Quote:
Originally Posted by Butterfly
Yes; much better in the long run to have your throat cut by an educated person with excellent infrastructure...than an ignorant raghead whit no indoor plumbing..:)
Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by Butterfly
Yes; much better in the long run to have your throat cut by an educated person with excellent infrastructure...than an ignorant raghead whit no indoor plumbing..:)
Quote:
Originally Posted by sabang
Maybe I'am a bit slow, but what is your point ? Does Jehovah's Witness have similar headlines like the one below ?
Quote:
Prime Minister David Cameron confirmed Wednesday that he would still like to ban Hizb ut-Tahrir more than almost four years since calling for the group to be proscribed under Britain's terrorism laws. “We have got to target groups that actually promote ...
Quote:
THE radical Islamist organisation Hizb ut-Tahrir says the worst terrorists are not Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda but the United States and its allies. "The worst terrorist attacks in our times have, in actuality, been the likes of the invasions of Iraq ...
Quote:
A court in Sughd province has sentenced eleven activists of the banned religious extremist Hizb ut-Tahrir group, including two citizens of Uzbekistan, to jail terms of three to twenty year, news agency "Asia-Plus" reported.
Quote:
Hizb-Ut Tahrir's Uthman Badar (front) sees bin Laden as a martyred hero. Picture: Amos Aikman Source: Herald Sun OSAMA bin Laden isn't dead.
Simply, that the radical Islamist 'threat' has been overstated for a number of years now. Deliberately so. In turn, fundamentalist Islam has become associated with anti-Westernism, thus radical Islam.Quote:
Originally Posted by HermantheGerman
In fact, our own foreign policy has both been largely responsible for nurturing it in the first place, and then deliberately exaggerating it, to justify an aggressive foreign policy in the Middle East. Very few Moslems actually want a Caliphate, or even a national theocracy. Very many- a distinct majority- want representative government like we have in the West. I'm hoping that the 'Arab spring' will put to bed that particular myth in most peoples minds, although it will inevitably take a while to sink in with Sun readers and Fox viewers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sabang
Try telling Salman Rushdie (for non Fox viewers example:Yassin Haj Saleh) about your thesis. Or any person trying to say something not conform about islam or its. I agree that you have to dig a bit deeper, then Sun readers and Fox viewers, in order to see the "millions" being prosecuted from your so called myth.
By the way, what does the "Arab Spring" fear most ? Our dirty foreign policy or islam?
Remember OBL killed more muslims then infidels.
Anyway, here is a good article for you.
Tunisian women hold tight to rights after revolution
* Tunisian women say fear Islamist resurgence
* Women's rights among the most advanced in Arab world
By Marie-Louise Gumuchian
TUNIS, April 27 (Reuters) - For Tunis resident Amel, her country's January revolution brought her personal freedom after two decades living in a repressive police state.
But as a woman, she is fearful Tunisia's yet uncertain future could bring something else -- an Islamist resurgence and what that could mean to her rights.
"As women we are scared to lose our rights, such as being forced to wear the hijab and losing our jobs," the office secretary said, declining to give her full name.
"Women won't have their freedom anymore. Women have suffered too much to lose these liberties. Nothing is clear yet about the situation of women."
Since independence from France in 1956, Tunisia has boasted some of the most advanced women's rights in the Arab world.
First post-independence leader Habib Bourguiba gave Tunisian women the right to vote, abolished polygamy, forbade marriage under the age of 17 and allowed woman equal rights to divorce.
But Tunisian women are now carefully watching to see whether the uprising that ousted authoritarian President Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali on Jan. 14 will also unravel women's rights bolstered by his secular regime in a predominantly Muslim country.
Tunisia's interim authorities initially struggled to restore stability in the North African country but in March laid out a plan for a transition to democracy.
"There are fears and questions, because we are at a phase where we are reforming the foundations of society," Maya Jribi, head of Tunisia's Progressive Democratic Party, said.
"There are voices that have dual messages, so we can hear pro gressive things from one person, and then from another person in the same party we hear reactionary words.
She said that Tunisian women and women who supported democracy also needed to mobilise to protect the gains Tunisia had made.
