Mtoto wa mtumwa ni mtumwa ..... Tubadilike kifra .....

[NEW TANZANIA]

Kosa la gaddafi ilikuwa kutumia pesa ya walibya kama yake,
kuna hoja nyingi kumtetea gaddafi lakini mimi nawaona walibya kama mfano wa kuigwa wameushinda utumwa wa fikra kama mtoa mada alivyojaribu kuhainisha

 

[Gamba la Nyoka]

mkuu gamba la nyoka



nilikuwa na maana hiyo fedha angewekeza libya badala ya kukimbiza nje, kwa nini alikuwa anawekeza nje ya nchi yake hasa afrika!!!! Libya si hiko afrika na wanamatatizo ya ajira yeye anawapa peanut kujikimu angewawezesha walibya kwanza


kuchimba majini ni jukumu la serikali si hela hipo na sijasema kwamba walibya ni masikini hata sehemu moja ila nimesema gaddafi amewarudisha nyuma kwa kuwekeza pesa yao nje ya nchi nakuigawa kwa marafiki zake bila hidhini yao ndio maana wamemtoa tusiwasingizie wakoloni kwa sababu tulikuwa watu kila kitu ni wao, mapinduzi ya libya ni ya kujivumia kwa walibya, sisi tunasimama wapi tunapoibiwa na barrick kupitia kwa mafisadi
hiyo 30 billion unayosema kwa plan ya tanzania ya miaka mitano serikali yetu iliyonayo haitoshi sasa inakuwaje itoshe kwa afrika nzima!!!! Na wangetoa kwa masharti yepi kwenye hiyo africa monetary fund yangekuwa nafuu kuliko imf kuna nchi ngapi za afrika zinanyonya nyingine ukianza na south africa, na hizo pesa walibya walikuwa wamekuba zitolewe huko kwenye amf , kumbuka hizo sio pesa za gaddafi ni hela ya walibya wote au wewe unashangilia tu kwa sababu ungekuja kama msaada bila kujua masharti yake ni yapi


south ndio nchi ya kwanza afrika kuwa na sattelite na kwa wakati huo libya ilikuwa bado kwenye vikwazo


hatuongelei fadhila hapa mandela ni mtu naye anaweza kuwa na personal attachment zake, sana wewe unathibitisha mawazo ya kitumwa ninayoongelea tuwe na fikra huru sio kwa sababu imefanyika na mandela basi ni sahihi, tusiwe educationalist


nato walitumia intelligence/ security info ku bomb libya hayo mabomu unayoongelea coordination yake ni ghali sana na ughali muda pia wewe unaona ni vyuo na hospitali lakini haikuonekana hivyo kijeshi nato hawakuwa na shida ya kuibomo libya bali kutoa cover kwa ntc it was well planned hakuna propoganda kwenye mambo serious kama haya.
Kama kuna mtu ana amini gaddafi ana big picture wrong,
gaddafi alikuwa anagombana na kila leader alikuwa na migogoro mingi kutimiza ndoto zake za kuitawala afrika kwa kutumia pesa ya libya bila lidhaa ya walibya lakini pia kuwanunua viongozi wetu walafi wa afrika, aliwahi kuwalipia hata ghalama za uanachama au hii ni nini?
Kama yeye alitengeneza maadui hiyo ni juu yake
mimi nachoongelea ni libya kwa libya mambo yote aliyofanya libya sio favour ni haki na hakupaswa kugawa hela yao ndio maana wamemkata na hiyo ni moja ya sababu fanya utafiti utagundua walibya walichoshwa na gaddafi kwa kugawagawa pesa yao agian wangekuwa kama adu dhabi chunguza tena libya uwezi kuifananisha na abu dhabi ndugu

wewe unazungumzia kwamba serikali kuleta maji ni jukumu la serikali, well that is fine, sasa hiyo serikali ilikuwa ikiongozwa na nani?, hivi unaweza kuzungumzia maendeleo ya nchi bila raisi/kiongozi mkuu ambaye ni man incharge wa state affairs?.

