independent and unofficial
Prince fan community site
Mon 11th Dec 2017 11:05am
Welcome! Sign up or enter username and password to remember me
Forum jump
Forums > Politics & Religion > Slavery in Libya
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Reply   New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
Author

Tweet     Share

Message
Thread started 12/02/17 7:07am

KoolEaze

avatar

Slavery in Libya

I was going to post this much earlier but thought it had been discussed before but now I see it hasn´t.

Since Ghaddafi is dead and no longer in charge there is a huge backlash against African citizens from sub-Saharan African countries.

Now don´t get me wrong, I´m not saying that I liked Ghaddadi because I didn´t but at least he was concerned about the wellbeing of many African countries, he worked on uniting Africa and making its countries stronger and more independent, and he wanted to introduce a new African currency called the gold dinar and no longer wanted to do business with dollars (much like Saddam´s idea to change from petrodollar to euro).

The bitter irony is that now that he is gone his country has turned into an extremely racist, backward thinking cesspool of radical Islamists and slavetraders, something that Ghaddafi would have fought in his lifetime.

He warned European countries of this scenario in case they get rid of him, and it turns out he was right about the rise of Islamic terrorists in his country and the dire situation for black Africans.

So, what do you think? How should the international community address this issue? And why isn´t there more outrage about this?

" I´d rather be a stank ass hoe because I´m not stupid. Oh my goodness! I got more drugs! I´m always funny dude...I´m hilarious! Are we gonna smoke?"




http://kooleasehvac.com/
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #1 posted 12/02/17 7:16am

NorthC

I think there isn't more outrage because all the people who end up in this horrible situation at least won't make it to Europe. Cynical though it may be, for a lot of Europeans it is, as we say in Dutch, "far from my bed".
And the only way to really stop this is to create better opportunities for people in Africa itself. But then immediately the political right will start complaining that development aid is a waste of money and we should take care of ourselves first.
[Edited 12/2/17 7:21am]
Don't ever lose your dreams.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #2 posted 12/02/17 7:29am

midnightmover

It's a total tragedy what has happened in Libya and it was completely predictable. That's our mess right there. But after we destroyed the country we simply walzed off into the sunset like nothing happened.

The Manchester bomber and his jihadist father were two terrorists sent out there by the British government in 2011. The skill needed to make that suicide vest was probably acquired in Libya after we turned it into a terror training camp.

It's depressing to even think about black Africans now being slaves there simply because of their colour.

“The man who never looks into a newspaper is better informed than he who reads them, inasmuch as he who knows nothing is nearer to truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods and errors.”
- Thomas Jefferson
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #3 posted 12/02/17 7:30am

KoolEaze

avatar

NorthC said:

I think there isn't more outrage because all the people who end up in this horrible situation at least won't make it to Europe. Cynical though it may be, for a lot of Europeans it is, as we say in Dutch, "far from my bed". And the only way to really stop this is to create better opportunities for people in Africa itself. But then immediately the political right will start complaining that development aid is a waste of money and we should take care of ourselves first. [Edited 12/2/17 7:21am]

Agree on both points but it would be much, much cheaper to help them in their respective countries than just letting millions of people migrate to Europe. Besides, sometimes it is just small steps that need to be taken, like making sure that the coastal countries can still survive on fishing (they can´t because many foreign ships just go and steal their fish), or we send them cheap meats and poultry and the local industries suffer. It´s a long story and I´m sure you already know all about it.

And yes, people are cynical these days and are just glad about every single person who can´t make it to Europe.

It´s also sad that certain European countries and Turkey are paying the price for the political mistakes of other countries, while those other countries are very stubborn when it comes to letting in immigrants. We are paying the price for wars that we did not want in the first place, and not just financially.

" I´d rather be a stank ass hoe because I´m not stupid. Oh my goodness! I got more drugs! I´m always funny dude...I´m hilarious! Are we gonna smoke?"




http://kooleasehvac.com/
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #4 posted 12/02/17 8:13am

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

slavery is very much alive and thriving. Like banning drugs there is always going to be someone that will find a way. There is a very bad problem in the US with human trafficking and slavery.

