Al-Libi's Suicide
by BenthamiteMay 15th, 2009 at 12:54 AM
Filed under: News Story Commentary
 |
I was recently reading a CNN story on the torture issue, when I crossed the following paragraph: At that point, "The VP's office ordered them to continue the enhanced methods," Wilkerson wrote. "The detainee had not revealed any al Qaeda-Baghdad contacts yet. This ceased only after Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi, under waterboarding in Egypt, 'revealed' such contacts." Al-Libi's claim that Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein's government had trained al Qaeda operatives in producing chemical and biological weapons appeared in the October 2002 speech then-President Bush gave when pushing Congress to authorize military action against Iraq. It also was part of Powell's February 2003 presentation to the United Nations on the case for war, a speech Powell has called a "blot" on his record. Al-Libi later recanted the claim, saying it was made under torture by Egyptian intelligence agents, a claim Egypt denies. And then I hit this part: He [Al-Libi] died last week in a Libyan prison, reportedly a suicide, Human Rights Watch reported. Stacy Sullivan, a counterterrorism adviser for the U.S.-based group, called al-Libi's allegation "pivotal" to the Bush administration's case for war, as it connected Baghdad to the terrorist organization behind the 2001 attacks on New York and Washington. That single mention of a recent suicide, and in light of all the media attention torture is getting, I had to search for more info. I found a good article on the issue of Al-Libi's alleged suicide: "Coverage of al-Libi 'Suicide' Almost Wholly Absent from U.S. Mainstream Corporate Media" AB shared some very good information on torture in "Stupid is as stupid does," and I'm not writing to debate that subject. If our military can undergo waterboarding for training, as I read in the reference in AB's article, then I think threats to our country can as well. But my curiosity is on how timely alongside the recent media coverage on torture Al-Libi's death is. Now I can't say for sure if the media would attempt to interview him again if he were alive, but that's a possibility.  By no means am I suggesting that we shouldn't do what is necessary to protect our country---  However, I think it's worth looking into complex situations to try to better understand them in there entirety. I like to think that the corruption we see in movies is just pretend, but could it be true that Al-Libi's death was in someway forced or coaxed? |
 |
Rate this Article
Submit a Critique
Critiques
Show Oldest First
Detainees were abused and tortured not for what they knew, but to find a link between Saddam and Al-quida, where there was not one. -- Ryan29
until all the info is declassified one is unable to fully take an educated stand. -- Rob
It is also clear that the American people were lied to --Ryan29
until all the info is declassified one is unable to fully take an educated stand. -- Rob
the true terrorists were George W. Bush and his cronies, Cheney and Rummie. --Ryan29
I was not to happy with Mr. "W.baa.U"; but, we are safe and have been safe for over 7 years. I have no investment in the future, here on earth; so, if Mr. "Oh.bomb.ah" lets the Iranians get the A or H bomb, I really do not give much of a hoot. I think and believe that our hope will lie with the Israelis. If they do not act we will have one big problem for all of us. Mr. "Oh.bomb.ah" is like a little boy, told by his mother that he is in charge of the other kids. The power has gone to "Juniors" head.
I guess what I'm curious to know here is who actually thinks that the government is capable of such an act---basically murder (or the equivalent) to hide a information; yet, this act would have been initiated through the former president's administration if true.
I'm on the fence over the issue and definitely curious. I have heard rumors of the Clintons having people killed. Are things like that just rumors?
Here's another point, take political scandals. There have been many scandals gone public that probably could have been covered up but weren't. Now going back to this Al-Libi story, would murder really be needed? I mean would the former administration really care so much if the public and media criticized them once more (with No Weapons of Mass Destruction being the first major criticism) for a scandal (the scandal being that the torture results were not reliable but used anyway to initiate war)? The Weapons of Mass lie was criticized for basically the same reason the torture of Al-Libi would be if it were true that Libi's testimony was a lie just to avoid torture---both were used as a reason to go to war.
Or would the motive for preventing access to Al-Libi be solely to preserve the US reputation abroad? Either way, who makes such a decision and how could it be controlled? ---This is my big problem with conspiracy theory in general: I don't see how elaborate cover-ups can be maintained in such a curious and media-centric world.
I guess I believe that murder or the equivalent could take place to cover-up actions of a presidential administration, since I know worse cover-ups happen all the time with local government (e.g., police) and corporations---we can read about them in almost any regional newspaper.
However, even though I believe it may be possible that Al-Libi was "silenced," what still remains unanswered is why the media isn't working full force to get more information. I've always thought that the media was too big and diverse for any particular entity (e.g., government and corporations) to control its actions.
I heard about this story as well. It is becoming more and mor eclear that under W, Detainees were abused and tortured not for what they knew, but to find a link between Sadaam and Al-quida, where there was not one. It si also clear that the American people were lied to and the true terrorists were George W. Busha nd his cronies, Cheney and Rummie.
Then why won't the big O declassify those memos that Cheney says shows that there was good intell as well. The memos that were already released show that an attack on LA was prevented. Its well established that you hate Bush and that's your right but look at things with your head not your heart.
