Dear Mr. Gaddafi

tahmed [``...Indeed, we Pakistanis could learn a lesson ...``]

Please, Ahmed sahib, leave me out of this ``we`` business. You may be a Pakistani but I am a Punjabi, not a Pakistani as I don`t recognize the legitimacy of that state and denounce its current form of existence on moral grounds.

...SR

TAhmed32:

Let`s remember the involvement of the Farsi speaking barbarian

---

Ayatollah Khomeini

---

in the murder of Flight 103`s passengers. Observes Human Rights Watch:

``Strong evidence also linking the bombing to the Iranian government and to the Syrian-backed Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine - General Command faction headed by Ahmed Jibril seemed to be brushed aside. ``
http://www.hrw.org/reports/1992/WR92/MEW1.htm

Adds the Guardian:

``Ayatollah Khomeini demanded revenge.Might the bomb experts of the PFLP-GC have been working for Iran? According to the CIA, several million US dollars were transferred from Iran to the accounts of the PFLP-GC after the airbus strike.``
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Lockerbie/Story/0,2763,193618,00.html

Anyone with common sense and the willingnes to see the truth can connect the dots.

The America-bashing club is `concerned` about human life only if the US can be blamed. They suffer from selective amnesia when the culprit is someone else.

Do not forgive. Do not forget. Human life is too important.

OM

SR#4 It is indeed stating the obvious that Gaddafi is a criminal and also the head of a state. And it is indeed sad that (like the boy who pointed out that the emperor in fact had no clothes when all around him were applauding his fine clothes) I have to point out the obvious on chowk sometimes. In your post, it was clear that what bothered you was not the fact that we have criminals as heads of state in muslim countries, but that the US stood up to these criminals.

In your post, you agree (in a grudging sort of way) that do indeed you consider the US to be the issue since the lockerbie bombing received all this attention because it was a US plane and not a plane from Djibouti. This, with all due respect, is like blaming the victim for struggling and seeking justice. Shouldnt you be pointing out that countries like Djibouti should learn from the US to value the life of its citizens. Indeed, we Pakistanis could learn a lesson from the US (and other progressive nations) as well on how to value the lives of our citizens. I dont recall seeing anything on chowk, in the pakistani press, or in any statements issued by musharaff or any of our other politicians, about the over hundred Pakistanis who were killed at the WTC - no accounts of their families, although I am sure every one of them had a story to tell. There were no processions ever taken out to mourn their deaths. We must learn to put people first, and not ideology (including the pointless ideology of making the US the issue on everything).

tahmed #2 [``...Gaddafi`s money goes to the families of ... Pan Am flight. ... campaign funds to politicans... you are... incorrectly make the US the issue...``]

Your ability to state the obvious is remarkable indeed. Of course, the two situations are vastly different, as you point out. The US is not the issue here you claim. You are such a killjoy, always taking things literally. Where is your sense of irony and satire? Well, okay lets look at it your way. Is the US the issue here? Yes and no...

Libya and Gaddafi, for all practical purposes, are non-entities when it comes to the global picture. It`s only because they targetted a Pan American jet that this became such a big affair. Had the poor Lockerbe 747 belonged to Rawanda or Djubuti there wouldn`t nearly have been as much fuss about it and the mad colonel would have gotten away with it scott free. So yes, the US is very much the issue. In fact, in a US-centric world the real issue IS the US. What the US does and what happens here effects the whole world. Thus it is quite appropriate to shed light on all matters US-related, particularly matters of money and politics that really effect the whole world.

...SR

PS: In response to #63 on the LUMS page, yes, I`ll be happy to elaborate on the miners, but it seemed bad form to usurp space over there.

Good advice but impartial. The only way out for the Tripoli Troublemaker is, well, OUT. The murderer needs to go and all his cronies and associated thugs need to go with him. The fellow has turned a most prosperous, forward-looking country of very decent people into the poster child of a pariah state.

SR #1 the only difference is that Gaddafi`s money goes to the families of the passengers and crew of the Pan Am flight. The figures you provide are campaign funds to politicans. I think you are comparing apples and oranges, and thus incorrectly make the US the issue.

I agree with Mr. Parthasarathy though that this wont make Gaddafi popular. There will always be people who will say that this payment does not prove that Gaddafi was guilty of terrorism (just as we still have people in denial on 9/11, and people who believe the photos of the man on the moon were fakes). Nevertheless, the fact is that he gave safe harbor to individuals for years who, when he finally turned them in and who were then brought to court, were proven guilty of the crime. And, common sense would indicate that in fact he was the authorizer of that terrorist act himself. It is Gaddafi that is the problem here, and we need to recognize that rather than (as you do) make a perfunctory acknowledgement that his is ``evil``, and yet stretch simple logic (as I point out above) to make the US the issue.

Let us pray we never have to live in a world where the likes of Gaddafi and Arafat are the dominant power (or name any muslim leader) rather than a country like the US.

Don`t blame Mr. Gaddafi for thinking that paying money may get him what he wants. After all, you may call him evil if you wish, but you cannot say that he`s stupid. Simpleton and clever maybe (as opposed to insightful and wise), but not hardheaded and naive.

If he`d study the inner workings of Washington politics the conclusions will seem obvious to him.

Consider, for instance the statistical correlation between Compaign contributions and Defence Contracts


Legend:
CA = Year 2000 Pentagon Contract Awards
LE = Year 1999 Lobbying expenditure (inclusive of non-military products
& services. CCD = Campaign Contribution to Democrats. CCR = Campaign
Contribution to Republicans.
TCC = Total Campaign Contribution

Lockheed-Martin Corporation:
CA = $ 15 Billion
LE = $ 4.16 Million
TCC = $2,163,184 [ CCD = 39% + CCR = 60%, NA = 1%]

The Boeing Company:
CA = $ 12 Billion
LE = $ 8.02 Million
TCC = $ 344,334 [CCD = 40% + CCR = 60%]

Northrop Grumman Corporation:
CA = $ 3.1 Billion
LE = $ 5.03 Million
TCC = $ 602,930 [ CCD = 42% + CCR = 57%, NA = 1% ]

(information source: www.thenewpress.com)