One of the huge areas is the sex industry.

"I was raped by the Arkansas AG who then becomes Governor & President..." Juanita Broaddrick
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #5 posted 12/02/17 8:20am

KoolEaze

avatar

OnlyNDaUsa said:

slavery is very much alive and thriving. Like banning drugs there is always going to be someone that will find a way. There is a very bad problem in the US with human trafficking and slavery.

One of the huge areas is the sex industry.

Oh, definitely, and I am aware of that. However, in the US you can at least try to escape, or maybe the police can help you, or Amnesty International, or you can somehow find a way out but those people are stuck in Libya. Most can´t go back to their countries either because they have run out of money.

But yes, the sex industry is a big issue these days. Over here, too.

" I´d rather be a stank ass hoe because I´m not stupid. Oh my goodness! I got more drugs! I´m always funny dude...I´m hilarious! Are we gonna smoke?"




http://kooleasehvac.com/
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #6 posted 12/02/17 8:29am

2freaky4church
1

avatar

Only, you have first hand knowledge?

DJ is da man
"2freaky is very down." 2Elijah.
"2freaky convinced me to join Antifa: OnlyNDA
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #7 posted 12/02/17 3:08pm

IanRG

The implicit assumption by this thread and those seeking to blame others for their own political purposes is that the slave trade in Libya did not exist prior to Ghaddifi's removal. This is simply not true:

.

LIBYA (TIER 2 Watch List) [Extracted from U.S. State Dept Trafficking in Persons Report, June 2009]

Libya is a transit and destination country for men and women from sub-Saharan Africa and Asia trafficked for the purposes of forced labor and commercial sexual exploitation. Migrants typically seek employment in Libya as laborers and domestic employees or transit Libya en route to Europe. Both migrants and trafficking victims are routinely smuggled through Libya to Europe, especially to or through Italy and Malta, en route to various locations on the continent. Libya’s migrant population of 1.5 to 2 million represents about one-third of its overall population. Although precise figures are unavailable, foreign observers estimate that one-half to one percent of foreigners (i.e., up to 20,000 people) may be victims of trafficking. In some cases, smuggling debts and illegal status leave migrants vulnerable to coercion, resulting in cases of forced prostitution and forced labor; employers of irregular migrants sometimes withhold payment or travel documents. As in previous years, there were reports that women from sub-Saharan Africa were trafficked to Libya for the purposes of commercial sexual exploitation. In May 2008, Nigerian officials arrested one of their nationals, a resident of Libya, and rescued 21 young women who they claimed were being trafficked for the purpose of prostitution in Europe after paying the trafficker fees to work as maids in Libya.

The Government of Libya does not fully comply with the minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking; however, it is making significant efforts to do so. Despite these overall efforts, the government did not show evidence of progress in investigating and prosecuting trafficking offenses and protecting trafficking victims; Libya is therefore placed on Tier 2 Watch List.

.

Note the date: it is before Ghaddiafi's removal - The worst you can say is the destabilisation caused by the Civil war may have increased the trafficking volumes. Slavery and trafficking is a world wide problem - it affects all countries.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #8 posted 12/03/17 7:56am

midnightmover

Trafficking is one thing. Slave auctions held in broad daylight are something else. That was not happening in Gadaffi's time. I don't think it's possible to seperate this new development from the general breakdown that has followed since Gadaffi was removed. In 2010 Libya had the highest rating on the UN's Development Index in the whole of the African continent. That measures healthcare, social security, life expectancy and other things. They were doing well in those terms. Now Libya is a hell-hole. We did that. Even Obama said that Libya was his "biggest mistake". I've yet to hear an apology from Hillary Clinton or David Cameron.

“The man who never looks into a newspaper is better informed than he who reads them, inasmuch as he who knows nothing is nearer to truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods and errors.”
- Thomas Jefferson
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #9 posted 12/03/17 11:16am

IanRG

midnightmover said:

Trafficking is one thing. Slave auctions held in broad daylight are something else. That was not happening in Gadaffi's time. I don't think it's possible to seperate this new development from the general breakdown that has followed since Gadaffi was removed. In 2010 Libya had the highest rating on the UN's Development Index in the whole of the African continent. That measures healthcare, social security, life expectancy and other things. They were doing well in those terms. Now Libya is a hell-hole. We did that. Even Obama said that Libya was his "biggest mistake". I've yet to hear an apology from Hillary Clinton or David Cameron.

