Slashdot Mirror


Politics: Libyan Rebels Announce Creation of a Republic

An anonymous reader writes "A report in p2pnet.net says a 'declaration for a temporary council in the Republic of Libya' has been published. The story quotes Alive in Libya, which says Mustafa Abdul Jaleel is the president, and Abdul Hafid Abdul Qader Ghoga is the deputy president and official spokesman. No other details are given."

27 of 154 comments (clear)

  1. Irrelevant by the+linux+geek · · Score: 3, Insightful

    A declaration by some wing of a splintered popular uprising in an African country, reported by a news source with zero credibility? Is this what Slashdot has come to? :(

    1. Re:Irrelevant by ScentCone · · Score: 2

      Is this what Slashdot has come to? :(

      Strange, your user account number doesn't look like a brand new one. And you probably missed the similarly credentialed thread, earlier, about life from space.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    2. Re:Irrelevant by Majik+Sheff · · Score: 3, Funny

      A declaration by some wing of a splintered popular uprising in the New World? Who is this John Hancock fellow?

      --
      Women are like electronics: you don't know how damaged they are until you try to turn them on.
    3. Re:Irrelevant by MaskedSlacker · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The wealthy head of a crime (smuggling) syndicate.

  2. Re:Republic of Bob! by nthwaver · · Score: 2

    It'd be just about as legitimate as Gadafi's rule is.

  3. They have support by hajus · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This group actually has backing from the local city councils that have been working to keep the local infrastructure running.

    1. Re:They have support by hajus · · Score: 2

      There was some confusion a few days ago when some ex-justice that worked with the Gadaffi govt tried to form a provisional govt without support from all the rebel cities and not all the human rights people backed him. Ghoga at that point had stated they were working already on a council of some kind with all the rebel city councils.

      http://www.tri-cityherald.com/2011/02/27/1385560/libya-rebels-set-up-first-political.html

  4. Re:Not so fast... by whitehaint · · Score: 2

    But now the problem is to have any credibility you need to be recognized by another nation; to that end as the dictator of Free Republic of Jim I hearby do recognize the Republic of Bob as a sovereign nation.

  5. Re:Not so fast... by $RANDOMLUSER · · Score: 4, Insightful

    By the same token, we could talk about the 13 colonies and the British Crown. Remember, it's only treason if you lose.

    --
    No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
  6. Re:Not so fast... by ScentCone · · Score: 3, Insightful

    And if you lose, you end up in Gitmo.

    Which rebellious US citizen, caught here in the US attempting to overthrow the US government, has found themselves in Gitmo? Please be specific.

    --
    Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  7. Freedom Fatigue by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The amount of disparaging and dismissive comments made here, along with the generally tepid response in the West to the Libyan revolution(as well as the Arab revolutions in general) makes me feel that the West in general has no interest in democracy or freedom. Even amidst the general populace.

    Obviously the west has little to gain politically or economically from any wave of democracy in the middle east. But even ideologically, people in the west seemed to be totally uninterested in recent events in the region.

    Have we entered the age of "Meh, Freedom"? Maybe democracy, having hitched its fortunes to marketism and failed to deliver on its promises, has simply lost its lustre for westerners? Maybe the rise of China is turning people towards alternative forms of government? Maybe the west--and America in particular-- is tired of international conflicts and is entering a period of isolationism?

    I don't know what it is, but comparing interest in the Arab revolutions to the interest in the Orange and Velvet revolutions only a few years ago, I'm struck by the increase in apathy, and in some cases dismissal by people living older democracies.

    --
    May the Maths Be with you!
    1. Re:Freedom Fatigue by BJ_Covert_Action · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well, that's an interesting perspective, but do you actually have a comment count or anything like that to back up your claims? I've been following just about every Slashdot thread on the Jasmine Revolutions since the revolt in Tunisia and so far I've witnessed, primarily, nothing but support and excitement by the Slashdot crowd. Granted, there is the typical number of cynics that keeps saying stuff like, "Yeah, protests are all fun and games until someone fire bombs you!" but I think those are primarily meant to lighten the mood and help intelligent people cope with the reality that hits them when they understand that there are still people dying for freedom in this world.

      All in all, I would say that the /. crowd has been very supportive and even eager about the prospect of freedom revolutions both in the Middle East and elsewhere. Hell, I've even noticed a few folks talking about emulating the protests in their home countries. So, I don't know where you get the idea that we are all so apathetic. Perhaps it's just a self-imposed perspective thing?

