The War Continues

September 4, 2011
last updates Sept. 13

Even as Tripoli has apparently fallen for good and is suddenly racked with horrific "Gaddafi" atrocities, the green side fights on. The cities of Sirte, Bani Walad, and Sabha, at least, are still in the hands of Gaddafi loyalists, including tribal militias. They are still being bombed by NATO's warplanes and attacked by their helicopters, as they prepare for a September 10 surrender deadline or a September 11 assault by al Qaeda-linked rebel lynch mobs.

I have nothing much to add. News on the "fighting" is scarce, with most reportage being about the search for a negotiated settlement and analyses of how long this last mop-up will take before Libya is purged and purified for the forces of neo-Liberal freedom. The world is not likely to allow them to just stay there like an Indian reservation. They'd surely attack "civilians" (Libya's new government and army) all over again if left alone, even if they swore not to. Everyone knows you can't trust Gaddafi. So they must go if they don't abjectly surrender (and they probably won't).

My heart goes out to all those caught in the crossfire, as well as to those still holding to their oaths and prepared to die for what they feel is right. Once you are dead or locked up to die of sadness or torture, future Libya will be deprived of your input and guidance. But that was probably going to be the case anyway. This is not an exercise in sharing by NATO and its preferred leadership of "free-market" crusaders.

Sept 7: A video from a hospital in Sirte:

Euronews on Bani Walid, Moussa Ibrahim states refusal of negotiations:

---
Update Sept. 12


No Adequate Surrender, Perhaps None Possible

The Telegraph reported:

Negotiations for Sirte have so far failed because residents insisted the former rebels could only enter if they came without weapons and they wanted an amnesty for anyone guilty of crimes committed under Gaddafi's regime. Many there fear a wave of revenge and looting [and rightly so - ed] on a city that is closely associated with Gaddafi and his inner circle.

On Saturday, the head of the transitional government, Mustafa Abdel Jalil, tried to convince them, along with residents of Bani Walid, that they had nothing to fear. "We try to extend our hands to show peace to our brothers there to let our troops enter these cities peacefully without fighting," he said. [they were unconvinced - ed] At the same, however, he added that the deadline for surrender had expired and an attack was imminent. "Now the situation is in the hands of our revolutionary fighters," he said.

Hold on - they agreed to surrender to NTC rule so long as no one is prosecuted, and no one is shot? They agreed to stop fighting and allow a peaceful transition, if I'm reading that right, but the rebels rejected it? They want only blood (via some kangaroo "trial," perhaps), and want to keep their wildly-brandished weapons for drawing blood, while promising to be peaceful for the first time once inside Sirte of all places? And the world is okay that the attacks is coming? I'll have to look into that...

One option open to someone presented with such an offer would be to take them up on it, have a peaceful transfer and play the good guys for once, and then deal with the alleged crimes Gaddafi and son were to stand trial for in one or another of ways. They could find a way to realize it was largely crap and noise, even apologize for their part in that, and agree to move on. They could try to coax Gaddafi to stand trial with promises of a fairness, made credible and eventually delivered on, and start a national healing process. Or they could just renege after the peace and try to arrest him, even at the risk of briefly opening the war again if necessary. At least there could be a breather in there and a cooling-down period, some time to catch up on sleep, get well-fed again, bury the dead, and grieve a bit.

But they've opted to say "no dice. If we're not forced to concede anything, we won't." While they've got the momentum and the bombers there, all loose ends will be tied up at once, in a totalitarian sense. Every demand must be met, and now.

Chaotic Attacks on Bani Walid
So, the promised deadline and promised date of attack has come and passed without adequate concessions from the Libyan government. Bani Walid, where Seif al-Islam and Saadi Gaddafi were thought to be holding out was attacked. The offensive there began a day ahead of schedule on September 9, after taking fire from loyalist Grads, it's said. Bloomberg reports some details:

The rebel Halbus brigade from Misrata entered the suburbs of Bani Walid along the Maldoon Valley, getting to within six miles from the town center, according to Khalid Abdula Salem, commander of the rebel Western Front, in an interview from his headquarters in the oasis Abdul Rauf.

They found some homes displaying the rebel tricolor and others the green flag of the Qaddafi regime, Salem said.