.

So - We must never help anyone overthrow a dictator because it then be our fault that the slave trade they actively practiced under that dictator will become more open in the period of instability afterwards?

.

Obama said intervening in Libya was the right thing to do but failing to prepare for the aftermath of Gaddafi being oustered was his biggest mistake. He did not say Libya was his biggest mistake, that is your spin. What he meant was the USA, UK and France should have intervened more afterwards and not been distracted as he accused UK and France of being (and by implication himself). By "we" you assume I am from one of these places - I am not.

.

The acts of the Libyan slave traders are the acts of the Libyan slave traders as allowed by the Libyan Government - this applies whether it was the Gaddafi dictatorship choosing to do nothing to prevent it or the current goverment's lack of effectiveness meaning they can do nothing to prevent it.

[Edited 12/3/17 11:18am]

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #10 posted 12/03/17 11:40am

2elijah

avatar

Yes it’s disgusting and horrific what’s going on in Africa, and many being butchered/murdered for their organs. It makes one wonder about the evils against humanity that continue to exist in the world.



[yrl]https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2017/11/30/african-and-european-leaders-want-to-evacuate-thousands-mired-in-libyan-slave-trade/?utm_term=.15ef69cb99d7[/url]



African and European leaders want to evacuate thousands mired in Libyan slave trade

By Max Bearak
November 30


African and European leaders concluded a summit in the Ivory Coast on Wednesday that was meant to focus on economic cooperation but was largely overshadowed by furor over the ongoing exploitation of African migrants en route to Europe in Libya.

A recent CNN report provided video evidence of what human rights organizations and aid agencies have been warning for years: In addition to facing utterly dismal conditions in Libyan detention camps, migrants are being bought and sold as slaves.

Late on Wednesday, the leaders of Libya, France, Germany, Chad, Niger and four other countries agreed to attempt a massive and imminent evacuation of migrants who are trapped in the camps. Most would be taken back to their home countries, according to the agreement. A night earlier, Libyan authorities in conjunction with the United Nations' refugee agency flew 240 Nigerians back to their country of origin.


One of the African Union's top officials, Moussa Faki Mahamat, told the gathered leaders that by his organization's estimates, there could be anywhere between 400,000 to 700,000 African migrants stuck in Libya against their will. The plans drafted Wednesday indicate that the first evacuation push will target 3,800 migrants.

Migrants, mostly from West African countries, transit through Libya in hopes of embarking from its shores on often flimsy boats intended to deliver them to Europe, but they often capsize or are turned back by the Libyan coast guard. Thousands drown each year. They are mostly escaping conflict and grinding poverty in their home countries.

Libya, which has not had a unified national government since its longtime leader Moammar Gaddafi was deposed in 2011, has been accused of abetting a growing slave trade by refusing outside access to the camps and for not cracking down on the trade's operatives. But recent changes in the European Union's migration policies have also attracted withering criticism for their role in trapping migrants in lawless Libya.
[Edited 12/3/17 11:45am]
'Trump voters got Hoodwinked by Trump' popcorn coke
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #11 posted 12/03/17 11:47am

2freaky4church
1

avatar

You do know Obama supported the destruction of Libya?

DJ is da man
"2freaky is very down." 2Elijah.
"2freaky convinced me to join Antifa: OnlyNDA
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #12 posted 12/03/17 12:15pm

IanRG

2freaky4church1 said:

You do know Obama supported the destruction of Libya?

.

So the Libyans could continue to do their slave trading?

