The ink was still fresh on UN Resolution 1973, and the western (bought) media were already speaking about air strikes and how to help the rebels. Two mistakes here - firstly, that was not the scope of the document and secondly, why are President Obama and Prime Minister Cameron deliberately misquoting the words of Muammar Al-Qathafi?

NATO and terrorism are one and the same thing and the latest sickening display from this military wing of the oil lobby which gravitates around the White House makes it patently obvious that this evil force is endemically hell-bent upon a policy of violence to perpetrate greed. In Libya, NATO has got it monumentally wrong - again.

The ink was still fresh on UN Resolution 1973, and the western (bought) media were already speaking about air strikes and how to help the rebels. Two mistakes here - firstly, that was not the scope of the document and secondly, why are President Obama and Prime Minister Cameron deliberately misquoting the words of Muammar Al-Qathafi?

The Brotherly Leader of the Great Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya had not sworn to show no mercy to the people of Benghazi - he had given the "rebels" (armed groups of thugs) a window in which to lay down their arms and had said hat he would show no mercy to those launching this armed uprising. He was not speaking about massacring civilians in Benghazi - many of his supporters there have already been murdered by the "rebels".

Appointed as his father's - the Libyan President Muammar Gaddafi - political successor, Seif al-Islam Gaddafi - said on Friday (18) that the government of his country has "no fear", after the adoption by the United Nations (UN) Security Council of a no-fly zone in the region. "We are in our country and with our people. And we're not afraid," said Gaddafi's son.

"They are not going to help the people if [you] bomb Libya to kill the Libyans. You will destroy our country. Nobody will be happy with that," said Seif al-Islam Gaddafi.

On Thursday (17) night with 10 votes and 5 abstentions the UN Security Council adopted a resolution establishing a no-fly zone in Libya and authorises "all necessary measures" to "protect civilian and populated areas "from attacks by forces loyal to the government of Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi."

Voting for the aggressive resolution was the United States, United Kingdom, France, South Africa, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Colombia, Gabon, Lebanon, Nigeria and Portugal. Brazil, China, Russia, Germany and India abstained.

After the decision, the U.S. president, Barack Obama, telephoned French President Nicolas Sarkozy and Prime Minister of Britain, David Cameron, to coordinate military strategy to be executed in Libya.

Don't get me wrong: nobody has greater respect, or has spent more time defending, the UNO, due to the wonderful job its many agencies do protecting human lives and safeguarding human rights. The approach towards Africa, however, continues to be patronizing, at best - and top-down at worst.
There is no need to mention the horrific legacy of imperialistic and colonial practices which devastated the social fabric of Africa, when lines were drawn on maps and families and peoples and tribes were divided, sold into slavery and massacred if they complained. Today, while the United Nations Organization does a tremendous amount of good work in Africa and elsewhere, the approach visible at the Competitiveness and Diversification Conference in Accra recently was tellingly paternalistic.

At the two-day conference entitled "Competitiveness and Diversification: Strategic Challenges in a Petroleum-Rich Economy", Kandeh Yumkella, the Director-General of the UN Industrial Development Organization, UNIDO, stated that "African leaders must have bold visions and good planning" and stated that African governments must guarantee transparency and accountability.

The media's plan to encourage foreign intervention in Libya: journalist Eleazar Diaz Rangel said that these agencies rely on their "credibility" (ed. lack of it) to deform the truth about Libya.
Venezuelan journalist and director of the national daily Ultimas Noticias, Eleazar Diaz Rangel, and Argentina's Carlos Aznares, university professor, reported on Tuesday that the international media maintained a strategy to "convince the world that it is convenient for foreign intervention in Libya."

Both agreed that international media expected action on Libya despite the dire consequences this could bring to civilians in the Arab country. In an exclusive interview with Telesur, Diaz Rangel said in the first instance, about revolts generated in Libya since the 17th of February, "there is much misinformation and distortion of news."

Since March 12, a potentially unprecedented catastrophe has been unfolding in Japan, despite official denials and corroborating media reports - managed, not real news. Believe none of them. Nonetheless, on March 15, Reuters suggested what's ongoing, headlining: "Japan braces for potential radiation catastrophe," saying:

"Japan faced potential catastrophe on Tuesday" after a fourth Fukushima reactor explosion, fire, and high-level radiation release, posing grave human health risks to an expanding area, including Toyko's 20 million population 170 miles south.

France's Nuclear Safety Authority rated the disaster a six on the international seven-point nuclear accident scale. Clearly, it's the worst ever. Europe's energy commissioner, Guenther Oettinger called it an "apocalypse," telling the European Parliament that Toyko lost control of events.

Independent experts agree. It's an unprecedented disaster spreading globally. All six Fukushima reactors are crippled, four of them spewing unknown amounts of radiation.

On March 15, city officials said levels were 20 times above normal, later stating they'd dropped, downplaying the risk. Government authorities also claimed Fukushima levels were falling. For residents throughout the country, believing them is hazardous to their health, given the gravity of the situation, likely deteriorating, not improving.