HEADSCARVES
Bourguiba considered Islam a threat to the state and called the Muslim head cover, or hijab, an "odious rag". Under Ben Ali, veiled women were long denied access to education and jobs.
Ben Ali was toppled by protests after 23 years in power and fled to Saudi Arabia. Seeking to assert their authority and gain legitimacy in the eyes of protesters who forced him to flee, the caretaker authorities are attacking the vestiges of his rule.
The interior ministry said this month women would now be allowed to wear the Islamic headscarf in photographs on identity cards.
However some commentators have used the new freedom of expression on television to advocate conservative values.
One said allowing polygamy would help right a demographic imbalance while another called for women to stay at home to solve Tunisia's unemployment problem, newspaper La Presse said soon after the revolution.
Hundreds of women rallied in the capital in January to voice their fears of an Islamist resurgence and call for more equality between men and women.
ISLAMIST RETURN
Tunisia's revolution allowed for movements such as the moderate Islamist Ennahda (Arab for "Renaissance") back on the political stage after a two-decade ban.
Ben Ali suppressed Ennahda after it officially won over 15 percent of an 1989 vote, exiling and jailing its members.
Its leader Rachid Ghannouchi, who returned from exile in January, said Ennahda believed in individual freedoms, women's rights and their equality with men. Analysts say Ennahda today might get up to 35-40 percent, close to what it may have actually won in the fraud-ridden 1989 vote.
"We want women to be well-represented politically, to participate effectively in decision-making, and to be represented in a way that reflects her presence in society," Ennahda member Chambi Riadh told Reuters.
"A woman is responsible for her family, she works and she is involved in many cultural and arts activities. Now is the time to translate this on the political stage, specifically in decision-making, and for women to take on the responsibilities that reflect her contribution to Tunisian society."
Authorities preparing Tunisia's July 24 election to choose a national assembly which will rewrite the constitution ruled this month that men and women must feature in equal number in the poll, a move hailed as historic in the Arab world.
Women activists hope democracy in Tunisia will safeguard as well as promote women's rights.
"I am optimistic because we are on the path to democracy. We are going to learn democracy slowly because we did not have it for 23 years, even more," Sana Ben Achour, chairwoman of the Tunisian Association of Democratic Women, said.
"I see democracy as the solution for all society, including women. Democracy will ensure that their rights are kept."
Women represent around quarter of Tunisia's working population and just over half of higher education students, according to Tunisia's national institute of statistics.
For 23-year old Rihab, Tunisian women have a stronger chance now to make their voices heard.
"Women today need to have a stronger personality than before," she said.
"She has to take up her rights much more and she has to be independent from men because as Tunisians we still think that a woman's destiny has to be linked to man's."
It seems ironic to me that we constantly find ourselves at war with the anti-Islamist, fascist Arab states, currently Libya, previously Iraq and by proxy with Syria, while we (the West) are in bed with those who support the most radical Islamists or are actually Wahhabis themselves (Pakistan, Saudi).
Because God allows both ? I guess it depends on your mood and needs :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by robuzo
-When a man's ways please the LORD, he maketh even his enemies to be at peace with him.
-That night the angel of the Lord went forth and struck down one hundred and eighty five thousand men in the Assyrian camp. Early the next morning, there they were, all the corpuses of the dead
Loaded question Herman. I know folks here get all excited when words like "extremist, terrorist, radical or fundamentalist" is used in conjunction with the word Islam or Muslim but a distinction must be made to answer your question. A Muslim fearing his/her own religion somehow makes no sense. It's the extremist who resort to terrorism they need to fear.Quote:
Originally Posted by HermantheGerman
Assuming you mean extremist, terrorist, radical or fundamentalist Islam/Muslim then the answer is a definite yes. Any organization preaching and practicing terrorism is an enemy of the state even in countries where fundamentalist Muslims rule. Saudi Arabia and Iran are a couple. We all know they have extremely strong anti terrorism intelligence organization who identify and hunt down terrorists.