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #13 posted 12/04/17 11:28am

morningsong

avatar

“Do I dare Disturb the universe?”
― T.S. Eliot

“Only by acceptance of the past, can you alter it”
― T.S. Eliot
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #14 posted 12/09/17 1:25am

midnightmover

IanRG said:

midnightmover said:

Trafficking is one thing. Slave auctions held in broad daylight are something else. That was not happening in Gadaffi's time. I don't think it's possible to seperate this new development from the general breakdown that has followed since Gadaffi was removed. In 2010 Libya had the highest rating on the UN's Development Index in the whole of the African continent. That measures healthcare, social security, life expectancy and other things. They were doing well in those terms. Now Libya is a hell-hole. We did that. Even Obama said that Libya was his "biggest mistake". I've yet to hear an apology from Hillary Clinton or David Cameron.

.

So - We must never help anyone overthrow a dictator because it then be our fault that the slave trade they actively practiced under that dictator will become more open in the period of instability afterwards?

.

Obama said intervening in Libya was the right thing to do but failing to prepare for the aftermath of Gaddafi being oustered was his biggest mistake. He did not say Libya was his biggest mistake, that is your spin. What he meant was the USA, UK and France should have intervened more afterwards and not been distracted as he accused UK and France of being (and by implication himself). By "we" you assume I am from one of these places - I am not.

.

The acts of the Libyan slave traders are the acts of the Libyan slave traders as allowed by the Libyan Government - this applies whether it was the Gaddafi dictatorship choosing to do nothing to prevent it or the current goverment's lack of effectiveness meaning they can do nothing to prevent it.

[Edited 12/3/17 11:18am]

The fact that you now have slave auctions in Libya (which was not happening before) is yet another sign of how the formerly stable and prosperous Libya has collapsed into an anarcho state following the removal of Gadaffi. That is not an opinion, it's a fact.

Furthermore, it was an entirely predictable outcome. I know that because I predicted it myself at the time. Furthermore, Gadaffi was actually our friend and partner at the time (one of many dictators we have been friends with). The bombing of Libya and arming of terrorists there in 2011 was state hooliganism masquerading as humanitarianism. And the effects of that Al Qaeda support mission (which was effectively what it was) have extended way beyond Libya (even more so than with our other crazy war in Iraq).

BTW, the report you quoted made it quite clear that Gadaffi's government was making efforts to stamp out human trafficking so I don't know why you are saying that he "chose to do nothing to prevent it". It should be pointed out also that Libya was just one of about 150 countries in that report. Clearly it's a global problem, but our war of aggression there has made it worse. Slave auctions are something most of us thought had been left behind in the 19th century. But Libya is now such a lawless hellhole that it can thrive.

Black people living in Libya have particularly suffered since the fall of Gadaffi. They could always find employment there before and Gadaffi was supportive of them. Once he was removed they were among the first to be targeted by the rebels. Here's a report on that from the time.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

'Libyans don't like people with dark skin, but some are innocent'

Any black African can expect arrest without proof he was not part of Gaddafi's forces. Patrick Cockburn reports from Tripoli
  • Monday 29 August 2011 23:00 BST

641262.binA Gaddafi loyalist is detained by rebel forces in Tripoli Reuters

Yassin Bahr, a tall thin Senegalese in torn blue jeans, volubly denies that he was ever a mercenary or fought for Muammar Gaddafi.

Speaking in quick nervous sentences, Mr Bahr tries to convince a suspicious local militia leader in charge of the police station in the Faraj district of Tripoli, that he is a building worker who has been arrested simply because of his colour. "I liked Gaddafi, but I never fought for him," Mr Bahr says, adding that he had worked in Libya for three years laying tiles.

But the Libyan rebels are hostile to black Africans in general. One of the militiamen, who have been in control of the police station since the police fled, said simply: "Libyan people don't like people with dark skins, though some of them may be innocent."

Going by Mr Bahr's experience, any black African in Libya is open to summary arrest unless he can prove that he was not a member of Colonel Gaddafi's forces.

Fathi, a building contractor who did not want to give his full name and was temporarily running the police station, wanted to know why Mr Bahr had a special residence permit that an immigrant worker would not normally obtain. "You must have been fighting for Gaddafi to have a permit like this," he said. Mr Bahr said that three years earlier he had walked through the Sahara and crossed the Libyan border illegally with other West Africans looking for work. They had been picked up by the Libyan police, but he had eventually bribed them to get a residence permit. He had been watching television with nine other African immigrants when they were arrested, though no arms were found in the house.

