Home » Posts tagged with » media (Page 292)
England v France – live!

• Email scott.murray@guardian.co.uk with your thoughts • Full coverage of the World Cup is here 17 min: Deville has been a bit shaky so far, but here she handles a Carney cross from the left brilliantly, with Ellen White and Yankey lurking in the middle. 14 min: France are enjoying the lion’s share of possession here. Abily is seeing a lot of the ball; she swings a deep cross into the area that’s only just over the head of Thiney. It’s an open game, this, though it’s yet to take off. Incidents, please! 11 min: England’s first serious jaunt upfield since the first 15 seconds results in a corner down the left, after good work from Kelly Smith. The ball’s hung above Deville’s six-yard box, the keeper flapping hopelessly under pressure from Smith and Faye White, but the referee’s convinced she’s been blocked off, and the danger’s over. 8 min: France are turning up the heat a wee bit here. Lepailleur and Abily combine down the right to win a corner. But the set piece is hoicked straight out of play on the far side. “The odd thing about the Lyon connection is that France have left their best goalkeeper and Lyon No1 Sara Bouhaddi, at home,” notes Curtis in Minnesota, the only MBM contributor in Guardian history to sound like they could have been released on the Stax label in the late 1960s. 5 min: Williams is booked for a ludicrous late lunge on Thiney. She protests her innocence, but it’s a no-brainer for the referee. 3 min: After a shaky start, France get their foot on the ball, and stroke it around the middle awhile. Suddenly Abily cuts inside from the right, and lashes an optimistic effort goalwards from 35 yards. Some respect, please! Having said that, it nearly hits the target, only just clearing the bar, but it’s right in the middle of the goal and Bardsley is behind it all the way. 1 min: The corner’s wasted. “Recalling White might make for an entertaining game,” suggests Sören Kaschke. “I seem to remember the player with the captain’s band (must have been White) almost begging the referee in the first two games to award the opponent a penalty; unsuccessfully, but I wouldn’t count on the refs, especially after the flak they seemed to have got after some less than convincing displays in the group stage, to constantly turn a blind eye to White’s peculiar understanding of acceptable behaviour for defending in your own area.” We’re off… and what a start! Within 15 seconds, Kelly Smith rounds keeper Deville on the edge of the area, having been sent clear from a sleeping French defence by Carney, and strokes the ball goalwards. The effort’s on target, but there’s no oomph behind the shot, and Georges sticks a foot out to deflect away for a corner. Blimey. Pennants are exchanged. The one Faye White receives from her counterpart Sandrine Soubeyrand is massive . It’s like a bedspread. France win the toss, and elect to stay kicking away from the boxed monstrosity at the south end of the stadium, perhaps because they can’t bear to look at it. England will kick off. The teams are out: France are listening to their lovely anthem. It is beautiful. Best not to mention the English one, there’s no point being needlessly negative. “Lyon have ten players in the full squad, but also six in the starting lineup,” notes a slightly concerned, or possibly not, who knows, Phillipa Booth. “The goalkeeper Deville has just transferred there from Montpellier. The whole squad is made up of only four teams: the others are Montpellier, PSG and Juvisy. These are the top four in the league last season.” Referee: Jenny Palmqvist (Sweden) England Ladies (note the recalled Faye White, Bradley dropping down to the bench): Bardsley, Alex Scott, Stoney, Faye White, Unitt, Carney, Jill Scott, Williams, Yankey, Smith, Ellen White. Subs: Brown, Chamberlain, Clarke, Aluko, Bradley, Houghton, Bassett, Asante, Susi, Rafferty. France Ladies: Deville, Viguier, Georges, Lepailleur, Soubeyrand, Bompastor, Abily, Necib, Bussaglia, Thiney, Delie. Subs: Philippe, Renard, Boulleau, Meilleroux, Franco, Le Sommer, Thomis, Pizzala, Bretigny. Kick-off: 5pm in the British money. The venue: Bayer Leverkusen’s BayArena. As for France? Their squad boasts ten players from Lyon, who won the Women’s Champions League this year. Ulp. Midfielder Camile Abily is their main draw, though Louisa Necib, causing all sorts of bother just behind the strikers, has been the one to watch so far. “They’re a very good side technically and difficult to play against, and after the 2007 World Cup they’ll want revenge,” says midfielder Fara Williams. It is ON! France are up first, though. England denied the French a trip to the 2007 World Cup in a qualifying play-off, for all that means. They’re coming into form after a shaky start against Mexico: following that draw, they came from behind to beat New Zealand, and were excellent in the win over Japan. Midfielder Jill Scott and striker Ellen White have been the stars of the show, while keeper Karen Bardsley, criticised for conceding from distance against Mexico, reasserted her quality with a storming display against the Japanese. Powell has one huge problem, though: recall captain Faye White, rested against Japan, or retain her replacement, the quicker and more mobile Sophie Bradley, who was superb in that match. Anyway, so here we are, ahead of arguably England’s biggest game in their history. Would a first-ever semi-final berth in the World Cup be a bigger deal than reaching the final of the Euros in 2009? It’s a moot point, but consider: if Hope Powell’s side make the Mönchengladbach semi against either Brazil or the USA – two of the sport’s powerhouses – expect World Cup fever to sweep the nation next week. You wait and see. Hats off to the BBC, then, for finally seeing sense and putting the big game on proper telly, in place of 1970s sitcom Porridge and absurd time-frittering antique show Flog It. That they even had to think about it, though. Dear God. Eleven years into the new millennium and all. Women’s World Cup 2011 Women’s football Scott Murray guardian.co.uk