If we move on the predominately Muslim countries who practice some form of "democracy", they do the same albeit more difficult under far more expanded human rights. Turkey, Indonesia, Malaysia and other smaller nations are doing quite well in countering Islamic terrorism. Prior to the "Arab spring", Egypt and Tunisia also made things difficult for terrorist organizations to take hold. Just because there have been demonstrations in these countries demanding dictators step down because of corruption, mismanagement of economy and repression of free speech, why would any believe they would suddenly opt for a fundamentalist Islamic dictatorship as practiced by Taliban in Afganistan?
No one knows the form of "democracy" each might take but what we do know, in Turkey, Egypt, Tunisia, Indonesia, Malaysia and even Pakistan, the Armed forces play a major role in ensuring the country is free from Islamic terrorism. In these countries AQ and AQ wannabees are not welcome. No reason to think AQ, a near nonexistent "movement", will suddenly end up ruling the governments in Egypt or Tunisia.
I have no idea how Syria or Libya will turn out if their dictators are toppled but in Egypt, the key player within the Arab world, I'm confident some sort of AQ inspired form of government is not to be feared. To my mind, Afghanistan is where this is most likely to happen.
As a footnote, I have lived and or worked extensively in nearly every major Islamic country in the world. Some extremely tolerant and others not so in the area of human rights. In none have I ever been threatened or felt afraid even though I am an obvious "westerner" resembling Bill Clinton.
Libya's oil chief 'defects from Gaddafi regime and joins rebels' - Africa, World - The Independent
"Libya's leading oil executive was reported yesterday to have defected to the rebels fighting to overthrow Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, as officials of the regime travelled to Moscow to push for an end to the Nato bombing which saw more government buildings set ablaze overnight.
News agencies reported that the head of Libya's National Oil Corporation, Shokri Ghanem, had defected from the Gaddafi government and fled to Tunisia. If confirmed it would represent a blow to Colonel Gaddafi. Many Libyan oilfields are in rebel-held territory, and it is estimated that the country has lost two-thirds of its oil output since the uprising began three months ago.
The government, however, insisted that Mr Ghanem, 68, was simply travelling. "I have no news that he has resigned or defected or something," an official in Tripoli told Reuters news agency. "Part of his job is to travel and deal with oil companies. So we have not heard anything beyond that."
In Moscow, the Russian Foreign Minister, Sergey Lavrov, called on the Gaddafi regime to stop using force against civilians and to allow the United Nations to deliver humanitarian aid. But even as the International Criminal Court issued warrants for the arrest of Colonel Gaddafi, one of his sons and the head of Libyan intelligence, the Kremlin stopped short of asking the long-standing leader to step down.
Instead, Mr Lavrov urged both sides to agree on a ceasefire, an end to Nato bombing raids and the introduction of international observers for talks about the political future of Libya. "We support the efforts to persuade all conflicting parties that there is no military outcome to the situation," he said after meeting the unnamed representatives from Tripoli in Moscow.
He said the Libyans had expressed a willingness to consider the "road map" to peace proposed by the African Union if the Nato bombing stops. However, this road map – and any solution that does not involve the departure of Colonel Gaddafi – has already been rejected by the rebels, who say many previous proclamations of a ceasefire have proved to be false.
Russia has a general policy of not supporting sanctions or armed intervention under almost any circumstances, and from the start has been wary about Nato's bombing raids. But Moscow's position has been muddied by an unprecedented split between the President, Dmitry Medvedev, and the Prime Minister Vladimir Putin. Mr Putin referred to the Nato bombing as reminiscent of the Crusades, only to be criticised by Mr Medvedev, who said such language was "unacceptable".
Russia has been a trading partner of Libya and had billions of pounds of weapons contracts with the Gaddafi regime. Russia's ambassador to Tripoli was recalled by Mr Medvedev after he said that failure to oppose the Nato bombing was a "betrayal" of Russian interests. Unclear how to act in a rare moment of discord between the country's leading statesmen, most Russian politicians have stayed quiet on the matter.
Mr Lavrov denied that Russia was looking to become the major mediator between Tripoli and the rebels, but his receiving the delegation shows that the Kremlin feels there is a chance to re-assert influence in the country. Mr Lavrov said a delegation from the rebel-controlled east of the country was also due in Moscow later this week.