Racism against black Africans and Libyans with dark skin has long simmered in Libya. Before the war there were estimated to be a million illegal immigrants in the country, which has a population of six million and a workforce of 1.7 million.

In 2000 there were anti-immigrant riots in which dozens of workers from countries like Ghana, Cameroon, Niger, Chad, Nigeria and Burkina Faso were killed. The war has deepened racial hostility. The rebels claim that many of Colonel Gaddafi's soldiers were black African mercenaries. Amnesty International says these allegations are largely unproven and, from the beginning of the conflict, many of those arrested or, in some cases, executed by the rebels were undocumented labourers caught in the wrong place at the wrong time.

But there is no doubt that all black Africans are now under suspicion. The head of the militia in Faraj, a short bearded man in a brown robe named Issam, explained how well-prepared local insurgents had taken over the area on 19 August, telling Colonel Gaddafi's supporters to hand over their weapons and stay at home. There was almost no resistance from the demoralised regime and few people had been arrested. Then Issam added, as an aside, that his men had also detained "tens of Africans whom we sent off to prison". He did not explain why they had been jailed.

Black African immigrants in the past benefited from Gaddafi's aspiration to be a pan-African leader. The position of illegal immigrants was always uncertain, but they were essential to the economy. With the fall of Gaddafi, those who have not already fled face persecution or even murder. Last weekend 30 bodies of mostly black men, several of them handcuffed and others already wounded, were found after an apparent mass execution at a roundabout near Gaddafi's Bab al-Aziziya headquarters.

Issam, the temporary chief of police, insisted that Mr Bahr had not been mistreated and was being fed well. Any interview with a prisoner must come with a health warning, since he or she are unlikely to speak freely about their treatment while still under arrest. Mr Bahr confirmed that he was being well treated, but he did look very frightened.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/libyans-dont-like-people-with-dark-skin-but-some-are-innocent-2345859.html

“The man who never looks into a newspaper is better informed than he who reads them, inasmuch as he who knows nothing is nearer to truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods and errors.”
- Thomas Jefferson
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #15 posted 12/09/17 1:39am

midnightmover

Here are some news reports from the time. In the first report you see black Africans detained by the rebels on false claims that they were Gadaffi fighters; they weren't; what they were was black and it was being black that made them targets for these rebels. If the British film crew hadn't been there those men would almost certainly have been killed, tortured or sold into slavery. The other reports show black people murdered by the rebels. As one of the journalists said "It's a bad time to be a black man in Libya". (Health Warning: for some reason this video puts an Alex Jones excerpt at the end, but don't let that put you off)

Mass Murder of Blacks in Libya

“The man who never looks into a newspaper is better informed than he who reads them, inasmuch as he who knows nothing is nearer to truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods and errors.”
- Thomas Jefferson
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #16 posted 12/09/17 2:47pm

IanRG

midnightmover said:

IanRG said:

.

So - We must never help anyone overthrow a dictator because it then be our fault that the slave trade they actively practiced under that dictator will become more open in the period of instability afterwards?

.

Obama said intervening in Libya was the right thing to do but failing to prepare for the aftermath of Gaddafi being oustered was his biggest mistake. He did not say Libya was his biggest mistake, that is your spin. What he meant was the USA, UK and France should have intervened more afterwards and not been distracted as he accused UK and France of being (and by implication himself). By "we" you assume I am from one of these places - I am not.

.

The acts of the Libyan slave traders are the acts of the Libyan slave traders as allowed by the Libyan Government - this applies whether it was the Gaddafi dictatorship choosing to do nothing to prevent it or the current goverment's lack of effectiveness meaning they can do nothing to prevent it.

[Edited 12/3/17 11:18am]

The fact that you now have slave auctions in Libya (which was not happening before) is yet another sign of how the formerly stable and prosperous Libya has collapsed into an anarcho state following the removal of Gadaffi. That is not an opinion, it's a fact.