I have read 10 or more of these "reports". They all are about the same. Let me brake this one down.
Think, my brother, think! -- Navy_Rob
This is not about "Al-Libi's death".
This is not even about it being "reportedly a suicide" or "Al-Libi's alleged suicide".
This is about, he was murdered to keep him from talking.
This is about, "Bush lied, thousands died".
This is about, "W.baa.U" had him killed.
Read it the way I do:
"Al-Libi's claim ... made under torture ... (falsely claimed) Saddam Hussein's government had trained al Qaeda operatives! ... President Bush ... (used this) "pivotal" allegation ... when pushing Congress to authorize military action against Iraq. (This lie of Mr. "W.baa.Us" was the reason Powell gave a speech he later) called a "blot" on his record."
To top it off:
"The detainee had not revealed any al Qaeda-Baghdad contacts yet. This ceased only after ... waterboarding in Egypt ..."
What can we assume from this last line?
"Torture" does not work.
People lie to stop being "tortured".
I’m sorry after reading my post several times I still fail to see where I questioned if the enhanced interrogations are efficient or not. I purposely stayed away from the piece of bait because until all the info is declassified one is unable to fully take an educated stand.
It can be done.
Dead Teen’s Mother Testifies about Daughter’s Vulnerability in MySpace Suicide Case — Update
Ok so a mentally ill 13 year old killed herself but you have to admit there is more here than just the cyber bullying that caused the event.
I heard about this story as well. It is becoming more and mor eclear that under W, Detainees were abused and tortured not for what they knew, but to find a link between Sadaam and Al-quida, where there was not one. It si also clear that the American people were lied to and the true terrorists were George W. Busha nd his cronies, Cheney and Rummie.
How can somebody be coaxed into killing themselves? -- Retired_Navy_Rob
I have read 10 or more of these "reports". They all are about the same. Let me brake this one down.
Think, my brother, think! -- Navy_Rob
This is not about "Al-Libi's death".
This is not even about it being "reportedly a suicide" or "Al-Libi's alleged suicide".
This is about, he was murdered to keep him from talking.
This is about, "Bush lied, thousands died".
This is about, "W.baa.U" had him killed.
Read it the way I do:
"Al-Libi's claim ... made under torture ... (falsely claimed) Saddam Hussein's government had trained al Qaeda operatives! ... President Bush ... (used this) "pivotal" allegation ... when pushing Congress to authorize military action against Iraq. (This lie of Mr. "W.baa.Us" was the reason Powell gave a speech he later) called a "blot" on his record."
To top it off:
"The detainee had not revealed any al Qaeda-Baghdad contacts yet. This ceased only after ... waterboarding in Egypt ..."
What can we assume from this last line?
"Torture" does not work.
People lie to stop being "tortured".
How can somebody be coaxed into killing themselves? -- Retired_Navy_Rob
It can be done.
Dead Teen’s Mother Testifies about Daughter’s Vulnerability in MySpace Suicide Case — Update
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2008/11/lori-drew-pla-1/
How can somebody be coaxed into killing themselves? What ever happened to personal accountability. No matter what is said or done the act was committed by them. This is as bad as back in the early 90s parents blaming rock groups for their children's suicide.
References
Visit (http://www.cnn.com)
"Coverage of al-Libi 'Suicide' Almost Wholly Absent from U.S. Mainstream Corporate Media" (Brad Blog)
Visit (http://www.bradblog.com)
"Stupid is as stupid does." or A can of Worms. (TAC)
Visit (http://theamericancritic.com)
Why would "W.baa.U" do something so stupid? It had already came out that the terrorist claimed he lied under torture. Killing the terrorist is a dumb move, no motive, to late to help "W.baa.U".
Yes, they are just rumors, unless some one comes forward with proof. The rumors I like about "Billy Jeff" are the rape rumors.
No. There is no reason, the damage was done a long time ago. The terrorist had nothing new to say.
Old news. Same thing. Why? He would gain nothing. This is just another way to dump on "W.baa.U". Who cares! He is not the man in charges, "Junior is. The question is why cover old ground, is it a cover for something new from the "Bomber" White House? What are they doing behind this smoke screen?
What reputation? We have a "Leader" that is acting like a movie star and a dictator all rolled into one. What reputation are you talking about? He fires CEOs, tells banks what to do with their companies, will not let them give bail out money back, tells the creditors that they have to take a loss while he gives the unions a bigger cut of a company the creditors paid for. What reputation? Who will invest in a company if they have no profits? Even the 'commies' think he is going crazy. I love the way he is getting even the people that voted for him so upset. War is going on and getting bigger. Trials by military courts. Enemies are friends and friends are enemies. Excellent work "Junior", the Dems are more upset then the Reps.
It's a none story, is why. Why go after a story that makes no since. "W.baa.U" had no reason to kill the man. He was in a jail worse then being in hell. He was doing time in a third world country. Picture that. He was in hell, no one wanted to talk to him, he was 'old news', why kill him? No return on the effort. Nothing to gain, ramble ramble repeat repeat etc etc ...