Early yesterday, Nato jets pounded two government buildings in the Libyan capital, including the Interior Ministry, and set them on fire"
The terrorist army has no reason to accept any ceasefire whilst the illegal crusader coalition continues to bomb and kill Libyan civilians for them. They continue to be fed, watered, supplied with arms, advised by mercenary forces, assisted with targeting and tactics on the front, sell stolen oil, and accept loans from "friendly" bankers.
To do so would illustrate their inability to actually help their supposed country move to stop this terrorist uprising. They would have to accept the realities of negotiating a peace, they would lose all "status" given to them through the force of the mercenary army. They would go back to being losers, not once, when the country was transformed from the medieval "kingdom", but this second defeat, when even with the mighty "crusader coalition" multi million £ forces failed to usurp the true leader of the Libyan people.
The illegal discrimination and bombing of Libya must stop, before there is nobody and nothing left to bomb or kill, or is that their intention? Pakistan was threatened with being bombed back to the stone age, is this the democracy we espouse to the world?
Their "masters" have demanded the illegal removal a sovereign nation's head of state, the illegal banning of nationals of a sovereign state from running for public office. This is not democracy this is the act of a dictatorship, headed by Cameron, Sarkosy and Obama. The blood being spilt in the sands of Libya is on the hands of these murderous mercenaries using the people of Libya as their cannon fodder.
indeed,Quote:
Originally Posted by OhOh
Osama bin Laden killing could justify killing Col Gaddafi - Telegraph
"Independent researchers from the House of Commons Library suggested that the arguments the United States has used to justify the death of the al-Qaeda leader could be also be applied to the killing of others.
American officials have said that it was legal for US forces to kill bin Laden because he was in direct command of forces hostile to US national interests. "Some of the arguments used to present Bin Laden's killing as lawful could also be applied if coalition forces kill Colonel Gaddafi," the researchers said.
The library paper, 'Killing Osama bin Laden: has justice been done?', also predicted that the "targeted killing" of individuals may become more common as a consequence of his death. "The nature of Bin Laden's killing may be a sign the US is increasingly likely to kill rather than to capture al-Qaeda members," the paper said.
"A wider implication is that the killing may be seen as a precedent for targeted killings of individuals by any state, across international boundaries, at least where terrorism is involved.
"The more states act in this way, the more likely it is to become accepted, at least politically if not as a matter of international law."
British ministers have said that Gaddafi will not be targeted as an individual, but have warned that anyone in a "command-and-control" role in the Libyan military could be a legitimate target for air strikes or other military action."
This reporter is a little late in highlighting "targeted killings" that "May become more accepted" The Israeli and US governments have been using this method for some time. Along with illegal torture, subjecting innocent civilians to barbaric "concentration camps", starvation, thirst and terror.
This "Wild West" mentality will only lead to tears.
^ aren't western democracies lovely ? a model for the world, surely
The US model is corrupt, the incumbent promised "change" but has delivered same old. The previous guy stole the election with the help of his appointed stooges on the judiciary.Quote:
Originally Posted by Butterfly
The UK unelected "coalition" promised many things, unfortunately the items delivered so far were not in their manifesto and whilst they had knowledge of the crisis awaiting them they now cry "but it is much worse than we imagined". The UK police forces are being shown to be corrupted by the media barons, The political parties show the same tendency. The media spout government propaganda and stifle discussion.
We have a Frenchman being humiliated from office. When were the bankers who stole trillions handcuffed and sent to jail. Those guys are still travelling in their corporate jets, Cadillacs etc. Have any of them seen the inside of a courtroom, no they have "suffered" a days grilling in front of equally corrupt politicians and remain in their jobs.
the US and western Europe have become a joke,
soon Thailand politics would make more sense than our western democracies,
anyway, the tendency of any Democracy is to slip slowly into an authoritarian regime with the full approval of the population. Democracy in the long run doesn't work, it's only a temporary situation that eventually get voted out.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Butterfly
Have you ever wondered why Nato is responsible for Libya and not the Mericans?
Don't bet on it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Butterfly
Where do you come up with this stuff?
You are aware of the US membership of NATO I presume? The US is hiding behind the "NATO" fig leaf.Quote:
Originally Posted by Carrabow
Quote:
Originally Posted by OhOh
I am well aware, but it is Frances General who is in charge of this fiasco. Clearly it is going way south for him. It is about time to see who's militarys are worth 2 shites.