Na kuhusu external state funds, hiyo ni jambo la kawaida kabisa kuweka assets za nchi katika mabenki ya nchi nyingine, kuna namna nyingi ya kufanya hivyo ikiwa ni pamoja na kununua securities katika nchi hizo, unaweza ukaweka gold katika mabenki ya nchi za nje, kiufupi ni suala zima la mambo ya uchumi na wala haimaanishi umewekeza nje umesahau kwako, mathalani wachina wananunua sana securities za wamarekani, wasaudi arabia pia n.k

kuhusu nato kubomb civilian institution hilo halina mjadala, ushahidi mmojawapo ni pale walipotarget nyumba na kuua mtoto wa ghadafi na wajukuu wa ghadafi, sijui utaniambia hata wajukuu wa ghadafi ni legitimate target, ushahidi mwingine ni pale walipotarget university na kuua wanafunzi, ushahidi mwingine ni pale waliportarget television ya libya(ni kinyume cha sheria za vita kutarget civilian information institution during war), ushahidi mwingine ni pale walipocarpet bomb libya ili kuwapalilia njia waasi kuingia tripoli, raia wengi sana waliuawa, ushahidi mwingine ni kutumia white phosphorous kule bin-walid, ushahidi mwingine ni pale walipotarget kiwanda cha kuzalisha spare kwa ajili ya mitambo kusukuma maji

labda ndugu yangu sijui unaliangalia vipi hili swala, unadai kwamba hivyo vitu nato walivyovibomoa havikuonekana kwamba ni mashule , mahospitali n.k- kiukweli kabisa ndege za nato zina uwezo wa kuona kitu kidogo kama pickup halafu eti ishindwe kujua shule, hospitali n.k, na inabidi ufahamu kwamba nato wana majasusi wao underground wanaoprovide coordinate za kile wanachokitarget, kiufupi ni kwamba wanajua wanachokifanya, na wako very precise katika kuua.

Funguka macho ndugu, cnn, bbc, aljazeera, newyork times, redio ufaransa, deutchwelle n.k ni mouth piece na tools za imperialism, ni wazuri katika kubrainwash, na ni wajanja vibaya sana katika tactics za propaganda, usisimamie katika injustice simama upande wa justice-

 

[Gamba la Nyoka]

Kosa la gaddafi ilikuwa kutumia pesa ya walibya kama yake,
kuna hoja nyingi kumtetea gaddafi lakini mimi nawaona walibya kama mfano wa kuigwa wameushinda utumwa wa fikra kama mtoa mada alivyojaribu kuhainisha

Pesa ya Walibya kaitumia kama yake kafanya nini?- zile pesa West walizofreeze ni STATE FUNDS ZA LIBYA, NA SI ZA GHADAFI mbona inakuwa vigumu hii kueleweka?. ila west media walivyokuwa wahuni wakiwa wanazungumzia hizo asset hujifanya kuweka katika mabano "Ghadafi funds", lengo kuwapoteza watu wafikirie eti ni pesa za ghadafi alizojiwekea nje kumbe siyo, bali ni pesa za WALIBYA WENYEWE!

 

[VIKWAZO]

wewe unazungumzia kwamba serikali kuleta maji ni jukumu la serikali, well that is fine, sasa hiyo serikali ilikuwa ikiongozwa na nani?, hivi unaweza kuzungumzia maendeleo ya nchi bila raisi/kiongozi mkuu ambaye ni man incharge wa state affairs?.

Na kuhusu external state funds, hiyo ni jambo la kawaida kabisa kuweka assets za nchi katika mabenki ya nchi nyingine, kuna namna nyingi ya kufanya hivyo ikiwa ni pamoja na kununua securities katika nchi hizo, unaweza ukaweka gold katika mabenki ya nchi za nje, kiufupi ni suala zima la mambo ya uchumi na wala haimaanishi umewekeza nje umesahau kwako, mathalani wachina wananunua sana securities za wamarekani, wasaudi arabia pia n.k

kuhusu nato kubomb civilian institution hilo halina mjadala, ushahidi mmojawapo ni pale walipotarget nyumba na kuua mtoto wa ghadafi na wajukuu wa ghadafi, sijui utaniambia hata wajukuu wa ghadafi ni legitimate target, ushahidi mwingine ni pale walipotarget university na kuua wanafunzi, ushahidi mwingine ni pale waliportarget television ya libya(ni kinyume cha sheria za vita kutarget civilian information institution during war), ushahidi mwingine ni pale walipocarpet bomb libya ili kuwapalilia njia waasi kuingia tripoli, raia wengi sana waliuawa, ushahidi mwingine ni kutumia white phosphorous kule bin-walid, ushahidi mwingine ni pale walipotarget kiwanda cha kuzalisha spare kwa ajili ya mitambo kusukuma maji

labda ndugu yangu sijui unaliangalia vipi hili swala, unadai kwamba hivyo vitu nato walivyovibomoa havikuonekana kwamba ni mashule , mahospitali n.k- kiukweli kabisa ndege za nato zina uwezo wa kuona kitu kidogo kama pickup halafu eti ishindwe kujua shule, hospitali n.k, na inabidi ufahamu kwamba nato wana majasusi wao underground wanaoprovide coordinate za kile wanachokitarget, kiufupi ni kwamba wanajua wanachokifanya, na wako very precise katika kuua.

