Mourning Gaddafi

From the New York Times:
While Libya’s former rebels and many Western nations welcomed the end of the country’s long and brutal dictatorship, many sub-Saharan Africans are mourning the death of Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi, celebrated as much for his largesse as for his willingness to stand up to the West.

To them, his violent death was another sad chapter in a long-running narrative of Western powers meddling in Africa’s affairs.

“We are the 1 percent who are not celebrating,” said Salim Abdul, who helps run a major mosque in Uganda’s capital named for the former Libyan leader, who provided the money to build it.

“He loved Uganda,” said Mr. Abdul in an interview at the mosque, in Kampala. He noted that Colonel Qaddafi had committed to paying the salaries for the staff of 20 for the next 20 years. “His death means everything comes to an end,” Mr. Abdul said.

On Friday, approximately 30,000 people packed the mosque to pay tribute to the slain leader, according to local news media in Uganda.

The Daily Monitor, a prominent independent Ugandan newspaper, reported that Sheikh Amir Mutyaba, a former ambassador to Libya, wept as he told followers that Colonel Qaddafi had “died as a hero.” He added that while “Allah will bless him,” foreign “oil diggers will be punished,” likely alluding to a perception among some that the West intervened in Libya mainly because of its oil riches.

In Nigeria, Africa’s most populous country and about half Muslim, a senator told local news media that Colonel Qaddafi “was one of the finest African leaders we have.” And a former Nigerian militia leader, who said he was once financed by Colonel Qaddafi, told Agence France-Presse that the former Libyan leader’s death would be “avenged.”

The colonel “spilled his blood as a martyr to rekindle the fire of revolution all over the world,” said Mujahid Dokubo-Asari, the militia leader. “The people of the world will rise up against this.”

...

In Zimbabwe, where President Robert Mugabe led a liberation struggle against a white-minority regime that ended in 1980, a presidential spokesman said Colonel Qaddafi would be remembered there for his support of Zimbabwe’s independence fight and railed against foreign interference in Africa’s affairs.

The government cannot accept drawing blood as a model for changing political systems on the continent,” said George Charamba, the spokesman. “Moreso when that blood is drawn at the instigation of foreign countries.”

Zimbabwe, of course, has had its own run-ins with West, facing intense criticism for a bloody, discredited presidential election in 2008. “As a matter of principle,” Mr. Charamba said, “Zimbabwe does not believe it is the duty of the West to tell us who our friends are and who our enemies are, who the beautiful ones are and who the ugly ones are.”

Even some Africans who said they did not necessarily support Colonel Qaddafi were stricken by the way he was killed and argued that he had left behind an important legacy.

“I had never been really a fan of Qaddafi, but now I am touched by how he died,” said Manny Ansar, the director of a popular annual music festival in Mali. “Love him or not, we must recognize that this is one of the greatest African leaders who influenced several generations, including mine, and found in the constancy and courage of his positions what we research in a hero. In a word: pride.”
Does this sound familiar? (scroll down)

Comments

  1. Only idiots that focus on the West's propoganda thinks Gaddafi was a tyrant. Do I believe the man was a saint? Heck no, but I do not believe he is the monster the West has been preaching about since the 70s. He wanted for gold to be the currency in the continent of Africa when it came to trading oil and other services to the West. They got scared and offed him. I bet the news wont show those mourning his death, smh.

    ReplyDelete
  2. A lecturer/colleague of mine pointed me to a video last night, which I have since uploaded on my Livejournal and my Tumblr accounts. If I wasn't cynical about what the news media is really telling us about certain events, I am now.

    ReplyDelete
  3. A few things caught my eye the moment I opened this aside from the fact this was printed in the NYT:

    "To them, his violent death was another sad chapter in a long-running narrative of Western powers meddling in Africa’s affairs."

    I never thought that a Western newspaper would allow a statement like this get printed.

    "...“Allah will bless him,” foreign “oil diggers will be punished,” likely alluding to a perception among some that the West intervened in Libya mainly because of its oil riches."

    Another thing I never thought they would print, and I hope this statement will come to past real soon, and I will be watching it with buttered popcorn.

    “Zimbabwe does not believe it is the duty of the West to tell us who our friends are and who our enemies are, who the beautiful ones are and who the ugly ones are.”

