With a comment like this, "Without any question, what was called for was a Russian attack that closed down Ukraine, destroying the government, all civilian infrastructure and ending the conflict immediately." oh, how could this author ever be called a Putin agent?
Destroying all civilian infrastructure is "surely" a peaceful and just
move, isn't it?

I'm really sorry you are going through this. My father (20 years ago) was one of the test subjects for testing for a new treatment for AML. He was too old and his condition was too advanced for a transplant and too poor for anything else but signing on as an experimential patient. It didn't go well for him, but I would think that in 20 years, lots of progress has been made and ask your oncologist if there are any studies that require subjects, and in this way, you will be admitted to treatment very quickly. I used to really like your site, but find that you are consistently on the wrong side of things as far as Syria goes. But, that doesn't interfere with me wanting you to be able to obtain treatment for your condition and regain your health.

It's quite interesting how the bulk of the article is about how vile it is to resort to (innacurate) labelling or to not use the label one actually aligns with in the place of reasoned argument, in order to shut them down and shut them out..... then Cook writes: "And we need to unmask as war hawks those who accuse the anti-war left of serving as apologists for dictators when we try to stop western states conducting more illegal, resource-grab wars with such devastating results for local populations." How convenient to pretend that the "anti-war left" is concerned about the local populations! The fact of the matter is, they are against them and do not have any interest in the tragedy that befell them by being under the boot of a dictatorship that is only "anti-imperialist" and "anti-zionist" in name. It literally is no longer pan-Arab, since the core victims of all its crimes are Arabs. if one actually looks at all the facts and evidence of what happened to the local populations, half of them driven off their own land and bombed by their own leadership that dragged its allies in to finish off any place the populations might dare return to, it is clear that "dictators" are the problem here, according to the people who used their own agency to free themselves and then were given the clampdown of all clampdowns because "the populations" are not what the regimes care about. The populations are the one thing hindering them from achieving their goals of permanent control, and they are given the grand "assist" by the so-called and ill-named "anti-imperialist and anti-war left

It's quite interesting how the bulk of the article is about how vile it is to resort to (innacurate) labelling or to not use the label one actually aligns with in the place of reasoned argument, in order to shut them down and shut them out..... then Cook writes: "And we need to unmask as war hawks those who accuse the anti-war left of serving as apologists for dictators when we try to stop western states conducting more illegal, resource-grab wars with such devastating results for local populations." How convenient to pretend that the "anti-war left" is concerned about the local populations! The fact of the matter is, they are against them and do not have any interest in the tragedy that befell them by being under the boot of a dictatorship that is only "anti-imperialist" and "anti-zionist" in name. It literally is no longer pan-Arab, since the core victims of all its crimes are Arabs. if one actually looks at all the facts and evidence of what happened to the local populations, half of them driven off their own land and bombed by their own leadership that dragged its allies in to finish off any place the populations might dare return to, it is clear that "dictators" are the problem here, according to the people who used their own agency to free themselves and then were given the clampdown of all clampdowns because "the populations" are not what the regimes care about. The populations are the one thing hindering them from achieving their goals of permanent control, and they are given the grand "assist" by the so-called and ill-named "anti-imperialist and anti-war left".

how odd, Bombing Libya is happening by Gheddafi too, with scores of victims, even infants. even bombing of hospitals and mosques.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5N-sO6vkNI&fe...
what happens to the migrants. don't believe the hype

if you are concerned about the sub-saharan migrants that are part of the human trafficking, this is the story: they leave, they are intercepted by Italy, sent to the Libyan prisons where they live worse than if they were criminals of the worst sort, they had an uprising and 15 were killed. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2O7QtL82rq0
there are hundreds more articles that prove this. Get your propaganda out of the way before you smear without knowing the facts

how odd, Lilly asks for him to substantiate his claims and he doesn't but then, nor do the commenters here. Satisfy her requests about documented and reliable proof that the human trafficking is to fund rebels. As an Italian living in Italy myself, I have known hundreds of Libyans and also Italians who do business in Libya as well as see the news and know about our "bilateral friendship agreement" where Italy routes the immigrants over to Libya who then keeps them in inhumane cages. Regime prisons. if you haven't heard about them, maybe you don't really follow Libya at all and know far less than those you are hear criticising as they voice disagreement and disgust with the unsubstantiated smears and the racist condemnation of an entire region.

did it ever cross your mind that maybe Lilly Taz knows more about the situation from a Libyan point of view than does the western pundits, those paid by West Point or people who were friends with Gheddafi. Of course, the experts who are not Libyans know more what's best for Libyan people than a Libyan does!!

this is an obligation of a journalist to provide substantiation for claims, otherwise they are just noise and opinion, when they are not rumours.
I would like to add, that I see the author intends on returning to Libya on another US Peace Delegation and he (rightfully) intends upon bringing flowers to the graves of the children killed by the USA and Europe. I hope that there are no more of these graves and I hope that if his heart is slightly flexible, he'd think of bringing flowers to the graves of the children massacred by Libyan forces faithful to Gheddafi. I know that at least up to this point, they dramatically outnumber the graves he wishes to honour.

Speaking of graves, it is much more than a rumour that Gheddafi loyalists had exhumed bodies from graves in the cities that were resisting. What was done with these bodies? hm. I am sure that Libyans are aware of what has become of them.

Truth is the only thing that counts. The rest is just one person's word against another. Truth sometimes is not immediately apparent, but it always tends to leave traces.