Libya Standing on its Own

NATO has just announced that it will be ending it's military mission in Libya, which includes the no-fly zone, a huge area of support for the NTC. But this recent announcement came with some conflicting emotions, as the NTC had previously asked NATO to postpone the ending of the no-fly zone. The NTC fears that Gaddafi loyalists will retaliate against them now after their leaders death, and say that the no-fly zone would serve as a deterrent for the time being until Libya has a firm grasp on its own freedom. No that NATO has gone ahead with ending their mission, will the NTC be able to handle it without the support from a no-fly zone? I think so, as I seriously doubt any loyalist groups will have access to any fighter jets anytime soon. With that in mind, this announcement is the first step into giving Libya full independence.

Fair Trials?

With Gaddafi killed as well as his son Mutassim, attention has now been focused on Saif al-Islam, Muammar's most dangerous and loyal son. Recent reports say Saif is in Niger, exiled from Libya. Having been thought to been in Bani Walid, Libyan rebels lost track of him and was able to escape into hiding. Saif al-Islam has a warrant from the ICC, and this is the sticking point in the final stages of the revolution. Wanted by the international court for crimes against humanity, Saif al-Islam is a hot topic, specifically because many in Libya would like to have him tried in Libya. But many fear that if he was tried in Libya, a repeat of what happened to his father would occur. With the ever increasing suspicion that Muammar Gaddafi was executed by the mob that found and captured him, and new footage showing graphic footage of a bloody Gaddafi being violently jostled and even stabbed by the crowd. With this new development, the NTC has stated that they will put those responsible for Gaddafi's death on trial. How this plays out will be interesting. The sentiment of most Libyans is of extreme hatred of Gaddafi. I mean that's understandable, he made their lives living hell day in and day out. But with the trial of the people who killed him, those sentiments could cause many to get upset. The last thing the NTC wants right now is to lose support from their people. But, hopefully many will overcome their bind hatred now that he is dead. If most Libyans can look past the hatred that built up over the last forty years, then maybe the NTC won't have such a problem and people will realize that the trial is necessary to uphold human rights.

With this insistence on fair trials being held in Libya, the news that Saif al-Islam is in informal talks with the ICC, who would have Saif tried in The Hague rather than in Libya, is full of tension. An ICC spokesman says he has substantial evidence that Saif was involved in the planning of bombing and shooting at civilians, as well as paying and transporting mercenaries from foreign countries. Libyans and the NTC  say that it would be the best if Saif was tried in Libya, and that it would be the only way that the Libya people can get any sort of closure. Seeing that the ICC has no police force, it all relies on what Niger decides to do. Niger is an ICC member state, meaning they have an obligation to arrest Saif is an order is given. But whether or not they do will decide whether the ICC has any chance of trying Saif. With this development, international pressure is high over the trial of one man. And with this pressure, it will be decided whether or not the international community is ready to trust the NTC with judicial power.

Occupy Oakland

On Tuesday, Occupy Oakland was forced out of their encampment. Early in the morning, police in full riot gear stormed the site and dismantled the tents and other structures set up their, as part of a fierce crackdown on protesters by police. Flashbang grenades and tear gas were used on protesters, many of whom were still sleeping wen the assault began. Is this was America stands for now? I thought we had a right to free speech, to protest, to gather. Apparently we can only protest during the day, when it suits people and their schedules. No! That's not what protests are about! Protests are about creating a rift in the status quo, interrupting peoples daily lives and making them think about the issues. Protesting isn't being assaulted by police as if you were violent rioters. Occupy Oakland was a peaceful protest, doing everything in it's power to have a clean, safe place of protest while at the same time spreading their grievances. The police response to this was unnecessarily brutal and its sickening to me how little compassion was shown to protesters, and many were injured indiscriminately and beaten.