Bani Walid’s garrison is composed of the elite 32nd Brigade commanded by Qaddafi’s son Khamis, members of the Legion Thoria secret police, and units of mercenaries from Darfur, Salem said.

Khamis? Hasn't he been killed now like five times? As for the "African mercenaries," you know, by mid-September it might finally be true. Back in February, and through most of the war, however, it definitely was not true.

The assault was called "chaotic" by fighters there and by the Global Post, lacking in co-ordination. That means it failed. Where it's a chaotic winning fight, and they can slaughter freely, they don't complain. Indeed, a rebel fighter told the Post:

Monem said 10 revolutionaries died Sunday and 15 were injured, with most being hit from well-concealed or elevated positions. “There’s no clear target,” Monem said. “There’s no close snipers. They’re not shooting us with Kalashnikovs. The distance [they’re shooting from] is about a kilometer and a half, maybe two. With my gun [AK-47] I cannot shoot them. I did not fire one shot today because there is no clear target.” He said some rebels answer was to shoot randomly in the air.

I recall seeing the Libyan government do about the same, with anti-aircraft guns, when under the abuse of god-like NATO forces. But these guys are the aggressors here, not the defenders. The Global Post also has Rebel leaders reiterate their intentions to aggress further:

[The] National Transitional Council say they won't consider Libya fully "liberated" until these loyalist centers fall."
[...]
On Sunday, they went into the fringes of Bani Walid and were bloodied by long distance guns and locals shooting at them from house to house.

What the hell! Why don't these human shields want to be liberated? Are they shooting only out of fear? Their dang heads will come off soon either way! They just stuffed Abu Salim trauma hospital with some hundred examples of their handiwork. It's nothing new really, after dozens of taken cities and similar atrocities blamed on the crumbling regime. And now freedom and "sanity" are coming to the last few holdouts.

NATO War Crimes Alleged
NATO's air support for this surge of freedom of course continues. How on Earth could it turn back now? I can't confirm the following, but Leonore in Libya (good with rumors, not so much with details), a site called Ozyism, and something called Alrai TV (Syrian?), all report that, however they're delivering them, NATO's using cluster bombs and mustard gas. As Leonore put it (translated):

Bani Walid: NATO used cluster bombs and mustard gas against Bani Walid [...] during the heavy bombing of NATO. This is a crime against humanity and against international law and standards.

Ozyism reported it once (unconfirmed), then again, (confirmed). The last was partly because Alrai TV in an on-line osting, has what it says is a photograph of one of the victims' face, dead, burnt and ravished. I'm skeptical of this, but no expert either.

Towards a Bloodbath in Sirte
Saadi has slipped out of Bani Walid into Niger, it's been reported, and Seif, is he's there or ever was, is safe for the moment. They stopped that attack and now the rebels are advancing on Sirte, where their father is "hiding," as the Tripoli post recently said, "like some rat." They halted the Bani Walid offensive not because it was too tough, but because that was their clever plan. As Bloomberg reported:

“Our mission is not to capture Bani Walid, it is to block the town and attack Sirte,” said [rebel intelligence officer Noraldien] Elmaiel, who is based in the rebel-held town of Misrata.
[...]
The rebels pushed through the front line west of Sirte and were 30 miles (50 kilometers) from the town yesterday.

Protecting their flank was a large screening force of jeep- mounted infantry that moved from forward positions near Bani Walid to push eastward, south of the coastal highway, capturing the towns of Zem Zem and Wadi Bay against light resistance, said Elmaiel.

At Kilometer Sixty, 110 miles west of Sirte and the furthest point rebel forces allowed journalists to travel, columns of black pickup trucks mounting machine guns streamed to and from the front, stirring up clouds of dust that blew across the highway.

“They are hitting us with artillery, with mortars, with Grad rockets,” said sweat-soaked 20-year-old rebel fighter Ismail Katika. “We can’t hit the guns, we can’t see them.”

Same problem they had at Bani Walid. Try dealing with NATO bombers some day, you punk.

Human shields are feared again, the Telegraph reports, of the held-hostage in the face of rebel onslaught variant.

Fathi Baja, head of political affairs for the National Transitional Council (NTC), told McClatchy Newspapers that on Thursday as many as 300 hostages had been moved to the village – a stronghold of Gaddafi's Gaddafa tribe – to be used as "human shields" to prevent any advance on the city.