Continue reading …
Politics 101: Don’t Sic the Lawyers on the Media. Local TV Station Report Is a Devastating Blow to CA Democrat

Los Angeles City Councilwoman Janice Hahn is locked in a surprisingly close race in the special election for California’s 36th District. The special election is Tuesday, as in 5 days from now. Back in the early part of this decade, America, and especially California, was living high on a speculative real estate bubble. Local and state Broadcasting platform : YouTube Source : Big Government Discovery Date : 07/07/2011 22:43 Number of articles : 3

Continue reading …
Rachel Maddow: During Real Jobs Crisis, Our Two Political Parties are Discussing How to Make it Worse

Click here to view this media Rachel Maddow did a really good job of laying out just how completely insane these so-called negotiations going on right now over raising the debt ceiling, a manufactured, purely political crisis are, when there’s a real crisis going on with the lack of jobs and one that’s going to me made worse by these cuts in government spending they’re debating. And sadly it looks like the Obama administration has completely bought into Republican framing on the issue that somehow reducing our deficit right now is going to make the real crisis with jobs better and not worse. As she noted in the beginning of the segment, Republicans were more than happy to take credit for good job numbers this spring which they’re now trying to lay at the feet of President Obama. And as she noted, Steve Benen has a really good post on that here — Post hoc ergo propter hoc : There’s a fair amount of talk today about who’s to blame for the weakening job market. It got me thinking about how Republicans play this game. When the jobs reports were looking quite good in the early spring, Republican leaders were eager to take credit for the positive numbers they had nothing to do with. Needless to say, GOP officials are no longer claiming responsibility, and are in fact now eager to point fingers everywhere else. It’s a nice little scam Republicans have put together: when more jobs are being created, it’s proof they’re right; when fewer jobs are being created, it’s proof Obama’s wrong. Heads they win; tails Dems lose. With this in mind, let’s consider the recent developments the way a Republican would. Here’s a chart showing private-sector job creation in the latter half of 2010, when stimulus money was still being spent, and when Democrats enjoyed the congressional majority. enlarge Credit: Washington Monthly And here’s a chart showing private-sector job creation so far in 2011, after stimulus spending largely ended, Republicans took control of the U.S. House and most of the nation’s gubernatorial offices, and the national discourse pivoted from jobs to the deficit and debt. enlarge Credit: Washington Monthly As Steve and Rachel noted, even if you might not be able to specifically blame this on House Republicans, it’s worth asking just who made things worse? Rachel went on to point out that the main reason for these horrid jobs numbers that just came out are because of the huge number of losses in government jobs. Matthew Yglesias posted this chart which Maddow featured in her segment over at Think Progress this Friday — CHART: Over 500,000 Government Jobs Lost Since Obama’s Inauguration : So should we blame today’s bad jobs numbers on Barack Obama’s big government policies? Again, I doubt it. What we continue to see are decent—though not great—private sector job numbers offset by tumbling public sector employment: enlarge Credit: Think Progress For a while temporary census-related jobs masked the underlying trend, but we’ve been steadily shedding government work. Maybe you think that’s a good thing. Certainly most of President Obama’s critics from the right claim to believe it’s a good thing. But what happens when you shed public sector jobs amidst an already weak economic climate is the sharply reduced incomes of the former teachers and whatnot lead to them spending less in their local communities. In total, we have about 500,000 fewer people working for the government since Obama’s inauguration even though the national population is larger than it used to be. Maddow continued with explaining that the reason we’re seeing these massive layoffs is because of budget cuts and quoted some of David Leonhardt at the New York Times here — The Cost of Austerity : We are also committing an unforced economic error. We’re cutting government at the same time that the private sector is cutting. It is the classic mistake to make after a financial crisis. Hoover and even Roosevelt made a version of it in the 1930s. The Japanese made a version of it in the 1990s. Now we are making it. A mistake as Rachel noted, is now being brought to Washington D.C.: MADDOW: An unforced economic error, a fumble, a mistake. State and local governments cutting their budgets dramatically, in many cases because they have to, and the one entity that can really help them out, the federal government, now heading not toward helping them out, but towards cuts of their own. Big ones. This, which we mainly have to thank local and state governments for, this is what Republicans are insisting be brought now to Washington. And