I bet the UK's Generals are sitting back giggling their asses off right now as well.
As far as Nato goes, they can take that fig leaf and wipe there arse with it. The only way to deal with those twats is with the same amount of violence if not more that they dish out. Peaceful my arse.
Simply misinformation or a seed planted to accuse Qaddafi of using chemical warfare against his own citizens?
Gaddafi accused of using Viagra as weapon of war
New York: Amid growing division among the international community over the military campaign in Libya, the US has accused the Libyan regime of distributing Viagra to soldiers to carry out rapes as a weapon of war.
Susan Rice, the US envoy to the UN, reportedly told other Security Council members that Gaddafi has been issuing Viagra tablets to soldiers fighting the rebels.
Rice accused Gaddafi’s forces of "issuing Viagra to his soldiers so they go out and rape",according to the Turtle Bay blog on the UN.
However, diplomats responded that there was no proof of the allegation.
Fred Abrahams, a special advisor to Human Rights Watch, told Turtle Bay that there had been instances of gender-based rape but it was not systematic and the Viagra allegations could not be confirmed yet.
"On Viagra and condom distribution we have nothing so far," he said. "It's not to dismiss it, but we do not have the evidence."
In March, Al Jazeera chanel reported that several doctors had found Viagra tablets and condoms in the pocket of dead Gaddafi fighters, which indicated rape was being used as a weapon of war.
Gaddafi accused of using Viagra as weapon of war
Gaddafi only has the medical health of the "camp followers" at heart. The soldiers are being paid in gold and diamonds so they are a good catch for the local BGs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Norton
He also knows what diseases are available from the "African" stockpile developed by the "civilised" world and tested on the African population.
Libya: enough is enough | Nazir Ahmed | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk
https://teakdoor.com/images/imported/2011/05/3324.jpg
Baron Ahmed (Nazir Ahmed), (born 1958) is a member of the House of Lords, having become the United Kingdom's first Muslim life peer in 1998
"I have recently returned from a visit to Tripoli and western Libya. As a parliamentarian I am concerned about conflict wherever and whenever it appears. There are many tragedies in an armed conflict, including suffering of civilians, particularly women and children and the elderly.
Parts of the British media have already mischaracterised my visit to Libya as a "peace mission to Gaddafi". This is untrue. It has now been two months, and 6,000 Nato air attacks, since UN security council resolution 1973. I visited western Libya to see what was happening on the ground and I intend to visit eastern Libya in due course.
It is clear that we have started something in Libya which will be very difficult to finish. Poor intelligence and wishful thinking embroiled us in wars in both Afghanistan and Iraq. We seem to be repeating this in Libya at an accelerated rate. We have gone from a "no-fly" zone, through regime change, to killing members of the Gaddafi family within a matter of days. At the same time it has become painfully obvious that virtually every assumption upon which the French and British-led Nato action is predicated has been false.
One assumption was that Libya would be the same as Tunisia and Egypt. There are different dynamics and different national characteristics at play. It is similar to formulating policy towards Germany on the assumption that Germany is identical in temperament to Italy or Portugal.
A second assumption was that Colonel Gaddafi would agree to leave Libya. It is painfully clear that poor intelligence continues to dog our action. The British government's false claim that Gaddafi had fled to Venezuela is but one example. This naivety is on a par to John Reid (a former defence secretary) believing that Britain could intervene in Afghanistan "without a single shot being fired".
A third assumption was that Gaddafi is without popular support. It is foolhardy to believe that there may not be a degree of political and tribal support for Gaddafi, at least within western and southern regions of Libya.
A fourth assumption seems to have been that the Libyan "rebels" are all Facebook idealists. The reality is that the young people who start revolutions are seldom the ones who come to control it. In their more candid moments, western political and military leaders have admitted they know next to nothing about the gunmen for whom Nato is acting as a de facto air force and whom they are militarily training and equipping.
What is known is that the rebels are led by former Gaddafi henchmen and include considerable numbers of al-Qaida militants among them. Their human rights record in eastern Libya is troubling to say the least. We are now being told by General Sir David Richards, the head of the armed forces, that the UK must further "up the ante" by systematically destroying more civilian infrastructure in Libya in support of the rebels about which we know little.
