This is an important book that I wanted to share with people. While many believe that Qaddafi was a bad and evil man, you must step back and ask yourself why you are thinking this. Do you really know if he was a bad person? Or have we just taken the information fed by the Media, and believed what it has told us. I ask you to take a step back, and think about the possibility that maybe he wasnt as bad as he was potrayed. In fact, if you watch videos of him, and learn about what his beliefs where, watch his speeches, you will come to find that the things he was talking and thinking about, posed a threat to the US government. Think about this, in every period of time in history where a ruler or leader doesnt "go along" with the Elite, what usually happens? That person is eliminated. Maybe Qaddafi is just another example of this, a person that wouldnt sell-out his country to the wants of the US Government and the Elites.

If you have a free moment, take a few minutes to read Qaddafi's book, The Green Book, by CLICKING HERE It can be found and read online, and is only roughly 31 Pages. He talks about how the election system is basically a dictatorship. Shows the greed for power. I must admit, after reading the book, i had to agree with most of what he was saying.

Here are a few excerpts from the book:

"All political systems in the world today are a product of the struggle for power between
alternative instruments of government. This struggle may be peaceful or armed, as is
evidenced among classes, sects, tribes, parties or individuals. The outcome is always the
victory of a particular governing structure - be it that of an individual, group, party or class
- and the defeat of the people; the defeat of genuine democracy."

"Political struggle that results in the victory of a candidate with, for example, 51 per cent of
the votes leads to a dictatorial governing body in the guise of a false democracy, since 49
per cent of the electorate is ruled by an instrument of government they did not vote for,
but which has been imposed upon them. Such is dictatorship."

"In actual fact, dictatorship is established under thecover of false democracy. This is the reality of the political systems prevailing in the world
today. They are dictatorial systems and it is evident that they falsify genuine democracy"

"True democracy exists only through the direct
participation of the people, and not through the activity of their representatives."

"A parliament is originally founded to represent
the people, but this in itself is undemocratic as democracy means the authority of the
people and not an authority acting on their behalf. The mere existence of a parliament
means the absence of the people."

"Moreover, since the system of elected parliaments is based on propaganda to win votes, it
is a demagogic system in the real sense of the word. Votes can be bought and falsified.
Poor people are unable to compete in the election campaigns, and the result is that only
the rich get elected."

"The most tyrannical dictatorships the world has known have existed under the aegis of
parliaments."

"The purpose of forming a party is to create an instrument to rule the people,"

"The party is a contemporary form of dictatorship. It is the modern instrument of dictatorial
government. The party is the rule of a part over the whole."

"The party allegedly governs on behalf of the people, but in reality the true principle of
democracy is based upon the notion that there can be no representation in lieu of the
people."

My question is why were the citizens so happy once he was out of power?

They weren't. Only the created "rebels" were happy. A small portion of the population the US media portrayed as being happy. The people in general arent shown

It start off decent in talking about corruptions of democracy, but towards the middle and the end is just more socialist propaganda BS.

"Land is the private property of none. Rather, everyone has the right to beneficially utilize it by working, farming or pasturing as long as he and his heirs live on it - to satisfy their needs, but without employing others with or without a wage. If lands were privately owned, only the living would have a share in it."

So individuals can not own the land they live or work on. Their farms belong to society. No thanks. I'm not buying this anti-capitalist garbage.