    Let the church say Amen.

    “Love him or not, we must recognize that this is one of the greatest African leaders who influenced several generations, including mine, and found in the constancy and courage of his positions what we research in a hero. In a word: pride.”

    It's something the Western media would not allow to show in its papers or airwaves.

    ReplyDelete
  4. @ Brotha Wolf

    I'm surprised by this article as well. I wasn't expecting it in Western media. I had to reread the author's name a few times.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Digital Coyote10/25/11, 10:15 PM

    I realize that, as a person who has never lived in Africa or under Qaddafi's regime, I'm not qualified to call him a terrible man or praise him as good one.

    I will say that the video of his last moments and subsequent death didn't give me the warm fuzzies I was told to expect from his passing. I was horrified. I was uncomfortable. I was sad because I was watching a confused human being die.

    I wonder if his death bothers me because he tried to reach out to Black people, still at home or part of the diaspora. I wonder what will happen to the Black people in Libya now that he's not there to protect them. Why is it that anyone who supports us has to die?

    I wonder what will happen to the next leader that tells West to MYOFB.

    ReplyDelete
  6. i don't buy this, i don't buy even the least of it. i'm not saying muammar gadhafi was the devil, but he certainly wasn't the pan-Africanist hero some people would like us to believe either. if he ever was a true patriot, that moment died in him decades ago, when he started to forget that any power he held was meant to benefit his own people. in his vision of African unity, gadhafi sat at the head of a united continent, using her vast resources as a huge bargaining chip, and a massive club to bash the entire world over the head with. all his posturing was so he could be crowned emperor of a united africa, with the rest of the world bowing to his whims.

    if he truly loved africans, why has he mainly supported subversive movements? why has he never openly taken the side of a popular democratic movement, in a continent where most people are hungry and diseased? the answer is pretty simple: because, like all the other african despots, he was only after his own selfish interest!

    forget doling out social security, can you honestly say that all strata of libyan society had the benefit of decades of oil wealth? where were the development projects and the real economic and social growth? why is none talking about the personal wealth he amassed in those 42 years?

    i also firmly believe that the man had suffered from some serious mental illness for at least the past decade, but none was brave enough to tell the emperor that his new clothes were nonexistent. does anyone not remember his speech at the UN a couple of years ago, where he rambled for hours about anything and everything, including his rhetorical demand to know who killed jfk?

    if he was truly a patriot, why did he sacrifice so many lives just so he could retain power after having ruled for 42 years? was power so important that he also had to shed the blood of his own sons? why would he directly and indirectly kill so many of his people just to satisfy his selfish desire to remain at the top? if he truly loved his people, he would have abdicated without turning his army's guns, and a force of hired mercenaries against his fellow libyans. the man might have been a revolutionary once, but he outlived that role decades ago. for the record, i think revolutionaries are meant to set the wheel of change in motion, setting their people free, and fading to the background to let the populace determine its own destiny by popular decision i.e. by democratic means.

    we should stop blaming the west for everything, and just accept that our people are also capable of thinking for themselves. in this case, they wanted a change, even if it turned out to be a mistake. rawlings and babangida are examples of african leaders who also wanted to hang on to power by all means, but they were able to see that they would only do so at the price of their own lives. gadhafi paid the price of his own obstinate tyranny, and he has none to blame but his own ego. that mosque in uganda should learn to fend for itself, or shut down.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I'm with Oluwanmui on this.

    At first when I heard about him unity about Pan- Africanism, I thought that he was alright,but there were other stories I read about him treatment of Black Africans in his country. Many of them we're, like many Blacks, were scapegoated for the troubles that Libya faced.Qaddafi's government tried to run them from his country.Also it was said that his son ,Saif, was supposedly pro-Black, like his dad,but when a reporter( I forget what the name of the Arab publication )was asked him would he marry a Black woman he said that he wouldn't.

    If Qaddafi was for Pan-Africism, he would have supported the Black Libyans and African immigrants that lived in his country,but he didn't. This is why I'm not a fan of his..and evidently, many of his own people wasn't as well.

    ReplyDelete
  8. People are missing the point. This isn't about Qaddafi being great or not.

    Reread the parts in bold.