Funguka macho ndugu, cnn, bbc, aljazeera, newyork times, redio ufaransa, deutchwelle n.k ni mouth piece na tools za imperialism, ni wazuri katika kubrainwash, na ni wajanja vibaya sana katika tactics za propaganda, usisimamie katika injustice simama upande wa justice-

Kwenye hiyo point ya NATO kutarge majengo labda tuweka sawa hapo nilipo weka rangi nyekundu umejijibu mwenye yakwamba NATO walikuwa na majasusi on ground na wanajua wanachofanya
kwenye point yangu ya nyuma nilisema kwamba kwako hayo yanaweza kuoneka kama ni mashule na hospitali lakini sio katika taalifa za kijasusi ni wazi vyuo wakati wa vita vilikuwa havikali je kina nani walikuwa hapo chuoni kwa wakati huo? ndio maana nikasema wewe unaweza kusema hiyo ni shule lakini NATO wanajua ni kambi ya jeshi ndio maana hakuomba msamaha wala kusumbuka na hizo propoganda za Gaddafi

Pia nimekuabia hapo juu ya kwamba walibya walishituka nchi yao ni tajiri kuliko wanachopewa na Gaddafi mimi naongea vitu ambavyo walibya wenyewe wanasema, tena moja ya tuhuma wanayompa Gaddafi ni kwamba anamiliki kisiwa mahali furahi hiyo badi haijawa clear ni wapi lakini walibya wanafahamu hilo.

kuhusu maendeleo aliyoleta nimesema mwanzo na narudi tena ni PEANUT kulingana na hela alizochota Gaddafi,
nitakupositia hapo chini nini familia ya Gaddafi ilifanya na hela za walibya

narudi

 

[VIKWAZO]

Pesa ya Walibya kaitumia kama yake kafanya nini?- zile pesa West walizofreeze ni STATE FUNDS ZA LIBYA, NA SI ZA GHADAFI mbona inakuwa vigumu hii kueleweka?. ila west media walivyokuwa wahuni wakiwa wanazungumzia hizo asset hujifanya kuweka katika mabano "Ghadafi funds", lengo kuwapoteza watu wafikirie eti ni pesa za ghadafi alizojiwekea nje kumbe siyo, bali ni pesa za WALIBYA WENYEWE!

waliitumia hapo mkuuu

Remember Gaddafi's son who paid Beyonce $2 million to perform?

Friday, October 21, 2011

Even though Beyonce and her husband Jay Z are the richest couple in entertainment, she still accepted $2 million in blood money to perform for the son of Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi at a New Year's party in St. Barts in 2009.
. The man who once bragged of spending $1.9 million a month on his lavish lifestyle was found cowering in a dirty drainage ditch alongside his murderous father.
Caution: the images are graphic and may be disturbing to some!

Cell phone videos uploaded to the Internet show Mutassim Gaddafi sitting on a bed in a makeshift hospital smoking a cigarette and drinking from a bottle of water. The front of his wife beater is bloody from a gash in his neck, and there is blood on his trousers.

The next image shows Mutassim lying lifeless on a gurney. He had been shot once through the neck (gaping hole in front).

Na hapa

Usher to donate Gaddafi concert fee to charity

R&B star follows Nelly Furtado, Beyoncé and Mariah Carey in expressing regret over performing for family of Libyan leader

Charity donation ... Usher 'sincerely troubled' over performing for Gaddafi family. Photograph: Malte Christians/EPA

