,’’ said Kridig, clutching a red, green, and black revolutionary flag as he strolled with his wife through Martyrs Square.
Thousands of Libyans lined up starting on Friday to gaze with contempt or wonder at Khadafy’s decomposing body, which had been laid out on a bloody mattress in a refrigerated meat locker in Misurata. The weak central government seemed powerless to wrest the body from the city’s fiercely anti-Khadafy fighters, who had captured him on Thursday.
Suliman Fortia, the representative of the city of Misurata on the national governing council, said in a telephone interview that Khadafy’s body was put in an unmarked grave “somewhere in the desert’’ at dawn yesterday. News services reported that a Muslim cleric recited prayers over the body before it was turned over for burial.
Libyan officials have said they wanted a secret site to prevent his tomb being desecrated or turned into a pilgrimage site....
In a fresh sign of how Khadafy was abused after his capture, a new video obtained by Global Post appears to show a man trying to shove a knife between the former leader’s buttocks as revolutionaries led him from his hiding place in a drainage pipe.
Libya’s interim government has said Khadafy was killed when his supporters opened fire on revolutionaries escorting the wounded former leader to a hospital. There has been no evidence of such a firefight, however.
Like citizens of Tunisia and Egypt, Libyans blamed their authoritarian leader for high unemployment and corruption. Libyans appeared especially stung because their country is oil rich. But little of that money trickled down.
What a distortion if not outright lie.
Then again, what would you expect out of the WaPo?
--more--"
Like all good eulogies, let's finish with a laugh:
"Khadafy linked to Iraq plot; Papers said to show he backed Ba’ath coup" October 27, 2011|By Tim Arango, New York Times
BAGHDAD - When Tripoli, the Libyan capital, fell, rebel fighters found secret intelligence documents linking Moammar Khadafy to a plot by former members of Saddam Hussein’s military and Ba’ath Party to overthrow the Iraqi government, according to an Iraqi official who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the matter was supposed to be confidential.
Why did forgery just spring to mind?
The details of the plot were revealed to Iraq’s prime minister, Nouri al-Maliki, this month in a surprise visit to Baghdad by Libya’s interim leader, Mahmoud Jibril, said the official. This week, Iraqi security forces responded, arresting more than 200 suspects in connection with the plot.
The looted ruins of Khadafy’s intelligence headquarters in Tripoli have revealed many secrets. The trove has uncovered ties between the Libyan strongman and the CIA and shed light on negotiations between Chinese arms dealers and Libyan officials during the uprising, an embarrassment to officials in Beijing.
Related: Western Intelligence Double-Crossed Khadafy
But in Iraq, the records of Khadafy’s plot had special resonance. The Iraqi media celebrated Khadafy’s death last week. But the news that Khadafy may have been backing a Ba’athist-led coup added another layer of intrigue just as Iraq was digesting the weekend news that President Obama had disclosed that the last US soldier would leave by the end of the year. Some suggested that it was a fiction spread only to allow for the arrests of Sunnis, a reflection of the fragile and tense sectarian tensions.
Didn't I say that at the top?
“The people that were arrested do not deserve this because many of them were old,’’ said Hamid al-Mutlaq, a member of Parliament’s security committee from the Iraqiya bloc, which is largely Sunni. “The timing for this is bad because the US forces are about to leave, and we should focus on national reconciliation.’’
And not even this could get us to stay, 'eh?
Related(?): Hundreds of Iraqis cheer departure of US forces
They were Sunnis?
On state television, Hussein Kamal, Iraq’s deputy interior minister, said the plot included agitators spread throughout the country’s south and just north of Baghdad.
The agitators, he said, had been planning “terrorist operations and sabotage’’ after the withdrawal of the United States military.
In Iraq, the memories of the Ba’ath Party maintain a psychic hold on the population, even almost nine years after the US invasion that drove the party from power. The United States disbanded the army and barred most party members from any government job, a decision that many said contributed to the subsequent insurgency and sectarian civil war.
Before last year’s parliamentary elections, a de-Ba’athification process eliminated many more people from the political process, often based on flimsy evidence.
It's being run by AmeriKan darling Ahmed Chalabi.
And in Iraq’s zero-sum politics, opponents often accuse one another of being “Ba’athies,’’ the worst kind of insult here.
Rumors of coups often swirl through the capital, with evidence of the latest intrigue often seen in tanks taking up new positions in the fortified Green Zone. Predictably, the latest uncovered plot prompted suspicion in some circles that the arrests were intended to score political points by playing to the vestiges of people’s fears from living under Saddam’s brutality.
Seem familiar, Amurkn?
Because the Ba’ath Party was dominated by Sunnis and ruled ruthlessly over a Shiite majority for decades, the term today also carries sectarian undertones, as was seen Tuesday in Tikrit, Saddam’s hometown in Salahuddin province, north of Baghdad.
Related: Occupation Iraq: Divide and Conquer
Sorry I'm no longer buying the sectarian s*** cover story, but you can see why, right?
There, protesters denounced the arrests outside the provincial council building.
“We are out today in peaceful protest to ask the government to stop arresting the sons of Iraq,’’ said Sheik Hussain al-Alusi. He added, “We are happy that the Americans are leaving, but the government is taking advantage of that. Where is the national reconciliation? Where is the constitution?’’
In the southern port city of Basra, where 40 people were arrested, according to Reuters, former low-level Ba’ath Party members feared they would be next.
--more--"