Decoded: Their "chaotic" forces are expected to kill about this many civilians they'll need to blame on Gaddafi. It was predicted for Tripoli, and it happened - the regime killed hundreds of men women and children, freedom-loving Libyans who nearly all, in photos, look like regime loyalists or rotting "African mercenaries." Photos from Sirte or Bani Walid: less likely.

My hunch is they know some majority of the country still supported Gaddafi openly up until armed rebel kids with awkward beards were on their streets. They know the tribes are solid and might resist the NTC takeover, and the hardcore loyalists - hundreds of thousands of them - will require too much de-programming. The free market future would greatly benefit from what the rebels are pushing here - head-on battles, after more massive air-power softening by NATO, with all the crimes buried silently inside, and every last scrap of Human flesh admitted to pinned on Gaddafi's account. He killed the whole town in a fit of madness the FFs were just too late to prevent, as usual.

It's hoped by some this will be the final and climactic demonization of the war, again justifying the war in spades, and will along the way kill as many problem people as possible (Islamists against loyalists?) and really humble those remaining into abject silence and possibly quiet self-implosions from grief.

It's time to ask world leaders an important question: "Hey, how's that operation to prevent a bloodbath in Benghazi coming along?"

Sept. 13: NATO airstrikes pound pro-Gadhafi targets

TRIPOLI, Libya (AP) — NATO says its warplanes have pounded targets in a number of key strongholds of support for fugitive dictator Moammar Gadhafi.

The alliance said Tuesday that airstrikes struck one radar system, eight surface-to-air missile systems, five surface-to-air missile trailers, one armed vehicle and two command vehicles a day earlier near Gadhafi's hometown of Sirte.

NATO also says it struck six tanks and two armored fighting vehicles in Sabha in the southern desert.

Jamahiriya counter-attack on Ras Lanuf reported by al Jazeera English
Hoda Abdel-Hamid on Ras Lanuf refinery attack
Vancouver Sun reports it too

The Independent reports on "Schisms" in the rebel ranks on the latest assaults. The local Warfalla tribe members working with the rebellion have let them down a couple times, and are becoming suspected of being "traitors," of putting tribal loyalties (and hence Gaddafi loyalties) over loyalties to NATO's one Libya. This may not go well for the Warfalla in the long run, true or not.

More on the Grinding Down of Sirte, up to Sept. 30:
Situation in Sirte: Neither Good Nor Great

Target Gaddafi: Reactions to the Assassination Attempt

May 3 2011
last update May 24

Some further reactions to the strike that killed Saif (or Seif) al-Arab al Gaddafi and his three young kids, while apparently aiming for their grandpa, Muammar Gaddafi.

It's been noted Saif survived an earlier attack on a family compound, again by the US, in 1986, when he was a young boy. Less luck these days.

The Mirror seems to think Saif deserved it - he was a spoiled thug. He allegedly hired someone to kill someone once over being famously kicked out of a bar. There's a Gaddafi - always attach your darkest plots to the highhest-profile hitch you can and be sure to be seen ... involved in a weapons-smuggling probe, they say. Had a way of charges of being dropped.

No one has provided evidence he or his three children were involved in attacks on innocent civilians. Or even against the NATO-backed insurgents trying to topple the regime in a civil war. Except by cheering up Grampa Gaddafi in his murderous campaign. So score one for the protection of innocents after all.

If the morale loss angle is working, it's not evident. They're putting on strong and defiant faces in Tripoli. Washington Post on the funeral, May 2:

About 2,000 Gaddafi supporters gathered for the funeral, chanting slogans in support of the regime. There was no sign of Gaddafi, who has appeared in public infrequently since NATO warplanes took over Libya’s skies in mid-March.

Saif al-Arab’s coffin, covered in a wreath of flowers and draped in the green flag adopted by the regime since Gaddafi took over in a military coup in 1969, was carried through a throng of supporters, who chanted, “The people want revenge for the martyr” and “Revenge, revenge for you, Libya.”
[...]
The most recognizable figure at the graveside was the bespectacled Saif al-Islam, dressed in a black round hat, a white shirt and black waistcoast. He reached down to touch his younger brother’s chest for the last time and then fought back tears as the body, covered in a white shroud, was taken from a simple wooden coffin and lowered into the ground.