Furthermore, it was an entirely predictable outcome. I know that because I predicted it myself at the time. Furthermore, Gadaffi was actually our friend and partner at the time (one of many dictators we have been friends with). The bombing of Libya and arming of terrorists there in 2011 was state hooliganism masquerading as humanitarianism. And the effects of that Al Qaeda support mission (which was effectively what it was) have extended way beyond Libya (even more so than with our other crazy war in Iraq).

BTW, the report you quoted made it quite clear that Gadaffi's government was making efforts to stamp out human trafficking so I don't know why you are saying that he "chose to do nothing to prevent it". It should be pointed out also that Libya was just one of about 150 countries in that report. Clearly it's a global problem, but our war of aggression there has made it worse. Slave auctions are something most of us thought had been left behind in the 19th century. But Libya is now such a lawless hellhole that it can thrive.

.

Why are you so hell bent on making a difference between the slave trade that was practiced in Ghadaffi's Libya and the slave trade that is being practiced now? It has only changed in magnitude. It is still slave trading INCLUDING processes to buy and sell people. YES, the Libyans who are failing to set up an effective government after they removed Ghadaffi are doing a worse job at preventing the slave trade, but they did not create the slave trade in Libya - it grew out of what was already being done under Ghadaffi. (In this tragedy, they are also failing elsewhere - Hence Obama's regret at not helping manage the aftermath).

.

Anyone who thinks slave trafficking (including auctions) died in the 19th century simply has not been paying attention. Anyone who thinks the buying and selling of slaves during Ghaddafi's time must not have involved any auctioning process is simply being naive.

.

BTW, the report made it quite clear that Ghadaffi's government KNEW very well that they had a slave trade problem. Despite this, they did NOT comply with minimum standards to eliminate their slave trade. This is damning because they are not merely just 1 of 150 countries but Libya has been recognised as a MAJOR gateway for the slave trade for a very long time - centuries. Particularly in regards to Ghadaffi's government, the report said the Government was making no progress in investigating and prosecuting trafficking offenses and protecting trafficking victims. It is worse now, but it was bad then.

.

I said in my first post that "Slavery and trafficking is a world wide problem - it affects all countries." That you, 8 days later, seek to make the same point as if I did not is telling.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #17 posted 12/09/17 11:12pm

midnightmover

IanRG said:

midnightmover said:

The fact that you now have slave auctions in Libya (which was not happening before) is yet another sign of how the formerly stable and prosperous Libya has collapsed into an anarcho state following the removal of Gadaffi. That is not an opinion, it's a fact.

Furthermore, it was an entirely predictable outcome. I know that because I predicted it myself at the time. Furthermore, Gadaffi was actually our friend and partner at the time (one of many dictators we have been friends with). The bombing of Libya and arming of terrorists there in 2011 was state hooliganism masquerading as humanitarianism. And the effects of that Al Qaeda support mission (which was effectively what it was) have extended way beyond Libya (even more so than with our other crazy war in Iraq).

BTW, the report you quoted made it quite clear that Gadaffi's government was making efforts to stamp out human trafficking so I don't know why you are saying that he "chose to do nothing to prevent it". It should be pointed out also that Libya was just one of about 150 countries in that report. Clearly it's a global problem, but our war of aggression there has made it worse. Slave auctions are something most of us thought had been left behind in the 19th century. But Libya is now such a lawless hellhole that it can thrive.

.

Why are you so hell bent on making a difference between the slave trade that was practiced in Ghadaffi's Libya and the slave trade that is being practiced now? It has only changed in magnitude. It is still slave trading INCLUDING processes to buy and sell people. YES, the Libyans who are failing to set up an effective government after they removed Ghadaffi are doing a worse job at preventing the slave trade, but they did not create the slave trade in Libya - it grew out of what was already being done under Ghadaffi. (In this tragedy, they are also failing elsewhere - Hence Obama's regret at not helping manage the aftermath).

.

Anyone who thinks slave trafficking (including auctions) died in the 19th century simply has not been paying attention. Anyone who thinks the buying and selling of slaves during Ghaddafi's time must not have involved any auctioning process is simply being naive.

.