John Boehner says we have a spending problem and a debt problem, but as Rachel pointed out, he hasn’t had much to say on our jobs problem and she wondered if Boehner thinks that jobs problem is just going to fix itself. They keep pretending that their policies of trickle-down economics are going to work and if you just reduce “uncertainty” and taxes and regulations, that’s magically going to create jobs, which Maddow didn’t mention here. Boehner apparently believes in the magical confidence fairy as a job creator instead of taxing the hell out of the wealthy and ending tax breaks for off-shoring where they have to spend their money in investing in the United States, their businesses here and our workers or it will just end up being paid in taxes to the government instead. Boehner apparently also finally decided to acknowledge the defaulting on our debt would do harm to our economy, but as Steve Benen pointed out, that didn’t stop him from thinking that threatening to crash our economy and choosing that risk was somehow an acceptable political strategy — Boehner acknowledges risk : As much as I’m glad to see Boehner acknowledge reality, and take some satisfaction in seeing the House GOP’s own leader shoot down irresponsible rhetoric from his own caucus, it’s that last point that stands out for me. The Speaker, as of this morning, believes failing to raise the debt limit puts the nation, to use his words, “in jeopardy.” He conceded that failure would also make unemployment worse. What Boehner left unsaid, however, is that he’s proven himself willing to pursue his hostage strategy anyway. In other words, the Speaker knows full well that failing to raise the debt ceiling would put Americans in danger, but he’s choosing to create this risk on purpose anyway. Give Boehner what he and his fellow Republicans demand, or he’ll deliberately “put us in an awful lot of jeopardy.” Why this isn’t a national scandal is still a mystery to me. For all the talk about what will or won’t get cut, how this will or won’t affect the economy, whether the agreement will be large or enormous, the strategy itself is often lost in the shuffle. John Boehner and his party are threatening to crash the economy on purpose unless Democrats meet their demands. The Treasury, the Fed, economists, Wall Street, and business leaders have all pleaded with GOP leaders not to do this, but Republicans ignored them all. There is no precedent for this, and it shouldn’t be treated as somehow normal. Indeed, it’s often hard to believe policymakers who claim to be patriots would deliberately put us all at risk this way. And yet, here we are. Another element that always seems to be missing from these discussions which are rare enough already in our sorry excuse for “news” these days are our trade laws which reward companies for shipping jobs overseas. Why that isn’t part of the discussion going on right now with job losses frustrates me to no end, but given that our corporate media profits from companies doing business overseas that have no loyalty to the United States and our workers here, I don’t find it surprising. Maddow wound up her segment with a pretty scathing critique of these negotiations that are going to be going on over the weekend and into next week. MADDOW: This really is Washington in crisis mode. The crisis in Washington is a political crisis. It is a crisis over the debt ceiling, which is a vote they take every year. Because of that vote, because Republicans are saying they’re not going to go along with it this year, debt and deficit issues are the crisis in Washington. That’s the weekend, beltway crisis, everybody come to work on Sunday thing going on in Washington. That’s why Washington is in a panic. But outside of that political crisis of our own making, outside of politics, this is a real crisis. This chart comes from Calculated Risk which is a really good blog about the economy. It shows all the recessions since the second world war, all the hard times in your parents’ lives and your grandparents’ lives and maybe even your great-grandparents’ lives. The lines show how steep the job loss was in those recessions and how quickly the economy recovered in each of those recessions. And this is a real crisis. Our economy has been almost unfathomably sick. That’s us, that bottom line there. And we have not stopped getting better as you can see. That line even outs and flattens out on the right. The private sector is not hiring enough and the government instead of acting counter-cyclically, the government is making it worse by cutting its own budget and laying people off. And this weekend in Washington, this is what the two political parties are meeting about; what they are discussing, what they are discussing, the topic of discussion in this big crisis, everybody go to work on on Sunday in Washington, what they are talking about is how to cut spending more, how to make this terrifying picture, worse. Here’s the site she was referencing and their chart — Employment Summary, Part Time Workers, and Unemployed over 26 Weeks . enlarge Credit: Calculated RISK If you’re as sick as this stuff as I am, you can find contact info for your House member here , your Senate member here and the White House here .