Swiftly regaining his composure, Saif al-Islam then left the graveside, flashing V-for-victory signs, waving at faces he recognized and shaking his fist in defiance, his every step jostled by a surging and poorly controlled crowd.

Benjamin Barber: Libya: This is Nato's dirty war
The Guardian, May 2 2011
A scathing (but not probing enough)piece by the author of Jihad vs. McWorld.

In Syria, where the government is also "killing its own people", prudent strategists urge restraint, cautioning that regime change can lead to unknown and pernicious consequences.

Here, the (intended) consequences are known, hoped for, planned for. Nothing's 100% sure, but the top people all seem ready to bet on it.

But it is the plain stupidity of the Nato commitment to assassination and violent regime change that is most disconcerting. What on earth is the endgame?

And end to the Green revolution. The expansion of McWorld. Privatizations and re-structuring.

Want to be sure that [Gaddafi] will fight to the finish at maximum cost to others? Corner him, try to kill him and his family, and warn him that he has no way out but abject surrender, certain arrest and probable execution.

Self-fulfilling prophecy. Provoke that which will "require" the desired end-game.

Alaa al-Ameri: Gaddafi is a legitimate target
The Guardian, May 3 2011

Al-Ameri offers no legal reasoning to support the title, only rhetorical ones. He cartoonish bad guy. It okay to kill him.

Gaddafi is not a head of state. He is a warlord in control of a personal army that he has tasked with the mass killing and terrorising of Libyans for the crime of wishing to live as free human beings.

It's easier to pick out the few correct words in there than to address the wrong ones. Newspeak in action here.

George Jonas, National Post:

Fancy that. Three generations of Gaddafis arriving at a known control and command centre just as NATO begins an air strike. Isn't it a small world? What a coincidence. It has to be, because the commander of NATO operations in Libya tells us we don't target individuals. As the UN's air force, we're 21st-century knights: Our quest is to rescue princesses without slaying dragons.

Or maybe NATO is lying and General Bouchard doesn't know it. Maybe NATO commanders aren't in the loop. After all, do commanders need to know? Targeted assassination is a policy matter; it's sufficient if the commander-in-chief knows about it, and judging by his speech [on the killing of Osama bin Laden], he does. He knows what targeted assassination are and why they may be necessary.

http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/columnists/Saving+lives+through+assassination/4715300/story.html

Arab Times on-line passes on details of the victims and the plea of Libya's top Catholic.

ROME, May 1, (AFP): The most senior Catholic official in Tripoli on Sunday confirmed on Italian television that Libyan strongman Muammar Gaddafi’s son Seif al-Arab had been killed and appealed for a ceasefire.
“I confirm the death of the son of the leader,” Giovanni Martinelli, the bishop of Tripoli, told the Sky TG24 channel.
Television pictures showed him standing with other religious dignitaries in front of three bodies covered in shrouds and flags.
He said he was taken to the morgue by officials of various local churches and added that they then all said a prayer.
Martinelli said he felt the anger of all those present but added that the dignitaries thanked him for his “gesture of solidarity”.
An early critic of the Western military campaign in Libya, he appealed to NATO, the United Nations and the international community to end the bombing of Libya.
“I ask, please, out of respect for the pain due to the loss of a son, a gesture of humanity towards the leader (Gaddafi),” he said.
[...]
Al Arabiya on Sunday broadcast footage taken from Libyan Jamahiriyah TV which it said were the bodies of Saif al-Arab and the three children — two 2-year-olds and a five-month-old. They were wrapped in green cloth with their faces covered in white.

Pravda: Only Criminals try to assassinate world leaders. Moscow Times: Foreign Ministry Says NATO might be targeting Gaddafi.

"Statements by participants in the coalition that the strikes on Libya are not aimed at the physical destruction of … Gadhafi and members of his family raise serious doubts," a ministry statement said Sunday.

A State Duma deputy who often serves as a mouthpiece for the Kremlin's views on foreign affairs was less diplomatic.

"More and more facts indicate that the aim of the anti-Libyan coalition is the physical destruction of Gadhafi," said Konstantin Kosachev, who heads the Duma's International Affairs Committee.