BTW, the report made it quite clear that Ghadaffi's government KNEW very well that they had a slave trade problem. Despite this, they did NOT comply with minimum standards to eliminate their slave trade. This is damning because they are not merely just 1 of 150 countries but Libya has been recognised as a MAJOR gateway for the slave trade for a very long time - centuries. Particularly in regards to Ghadaffi's government, the report said the Government was making no progress in investigating and prosecuting trafficking offenses and protecting trafficking victims. It is worse now, but it was bad then.

.

I said in my first post that "Slavery and trafficking is a world wide problem - it affects all countries." That you, 8 days later, seek to make the same point as if I did not is telling.

The report you cited lists Libya as one of 150 countries in which human trafficking is a problem. It does not list Libya as one of the worst. We should be clear on that.

Neither you nor I have any objective measurement of the amount of human trafficking going on then compared to now. But given that the country has descended into lawlessness and anarchy since the removal of Gadaffi, given that terrorism has increased there, given that poverty has increased there, and given that blacks have been singled out for the harshest possible treatment since Gadaffi's fall, and since we are now seeing slave auctions in Libya (something which we never saw before) I think it is a VERY safe bet that the problem has gotten much worse since NATO's disastrous intervention.


That is my only point. And it's a point which you have agreed with. So we're done here. Adieu.

[Edited 12/9/17 23:56pm]

“The man who never looks into a newspaper is better informed than he who reads them, inasmuch as he who knows nothing is nearer to truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods and errors.”
- Thomas Jefferson
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #18 posted 12/10/17 12:28am

Astasheiks

avatar

KoolEaze said:

I was going to post this much earlier but thought it had been discussed before but now I see it hasn´t.

Since Ghaddafi is dead and no longer in charge there is a huge backlash against African citizens from sub-Saharan African countries.

Now don´t get me wrong, I´m not saying that I liked Ghaddadi because I didn´t but at least he was concerned about the wellbeing of many African countries, he worked on uniting Africa and making its countries stronger and more independent, and he wanted to introduce a new African currency called the gold dinar and no longer wanted to do business with dollars (much like Saddam´s idea to change from petrodollar to euro).

The bitter irony is that now that he is gone his country has turned into an extremely racist, backward thinking cesspool of radical Islamists and slavetraders, something that Ghaddafi would have fought in his lifetime.

He warned European countries of this scenario in case they get rid of him, and it turns out he was right about the rise of Islamic terrorists in his country and the dire situation for black Africans.

So, what do you think? How should the international community address this issue? And why isn´t there more outrage about this?

Looks like the person buying the slave in the white shirt is Black Or he is one of the pair of slaves that have just been bought, Either way he is smiling. So what the heck is that?

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #19 posted 12/10/17 1:39am

IanRG

midnightmover said:

IanRG said:

.

Why are you so hell bent on making a difference between the slave trade that was practiced in Ghadaffi's Libya and the slave trade that is being practiced now? It has only changed in magnitude. It is still slave trading INCLUDING processes to buy and sell people. YES, the Libyans who are failing to set up an effective government after they removed Ghadaffi are doing a worse job at preventing the slave trade, but they did not create the slave trade in Libya - it grew out of what was already being done under Ghadaffi. (In this tragedy, they are also failing elsewhere - Hence Obama's regret at not helping manage the aftermath).

.

Anyone who thinks slave trafficking (including auctions) died in the 19th century simply has not been paying attention. Anyone who thinks the buying and selling of slaves during Ghaddafi's time must not have involved any auctioning process is simply being naive.

.

BTW, the report made it quite clear that Ghadaffi's government KNEW very well that they had a slave trade problem. Despite this, they did NOT comply with minimum standards to eliminate their slave trade. This is damning because they are not merely just 1 of 150 countries but Libya has been recognised as a MAJOR gateway for the slave trade for a very long time - centuries. Particularly in regards to Ghadaffi's government, the report said the Government was making no progress in investigating and prosecuting trafficking offenses and protecting trafficking victims. It is worse now, but it was bad then.

.

I said in my first post that "Slavery and trafficking is a world wide problem - it affects all countries." That you, 8 days later, seek to make the same point as if I did not is telling.

The report you cited lists Libya as one of 150 countries in which human trafficking is a problem. It does not list Libya as one of the worst. We should be clear on that.