As you can see in this video, police have started throwing tear gas canisters at the protesters. This took place later in the day on Tuesday, as protesters took to the streets in protest of the demolishing of their encampment. Some protesters are seen to be hurling the tear gas back at police, but about 25 seconds in, you can see someone lying on the ground a few feet from the police line clearly injured. As protesters notice something is amiss, they rush to help the injured protester, pleading with the police, shouting "Help him! Help him!" Of course the police do nothing but stare menacingly at the protesters, who obviously incited the whole incident. (Note my use of sarcasm here) But to make matters even worse, one police officer decides that adding an explosive to the mix would make it much better. 35 seconds in you see a black object, a flashbang grenade, thrown from behind police lines. This is hurled directly into the group around the injured protester, going off right by the person on the ground, scattering the helpers. There are so many things wrong with that! Why would anyone do such a thing, knowing full well that this group of people is not a threat, and that they are merely trying to aid someone that is injured? Where is the humanity in this? I'm sorry, but this seems more like something that would happen in Egypt 5 months ago, not America.





This time, another protester is injured, but this time it is much more serious. 24-year-old Iraq war veteran Scott Olsen is seen here being carried away after being shot in the head with a rubber bullet round from police. As seen ere, he is bleeding from the head and looks very dazed and confused. After being taken to a nearby hospital, Scott was unconscious for nearly 12 hours before finally waking up. He is now doing fine, although his speech is somewhat impaired. Unfortunately, his brain is swelling due to the fracture of his skull, and surgery may have to be performed if it does not go down soon. Since when are police allowed to shoot a person in the head, nonlethal projectile or not, and cause them to have a skull fracture and result in a mini-coma and swelling of the brain? Personally, this disgusts me, and I seriously hope that attention will be brought to the OPD and their brutal tactics. But so far, no major news organization seems to be covering it, leaving me to wonder how far America has fallen.

International Outreach

All across the world nations are sending messages of support for a new Libya. Many are wishing a fast transition from a bloody and gruesome fighting phase to the democratic phase, one which may be easier said than done. Many countries are also worried about the state of aid in the country, as medical supplies and basic human needs are running low. As a new age for Libya comes, new allies and help will be more important than ever.

Death of a Dictator: Inhumane?

               With all the videos and pictures circulating about Gaddafi's last moments before death, criticism from the international community has started to grow. There is no doubt the images are disturbing, a bloody, weary man being beaten and pulled around by a angry crowd of fighters, each having their own personal vendetta against him. Videos has also emerged now showing him alive and wounded, on the hood of a pickup truck, and also video of him being dragged out of the drain where he was found hiding. As of now, the NTC is saying that Gaddafi was killed in a crossfire on his way to Misrata to receive medical attention. He was already wounded at this point, from the blast and from being beaten by a crowd, although not severely. This is what the UN Human Rights council is questioning. Did he really die in a crossfire, or was he executed? An execution is against human rights laws and would be dealt with severely. Although how effective that would be, since it was so chaotic and there were so many people at the time of his death, that it would be almost impossible to determine who actually did it.

             Also, you've got to think to the implications of this investigation within Libya itself. The Libyans themselves have been oppressed by this man for generations, their family killed by his government and during the revolution. They feel intense hatred towards this one man and it is hard to override compassion sometimes for someone you hate so much. I feel like if the UN tries to get involved and point fingers of blame at certain fighters and at the rebellion as a whole, that the Libyan view of them will deteriorate. Instead of being incredibly thankful for the support they've been shown by the UN and NATO, they might feel betrayed and suspicious of the UN if the the UN tries to intervene with human rights trials and investigations. Not that these investigations would be pointless. There have been reports for awhile now that abuse of Gaddafi loyalists and black Africans has been a problem, and that discriminatory views are starting to take hold as many of the loyalists were black mercenaries from southern Africa. This and the fury-fueled revenge enacted by rebel fighters creates an uneasy environment where at one moment they might be cheering in celebration, the next parading around a prisoner in a abusive and almost grotesque way.

The UN has raised concerned over the possibility that Gaddafi was executed. [EPA]

                So far the UN is beginning to look into the events that transpired in Sirte, trying to piece together what really happened. Gaddafi's wife Aisha has called for a human rights investigation as well, seeing that Gaddafi's son Mutassim has died just as mysteriously as Gaddafi did, and reports of Seif al-Islam being wounded but captured are also circulating without any concrete idea of where he is. Right now, I think an investigation might be appropriate in this whole revolution, seeing as the rebels overstepped some boundaries in abuse and executions sometimes due to the adrenaline/rage fueled antics. But if human rights violations are unearthed, what will they do? They can't directly pinpoint certain people in many cases, and if they do the backlash from the Libyan population will be severe. I think for now, they should investigate and withdraw, waiting until Libya is more stable and controlled to act upon evidence of human rights violations. Because if they act now, the reactions will not be favorable in Libya.