    2. Re:Freedom Fatigue by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Maybe it's because, no matter which choices we make, we're going to get criticized by the usual suspects? This sort of thing does inspire cynicism. Let's grab a random example: PBS show on 1993 Somalia, "explores the well-intentioned, aborted, and ultimately tragic American effort to bring about stability and stop starvation." PBS show in 1994 Rwanda, "how the West ignored warnings of the 1994 Rwanda genocide and turned its back on the victims."

      It's the Kobayashi Maru - the no-win situation. And there's no reprogramming the computers this time. Is it any surprise that there is a lack of enthusiasm? You're bitching that we aren't doing anything, but the minute the first US Marine sets foot in Libya you'll change your tune to IMPERIALISM USA FASCISTS OIL HALLIBURTON EARTHQUAKE MACHINE 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB WHARRRGARBL

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    3. Re:Freedom Fatigue by toastar · · Score: 2

      perhaps we can do something without putting boots on the ground, Maybe a no fly zone?

    4. Re:Freedom Fatigue by BluBrick · · Score: 2

      Have we entered the age of "Meh, Freedom"?

      Thanks to the lawl, I can't own a ferret.

      A ferret, FFS.

      We've pretty much never known true freedom in the West, despite what propaganda and jingoism will tell you. Freedom, forsooth. I can't own a ferret. I can't take a leak outside on my property. I can't walk down the street with a beer in hand.

      Oh, joy, I can't be discriminated against for my race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, creed... Err, wait. At will employment. Wink wink, nudge nudge, we're firing you. Just firing you. K, thx, bye.

      I can't fly without having my papers inspected by Comrade Commissar. I can be shot up with cancer-causing radiation or sexually molested. If I went around irradiating people or groping their junk, they'd put me away.

      Freedom.

      Meh. Meh indeed, sir, meh indeed. Meh.

      Well fancy that! I would have thought it an oxymoron, but you sir, are vehemently apathetic.

      --
      Ahh - My eye!
      The doctor said I'm not supposed to get Slashdot in it!
    5. Re:Freedom Fatigue by DerekLyons · · Score: 2

      The amount of disparaging and dismissive comments made here, along with the generally tepid response in the West to the Libyan revolution(as well as the Arab revolutions in general) makes me feel that the West in general has no interest in democracy or freedom.

      General elections in Tunisia have been essentially suspended indefinitely. Egypt is in the hands of a military junta whose leader is a known supporter of the status quo ante. Libya hangs in the balance and anything could happen yet.
       
      What democracy and freedom are you referring to exactly?
       
      I know that most net denizen's are eager to twit "M1SS!0N ACC0MPL!S3D !1!1" so they can move on to their next shiny - but don't confuse the short attention span of the 'net with the real world.
       

      Have we entered the age of "Meh, Freedom"?

      No, we've entered an age of "being damn tired of dammed-if-we-do, dammed-if-we-don't" as so aptly explained by another commenter here.

    6. Re:Freedom Fatigue by Frangible · · Score: 2

      Can you blame them? We've been serious dicks to the Russians, from *publicly lying* about the Georgia / South Ossetia conflict (in actuality, Russia was not the aggressor, nor at fault) to the "Iranian" missile defense in Europe, and other assorted cold-war type stunts. The Russian people are pretty bitter, even about their own government and the oligarchies/corruption. I've read Izvestia and Russian comment threads periodically, and while they certainly criticize US/NATO over stuff like the above, they also voice approval when we do something non-stupid. Heck, I've seen liberals in the US that were less cognitively flexible.

      I don't think the Russians as a whole have any sort of wide-ranging anti-American bias or conspiracy, it's just that we keep kicking them in the nuts so they point the finger back at us. Russia has had its share of dealing with terrorism and muslim extremists, such as Chechnya (which we criticized them over), the Beslan hostage crisis (which we criticized them over), and the Moscow theater bombing (which we criti... you see the trend). It's certainly nothing like the "Zionist Jew-American Conspiracy" that a number of nutty left-wingers and Arab Muslims believe.

      I think we come across as very insincere in the previous mentioned incidents that contradict what we are saying our policies are, and the Russians certainly pick up on that. I bet you if we quit being dicks to Russia, our relations would improve.