Weeks into the uprising in Libya, Usher has finally responded to calls that he donate his fee from a private concert for the son of Muammar Gaddafi. The R&B star is "sincerely troubled", he said, after learning about the circumstances of a star-studded New Year's Eve gig in 2009. Following similar gestures by Nelly Furtado, Beyoncé and Mariah Carey, Usher pledged to give his earnings "to various human rights organisations".
Usher and Beyoncé performed at the same event on the island of St Barts, funded by Mutassim Gaddafi. It is not known how much Usher was paid, but Beyoncé allegedly earned $2m for her performance. Both stars claim they did not know who was hosting the gig – despite the fact that hip-hop impresario Russell Simmons tweeted from the event, referring to it as the "khadafy party".
Whereas Furtado announced that she was donating her fee before she had been called on to do so, the responses from Beyoncé, Carey and Usher follow public outcry over celebrity performances for dictators. Beyoncé claims she donated her earnings last year, as soon as she discovered the Gaddafi family's role in the gig. Carey promised to donate proceeds from a future single. Now, Usher will give away "personal proceeds" from the show to charities including Amnesty International. "Usher's donation will support this urgent work to counter the brutal conditions like those imposed by Gaddafi and other leaders across theMiddle East," the human rights organisation said.
In spite of the announcements by Usher, Carey, Beyoncé and Furtado, several other stars have yet to answer claims that they collected huge earnings by performing for the Gaddafis. Timbaland, Lionel Richie, 50 Cent and Enrique Iglesias have all allegedly played for the family, while celebrities including Jay-Z, Lindsay Lohan and Jon Bon Jovi were spotted at the performances.

 

[VIKWAZO]

Gaddafi alikuwa na roho mbaya hata siku za usoni kwa wapiganaji wake mamluki....... hakuwa na walibya wa kumpigania?

[h=1]Video: Gaddafi soldiers/mercenaries paid in fake money[/h]On the frontlines in Dafniya (west of Misrata), Freedom fighters find out-dated currency that has not been in circulation for over 10 years in the possession of Gaddafi soldiers/mercenaries, suggesting that the Gaddafi regime is paying it's soldiers'/mercenaries' in fake money.

<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(34, 34, 34); font-family: Tahoma, Calibri, Verdana, Geneva, sans-serif; font-size: 15px; ">[video=youtube_share;1l2MTGzPkiY]http://youtu.be/1l2MTGzPkiY[/video]

 

[VIKWAZO]

Pesa ya Walibya kaitumia kama yake kafanya nini?- zile pesa West walizofreeze ni STATE FUNDS ZA LIBYA, NA SI ZA GHADAFI mbona inakuwa vigumu hii kueleweka?. ila west media walivyokuwa wahuni wakiwa wanazungumzia hizo asset hujifanya kuweka katika mabano "Ghadafi funds", lengo kuwapoteza watu wafikirie eti ni pesa za ghadafi alizojiwekea nje kumbe siyo, bali ni pesa za WALIBYA WENYEWE!

Hela ni ya Gaddafi soma hapo tena alipitia njia za panya kuwekeza kwenye mataifa ya kigeni, kama ujui historia ya Gaddafi vizuri fuatilia Gaddafi alimuonga afisa mmoja wa MI5 uk kuiba ushahidi ya ndege waliyotungua na kuwahacha waingereza hoi jamaa ni hatari kwa kupenyeza RUPIA alijua bei ya kila kiongozi sisi tumeambulia misikiti na kahoteli
tuondokana na mawazo ya kitwamwa sio kila kitu kimetoka ulaya walibya wamejikomboa wenyewe kwa pesa yao walifanya initiative wakapata support sisi tunakalia kulia sio wao kwa sababu tumezoea kuliwa.
Kesho Zambia wakianza kupaa tunasema ni wezi au wana urafiki na marekani tuhuma tunazowapa kenya kila siku

[h=1]How Did Gaddafi Bypass US Anti-Money Laundering Rules To Bank With Goldman And JPMorgan?[/h]

One of the most critical questions that has to be asked in light of yesterday's revelation that among the banks providing banking and asset amangement services for Libya were Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan and Citigroup, is just how did Libya get an exemption for anti-money laundering provisions both in Europe and the US. Oddly enough, this future mainstream debate arises not in the US, where any form of critical thinking appears to be immediately curbed by SEC Rule 201 (for all those calling for a hike in the SEC's budget, we suggest the following contrarian thought experiment: let's cut its budget to zero and see how long before anyone notices) , but out of the UK, where a reader writes in to the FT (oddly enough, partially owned by the Libyan Investment Authority) with the following very simple question: "It seems to me entirely implausible that Col Gaddafi could have earned
billions of dollars through legal means. And yet if the AML procedures,
to which we are all subjected, have not been applied rigorously to the
likes of Col Gaddafi and his family, one is forced to ask what purpose
they really serve." Or what purpose any regulation serves in general when fraud results in surging stock prices, and companies that adhere to the rules are promptly wiped out in this bizarro capitalist world.
From the FT:

Sir, I read with interest the news that the UK government is freezing billions of dollars in assets belonging to Muammer Gaddafi and his family. I would also be intrigued to know whether the banks and other financial institutions handling these assets have applied the same anti-money laundering (AML) procedures to these assets as are applied to every other "normal" banking client in the UK.
I am less interested in whether Col Gaddafi and his family were able to supply passport copies and utility bills but more interested in what evidence they were able to present as to the source of the funds.
It seems to me entirely implausible that Col Gaddafi could have earned billions of dollars through legal means. And yet if the AML procedures, to which we are all subjected, have not been applied rigorously to the likes of Col Gaddafi and his family, one is forced to ask what purpose they really serve.
Charles L.M. Horner,
Bangkok, Thailand
​

 

[VIKWAZO]

Pesa ya Walibya kaitumia kama yake kafanya nini?- zile pesa West walizofreeze ni STATE FUNDS ZA LIBYA, NA SI ZA GHADAFI mbona inakuwa vigumu hii kueleweka?. ila west media walivyokuwa wahuni wakiwa wanazungumzia hizo asset hujifanya kuweka katika mabano "Ghadafi funds", lengo kuwapoteza watu wafikirie eti ni pesa za ghadafi alizojiwekea nje kumbe siyo, bali ni pesa za WALIBYA WENYEWE!

Hela ni ya Gaddafi soma hapo tena alipitia njia za panya kuwekeza kwenye mataifa ya kigeni, kama ujui historia ya Gaddafi vizuri fuatilia Gaddafi alimuonga afisa mmoja wa MI5 uk kuiba ushahidi ya ndege waliyotungua na kuwahacha waingereza hoi jamaa ni hatari kwa kupenyeza RUPIA alijua bei ya kila kiongozi sisi tumeambulia misikiti na kahoteli
tuondokana na mawazo ya kitwamwa sio kila kitu kimetoka ulaya walibya wamejikomboa wenyewe kwa pesa yao walifanya initiative wakapata support sisi tunakalia kulia sio wao kwa sababu tumezoea kuliwa.
Kesho Zambia wakianza kupaa tunasema ni wezi au wana urafiki na marekani tuhuma tunazowapa kenya kila siku

How Did Gaddafi Bypass US Anti-Money Laundering Rules To Bank With Goldman And JPMorgan?



One of the most critical questions that has to be asked in light of yesterday's revelation that among the banks providing banking and asset amangement services for Libya were Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan and Citigroup, is just how did Libya get an exemption for anti-money laundering provisions both in Europe and the US. Oddly enough, this future mainstream debate arises not in the US, where any form of critical thinking appears to be immediately curbed by SEC Rule 201 (for all those calling for a hike in the SEC's budget, we suggest the following contrarian thought experiment: let's cut its budget to zero and see how long before anyone notices) , but out of the UK, where a reader writes in to the FT (oddly enough, partially owned by the Libyan Investment Authority) with the following very simple question: "It seems to me entirely implausible that Col Gaddafi could have earned
billions of dollars through legal means. And yet if the AML procedures,
to which we are all subjected, have not been applied rigorously to the
likes of Col Gaddafi and his family, one is forced to ask what purpose
they really serve." Or what purpose any regulation serves in general when fraud results in surging stock prices, and companies that adhere to the rules are promptly wiped out in this bizarro capitalist world.
From the FT:

Sir, I read with interest the news that the UK government is freezing billions of dollars in assets belonging to Muammer Gaddafi and his family. I would also be intrigued to know whether the banks and other financial institutions handling these assets have applied the same anti-money laundering (AML) procedures to these assets as are applied to every other “normal” banking client in the UK.
I am less interested in whether Col Gaddafi and his family were able to supply passport copies and utility bills but more interested in what evidence they were able to present as to the source of the funds.
It seems to me entirely implausible that Col Gaddafi could have earned billions of dollars through legal means. And yet if the AML procedures, to which we are all subjected, have not been applied rigorously to the likes of Col Gaddafi and his family, one is forced to ask what purpose they really serve.
Charles L.M. Horner,
Bangkok, Thailand
​