It is interesting that Richards used a gambling analogy, because that is how I characterise much of the past two months. Britain has gambled on the Libyan issue. We bet on it all being over in 48 hours. When this did not happen, we doubled the bet, and then doubled it and doubled it again. We should have cut our losses some time ago. To carry the gambling theme further, the Libyan debacle may become our foreign affairs equivalent of the European exchange rate mechanism's "Black Wednesday" in 1992. The only people to benefit from this misstep will be those who want to see the destabilisation of the Arab and Muslim world.
As for the alleged surgical precision of Nato bombing, a Nato bomb exploded 400 metres away from me during my visit. It was dropped on a parliamentary complex I had visited four hours earlier. Other Nato bombs had destroyed a lamppost on a pavement adjacent to the parliamentary office. They were hardly "command and control" centres.
While one could understand the push for a security council "no-fly" resolution, to term the way in which the resolution has been stretched "mission creep" understates the pace at which Britain is racing to full-scale war. "Mission creep" is shorthand for an escalation in the number of dead civilians. For all the haste we have seen on Libya, we see no such urgency, for example, in the case of Syria, Yemen or Bahrain. It appears to many observers that Libya is being singled out for political rather than human rights reasons.
What also concerns me is the message that the Libyan – and also the Egyptian – situation has sent out about western foreign policy. Several years of painstaking diplomacy brought Libya back into the community of nations: this effort was thrown away in 48 hours. What conclusions are to be drawn about British and western foreign policy by developing and emergent countries? The involvement of the questionable international criminal court is an additional complication. I have seen through my own involvement in the Darfur peace process how enpuig intervention skews any attempt at peacefully resolving conflicts. It encourages rebels not to engage in dialogue and hardens government positions. Libya will be no exception.
We are standing on the edge of an abyss. The hundreds of north Africans and black African refugees who have already died in attempts to reach Europe are the precursor to the chaos that may follow should western intervention lead to another Afghanistan in north Africa.
The concern I have about the Nato escalation of this conflict may be misconstrued as support for the Libyan government. It is not. It is rather an argument for common sense. Enough is enough. Plan A has failed, there must be another approach."
^ nice,
I wonder how it's going to end,
can we just say Lockerbie revenge ? ok he got the message, can we now stop ?
Is this a reference to an unamed French general, or is this the name of the person in charge of this war?Quote:
Originally Posted by Carrabow
Here is your M.F.I.C; sorry I misquoted the rank, he is an AdmiralQuote:
Originally Posted by OhOh
l'amiral Edouard Guillaud
https://teakdoor.com/images/imported/2011/05/3344.jpg
NATO planes hit Qaddafi warships as Obama predicts Libyan
NATO planes hit Qaddafi warships as Obama predicts Libyan’s exit from power
Friday, 20 May 2011
https://teakdoor.com/images/smilies1/You_Rock_Emoticon.gif
Libyan visitors looking at caricatures of Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi at a former high court in Benghazi. (File photo)
By ABEER TAYEL
Al Arabiya with Agencies
NATO aircraft sank eight warships belonging to Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi’s forces in overnight attacks, the alliance said on Friday, hours after President Barack Obama of the United States predicted the veteran Libyan colonel would “inevitably” leave or be forced from power.
The ships were sunk in coordinated attacks on the ports of Tripoli, al-Khums and Sirte, an alliance statement said.
“Given the escalating use of naval assets, NATO had no choice but to take decisive action to protect the civilian population of Libya and NATO forces at sea,” Rear-Admiral Russell Harding, deputy commander of the NATO mission in Libya, said in a statement, according to Reuters.
“Overnight, NATO aircraft hit pro-Qaddafi warships, striking eight vessels,” the statement said.
“All NATO’s targets are military in nature and are directly linked to the Qaddafi regime’s systematic attacks on the Libyan people,” said Admiral Harding.
Fresh explosions were heard in the Libyan capital Tripoli early Friday hours after NATO air strikes targeted the city’s port, with a ship still ablaze after the raid.