Continue reading …
Betty Ford dies aged 93

Former US first lady and founder of rehabilitation clinic credited with removing the taboo from addiction Betty Ford, the first US first lady of the post-Watergate era and inspiration for the addiction clinic that bears her name, has died aged 93. During and after her years in the White House, 1974 to 1977, Ford won acclaim for her candour, wit and courage as she fought breast cancer, severe arthritis and the twin addictions of drugs and alcohol. She also pressed for abortion rights and women’s rights. Ford’s husband, Gerald, died in December 2006 at age 93. They had been married in 1948, the same year Gerald Ford was elected to Congress. Barack Obama said in a statement that the Betty Ford Centre would honour her legacy “by giving countless Americans a new lease of life”. “As our nation’s first lady, she was a powerful advocate for women’s health and women’s rights. After leaving the White House, Mrs Ford helped reduce the social stigma surrounding addiction and inspired thousands to seek much-needed treatment.” In an era when cancer was discussed in hushed tones and mastectomy was still a taboo subject, the first lady shared the details of her breast cancer surgery. The publicity helped to bring the disease into the open and inspired countless women to seek breast examinations. Indeed, Ford built an enduring legacy by opening up the toughest times of her life as public example. While her husband was president, Ford’s comments weren’t the kind of genteel, innocuous talk expected from a first lady, and a Republican one no less. Her unscripted comments sparked media storms and dismayed her husband’s advisers, who were trying to soothe the national psyche after Watergate. But 1970s American found Ford’s openness refreshing, and people loved her for it. Her most painful revelation came 15 months after leaving the White House, when Ford announced she was starting treatment for a longtime addiction to painkillers and alcohol. She and her husband had retired to Rancho Mirage, California, after he lost a bruising presidential race to Jimmy Carter in 1976. She went to work on her memoirs, The Times of My Life,, which came out in 1979. But the social whirlwind that had engulfed them in Washington was over, and Betty Ford confessed that she missed it. “We had gone into the campaign to win and it was a great disappointment losing, particularly by such a small margin,” she said. “It meant changing my whole lifestyle after 30 years in Washington, and it was quite a traumatic experience.” By 1978, she was addicted to alcohol and prescription drugs. She would later describe herself during that period as “this nice, dopey pill-pusher sitting around and nodding”. “As I got sicker,” she recalled, “I gradually stopped going to lunch. I wouldn’t see friends. I was putting everyone out of my life.” Her children recalled her living in a stupor, shuffling around in her bathrobe, refusing meals in favour of a drink. Her family finally confronted her in April 1978 and insisted she seek treatment. She credited their “intervention” with saving her life. She entered Long Beach naval hospital and underwent a grim detoxification, which became the model for therapy at the Betty Ford Centre. She saw her recovery as a second chance at life. Although most famous for celebrity patients like Elizabeth Taylor, Johnny Cash and Lindsay Lohan, the Betty Ford Centre keeps its rates relatively affordable and has treated more than 90,000 people. Her own experience, and that of a friend whom she helped with his alcoholism, were the inspiration for