The Fall of a Dictator

Unless you literally live under a rock, you would know that Muammar Gaddafi, the longtime dictator and oppressor of Libya, was killed today by rebel forces in his hometown of Sirte. Reports broke out early this morning, with unconfirmed pictures of an injured, but alive Gaddafi, in the hands of Libyan rebels. Soon, reports of his death were circulating, with a video taken from a cell phone showing Gaddafi's bloodied body(Warning: Graphic Footage). What was at first thought just another unconfirmed report, this news soon became verified, as the NTC announced that Muammar Gaddafi was in fact dead. This created an uproar of coverage, every new agency was all over it, reporting live, minute-by-minute coverage. I had never seen anything like it related to the Arab Spring. It was almost comforting seeing that this huge story was shown the attention it deserved here in the US.

Libyan rebels rejoice at the news that Col. Muammar Gaddafi is dead.

While this broke, I was at school. Unfortunately, I didn't know about it before school, which was when news first started to break out. Luckily, my friend told me about it, and I quickly got on it, looking at every mobile news app I had. To what did my wondering eyes did appear, but the most welcome news of the year! They had actually done it, they had killed Gaddafi! I was thrilled, and so were my friends. Lunch was an intense discussion about the affects and story surrounding his death, with new updates coming in every minute. I hadn't felt this relieved since Hosni Mubarak stepped down from power in Egypt!

The storm drain where Muammar Gaddafi hid from rebel fighters.

Here's what I've managed to piece together so far of what happened, from various news sites and sources: Muammar Gaddafi was in Sirte with a legion of loyalist fighters. They were in the western industrial side of Sirte, where intense fighting was breaking out. They started to flee, a convoy making its way out of the town. Not two miles outside of town, NATO planes and US drones fired missiles at the convoy, hitting and destroying some of the cars, scattering the rest. Muammar Gaddafi's son Muatassim was killed in the attack and his other son, Seif al-Islam was wounded and captured. Following this blast, Gaddafi and a small group of his loyalists took refuge in the drain pipes where he was later found. Having been in one of the cars initially hit, Muammar was at this point already injured. Then as rebel forces moved in to surround the convoy, a firefight broke out around where Gaddafi was hiding, being instigated when a loyalist came out and yelled for surrender, then promptly started shooting at the rebels when they emerged from behind cover. Gaddafi was wounded in the leg after this, and maybe in the stomach as well. Bleeding heavily and somewhat out of it, rebels found him in the drains and pulled him out. He even said to one fighter, "What have I done to you?"













At this point stories confuse each other. Some say that on of his own guards shot him in the chest at this point, although not immediately fatal. Wounded nonetheless, Gaddafi was captured by rebel forces, and soon taken to a pickup, where he was to be taken to Misrata to receive medical attention. Once again, stories clash when at this point, he dies suddenly. Some say he just collapsed to the ground, dead, others say it was an execution, with him being shot. At this point, the official story seems to be leaning towards the latter. (Which if it is true, may raise all kinds of hell)

Libyans celebrate Gaddafi's death

At this point, huge celebrations are being held across Libya, people finally rejoicing over the fact that they are now free from the fear and rule of Gaddafi. As this story develops, be sure to come back for the reactions and implications this will have on the world, and what the NTC has to do next in order to smoothly transition from the fighting stage, to the democratic stage. Until then, feel free to listen to the Libyan's ecstatic cries of Allahu Akbar!

