Its about time, changes are coming slowlybut they are coming, which is good.

Khadafi, as of late, has been trying to get some sort of pan-African movement going. One guess as to who he sees heading this thing. He's just taking another direction to "Libyan greatness". Instead of looking east (Arabs) he's looking south (Africans). Recall his touring convoy of the continent.

One more thing... Could this be a "Berber identity" thing? I honestly don't know, so hopefully someone who knows better will say something.

I think mr. Gadaffi has poor experience with terrorist support.

In USa you seem to have very simplistic ideas. Which is not good is evil , which is not white is black....etc the lybian gov. has removed the term "arab" in the country name , and now they are not arabs anymore. Congratulations for this argument. When someone in USA has the good ide to remove " in god we trust" , you won't be anymore christians or else ??? you make confusion with "people" or "socialist" republic which are non permanent political states.

The US ideas of the rest of the world are not more simplistic than Europes. Europeans redicule yanks for not knowing the name of their capital, France being the capital of Moscow f.i.; but very few Europeans can name the capital of Michigan, Louisiana, Texas or New York. The European idea that Bush is just a dumb cowboy is as stupid as the notion of Reagan being a second rate actor - they failed to realise his efforts in the actors union. We Europeans that know France (and Sweden for that matter) we know what we dislike!

Congratulations, Jean, for thinking that my whole premise on Libyan identity trends rests on one sentence, instead of analyzing the whole trend discussed in the article. Very Simplistic of you. Is that a typical French Trait? Do you offer any evidence to counter the argument that the Libyan leadership is seeking to establish a pan-African identity at the expense of Pan-Arab identity, or do you simply beleive, in typical French Arrogance, that what you say must be correct, simply because a French Person says it? As for Good and Evil, Jean, sometimes, unless you are French, you must draw the line. That is why there would never have been a "Vichy England". Yes, we Americans have a saying- we call'em like we see'em. (It's from baseball, but nevermind). If you don't, nothing ever gets done. We have another saying, and it comes from some famous person, maybe Churchill or Franklin, I don't know, but the words are: "the only thing necessary for the triumph of Evil is for Good men to do Nothing". Your French blurring of good and evil into one cloudy gray fog is nothing more than your excuse to do... Nothing. Beleive it or not, there IS evil in the world. Your grandparents saw it, or maybe they were part of it. But somehow most of their grandchildren failed ot learn the lesson, and no longer know what it looks like. Since you are unable to tell Good from Evil, the only logical thing for you to do, if you wish to further the cause of Good in the world, is trust in people who still can. You find them in the US, UK, Denmark, Australia, and even in other places. There are even a few in France. Listen to them. Here's a lesson on the nature of good and evil. When US troops entered the suburbs of Bagdad, they found a Prison for Children- held as political prisoners, as young as 4 or 5! That's "EVIL". Bad, Bad, Bad evil. Brave men with guns made that evil go away. Good men. Good vs Evil, lesson one!

the only thing necessary for the triumph of Evil is for Good men to do Nothing" - edmund burke, irish philospher (and a thanks to google)

and if I may paraphrase that wonderful quote into modern context; "The only thing necessary for the triumph of Evil is for Good men to act like the french." E.

I think that what this comes down to, Jean, is that we simple americans have learned to recognize what cartoonist Scott Adams has termed "the way of the weasel." I understand that a change in name does not necessarilly change a populace's makeup. However, this is a sure sign that certain nations do not want to be associated with the term arab anymore. Being an arab has apparently lost its appeal, possibly due to decisions made by other arab nations.