the centre. She helped raise £1.8m, lobbied in the California state capital for its approval, and reluctantly agreed to let it be named after her. “The centre’s name has been a burden, as well as honour,” she wrote. “Because even if no one else holds me responsible, I hold myself responsible.” She liked to tell patients, “I’m just one more woman who has had this problem.” Her efforts won her a presidential medal of freedom, the highest civilian honour, from George Bush Sr in 1991. “She was a wonderful wife and mother; a great friend; and a courageous first lady,” the former president said in a statement. “No one confronted life’s struggles with more fortitude or honesty.” United States Watergate Washington DC Alcohol Breast cancer guardian.co.uk

Continue reading …
Rupertgate Recap – Killing The Patient To Make Him Look Better.

enlarge Credit: CNN Damage Control In The World Of Murdoch. Click here to view this media Coming as a shock, and amidst an ever-rising tidal wave of anger and disgust, News Of The World decided to shut it’s doors and publish its last edition this coming Sunday. After 168 years, it comes down to this. The ever-deepening scandal currently overtaking Newscorp and News International is now taking on the appearance of shell game. Attempt to find the elusive pea while fighting distractions from hands. As it was reported on this edition of PM from BBC Radio 4, news was swift and abrupt. A short, terse statement from James Murdoch, son and heir-apparent expressed remorse and regret, while former Editor and now Chief Executive of News International Rebekah Brooks took the life preservers and split out the back, leaving colleagues and staff abruptly unemployed and drowning. As PM Anchor Eddie Mair asked “Are you rejoicing?” the answer came back ultimately no. Or as Michael Wolff pointed out “Rupert Murdoch is now naked and scared”. The question now is, what next? It would seem shutting News Of The World was a maladroit attempt at damage control – the out-of-sight/out-of-mind analogy, but I think it has gone way too far for that. The damage is still being revealed, the guilt is slowly making its way up the ladder. As was pointed out in the broadcast, Prime Minister David Cameron is now in a very precarious position because of his personal relationships with both Murdoch and Brooks, appointing disgraced (and now possibly jailed) Andy Coulson to Communications Director and facing the looming issue of the proposed buyout of BskyB by Newscorp.Questions are now coming to light as to just how much Cameron knew about Coulson and how much he chose not to know at the time of his appointment. But as was also pointed out, this scandal has repercussions all over Parliament because of the nature of Politics and the Press, not only the immense damage that has been done to Scotland Yard. But this is what’s currently going on in the UK only. That’s all we’re hearing about for now. The subject of just how widespread this system of hacking has been with any other publications, or news outlets currently owned by Newscorp throughout the world begs a much more alarming question. If this has been company policy, it’s highly unlikely this scandal is confined to one newspaper in one area alone. Think cockroaches. It’s just speculation at this point and as I said yesterday, this story is far from over. But for now, here is the July7th edition of PM, followed by another BBC Profile. This time it’s the elusive Rebekah Brooks. enlarge Rebekah Brooks – beyond the facade, a player. Click here to view this media The wonders won’t be ceasing for a long-long time.

