Gaddafi was not all bad

The post that was quoted here has been removed

I made no such claims about the My Lai massacre. You are inventing stuff to support your unsupportable claims.

1. extremely racist Normbenign
2. pathological liar Normbenign

Somehow you think that repeating these libelous lies will make them true.

Let these writers come forward, or I suspect they are figments of your fertile imagination. You well know what is good fertilizer.

The post that was quoted here has been removed

As I am 'up and running' on this thread vs No1M, I would just like to ask the good lady...

How is Norm's * pretending that.....evidence...disappears...5 mins* any different from HER non-defence of a ludicrous exchange vs Wajoma a few weeks ago

Providence can be supplied if needed

Originally posted by no1marauder
Some responsibility does not equal ordered it.

The way the event unfolded makes a premeditated attack on orders from Tripoli most unlikely. In Libya they might not have even known who actually fired; there was some dispute among British ballistic experts where the shots came from. In any event, for the Libyan government to have ordered in advance peo ...[text shortened]... sent any evidence supporting such an explanation, I find its assertion as fact rather ludicrous.

Nevertheless, the shot was fired. Had the order not come from the Libyan government then they were in a position to hand over the perpetrator who had exceeded his orders. Since they didn't, your argument that the Libyan government would not have premeditated "an incredibly reckless and provocative act" leaves an explanatory gap.

Originally posted by sh76
Let me guess. He had nothing to do with Pan Am Flight 103.

Am I right?

Evidence of that is less than Reagan"s involvement in the Iran Contra conspiracy. The Reagan administration armed both sides of the Iran/Iraq war.

http://www.nytimes.com/1992/01/26/world/us-secretly-gave-aid-to-iraq-early-in-its-war-against-iran.html

http://www.democracynow.org/2004/6/9/remembering_the_dead_reagan_armed_Iraq

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2402174/CIA-helped-Saddam-Hussein-make-chemical-weapons-attack-Iran-1988-Ronald-Reagan.html

There is more evidence that Reagan is an evil mad dog than Gaddafi. By your own standards Reagan is far worse than Gaddafi if you examine the history.

Also, should you also condemn Reagan for the downing of Flight 655? Iran said all 290 people on board were killed.

http://www.nytimes.com/1988/07/04/world/downing-flight-655-us-downs-iran-airliner-mistaken-for-f-14-290-reported-dead.html

Originally posted by Metal Brain
Evidence of that is less than Reagan"s involvement in the Iran Contra conspiracy. The Reagan administration armed both sides of the Iran/Iraq war.

http://www.nytimes.com/1992/01/26/world/us-secretly-gave-aid-to-iraq-early-in-its-war-against-iran.html

http://www.democracynow.org/2004/6/9/remembering_the_dead_reagan_armed_Iraq

http://www.dailymail ...[text shortened]... 8/07/04/world/downing-flight-655-us-downs-iran-airliner-mistaken-for-f-14-290-reported-dead.html

Flight 655 was a tragic mistake and certainly was not ordered by Reagan.

As for Iran-Contra, Reagan probably was involved. So what? The activities were illegal under the Boland Amendment, but that's not in the same ballpark as bombing a civilian airliner for no real reason. One might even go so far as to say it was a "neat idea" (if one is named Oliver North).

Originally posted by Metal Brain
Evidence of that is less than Reagan"s involvement in the Iran Contra conspiracy. The Reagan administration armed both sides of the Iran/Iraq war.

http://www.nytimes.com/1992/01/26/world/us-secretly-gave-aid-to-iraq-early-in-its-war-against-iran.html

http://www.democracynow.org/2004/6/9/remembering_the_dead_reagan_armed_Iraq

http://www.dailymail ...[text shortened]... 8/07/04/world/downing-flight-655-us-downs-iran-airliner-mistaken-for-f-14-290-reported-dead.html

Reagan did not order the shooting down of flight 655, they mistook the Airbus for an F-14 during hostilities. You might condemn his administration for the handling of the aftermath, the Captain of the Vincennes for being extremely trigger happy and the US Navy for the failures that lead up to the shootdown, but it is in a different category to the downing of the Pan Am flight where a civilian airliner was deliberately and premeditatively targeted.

Originally posted by DeepThought
Nevertheless, the shot was fired. Had the order not come from the Libyan government then they were in a position to hand over the perpetrator who had exceeded his orders. Since they didn't, your argument that the Libyan government would not have premeditated "an incredibly reckless and provocative act" leaves an explanatory gap.

At least one explanation has already been offered in the same post that you quoted:

In Libya they might not have even known who actually fired; there was some dispute among British ballistic experts where the shots came from.

A second possible explanation is that they didn't want to hand over a Libyan citizen for British justice given the intense hostility between the nations at the time.


Both are far more plausible than that Gaddafi ordered people (not even government officials BTW) to fire on a crowd in Great Britain's capital.

The post that was quoted here has been removed

almost certainly 'yes'

but as it is question with no definitive answer, that has little credence.

do you have an example of similar behaviour from a British Embassy, roles reversed?

The post that was quoted here has been removed

One thing for certain, is that there is no shortage of brutal dictators now or in the past.

My stance is that it is not the job of the US, to clear the planet of these brutal people. We dealt with ours more than two centuries ago.

The post that was quoted here has been removed

The "evidence" of my many lies and blatant racism is simply that I disagreed with Duchess64.

As to disappearing evidence, I understand that everything written here is archived. I don't know how to access it, and I certainly don't want to help Duchess64.

If these "lies" and "blatant racism" are so common, why can't you find one in the present tense? I'm the same person, and at my age it is doubtful that I'll be changing. It might help you to simply admit that these so called lies, are just disagreements with you, and since you are not the source of distilled truth, they are not lies at all, but topics of debate. Since you routinely lose rational debates, you attempt to make disagreement with you lies. Nice try, but nobody's buying it.