  8. Somewhere between a coup and a revolution. by Animats · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's more than a coup attempt, but less than a revolution. The rebels claim a port city, there's some fighting near the capital. Some army units are supporting the rebellion. This is the normal form of regime change in some countries. The people at the top change, but the whole government isn't replaced.

    The announced head of the new government is a former justice minister. He seems to be the compromise choice of several factions, which is a good sign. Interestingly, this seems to be a secular rebellion. The leadership isn't talking about establishing an Islamic state.

    1. Re:Somewhere between a coup and a revolution. by Billly+Gates · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The rebels took half the country!

      It is a revolution. The people protested. Gadhafi sent troops to kill them. Unlike Egypt there was nothing else they could do but fight back with force.

      They want democracy so the next time an unpopular leader is around they can vote him or her out instead of taking the streets with weapons.

  9. Re:Republic of Bob! by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Informative

    If you enjoyed substantial popular support in said room, had recently captured a variety of arms caches, and were thus far holding the military of the existing regime at bay, while said regime takes a substantial battering in world opinion, it would in fact mean just as much...

    Dirty little not-really-secret is, virtually all declarations of nationhood are legally risible. Some were legally risible and supported by armed force and resources. Others were just risible all around.

  10. Republic, eh? by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Well, I must have missed where they held elections. Anyway, since the link is a typical Slashdot non-story, let's talk about Harvard university professors supporting Khadaffy instead. Nicholas Negroponte from OLPC accepted his money and is proud of his participation. The really outrageous detail is that these professors were complicit in the award of a fraudulent PhD. For that they should have their tenure revoked and their academic positions removed. Of course, this won't happen. If a buffoon like me showed up to protest Haah-vahd, I'd be laughed out of the discussion due to my lack of a doctorate, and even if I did have one, my Ph.D would be mocked as the award of an inferior school. Khadaffy's son Saif is hardly the first to have his Ph.D thesis written for him. Unfortunately this is a perfect example of the principles (or lack thereof) of the cultured, intellectual elite who are convinced that they should be in charge of America. That they are reprehensible scalawags who are for sale to a tyrant will never be accepted. It would be like a socialist accepting that her ideology resulted in the deaths of millions of 20th century humans. The consequences are just too much to bear thinking about.

    --
    Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    1. Re:Republic, eh? by francium+de+neobie · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Ok, let's say you're doing some kind of charity project like the OLPC, and you seriously need money to move your project forward, and you're just a MIT professor who'd been minding his research, and published a few books, for over 40 years.

      And Qadaffi, a leader of some African country which just happens to be in your target market, donates money to you so you can move your project forward. You've never been a diplomat so you don't really know what Qadaffi has been up to, but it's good money and probably some goodwill with a non-small African country. All you know is you can use that money to help a bunch of poor kids in Africa.

      Now, who wouldn't accept that money?! Seriously, get a grip. An MIT professor isn't some kind of all-knowing god.

    2. Re:Republic, eh? by takowl · · Score: 2

      Well, there's an important difference. An oil company would bribe dictators to let them make more money by extracting the country's resources. A non-profit organisation producing educational equipment takes their money and supplies educational equipment. I suppose it's possible that the dictator hands out the laptops only to his supporters, but it's hard to really see OLPC as somehow propping up a dictator.

  11. Re:Not so fast... by ScentCone · · Score: 2

    So, you just use "Gitmo" as a generic term for "prosecuted?"

    --
    Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  12. Libya is already a republic by seyyah · · Score: 2

    Libya is already known as the "Great Socialist People's Libyan Arab Republic" or in short the "Libyan Arab Republic".

  13. Re:Not so fast... by mdozturk · · Score: 2
  14. Re:Not so fast... by ScentCone · · Score: 2

    a country founded on rebellion and treason

    Ah, good ol' moral relativism!

    The colonists rebelled against a monarchy that was denying them the liberties that became the foundation of the new country's constitutional framework. People living in the country now, who violently promote, say, a society based on Sharia law (which is inconsistent with those liberties) aren't fighting for the same thing as those colonists two centuries ago. They are promoting an objectively inferior social contract, and it's right to prevent that effort when the attempts become violent. And even more so when they are aligned with foreign actors that have vowed the end of the coutry and the culture that lives there.

    Regardless, it's the violent ones that are in question, here. The country is full of people spouting off all sorts of nonsense and promoting everything from neo-Nazism to pan-global-Caliphates or just good old anarchy. And they get to keep right on doing so as long as they aren't trying to hurt people.

    --
    Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.