An Agence-France Presse journalist, part of a group sent by the authorities to a bridge facing the port about a kilometer (less than a mile) away, was unable to determine whether the blazing ship was a military or civilian vessel.
The NATO statement said: “Over the past couple of weeks we have witnessed indiscriminate mining and the escalating use of force by pro-Qaddafi maritime forces.”
“This has directly disrupted the safe flow of desperately needed humanitarian assistance and put NATO forces at risk. This development of pro-Qaddafi tactics has also demonstrated a clear intent to attack NATO forces,” the statement said.
Admiral Harding said: “All the vessels targeted last night were naval warships with no civilian utility.”
Earlier, regime spokesman Mussa Ibrahim told a press conference in the Libyan capital: “I have just learned that the port of Tripoli is now being targeted by NATO air raids. I am told that a boat has been hit.”
He did not give further details on the vessel, but told the journalists: “Whatever the ship that has been hit, it is clearly a message sent by NATO to the international maritime companies not to send any more vessels to Libya.”
“Military and civilian sites are currently the targets of raids by the colonialist Crusader aggressor,” Libyan state television said.
Tripoli is targeted nearly daily with air raids by the international coalition, which launched strikes on March 19 to prevent Colonel Qaddafi’s forces from attacking civilians.
NATO took over command of the operation over the country of six million people on March 31.
The Libyan government spokesman described as “delusional” President Obama’s prediction in a keynote speech on US Middle East policy of the Libyan leader’s inevitable demise.
“Obama is still delusional—he believes the lies that his own government and own media spread around the world,” Mr. Ibrahim said.
“It’s not Obama who decides whether Muammar Qaddafi leaves Libya or not. It’s the Libyan people who decide their future,” he added.
In a major speech responding to the protest movements sweeping the Arab world, Obama had said: “Time is working against Qaddafi.”
“He does not have control over his country. The opposition has organized a legitimate and credible interim council,” Mr. Obama said of the rebels’ National Transitional Council based in their eastern stronghold of Benghazi.
“And when Qaddafi inevitably leaves or is forced from power, decades of provocation will come to an end, and the transition to a democratic Libya can proceed,” Mr. Obama said.
His remarks were welcomed by the vice chairman of the rebel administration, Abdul Hafiz Ghoga.
“We welcome the statements made regarding the legitimacy of the body of the National Transitional Council,” Mr. Ghoga said in Benghazi.
“We look forward to further support from the United States and the international community to help us further develop our democratic aspirations and for the development of our people,” he said.
Acting under a UN mandate, NATO allies including France, Britain and the United States are conducting air strikes that aim to stop Colonel Qaddafi using military force against civilians.
In some of the latest strikes, NATO hit Mr. Qaddafi’s forces around 15 kilometers (9 miles) east of the revolt-held town of Zintan in the Western Mountains region. The town and the port city of Misrata have seen some of the heaviest fighting in recent weeks.
A Reuters reporter in Zintan said NATO strikes on a government weapons depot outside the city sent plumes of smoke into the sky. Government shelling of opposition positions near the town killed at least one protester and wounded three, a medical official in the town said.
Protesters control eastern Libya and pockets in the west but the conflict has reached a stalemate as rebel attempts to advance on Mr. Qaddafi’s stronghold of Tripoli have stalled.
Libyan state TV showed footage of Colonel Qaddafi meeting a Libyan politician in Tripoli, who government spokesman Ibrahim said had been part of a delegation that met Russian officials in Moscow this week to explore possibilities for a ceasefire.
The footage zoomed in on a TV screen in the room that showed Thursday’s date displayed in the corner. The leader wore a brown robe with a hat and sunglasses.
Mr. Qaddafi, 68, was last seen on May 11 when state TV showed him meeting tribal leaders in Tripoli. NATO bombed his compound the next day, and a day later TV broadcast an audio clip in which he taunted NATO and said the alliance could not kill him.
Western powers are likely to stress their determination to keep the pressure on Colonel Qaddafi when heads of state from the Group of Eight industrialized nations meet on May 27-28.
In an attempt to raise pressure on Tripoli, the European Union is considering tightening sanctions by blacklisting some Libyan ports to prevent exports of oil and imports of fuel, a Western diplomatic source told Reuters.