    ReplyDelete
  9. “Zimbabwe does not believe it is the duty of the West to tell us who our friends are and who our enemies are, who the beautiful ones are and who the ugly ones are.”

    “To them, his violent death was another sad chapter in a long-running narrative of Western powers meddling in Africa’s affairs.”

    This is where the European white excels. This is how he's maintained supremacy all these years; through divide and conquer. The white man’s burden is to dictate to the lessor non-white nations. To lead- and dominate until such time as they’re able to take their place on the world stage. Surreptitiously feed the target nation misinformation about its alleged enemies, then poor guns and advisers into the region to upset the balance of power. The white man is always the first one to tell you who your friends are, even when he approaches you as friend. Just as he did with the indigenous American; he would have those nations believe he’s protecting their interests, when in reality he was plotting their demise.

    "They would make slaves of us if they could; but as they cannot, they kill us. There is no faith to be placed in their words. They will say to an Indian, "My friend; my brother!" They will take him by the hand and, at the same moment destroy him.... Remember that this day I warned you to beware of such friends as these. I know the Long-Knives. They are not to be trusted."

    Western powers (namely the United States) have but one goal; world domination. Through clandestine means the CIA, Blackwater and other nefarious groups compel both brown and black nations to turn on themselves, then wait for the smoke to clear. Much like, The Matrix: One representative is sent overseas in the name of democracy to balance the region. While secretly; a group of operatives are sent to that very same region ostensibly, to un-balance the region.

    "Every war when it comes, or before it comes, is represented not as a war but as an act of self-defense against a homicidal maniac." George Orwell

    The ancient proverb: “The enemy of my enemy is my friend,” comes to mind as well. On many an occasion our leaders have trekked over land and sea to shake the hands of Muammar Gaddafi and Saddam Hussein. This nation supplied them with weapons and strategic support, only to turn against them when they outlived their usefulness. The very men we fight in Afghanistan were lovingly called Freedom Fighters when they fought against the Soviets. Funny how quickly things change.

    ReplyDelete
  10. @ M. Gibson

    You nailed it, as usual. And since the average (white) American doesn't know and/or understand all the variables, they never understand why Africans, Asians, Latinos, and Eastern Europeans don't jump for joy whenever the US government murders someone like this.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Ankhesen Mié said...
    And since the average (white) American doesn't know and/or understand all the variables, they never understand why Africans, Asians, Latinos, and Eastern Europeans don't jump for joy whenever the US government murders someone like this.

    For many whites it’s not really important to know about everything our government does, (the secrets that it keeps) suffice to say it’s doing it for our protection. Past presidents have plied the American people with fear of the non-white on a daily basis and Bush was no different. What non-white nations see, is just another encroachment of the United States upon their sovereignty, their rights and their interests; not the removal of a madman. After each confirmed kill what we get from most whites is your standard talking point. “These boys are over there fighting for your freedom!” If memory serves, Hitler did the very same thing when he invaded Poland.

    "The Polish State has refused the peaceful settlement of relations which I desired, and has appealed to arms. Germans in Poland are persecuted with bloody terror and driven from their houses. A series of violations of the frontier, intolerable to a great Power, prove that Poland is no longer willing to respect the frontier of the Reich. In order to put an end to this lunacy, I have no other choice than to meet force with force from now on. The German Army will fight the battle for the honor and the vital rights of reborn Germany with hard determination. Proclamation by Adolf Hitler, Chancellor of the Reich, to the German Army, September 1, 1939"

    In light of how well the propaganda machine worked on the Germans, it’s no surprise how susceptible whites appear to be. The more patriotic you are, the more vulnerable you are to group-think. I believe the very reason the United States took so long to engage Hitler was because he was white. This could explain why it was easy to drop two nuclear bombs in Japan, while Germany was spared. Why American Germans walked free in this country, but Japanese Americans were interned.

    Since then, every action we've taken is supposedly in defense against the rants of some madman of color hallway across the world. Sadly our leaders jumped into bed with these men; carried on an illicit affair by plying them with guns and technology. Then out of guilt or shame, they invaded/killed the person to cover up other sins they committed while in the relationship.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

This blog is strictly moderated. Everyone is now able to comment again, however, all Anonymous posts will be immediately deleted. Comments on posts more than 30 days old are generally dismissed, so try to stay current with the conversations.