Continue reading …
Hugh Grant Is Even More Lovable After Berating News of the World Editor

And here we thought Hugh’s best stuff came in confessions of love. The British actor, best known for his affable charm in romantic comedies like Notting Hill and Love, Actually, was one of the targets in the News of the World phone hacking scandal. He appeared on the BBC on Friday to explain how he

Continue reading …
Chuck Grassley: Constitution May Trump Debt Ceiling on Default Impasse

Click here to view this media As Ryan Grim noted in his article this week, despite some House Republicans threatening impeachment if President Obama resorted to this to keep the United States from defaulting on its debt, but at least one Republican member of the Senate thinks the Constitution would trump the law — 14th Amendment Option May Be Legit, Says Leading Senate Republican : Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) said on Thursday that the Constitution may trump the debt ceiling, allowing the administration a way out of the default impasse. Negotiators are considering gutting the social safety net in exchange for a vote to lift the debt ceiling. Grassley, in a conference call with local reporters, said that there may be another way out. “There’s one thing that hasn’t been talked about yet, and I haven’t checked on the constitutionality of it — and I read the Constitution, but I don’t remember reading this — but in the 14th amendment, there’s something that says something about the debt of the United States government shall be honored,” Grassley said, according to a recording of the call. “The 14th Amendment includes a public debt clause that insists the obligations of the government ‘shall not be questioned.’” “So people are looking at the fact that maybe the debt ceiling bill that Congress presumably has to pass for the government to borrow more maybe is contrary to that constitutional provision, and that the administration may take out [loans] on their own — just to borrow money — and say that they can ignore the law,” he said. Grassley said that he was personally supportive of the debt ceiling, because it focuses attention on spending, but that if its existence was unconstitutional, there was nothing he or his colleagues could do. “I think it’s a discipline that Congress uses effectively from time to time, maybe not to cut down on the amount of spending but to have a refresher course,” he said. “It’s a good discipline, so it bothers me if the Constitution provision would trump it, but that would be up to the courts to say. But who’s going to argue against the Constitution? It’s the basis of our government; it’s the law of our land, and everybody has to abide by it.” “The Constitution trumps the law, obviously,” he said. Read on…

Continue reading …

Today is one of them, and mostly because it’s fraught with nonsense about what one person said or what another one didn’t say, who signed what and how loudly the noise machine can amplify it . For example, David Plouffe didn’t say the unemployment rate wouldn’t determine the outcome of the 2012 election. This is what he said: I would make a general statement, though, because there is a lot of attention focused on the unemployment rate. The average American does not view the economy through the prism of GDP or unemployment rates or even monthly jobs numbers. In fact, those terms very rarely pass their lips. So it’s a very one-dimensional view. They view the economy through their own personal prism. You see, people’s — people’s attitude towards their own personal financial situation has actually improved over time. You know, they’re still concerned about the long-term economic future of the country, but it’s things like “My sister was unemployed for six months and was living in my basement and now she has a job.” There’s a — a “help wanted” sign. You know, the local diner was a little busier this week. Home Depot was a little busier. These are the ways people talk about the economy. They don’t talk about it in the terms of Washington. And so their decision next year will be based upon two things, okay, how do I feel about things right now, and then, ultimately, campaigns are always much more about the future, and who do I think has got the best idea, the best vision for where to take the country? I would submit to you that a healthy percentage of Americans, far more than a majority, believe the president has a very sound vision for where the country needs to go. So, you know, people won’t vote based on the unemployment rate. They’re gonna vote based on, “How do I feel about my own situation? Do I believe the president makes decisions based on me and my family?” But of course, Mitt Romney jumped on it right out of the gate and said Plouffe should have been summarily fired for such a thing. It’s all bluster, posturing, and playing to the base and it gets old and boring because it’s fundamentally dishonest. By comparison, however, we have Michele Bachmann signing virulently anti-gay statements while saying outright that she hopes the high jobless rate helps her get elected . Because this is what it all is for these Republicans. Politics. Never mind that the unemployment rate can be directly linked to the loss of public sector jobs . Michele Bachmann doesn’t care, because she wants high unemployment to work for her politically in order to get elected. I hate it. I hate that the media never calls these people out on their cynical, self-serving, made-for-TV hissy fits, I hate the distraction it creates, I hate the way gossip turns to truth and I hate the way it causes people to just disengage entirely from the process. Most people get tired of constantly having to filter the magnified crap out there to try and discern the truth, and so they just tune out entirely. Republicans count on that, hoping that if they just reinforce key messages they will win. Death panels. High Unemployment, etc. becomes a three-word slogan instead of reality. And god forbid there’s anything like nuance involved, because the media won’t decode it and the Republicans will run sixty zillion ads magnifying it. Grrrr. Happy Friday. PS: It’s not just here. This is a stellar example of how ridiculous the media is here and abroad. This isn’t a joke, but where is the interviewer looking this guy in the eye and telling him to lose the prepared sound bite and answer the damned question? [h/t Andrew Sullivan ]