Kosachev called on Western leaders to make their position on the airstrikes clear.

"I am totally perplexed by the total silence from the presidents of the United States, France, the leaders of other Western countries," Kosachev said in an interview, according to Interfax. "We have the right to expect their immediate, comprehensive and objective assessment of the coalition's actions."

China calls for a cease-fire (on NATO this time!). As does Venezuela, urging wider UN support.

May 8: More details on the second strike on the Gaddafi family home and the burning of empty embassy buildings, and the responses to that: http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2011/may/08/ml-libya/

May 24: Ireal Shamir has an excellent article I missed: Did the UN Security Council Authorize Assassination? (Counterpunch, May 5). An excerpt:

The chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court announced on Thursday that he would soon stand before the United Nations and report on alleged Libyan war crimes. We can only hope that his brief will include the latest war crime, the murder of Qaddafi’s family, his son and three grandchildren, and the assassination attempt on the life of the Libyan leader on May Day, 2011. Cameron, Sarkozy, the NATO field commanders and the Danish air crew should all be indicted for this crime.

Or whomever, exactly. I heard the jets were Norwegian-flown ... But the following is highly interesting:

The date of the operation was known well beforehand, and had already been openly discussed in late April by the Russian Secret Service SVR (External Intelligence Service). On April 29th, a Russian netzine published an article by Kirill Svetitsky who quoted an anonymous source within SVR:

“There will be an attempt to kill Muammar Qaddafi on or before May 2. The governments of France, Britain and the US decided on it, for the warfare in Libya does not proceed well for the anti-Libyan alliance: the regular army has substantial gains; Bedouin tribes entered the fight on the government’s side; in Benghazi, a “second front” was opened by the armed local militias who are tired of rebels’ presence, their incessant fights and robberies.

“But the main reason for the timing is that the Italian parliament plans to discuss Italy’s involvement in Libyan campaign on May 3. Until now, decisions were taken by Berlusconi, but there are strong differences of opinion within the government coalition regarding the Libyan war, and they will probably bring the government down on May 3, and Italy will effectively leave the anti-Libyan alliance. It is likely to have a domino effect. For this reason leaders of the UK, the US and France decided to eliminate Qaddafi not later than May 2d, before the session of the Italian parliament on May 3d.”

Unlike many Internet predictions, this one turned out to be timely and exact. On May 1, the US, France and the UK made a failed attempt on the life of Muammar Qaddafi, although they did succeed in killing his son and three grandchildren. Such unusual operative foreknowledge implies that Western leaders had advised the Russians of the planned attack, and that the SVR had then leaked the plans.

Actually, as we've seen, the attack occurred about 8:30 pm the night of April 30, but obviously reports didn't really emerge as to the effects, even within Libya, until the first hours of May 1. Same difference, mostly. Either way it's not exactly "well before," but the previous day - April 29 - it had been reported based on a probably fresh leak or good guess that NATO would try to assassinate Gaddafi. That's gotta mean something - at the very least that their moves are getting more predictable.

Legal Warfare: ICC Joins NATO Axis, Insanely Unfair

May 18 2011

Andy Dilks: The “International Criminal Court”: Prosecuting Gaddafi With Questionable Evidence While Ignoring NATO-Israeli Atrocities

The International Criminal Court has requested an arrest warrant for Colonel Gaddafi and his sons for “crimes against humanity”, accusing them of ordering, planning and participating in illegal attacks on civilians. Luis Moreno-Ocampo, International Criminal Court Prosecutor, said, “Based on the evidence collected, the prosecution has applied to pre-trial chamber one for the issuance of arrest warrants against Moammar Muhamad abu Minyar Gaddafi, Saif Al-Islam Gaddafi and Abdullah al-Sanoussi.”

But what is the evidence? The press release on the website of the International Criminal Court makes frequent reference to “direct evidence” but fails to cite any of this evidence in detail. In order to try and clarify the grounds for the prosecution, I emailed the ICC:
[...]
The ICC promptly responded, providing me with a document entitled, PUBLIC REDACTED Version Prosecutor’s Application Pursuant to Article 58 as to Muammar Mohammed Abu Minyar GADDAFI, Saif Al‐Islam GADDAFI and Abdullah AL‐SENUSSI.

Needless to say, “redacted” is the operative word.