The Inside Story

  

Al Jazeera’s Inside Story analyzes the effects of the Occupy Wall Street movement, it’s causes, and the goals of the movement with OWS media team member Mark Brayer, and independent stock broker Alessio Rastani. Watch this video! If nothing else, this video gives a clear-cut interpretation of the movement, with easy-to-understand language, and two sides of view. Seeing the stock broker, I thought we were in for heated exchange, but I was wrong. Alessio Rastani for the most part agrees with the movement and realizes that big business does in fact control politics, and that things do need to change. Both Mark and Alessio gave great points about the topics handed to them and I think their statements complements each other’s nicely, growing off of each other’s statements. The weirdest thing about this video though has to do with Alessio Rastani’s prediction at the very end.

This video was filmed recently, but just as the worldwide support was showing. At the very end, Alessio Rastani makes his prediction that this will spread throughout the world, to every major city. People will realize the situation and will not be happy. And he says this means they will go after the banks and financial institutions, the governments, the politicians and the lobbyists. He makes it clear that people will want real change and that the entire system of running things may be changed by this. With the worldwide support growing, I found it eerie how his prediction is starting to play out, and anxious to see if it proves to be true.

The Real Reasons

Now many people have so far asked the question: What do the protestors of Occupy Wall Street want? Answers vary from source to source, reflecting different viewpoints of the people. The fact of the matter is people have different reasons for participating in the Occupy movement. Some are unemployed are want unemployment to be dealt with. Others are upset about the inefficiency of the government, while others are upset about the corporate lobbying and corruption of Congress. Still others are upset about the wide gap between the top 1% of the population (who control most of the wealth) and the lower 99%. But all these problems are all part of a general dissatisfaction with the current political and economic system.

Now some may say it’s not so bad. The wealthy aren’t as high up s you think they are, and it’s been like this forever. These people don’t get it, and are probably trying to cover their backs. Because looking at the stats, the statistical support is overwhelmingly in Occupy Wall Street’s favor in terms of who’s right. But that’s not really a good thing, now is it? According to Business Insider, the gap between the top percent of America and the rest is larger than ever, and isn’t reflected in other countries. Unemployment is at a high and its taking longer for people to find jobs and longer for companies to find qualified employees. All these factors weigh in heavily on the minds of people, and it’s just now finally showing through with these movements. 

About one thousand people gather and form a large "99%" in the middle of Freedom Plaza during an occupation of the plaza Oct. 6 in Washington, DC. Inspired by the Occupy Wall Street movement that began last month in New York, large and small occupations have sprung up in cities across the country. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images) #

With all these readily discernible facts and statistics ready to back up the movement and its validity, you would think there would be more of a positive reaction, a call to action if you will. Now while the people feel this call to action, (The movement has spread nationwide and worldwide incredibly fast) the people who can actually initiate the change are still sluggish to react in any meaningful way.

Occupy the World

                As Occupy Wall Street moves into its 5^th week, solidarity protests are springing up around the world. It seems that public support and media circulation has arrived to help out the cause. Protests across the US and around the world erupted yesterday and continue today, from Iowa, to Hong Kong, China. Marches and rallies were held across the world in support of the recently growing ‘Occupy’ movement, a movement aimed at using peaceful protests to assert views against corporate corruption and economic inequality. Most notably in Spain and Greece, protestors have been demonstrating for a while now. Greece is having its own economic panic, as much of the population is angry at the supposed corruption and high unemployment throughout the corruption. 

                However, for every peaceful protest, there are a group of trouble makers. In Rome, a group of anarchists calling themselves the ‘Black bloc’ torched a number of cars after hijacking a large, peaceful demonstration. This led to confrontations with the police, and more than 70 people were injured, 40 of which were police officers. This is not the spirit and ideology behind the occupy movement. The spirit should be of peaceful demonstration, of civil disobedience. But turning to a riot mentality is not OK. In order to be taken seriously, and as a legitimate organization of real people with real issues, it has to be nonviolent. We can’t have a bunch of people running around, badmouthing police because they can, because they’re in a large movement. They have to act as one, as a whole group bound together by the same principles.

Protesters hold a banner that says in Swedish, "We refuse to pay the crisis of capitalism," as they take part in the Occupy Stockholm demonstration on Saturday.

