Were the Algerians right or wrong to admit Gaddafis family? The Libyan rebel transitional government are calling it an aggressive act! The Algerians saying it was a humanitarian act! What do you guys think? (as we have no footy matters to chat about for a week or so!)
Well, given that he has fled his own country and would surely be killed were he to return there, theoretically he could claim refugee status in just about any other country you care to mention - as did our own Al Bangura. So I guess that, yes, it's a humanitarian act on their part. For doing it though, they deserve everything that will undoubtedly be thrown their way IMO.
I suppose it depends on who in his family has legged it over the border to Algeria. If it is a couple of his wives and a few little kids, then it can be seen as a humanitarian act. But if includes some of his sons who have warrants for war crimes on their heads, then the Algerians should be locking the buggers up and shipping them to The Hague.
As a humanitarian act Algeria was right. It is now for the Libyans to try and get them back through legal ways, if they really want the family back. How Muamar Gaddafi's family got into Algeria is another question, was it a lawful entry or not. I think that does not matter really.
According to the BBC the sons are the two who have not been involved in politics. Not sue about the daughter. Clearly they have gained from the regime, but then so have many other people. The question is whether you think that family should be punished for the actions of others. Gadaffi thought that.
If they are "wanted" persons, no Algeria should not claim that it is humanitarian. On that basis they would take in any criminal from anywhere in the world. The thing that bothers me, is why someone like Gadaffi is prepared to put his family at risk, several have been killed over the years, just so that he can retain power. When power becomes that all consuming, it becomes a disease of the mind and that person is not fit to run a country. Of course he is not the first to hang on and we can see the same mentality in Syria.
Do you think that if Syria was an oil producing country NATO would "protect "the syrian civilian population ,like Libya?
Provided that it has only admitted the precise family members reported, I don't think Algeria has done anything wrong, even though it's easy to see why the new Libyan government would see it otherwise. I don't understand the hypocracy of the transitional council though. Over the weekend, with Tripoli pretty much taken, they were prepared to offer Gaddafi amnesty in a bid to prevent a bloodbath in Sirte, and hopefully get more information on prisoner locations from hard-liners who realised that Gaddafi had sold them down the river. Yesterday they said that Al-Megrahi wouldn't have been extradited even if he was fit to travel and Scotland or America requested it. Today, they are threatening all out war with Algeria for taking in people whose lives would genuinely be at risk in Libya, and who from what I can tell have done less wrong than either of those two men. From the outside I don't see a big issue with the wife. If you are living in a military dictatorship you do not refuse to marry or attempt to divorce the dictator. With the kids, you can't help who your ancestors are. And in a society run by your fringe lunatic of a father, you may be able to justify doing or in particular saying things that you should ordinarily expect punishment for, on the grounds that what you were doing was less severe than the punishment you would have faced for not doing it. My impression is that Saif Al-Islam is the only one who has gone consistently and considerably further than doing the minimum necessary to ensure his survival, so he's probably the only son who definitely shouldn't be allowed out of Libya.
Norway, Syria is an oil producer, nearly 400,000 barrels per day. It still brings the government around US$3.2bn. Perhaps not a great deal compared to other nations in the region, but still a good quantity. The one thing that does surprise me is the USA not stepping in and helping the rebels in Syria, because of the threat to Israel of what might happen if a more extreme Islamist type government takes over from the Assad's Alawite government: unless it doesn't want to upset Iran. I am in a quandary with regard to the actions of the Algerians. Whether these members of the Qaddafi family present a threat to a future Libyan state or not is open to question, but it is more the Libyans who should have stopped the exit rather than the Algerians for allowing it. After all they, the Algerians, allowed normal Libyans to enter when this trouble started, albeit with a lot more difficulty. I am happy that Muammar al-Qaddafi has, seemingly, been removed as he has been creating problems for the region and world in general ever since he removed King Idris in 1969, starting with his accepting the Palestinians who committed the Munich Massacre, both alive and dead, the various actions in the Philippines, supporting the IRA, blowing up people in Berlin, Lockerbie and othe places, the killing of WPC Yvonne Fletcher, trying to attack dissident Libyans in Mecca, supporting FARC in Colombia and supporting the Serbs against Bosnian Moslems. The man is evil and needs stopping, which has hopefully happened.
Al-Megrahi may well have been a fall guy for Lockerbie all along. There is a book coming out that says that. There is so much rhetoric mainly from the US about getting him... and we know how the US seek to use their big first to extradite people from all over the world. There seems to be a domino effect and world attention may well turn to Algeria next and the Algerian leaders will know that. May be part of a negotiating chip on their part. As for Syria I reckon there will be much pressure on Assad and covert support for the people there now.
Surely that means we can have no asylum system? Pretty much all refugees are "wanted" in some capacity, whether it is for alleged crimes or simply being another race/gay/left wing etc. I think they were right to let them in, at least until it can be determined if they had any direct involvement in any alleged crimes other than being related to a mad-man. Just to touch on Syria, I think it is shocking there has not been intervention there. The situation on the ground is just what it was in Libya, if not more severe. You cannot pick where you choose to intervene on humanitarian grounds. You either believe in it or you don't.
I wholeheartedly agree.... ditto the human rights abuses in China.... I have a lot of connections with Tibet and the oppression and restrictions imposed by the Han Chinese Gvt there and on other minorities in their empire is awful...
I am not sure that Algeria has an asylum system in the way that we know it. By all means take people in for assessment and give them refuge, but if the rules for allowing people to stay are too wide, then everyone who wishes to live in a different country will be able to make a case.
The daughter actively supported the regime. She was on the television only recently making a political speech. Whether she knew of or took part in 'crimes' is another matter. I'm fairly sure his wife was politically active too. I'm surprised that any of the sons were not active. Asylum is something to be respected and this does not serve it well, if they are guilty of crimes against their people. To simply 'hop over the border' when things get a bit too hot is not good enough for me and is not an advert for justice IMHO.
My question is how much property of the Libyan people (Gold) did they take with them in the boots of 6 mercs? Aisha was preggers and about to give birth and is not that a bad person. Prosecution for proven crimes needs to take place. As for Syria read Syria plus Iran, a strategic decision has been made, we do not interfere directly, if we did it would provoke an Iranian attack on Israel WW3 for real. As for oil in Syria yes check out AFPC. http://www.afpc-sy.com/new/index.htm