Sources backing up the frequent assertions in the document regarding crimes against humanity carried out by Gaddafi and his sons are notable by their absence. For example, the document states, “In the early days of the demonstrations, GADDAFI transmitted orders through his Secretariat to “discipline” civilians, by killing them and destroying their property, who had openly rebelled against the regime. Further, AL‐SENUSSI, upon GADDAFI’s instructions, directed and coordinated the operation of the Security Forces in Benghazi and expressly ordered the shooting at civilians. Demonstrators were attacked by members of the Security Forces who opened machine gun fire on them in different areas of the city, such as the Juliyana bridge and Jamal Abdun Naser Street.” The sources for these alleged transmissions and subsequent attacks are not provided. Further, the report uses vague generalisations concerning the history of Libya in an attempt to bolster its case. “Direct evidence of the plan to use extreme and lethal violence is corroborated by the scale, scope and duration of the attacks; the pattern of the attacks in various cities; the speeches and statements of GADDAFI, SAIF AL‐ISLAM and AL‐SENUSSI; the history of the regime’s response to any political opposition within Libya; and the complete authority exercised by GADDAFI and his subordinates over all important security decisions.” Again, the “direct evidence” is not sourced, while appealing to a state’s prior human rights record is not proof by any measure of the current crimes of which they stand accused.

Again, the link: Prosecutor's submission for the arrest warrants. It's a PDF download, and worth a scan. Indeed, the supporting evidence section, what I'm most interested in as it's probably bunk, is entirely redacted. For "safety" reasons, to be sure. The findings themselves will give us some clues, but I'd have to read it much closer before I could add anything. It's probably just more unsubstantiated and illogical rebel reportage and defector drivel, lapped up eagerly by a corrupt system.

These arrest warrants, if issued, will ensure a longer fight. If there's no safety to guarantee from arrest, there's no negotiation and less chance than ever of turning back this insane operation. Not that NATO and its supporters have previously shown any interest in that. Only holding a country - a rump Libya or Tipolitania if nothing else - will insulate the leader's family from that, and the Gaddafis will insist on that all that harder now, as they arguably should anyway.

More later, perhaps ...

The Strike that Killed Seif

Sunday, May 1 2011
Last update May 8, 

It's been reported by Libyan government that a NATO strike on Saturday in Tripoli has somehow killed three young children, all grandchildren of leader Muammar Gaddafi, along with the leader's youngest son, Seif (or Saif) al-Arab al-Gaddafi, age 29. (Not to be confused with older son and heir apparent Saif al-Islam). Further, says Libyan government spokesman Moussa Ibrahim, the same strike nearly killed the leader himself and his wife, who were in the building that was struck by three missiles.

This post will seek to work out how and why this happened. First, al Jazeera's live blog for April 30 gives the apparent time of the NATO strike as about 9pm local time.

8:50pm
The Reuters news agency quotes witnesses who say they heard loud explosions in the capital, Tripoli.

"Missiles appeared to fall behind the Rixos Hotel, which is near a major conference centre, opposite the palace Muammar Gaddafi uses to host visiting dignitaries and not far from his Bab al-Aziziyah compound. It was not immediately clear what the target was," the news agency reported.

Then, and until the --- is from a Los Angeles Times report:

[T]he possibility that the strike had killed civilians could deepen splits within the alliance and at the United Nations about the goals of the air campaign. 

Turkey, Germany and several other alliance members are deeply worried that NATO is moving toward a war aimed at overthrowing the Kadafi government, a goal that they insist was not authorized by the U.N. resolution allowing military action to protect civilians in Libya.

NATO for the moment has been unable to confirm who was killed in the strike. They insist they only target "command, control, and communication centers" or C3, coordinating the government's military response to the NATO-backed insurrection. Or, as phrased by NATO, "attacking civilians." As usual, they deny trying to assassinate the leader, which is expressly forbidden under international law.

But command and control is a slippery term. If they had known Gaddafi was there, it would have been okay to strike, as it was most definitely commanding military forces.

In a statement, the Canadian commander of the NATO operation in Libya said the alliance had attacked "a known command-and-control building" in Libya. 

