Stay updated with breaking news from Gadhafi. Get real-time updates on events, politics, business, and more. Visit us for reliable news and exclusive interviews.
convoy of vehicles. so, you know, it was almost like being in the room with his spitting image puppet. and in the case of those two men, you had also spent time reporting on the consequences of the actions of their government. considerable amount, yeah — and their victims. how did you square the two men who were in front of you, who was speaking to you with apparent conviction, and what you knew to be the cause of their instructions? well, i tried to use it against them. for example, with gaddafi, he was saying, "my people love me. "they love me all" — i remember him saying that. he said it in english. and i said, "well, hang on, a minute. "i was just earlier on today, people were out on the streets of tripoli and they were protesting". he said, "no, they were supporting me". i said, "no, they weren't. "they were saying �*down with gaddafi'". "no, they weren't." i actually think he believed in his own propaganda. he lived in a bubble.
how do you manage that relationship? one of the things that have really changed, all groups, from little armed groups to governments are much tighter about control of the media and they want to somehow control the message, so they do like to keep a very close eye and insist on lots of permissions, just getting to somewhere like bakhmut requires all sorts of permissions and permits to get in there in the first place, and that gives them quite a bit of power over you. the only where you can operate is to realise... one of the things you have to realise is we are fairly powerless, and you work around those structures. and sometimes, it requires making compromises, if you're working in the libya in the days of gadhafi, syria, or other authoritarian places, you have to work on their system, which involve sometimes a lot of schmoozing. but you must not compromise what comes out of it,
which you can push back at them. but yeah, if they're going to keep at it, they're going to keep at it. and in those moments on each side of the interview when you arrive, when you're packing up, both with president asaad, but also gaddafi as well, can you learn things about how they interact with their colleagues, about how they carry themselves? absolutely. assad is incredibly polite in a sort of old world, courtly way. he'll leap to his feet when you get to the room. he'll break his neck to make sure he's not the first person through the door — "after you," and then, he always — i've interviewed him a few times — and he always gives you about ten or 15 minutes one on one beforehand, you have a little chat. gaddafi, on the other hand, you know, he swept in, the absolute caricature of his own image, in a flowing ochre robe, aviator sunglasses, slightly spacey, at the head of a massive convoy of vehicles.
so, you know, it was almost like being in the room with his spitting image puppet. and in the case of those two men, you had also spent time reporting on the consequences of the actions of their government. considerable amount, yeah — and their victims. how did you square the two men who were in front of you, who was speaking to you with apparent conviction, and what you knew to be the cause of their instructions? well, i tried to use it against them. for example, with gaddafi, he was saying, "my people love me. "they love me all" — i remember him saying that. he said it in english. and i said, "well, hang on, a minute. "i was just earlier on today, people were out on the streets of tripoli and they were protesting". he said, "no, they were supporting me". i said, "no, they weren't. "they were saying �*down with gaddafi'". "no, they weren't." i actually think he believed in his own propaganda. he lived in a bubble. but — so, i think you can try to use things you've seen but the great strength —
you, maybe they offer you with a drink, someone is injured and you help them, how do you manage that relationship? one of the things that have really changed, all groups, from little armed groups to governments are much tighter about control of the media and they want to somehow control the message so they do like to keep a very close eye and insist on lots of permissions, just getting to somewhere like bakhmut requires all sorts of permissions and permits to get in there in the first place, and that gives them quite a bit of power over you. one of the things you have to realise is we are fairly powerless, and you work around those structures. and sometimes it requires making compromises, if you are working in the libya in the days of gadhafi, syria, or other authoritarian places, you have to
compromises, if you are working in the libya in the days of gadhafi, or other authoritarian players, you have to work on their system, which involve sometimes a lot of schmoozing but you must not compromise what comes out of it which is the journalism, what comes out of it which is thejournalism, and if there are problems of things you can't see, it's very important to be transparent and say we could not get that because... i was going to ask you about that because you think the journalists are transparent enough around the relationships and system that is necessary for them to be there? do you think the consumers of news understand that is the equation?— understand that is the equation? understand that is the euuation? equation? some people say --eole equation? some people say peeple find _ equation? some people say people find it _ equation? some people say people find it more - equation? some people say i people find it more interesting if we actually went more into some of the process. i think we tend not to do that because we might think the process is a bit boring, it is not really why we're there, it is not about us, we feel that very
children back. what's the reason? what's the motivation to keep that allowed authorities to them as your nationals with your passport, teach them a foreign quickly expel migrants seeking asylum was allowed to lapse. language? why not give them back to their families, give them to a third state, as required by the geneva a tweet warned it could be chaotic for a while. tens of thousands of migrants conventions, let that state return them back to their are believed to be massed in homeland? they're not doing that, and it northern mexico and two counties begs the question why. issued disaster declarations in >> you're in new york to brief preparation. the security council on the today there's no evidence of a human rights situation in libya. rush, at least not an immediate a lot of people have not paid it one. this video is probably the best evidence. much attention since gadhafi was on the left you see the border killed. as it was yesterday with but it is a broken state. migrants camped just outside it. on the right, the border as it the country is divided. was today. there's a lot of theories where there's a warlord in the east of those people went. the country from benghazi we'll get to that in a moment. a source tells cnn according to further east battling the a count by border patrol, around central government, which is 23,400 migrants were in custody supported by the, recognized by as of this afternoon. the u.n. in tripoli. that's slightly lower than >> it's completely broken. and there are different power, earlier this week. nevertheless, the administration is still preparing for more epicenters of power. i went to benghazi, met general migrants seeking asylum. i.c.e. is adding 5,000 detention hafta -- >> that's the warlord in the beds. there's also the political chaos east? >> absolutely. i was criticized for that. with republican calls for the border to be shut down and the i went to tripoli, met
january. and who made the decision not to treat this as an act of war because it was a terrorist act and in short order we knew it came from libya. in 1991 we charge libyan intelligence official and we charge a libyan airline official for being complicit in what we're defining as a crime. but going back to 86 in april of that year, a nightclub in germany in berlin was bombed by libya. one soldier was killed and 20 or 30 -- about 50 were wounded and other germans as well. nine days later we conducted a massive attack against libya based on some hard intelligence with 100 airplanes. bases, barracks and gadhafi's headquarters. it was treating a terrorist act as an act of war and giving us
and one of the problems is that, you know, berlusconi, who was in and out over the 2000s, and by the way, one of her partners in the governing coalition, a convicted criminal, and he was one of the first to detain migrants and demonize migrants in all of its government, so the other governing partner, he actually called for, quote, mass cleansing of immigrants. and so when you have -- so this is the problem, when you have such extremes and people actively promoting racist and violence against immigrants, and berlusconi loved to make deals with other despots and made a deal with gadhafi and sent all the boats back, that skewed the whole debate. and when you've got these extremists, it's very difficult to have a kind of centrist option prevail.
presidthe president there. within 16 months, he couldn't steal enough votes to stay in power. within 25 months, he was in the hague. many people thought it would be impossible. in other cases such as libya, president gadhafi died hiding in the battlefield, he was indicted 45 days after the icc gained jurisdiction. there could be charges relatively soon. it's a question of how challenging it is to put the cases together. there are two types. bombardment of mariupol, which may, according to the mayor, have more than 10,000 dead. whether that can be shown to be a war crime or whether those are legitimate targets that were shot. then we have the crimes of murder and rape and torture like we have seen in your reports. of course, attributing those to the high command, they will argue those are rogue elements doing those things. >> of course.