            For instance, Redditor Readdator posted this plea to protestors in New York, urging them to be more respectful and mindful of their overall goal after witnessing the events himself.  He recounts seeing people blatantly trying to provoke the police by personally attacking them verbally and generally being combative, as well as advocating their own personal agendas. These people are taking advantage of this system of protests, of the media coverage to spread their own little message. While this is somewhat part of the whole ideology of Occupy Wall Street, their views need to add to the validity of the movement, not detract from it. Top commenter bitcloud makes a good point about this: “TL;DR: Be the change you wish to see in the world”  (TL;DR being an acronym for the phrase too long; didn’t read. This is often used in the reddit community to express the main idea of a statement)

                But if the movement can distance themselves from these separate groups, what next? Every day support is growing and the worldwide solidarity demonstrations show a worldwide desire for change. If this is so widespread, so international, what would it take for this to change the world as we know it? I don’t mean to sound over dramatic, but this movement could very well be the tipping point for worldwide social and economic change. It depends on how effective they are, how much they affect business as usual. As states before in ‘Fake Activism’, a protest will not work if you obey the rules, don’t disrupt the flow. You have to do these things in order to get attention; attention from the media, attention from the people, and attention from the big businesses.  The push for change must continue, and it has to get the attention of government officials, no matter how much people may dislike the idea of going through the government to get what they want. If politicians feel the need to listen to the movement, then maybe real progress can be made. But otherwise, the protestors will just be more white noise I the streets.

The Occupy Wall Street movement has spread cities around the world. Hundreds of anarchists during the protests in Rome have burnt cars and set an Interior Ministry building on fire.

Why Can't OWS get off the Ground?

Occupy Wall Street has been getting more coverage little by little over the past week. But the protests have actually been going on for almost three weeks now. What has made the media so slow to react? And when they finally did react, why at first was it so dismissive? Is American media so disenchanted with protests now that they give them no heed until violence breaks out? Do protests have to contain a concise purpose? A sense of unity in order for it to become legitimate? According to most mainstream media outlets, yes. 

When coverage first began, it was quick to label and dismiss the protestors as societal oddballs, the weird hippies and delinquents of New York. But as it spread and grew, they realized that image wouldn’t fly anymore. So they started to question the purpose, since so many protestors were giving different answers when asked why. But they are missing the point of the whole thing. There’s no way they can ask for specific things to be done, if they don’t want to keep the current system in the first place. You don’t ask the system to change if you don’t like the system fundamentally.That's the whole point of Occupy WallStreet, to show the American people's general dissatisfaction with the government and the way society is run now, and the desire to change it. Issues such as employment, homelessness, poverty, corporate corruption and greed are all part of this massive movement.

Occupy Wall Street at Foley Square

The fact that the media has to have video of violent reactions by police and rights violations in order to cover it properly reflects the growing sentiment that the media is “in bed” with the “1%”. And this might be the case. Media is run by some of the wealthiest people in the world and corruption can be rampant. I mean, just look at the case of Rupert Murdoch. That is basically the problem in a nutshell with the media. A corrupt media with its own agenda does not reflect the will of the people and for a long time now this has been going on. So much so that people nowadays don’t question what the media says. They shouldn’t have to, media should be objective, but it’s not so they should. But they don’t and that’s where it goes wrong. When real issues are being dismissed, or set aside, or reported in a biased manner, the media is not doing its job. And so far, this has been the case.

Fake Activism

On the topic of activism, and the earlier topic of Occupy Wall Street, I thought I would share a video I stumbled across while searching through articles:

In this interview, Naomi Wolfe (who honestly I've never heard of before) brings up some goods points, her main point being that with the laws set by our government today, protests are not effective. She says that in order to be effective, they have to disrupt the way people outside of the protest go about their lives. This makes sense, I mean, no one will pay attention to it if they can just bypass it. But if they get stuck in traffic because thousands of protestors are taking to the streets, then they tend to take notice. So why now, even though our rights give us the right to protest, can we not protest disruptively? Civil disobedience is almost illegal now, since protesting without a permit is illegal and with a permit you have to follow strict guidelines. But these strict guidelines take away any sort of oomph the protests have and strip it of any effectiveness. 