Continue reading …
Gaddafi threatens attacks in Europe

Libyan leader says he will send hundreds of supporters to ‘martyr’ in Europe in revenge for NATO campaign Muammar Gaddafi has threatened to send hundreds of Libyans to launch attacks in Europe in revenge for the Nato-led military campaign against him. In a speech on Libyan television the Libyan leader said: “Hundreds of Libyans will martyr in Europe. I told you it is eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth. But we will give them a chance to come to their senses.” The Canary Islands, Sicily, other Mediterranean islands as well as Andalusia in southern Spain were Arab lands that should be liberated, he said. Gaddafi, whose forces have been battling rebel fighters increasingly encroaching on his territory and Nato warplanes, was speaking to a crowd of about 50,000 in the desert town of Sabha, about 500 miles south of Tripoli. The speech appeared designed to show that he still enjoys support in the areas of Libya still under his control. “You will regret it, Nato, when the war moves to Europe,” he said. “The Libyan people have no problem, the colonial powers are the ones who have a problem. They want to control our oil. They are jealous because God gave us the gift of oil,” Gaddafi said. “We do not fear them. We have no choice but to resist, become martyrs and fight on till the end.” Muammar Gaddafi Libya Middle East Africa Nato Arab and Middle East unrest guardian.co.uk

Continue reading …
Gaddafi threatens attacks in Europe

Libyan leader says he will send hundreds of supporters to ‘martyr’ in Europe in revenge for NATO campaign Muammar Gaddafi has threatened to send hundreds of Libyans to launch attacks in Europe in revenge for the Nato-led military campaign against him. In a speech on Libyan television the Libyan leader said: “Hundreds of Libyans will martyr in Europe. I told you it is eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth. But we will give them a chance to come to their senses.” The Canary Islands, Sicily, other Mediterranean islands as well as Andalusia in southern Spain were Arab lands that should be liberated, he said. Gaddafi, whose forces have been battling rebel fighters increasingly encroaching on his territory and Nato warplanes, was speaking to a crowd of about 50,000 in the desert town of Sabha, about 500 miles south of Tripoli. The speech appeared designed to show that he still enjoys support in the areas of Libya still under his control. “You will regret it, Nato, when the war moves to Europe,” he said. “The Libyan people have no problem, the colonial powers are the ones who have a problem. They want to control our oil. They are jealous because God gave us the gift of oil,” Gaddafi said. “We do not fear them. We have no choice but to resist, become martyrs and fight on till the end.” Muammar Gaddafi Libya Middle East Africa Nato Arab and Middle East unrest guardian.co.uk

Continue reading …