Fidel's Warning on February 22, 2011

   Does anyone remember on February 22, 2011 Fidel Castro warned of a pending NATO invasion of Libya?  Does anyone remember his assertions being brushed aside as absurd?  Fidel's predictions were correct and now the future of Libya is uncertain. 
   What is certain is the press is acting in its usual manner.  It publishes articles about the possibility of Gaddafi seeking refuge in Venezuela or Cuba without any evidence to suggest it.  It continues to portray NATO as concerned with human rights.  But now we find out that Libya's intelligence had worked closely in previous years with the CIA and MI5 in the so-called "War against terror" in the interrogation of captured suspects. 
   What about the United States' desire to bring Gaddafi before the International Criminal Court?  Does the US support the court?  If so, why not become a participant?  Is the US fearful of its own leaders being brought to trial there?  Of course, as it always is with the United States, "do as I say, not as I do."
   So as the international press continues in its efforts to portray Fidel Castro as an out of touch conspiracy theorist, NATO has broken a country it had once collaborated with and in the process, confirmed the warnings given by Fidel Castro on February 22, 2011.

The Arrogant "Honorables"

News of NATO's killing of gaddafi's son and grandchildren the other night while they were inside a residential complex comes to many as a surprise but it shouldn't be a shock.  NATO claims that it is not targeting any indivuduals, is harder to believe every time they attack a residential comlex of the Gaddafi family.  Without taking a side in the internal affairs of Lybia, I must question what kind of credibility does NATO believe it has.  Being a supposedly defensive alliance, it is strange how its bombing of a nation to prevent a government from putting down a rebellion would be considered by honest people as self-defense.  The United States who is trying to appear to play a lesser role in the "defensive" offensive has a policy of targeting enemies for assasination, including its own citezens.  Already in the 1980's, Reagan's administration bombed Tripoli and was responsible for the death of another child of Gaddafi. Now as bombs continue to fall in what is basically an attempt to remove Gaddafi, we are supposed to find legal excuses for his assasination by twisting it into being considered that his very presence constitutes a threat to people.  Supposing that he were to be charged with something by the International Criminal Court, which was being prepared before the bombs started falling, one would have to be a bit cynical when thinking about the NATO countries love for due process.
As a responsne to the killing of Gaddafi's son, the UN staff decided to leave Tripoli because its offices were attacked by people.  Also attacked were the British and Italian embassies and US commercial and consular affairs offices.  Lybia's ambassador to the UK was expelled in response and the "honorable" British foreign secretary managed to keep a straight face while saying "The Vienna Convention requires the Gaddafi regime to protect diplomatic missions in Tripoli. By failing to do so that regime has once again breached its international responsibilities and obligations." Really guys? The arrogance is amazing.