Neither you nor I have any objective measurement of the amount of human trafficking going on then compared to now. But given that the country has descended into lawlessness and anarchy since the removal of Gadaffi, given that terrorism has increased there, given that poverty has increased there, and given that blacks have been singled out for the harshest possible treatment since Gadaffi's fall, and since we are now seeing slave auctions in Libya (something which we never saw before) I think it is a VERY safe bet that the problem has gotten much worse since NATO's disastrous intervention.


That is my only point. And it's a point which you have agreed with. So we're done here. Adieu.

[Edited 12/9/17 23:56pm]

.

I am happy to agree with you that the slave trade INCLUDING processes to buy and sell slaves existed as a very serious problem in Libya under Ghadaffi that has been made worse by the failure of the Libyan government to control its own country since it freed itself of Ghadaffi with the assistance of Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Denmark, France, Greece, Italy, Jordan, Netherlands, Norway, Qatar, Romania, Spain, Sweden, Turkey, UAE, UK and USA on 20/11/2011 (Note: Not all NATO countries were involved and not all involved countries are in NATO).

.

I am horrified that the slave trade has got worse when it was so bad under Ghadaffi that the people running auctions and trafficking were not being investigated or prosecuted and there was no protection for victims under Ghadaffi. This descent is more likely to been with the descent into the Second Civil War in 2014 between the democratically elected Government and various Islamist and Tuareg groups.

.

I am unconvinced by your dismissal of Libya as just 1 out of 150 countries with slave trading problems when it was well known that Libya was a key slave trading gateway during and after Ghadaffi.

.

Adieu.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #20 posted 12/10/17 2:59am

midnightmover

I suppose this thread is as good a place as any to point out that the UK parliament had an investigation into the Libyan mess a few years ago. The Foreign Affairs Committee was led by Conservative MPs, yet it was damning in its assessment of David Cameron's behaviour in agitating for this misguided war. It also criticized the media for reporting fake news about Libya in order to justify the war. They played a crucial role in whipping up support.


One of the lies that was told was that Libya was not a tribal society and didn't have the same kind of competing factions they have in Iraq. This lie had to be told in order to counter the correct point that smart people were making about the parallels with Iraq. They pointed out that removing Gadaffi would plunge Libya into chaos just like removing Saddam Hussein had done. So the entire media gave a platform to liars who gave a fictitious account of Libya as a non-sectarian totally unified country. Those lies could've been very easily checked and debunked. The media didn't bother, despite the huge stakes involved in getting it right. They also ran fake stories about Gadaffi's troops going on Viagra-fuelled rape binges.

The Foreign Affairs Committee also concluded that the central premise for the war - that Gadaffi was going to "slaughter his own people" was exaggerated (something that was obvious even at the time).

Another sign of the moral vacuum at the heart of our establishment was how organizations here in Britain that were listed as "terrorists" in 2005 were rebranded "rebels" in 2011 when they were allowed to go and fight in Libya to remove Gadaffi, despite being under travel bans. One of those terrorists came back and murdered 22 Brits earlier this year at a pop concert in Manchester (he was the son of a known jihadist living in the UK who also went to Libya in 2011).


Bottom line is: every single one of these regime change wars in the 21st century has been justified with lies, misinformation and propaganda. Now that the Syrian war is coming to an end we're starting to see the lies finally unravelling about that conflict (even the BBC is now changing their narrative).

“The man who never looks into a newspaper is better informed than he who reads them, inasmuch as he who knows nothing is nearer to truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods and errors.”
- Thomas Jefferson
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #21 posted 12/10/17 10:20am

NorthC

Of course Lybia is a tribal society. It's not even a country. It's just some lines drawn on a map by colonial powers, just like so many other "countries" in Africa and the Middle East. And that's why these dictators were all we had to keep the "peace". As Mobutu said, "c'est moi ou le chaos." He was right. But still, these dictators were criminals. Sure, they were criminals because "the West" allowed them to be criminals, but that doesn't make people like Mubarak of Mobutu or Assad any less ciminal. Or Maduro, for that matter.
Don't ever lose your dreams.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply   New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Forums > Politics & Religion > Slavery in Libya