The NATO officer would not discuss the intelligence that led to the attack or whether the alliance knew Kadafi was in the building when it was attacked [...but he] suggested that the Libyan leader may have surrounded himself with members of his family even as he was communicating with his military forces. "If Kadafi had people in the building he was using to conduct command and control, we have no way of knowing they were there," said the officer

They now believe col. Gaddafi himself - not a real colonel and really more of a figurehead - was personally controling the military operations. As if he'd have no staff of professionals to manage these things!

They should be expected to have proof of this, but I suspect rather they received intel that the leader was there, and then "decided" he might be controlling things from there, and struck, only to learn he'd surrounded himself with "human shields" as he did so.

It could be the case, but it just ... seems unlikely. But once it's done, this discovery the leader was staying where those orders had come from might serve as a useful "proof" for NATO's leaders. If Muammar Gaddafi is running things militarily, it could be argued he is a viable ("command and control") target. I'd presume there is little or no precedent for this, so it's hard to say if that argument would stick.

What it comes down to is two questions:
1) Was Mr. Gaddafi in fact inside the building that was struck?
2) Were there in fact war commands coming from that same building?

A lot rides on this supposed knowlege. As the Times notes:

The assertion by NATO that the facility was involved in coordinating Kadafi's military attacks is an important one because, if true, it would make the compound a legitimate military target.

Again, the unnamed NATO officer said:

"We know to a great extent how the chain of command worked [past tense in original] and how they are controlling their attacks on innocent civilians [present tense in original]. This compound we attacked is a building that is involved in the command and control of attacks on civilians."

So if they know so much, why is there confusion over just where this building is? Again as above, the LA Times.

There also appeared to be conflicting versions as to the exact location of the strike.

NATO officials said a compound in an area of Tripoli called Bab Azizia, which has been bombed previously, was the target. Libyan officials, meanwhile, took journalists to a destroyed house in a different, wealthy residential area of Tripoli, Reuters news agency reported. At least three missiles hit that house.

State television showed scenes of heavy damage to a structure. Webs of reinforcing metal were seen hanging inside the damaged building, poking through chunks of concrete. Journalists and others were seen walking through the rubble and, at one point, handling what appeared to be a missile half-covered in dust and debris.

Why the disconnect? Or is there really one? This is the main question I'll return to later with more information. A map might help.
---
Further information:
Al Jazeera's live blog for May 1 provides a minute-by-minute timeline (be sure to double-check anything really critical where an anti-Gaddafi bias might slant things).

4:04 am Al Jazeera's Anita McNaught, reporting from Tataouine in Tunisia, says the Libyans she's been talking to are not celebrating the reported death of Gaddafi's son.
"They simply don't believe this news," she says. "They think it's a rumour manufactured to make it seem that NATO has gone beyond its mandate".

Some elaborate hoax, if so. They blew up a whole separate building in a separate neighborhood. The Tripoli Post carried a nicely balanced and informative piece:

Seif al-Arab Al Qathafi, 29, was hosting a gathering of family and friends when three missiles struck his house just after 8 p.m., causing huge explosions that could be felt more than two miles away.

The Libyan leader and his wife, Safiyah, were also there, government spokesman Moussa Ibrahim said, describing the attack as an assassination attempt.
[...]
Ibrahim said the attack was neither permitted under international law nor morally justifiable, and that it contravened NATO’s mandate under Security Resolution 1973 to protect Libyan civilians. Intelligence about Al Qathafi’s whereabouts or plans must have been leaked to NATO, he said.

“We ask the world to look into this carefully, because what we have now is the law of the jungle,” he said. “How is this helping in the protection of civilians?’’

Hours earlier, Al Qathafi had called for a cease-fire and negotiations with NATO but refused to surrender power. Even as he spoke, alliance warplanes struck a government complex in the capital. Ibrahim said NATO’s response was proof that it was not interested in peace or in protecting civilians. “We renew our call for peace and negotiations,” he said.

Reporters were taken to the house in Tripoli’s upscale Gharghour neighbourhood. One building had been turned into a wreck of shattered concrete and twisted metal, with an unexploded missile lying in the rubble, and a huge crater that had unearthed what looked like an underground cellar or bunker.

The walls of an adjacent building were partly destroyed. In one room, a television was still turned on, and a pile of PlayStation games lay on a sofa, including Modern Warfare 2 and FIFA Soccer 10. A pair of Homer Simpson slippers was half buried in the dust.

