skip to Main Content

anti-nucleaRist bloG #62/ Fri, 14 Oct 2011 sub-Saharan African migrants in US-backed Libyan rebels?

anti-nucleaRist bloG #62/ Fri, 14 Oct 2011

sub-Saharan African migrants in US-backed Libyan rebels?


tO peace-People:


I’ve a high regard for social-commentary, both from having been the 1972 white-Paper: journalist and on ‘journalists’. The case of last week is well taken i.e. that Democracy Now is fallacious & too- embedded on Libya! There are no weaknesses when reporting is not the case, but reality is concerned w some rapprochement if honesty demands.


What’s good is that Mr. Dixon makes his points about where they, Kamat & Kouddous are remiss, but in an overtone of “black-Culture & immersion” which i agree is not wholly circumspect, but direct. I’ve been into Libya, and Khaddafi made life hardship, un-less you were an afro-African of the Libya tribes. They purposefully did not allow no-Bull be brought into their camps/rival living and cultural areas, at all. There were other tribes who were not as aspiring in culture, who may have had to be brought into becoming “mercenaries”, too! That was 1981.         “R”


“By BAR managing editor Bruce A. Dixon…


Have Democracy Now’s correspondents in Libya, Anjali Kamat and Sharif Abdel-Kod[d]ous minimized or avoided reporting upon the persecution of black Libyans and sub-Saharan African migrants in by US-backed Libyan rebels? Have they reported massacres that may not have happened, and mercenaries who might not have existed? Have they ignored or minimized the impact of US and NATO bombing and the presence of Saudi, Qatari and other foreign forces on the ground in Libya, also in support of the US-backed Libyan rebels? Have they simply embedded themselves with US-backed forces in Libya to pass the views of the Pentagon and State Department to us as “independent, unembedded news”? It’s hard to know all of this for certain. We’re over here, they’re over there, and Libya is very much a war zone.


I’m not in Libya and never have been, but people who have say the country is anywhere from a quarter to half what we would call “black” in the US. It’s hard not to notice that Anjali Kamat can’t find any black Libyans to talk to, and that none are visible among the US-backed Libyan rebels.”


See, below “Are Democracy Now!’s Libyan Correspondents Feeding Us the State Department and Pentagon Line on Libya?” Wed, 10/05/2011


Sometimes to the point, sometimes off. What has also transpired other than mercenaries not interviewed, is no-Discussion on NSDU- 238, which has been used, reported as used by militia’s and by reporters of Global Research, but not discussed by Bruce Dixon, who was not there either. The other aspect he did not mention is that, as a woman Kamat is really going to be under-board on dutifulness, so why was there not some ‘zoombie’ dressed-UP in “Dai-ichi’s type radionuclides protection garments” he did not mention either. But that was not merely mentioned by DEM Now nor Kamat either? What Dixon did was not to bare-Witness, but bare-Witless about himself as a reporter–as he usually does his useful and then-some productfulness better, as here vehemence in testament. But not to have to mention, I do not disregard, he could have spared himself some ennui, which of course he has not.   “R”


The NSDU-238 simply needs “all’ reporters including Aljazeera & BAR as well as DEM Now, not all English reporters who possibly, ought to have introduced the word term that i’ve been using since 1991 i.e. “not-so- depleted Uranium 238” NSDU-238 is not good for you… do not go looking some “nice radiation” w.o. radiation-monitoring digitalized meters or w.o. knowing wars are over and then go “fully dressed, delux”? “R”


Another indemnity is that BAR-black agenda report has been synergystic when not including Global Research whose reporting stresses the affirmed intel-Gence and discerning that puts just about all three of them into the supporters of dEMS are always progressives who loose, but never mention NSDU-238, which is not more yours-Truly disposition on socio-polity, as that is merely understanding political Science and Ecology in correlation to Philosophy, that is that human- Structure wins out in the means to the end–which I believe Dixon also does, to help realize that history takes precedent on being remembered, not beings castigating, when “military-hegemony and Plutocracy” does that…             “R”


Who mentions that otherwise look and you’ll see that there is democracy interwoven w.o. dEMS support of the major Oligarch Ohh-bom-bah-bin-dingy. Who? He that never mentions NSDU-238 ought to be at least hired by Quantanamo military pride–before being tortured into propaganda!…also something Bruce Dixon does not acquiesce.           “R”


“DN’s correspondents in Libya apparently have more important things to do than interview the black Libyan and migrant victims of what Kamat called “populist rage,” a curious and revealing term for lynch law in Libya…In that same segment, Kamat queried Peter Bouckaert of Human Rights Watch about the existence and identity of Khadaffi’s alleged “African mercenaries”.” Says Mr. Dixon.


“Are Democracy Now!’s Libyan Correspondents Feeding Us the State Department and Pentagon Line on Libya?”

Wed, 10/05/2011—by BAR managing editor Bruce A. Dixon – 09:43 correspondents-feeding-us-state-department-and-pentagon-line-libya


a voice fRom the VOId, the peace-Warrior,   “R” Addison   (posted/sent 9:44 pm)


–note: peace-Warrior pRefeRRed bloG post #17/

Tags/ Bruce A. Dixon, Oligarch Ohh-bom-bah-bin-dingy, he that never mentions NSDU-238, Anjali Kamat and Sharif Abdel-Koddous, 1972 white-Paper: journalist, civilian impact of US and NATO bombing, synergystic, Dai-ichi’s type radionuclides protection garments

Bio-sketch (2-27-16)…

I started into believing that I would be able to show my data and my photogRapHics in 1996. By 1998 I was learning computers would gain ascendant methods thru technics of programming for a future connected to data and information. That was nuclear-Molecular finding(s) to share and my personal-Activism w first account specifics and engendering(s).

As cameras went 'digital-Tech' I fond that editing was also to follow in 2004. Then, in 2005 my first digital camera had replaced usage(s) of s.l.r. 35 mm's. I have no mercy nor pity for the thieves who have stolen my hard werk, as anxiety of what I allowed was mid-stReam--anyway! Those asshole-Pukes have cost me $1,000's on a fixed income and I remain single, sole-Survivor of two-Families w.o. offspring!

This Post Has 0 Comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

15 + nineteen =

Back To Top
×Close search