You can't protest the status quo by obeying it, that's not how it works. But you have to now or risk being arrested. Which in this economy, if people are arrested, they lose any chance of finding a decent job. Which is what they're protesting about. So it all comes around in this big loop of fake activism, where activism nowadays has been fixed so that it almost has no meaning. Unless they are willing to protest indefinitely with this slow rate of acceptance, Occupy Wall Street needs to figure out how to get around this obstacle of ineffective protesting.

Activism for Activism's Sake

                So here I am, sitting around watching my show Community. I have a ton of homework to do but I’m in one of those procrastinatory moods, you know the one. So I’m trying not to think about my blog posts because I have no idea what to talk about. None. Zilch. Nada. Then while watching Community, it just hands me an idea. It’s like it realized my light and decided to help. Thank you Community, I never thought a show about the most unproductive study group could ever help me be productive, but it has.  So in the recent episode, a lot is going on, but Britta (the “activist” of the group) learned that a ‘friend’ of hers is part of a small group that went to Syria and got detained by the government for protesting. So this sets off a chain reaction where she basically reasserts her hippie ideologies and stages a bunch of unsuccessful, solitary protests against anything related to “the man”. The joke being, that she feels the obligation to be as “unruly” (Couldn’t think of a good term, meh) as the friend that just got detained, so she starts to protest again just for the sake of protesting and being cool. Which got me thinking about how it seems that there are some people that do do this. And those people don’t really add any legitimacy to any protests or cause they join, they just bog it down with what people see as being hippies for hippies sake. But is this so common? 

That one guy

 We all know that one activist guy, the guy who knows all the causes and raises all the fundraisers and gets involved. But what really decides whether or not they are being a poser or if they are actually helping. Because sometimes it seems to me that, while some people may in fact use it too much for their own image than for the actual benefit, activism can sometimes be purposely misconstrued to seem self-centered. When in fact, it may not be self-centered, but rather that person is actually getting involved because they want to help.  And the real reason people feel so hostile towards them is that because they realize that that person is doing more good than they are and they want to reassure themselves about their own actions (or inactions). And now even as I’m writing this I feel self-conscious and almost hypocritical, although not really, because I’m kinda righting an activist blog and I’m now writing about fake activism that doesn’t help, even though my opinions don’t really help either. Hmm.

People dislike activism sometimes because it makes them feel like they aren’t doing enough. But you don’t have to be that kid with the dreads who always passes petitions around, buys only organic food, and attends all the protests. Activism is about spreading a word, an ideology where if people are informed about something, they will make more informed decisions. And informed decisions lead to a better society. So you don’t have to be in that club with all the hippies to be an activist. Those are the people who really do the extra mile. All you have to do is be informed. Read the news; stay up to date on current issues. Most of all just stay informed. If you know for a fact a certain product isn’t manufactured in a fair environment, or a certain company is kinda sketchy, just don’t buy that brand. Bringing back that old sense of boycotting, well it really can make a difference. And it doesn’t have to be loud and in-your-face to work.

This Time, Its America

With the recent demonstrations in New York City, Occupy Wall Street has been gaining momentum, spreading to several big cities across the US. Representing the “99%’, Occupy Wall Street mirrors the anger of the middle class against the few elite and the inefficiency of congress.  Having set up their own sort of base camp in Zuccotti Park in downtown Manhattan, O.W.S. has grown over little more than a week to thousands of people. With marches and protests across New York City, they are drawing attention to their struggle for social equality and effective government. But the main media attraction isn’t about the protestors themselves, but police reaction to them. 

Recently, video has emerged showing a police commander indiscriminately, and unprovokedly pepper spraying random protestors, who had done nothing illegal. Other reports of police brutality have been filed, including assault and unjustified arrests. In trying to expose the governments and the upper class, the protestors have also once again laid bare the growing corruptness of our police system and the unchecked police brutality. But this isn’t new is it? No, police have been power tripping for quite some time now, and every once in a while the media latches on to a particular story, a startling revelation of police corruption. But nothing ever comes of it. And that is what needs to change in America. We have so many problems with corruption, and discrimination, and greed, and in proportionate wealth, that we just need to fix it. That’s why there are protests going on now. Because our government is not doing its job.