Ibrahim did not identify the children who were killed but said they were all under 12 years old.
[...]
In Tripoli, Al Qathafi supporters took to the streets, waved the green flags of the regime and fired guns in the air. The crowd swelled at Bab al-Aziziyah, Al Qathafi’s compound, where hundreds of people gather every night to express their support for their leader and offer themselves as human shields.

Guns were also fired in the air in the eastern city of Benghazi, the de facto capital of the opposition, but in celebration rather than in defiance. Young men took to the streets, waving their arms in the air and displaying the flag of the opposition, the skies lit up with tracer fire.
[...]
A rebel spokesman said he knew that Al Qathafi would use the deaths to paint the NATO operation as a mission to kill him rather than save civilians. [...] “He’ll milk it for all he can,’’ said Jalal el Gallal, a rebel spokesman in Benghazi. “Now he knows how the Libyans feel and it’s a shame they didn’t get (Muammar Al Qathafi) . . . We need this to be over and done with and, frankly speaking, this is the easiest way.’’

At left is a useful image of the compound at Bab al-Aziziya and a map, from the UK telegraph. Below, right, a graphic I made showing the same areas highlighted - the embassies and the compound (named differently), plus the Ghargour neighborhood were Seif was killed nearly a mile away.

The BBC covered how the strike could backfire badly for NATO. It aslo claims a slight expansion of the C3 concept to C3I.

Third, and most important, air strikes began to target command, control, communications and intelligence networks (known, in military parlance, as C3I). The Bab al-Aziziya compound includes all three such networks, and it was presumed that their disruption would disorient regime soldiers on the front line, cut off field commanders from Tripoli, and sow confusion in the ranks.
[...]
[however], this is no longer a conventional war in which top-down direction is crucial. Pro-Gaddafi forces in both the besieged western city of Misrata and in the east have adapted to Nato's air power and are using increasingly unorthodox tactics.

They need not rely on a stream of detailed orders from Tripoli, and can cause considerable harm to civilians without this guidance.

The Guardian has photos of Libyan civilians (not the one's we're protecting) holding pictres of the slain son of their leader and looking rather sad. Others have gotten angry, and that's causing its own problems vis-a-vis embassies in Tripoli and fire safety. European concerns the out-of-line strike(s) backfired - or even will be perceived as such - have been quickly offset by this new Gaddafi violation. NATO's leaders seem to be using that to ensure the assassination attempt backfires against Tripoli even worse than against themselves.
---
Update, May 8:
A lot of details of the scene of the bombing. Everything about it, from the neighborhood to the pet deer killed outside suggests full residential use, we have some confirmation for Saif's death, and the children have been named, born to multiple Gaddafi children, all babies.

Officials said it killed 29-year-old Seif al-Arab Gadhafi, who had survived a 1986 U.S. airstrike on his father's Bab al-Aziziya residential compound. Also killed were 2-year-old Carthage, the daughter of Gadhafi's son Hannibal; six-month-old Mastura, daughter of Gadhafi's daughter Aisha; and 15-month-old Seif Mohammed, son of Gadhafi's son Mohammed.

Dr. Gerard Le Clouerec, a French orthopedic surgeon who runs a private clinic in Tripoli, inspected the bodies of an adult and two infants at Tripoli's Green Hospital on Sunday.

He told reporters that the adult's face was intact and that "in relation to a photo we have seen most probably was the son of Gadhafi." He said the adult had a thin mustache and a full beard.

The two children had been badly disfigured, the doctor said.

The complex targeted Saturday, hidden from view by blast walls and tall trees, contained three one-story buildings and a large yard with lawns, geranium flower beds, a woodshed, a swing and a table soccer game. A dead deer and a twisted bathtub lay on the debris-strewn grass.

A kitchen clock, knocked from the wall, had stopped a 8:08 and 45 seconds, the time of the explosion. Cooking pots with food, including stuffed peppers, noodles and a stew, had been left on the stove, covered with aluminum foil. Thick gray dust covered crates of onions and lemons in the pantry.

http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2011/may/08/ml-libya/

And American sources say Norway had a role in this notorious raid, which Norway's Defense Minister has not confirmed.

Some of the further reactions to the apparent assassination attempt are collected here.