Having it both ways

What a mixed message! In one breath the Honorable James Steinberg says about Qadhafi (and his family) that they “must go so that the Libyan people can determine their own future.” Towards the end he says “Qadhafi knows what he needs to do. The violence must end and the threats must stop. His troops must withdraw from the cities they have entered“. That is flimsy at best and offers no clear result oriented goal.

So should Qadhafi first command the decline of the assault and then step down? Just because the defections have been numerous there is no reason to believe the assaults on civilians wont continue in his absence. What are you advocating for sir? If Qadhafi goes there is no guarantee the assaults will stop. However, only if he stays can he actually command the forces to stop striking civilians. You can’t have it both ways. And I humbly beg your pardon my dear sir. TRANSCRIPT HERE (read it if youre lost) and the video is below. Also can we finally agree on a proper spelling of his name?

Leaked Saif Gaddafi Video Shows Polar Opposite of Image Projected Through Media

What happened to the soft-spoken son of Muammar al Gaddafi? New leaked video taken by a Gaddafi supporter shows Saif whooping up a crowd, assault rifle in hand, vowing to arm his supporters to take back lost ground.

Calling the protesters “nothing” and referring to them as “bums, brats, and druggies” Saif al Islam vows to return with more weapons so that they can sweep Tripoli clean of protesters. Gaddafi also hints at having them equipped in police gear and entering the protests undercover (very Cass Sunstein of him) Translation available in the description on youtube.

What happened to the respectable Saif al-Islam Gaddafi that was presented to us through the lens of the mainstream media?