UNDP's goodwill ambassadors collage in Flickr misses Aicha Gadhafi pics

UNDP Goodwill Ambassadors

Ambassadors share human development concern and commitment

They are at the top of their field, whether it's broadcasting, the literary world or the football stadium, with talents and achievements that have made them household names in their own, and in some cases, in many other countries. Despite their diverse claims to fame, however, they all share a deep concern for the world's poor and a commitment to making the planet a better place for all, ridding it of poverty, combating HIV/AIDS, ensuring environmental sustainability, protecting human rights, and empowering women.

For more information: www.undp.org/goodwill/

CLICK HERE FOR FLICKR PHOTOS 

CanadaFreepress: - The UN: Dictators R US

The UN: Dictators R US

Jeff Crouere Wednesday, September 21, 2011

September 20, 2011…. This week, world leaders are gathering in New York for the United Nations General Assembly. As usual, the spotlight will be on some of the world’s biggest tyrants who will be given the key speaking positions.

Iranian dictator Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will bring a contingent of 140 Islamic radicals to the Big Apple. Once again, Ahmadinejad will speak to the U.N. General Assembly and receive a warm reception from the vast majority of 193 delegates. In contrast, the Prime Minister of Israel, the only democracy in the Middle East, will receive another rude reception. Certainly, anti-Semitism is a key factor in this rough treatment, but it is also worthwhile to note that two-thirds of the U.N. delegates represent developing counties where democracy is a foreign concept. Sadly, tyrants, despots, radical clerics, and dictators are well represented among the U.N. General Assembly.

In previous years, terrorists like Yasser Arafat of the PLO and dictators such as Fidel Castro of Cuba and Muammar Gaddafi of Libya have been given starring roles at the United Nations. In a 2009 U.N. speech, Gaddafi rambled on for two hours about so-called enemies of his country. In fact, Libya’s biggest enemy has been Gaddafi, who has finally been removed from power. He is currently wanted by the International Criminal Court for crimes against humanity. The world would have been spared much misery if the minute Gaddafi set foot in New York he would have been arrested for his role in the bombing of Pan American flight 103 and the killing of 270 innocent people. Instead, Gaddafi was given a hero’s welcome at the U.N. and treated like some sort of Islamic rock star.

In 2009, a true tragedy occurred when Gaddafi was allowed to come to this country and spew his poison. This week, U.S. officials should not make the same mistake again. Ahmadinejad should be arrested and immediately delivered to the International Criminal Court for his long list of crimes.

Ahmadinejad has been advancing an illegal nuclear weapons program and lying to the world about his intentions. He has been lavishing funding worldwide on the main enemy of the United States, Al-Qaeda. In fact, according to Nathan Carlton of United Against a Nuclear Iran, Ahmadinejad’s regime is “the world largest state sponsor of terrorism.” There is clear evidence that Ahmadinejad is arming insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan with the latest weaponry, which is used to kill American soldiers.

Along with supporting international jihad which specializes in killing innocent civilians, Ahmadinejad brutally repressed a peaceful democratic uprising in his country in 2009. This brutality has not stopped and according to Amnesty International, the Iranian regime has executed an average of two people per day in the first half of 2011.

Ahmadinejad has blood on his hands, which is why no organization that purportedly pursues peaceful coexistence among nations should allow this tyrant a platform to emit his hatred toward the U.S. and Israel, or his anti-Semitic beliefs denying the existence of the Holocaust.

As we await another disgusting display at the United Nations, U.S. taxpayers should demand that Congress withdraw funding from this organization. Currently, The U.N. receives 22 percent of its regular budget and 27 percent of its peacekeeping operations from the United States taxpayers. No other country contributes as much as the United States and some countries contribute as little as 0.001 percent of the budget. In addition, our country incurs significant costs in hosting the U.N. headquarters in New York City.

Facing a massive $1.4 trillion annual deficit and a national debt of $15 trillion, the United States can not afford to waste money on an organization that promotes anti-Semitic, anti-American dictators.

Along with de-funding the United Nations, we should also give the group a one-way ticket out of the country and let some other nation provide these tyrants a headquarters.

Amid Opposition to Leaked UN Plan for Libya, UN Refuses to Answer

By Matthew Russell Lee @ InnercityPress

UNITED NATIONS, August 29 -- After Inner City Pressobtained and published the UN's plan for Libya, complete with 200 military observers and the expectation of NATO maintaining a role, the plan's author Ian Martin refused to answer questions, telling Inner City Press that "it's an internal document."

Now that Inner City Press' publication of the leaked reporthas spread, from Geneva to Doha to Istanbul to as far asThe Australian, Inner City Press has asked the Office of the Spokesperson for Secretary General Ban Ki-moon a series of questions:

"On the Martin report, published on Friday, can you first provide UN description of what the document represents (esp in light of a statement by OSSG last week that is it "not a UN document") and then state the basis for saying NATO has a continuing role, for saying that some deployments can be made without a specific mandate and more generally, on whose behalf and at whose behest this planning was done, if and when the plan was even going to be shown to member states, if so, which member states and when?"

Several member states' lead ambassadors at the UN have asked Inner City Press about the report, saying they've sent it to their capitals for analysis. At a Security Council lunch with Ban Ki-moon on August 26, Ban said he would brief the Council about it in the coming week (just as Martin has promised to belatedly give a press briefing).

But even once the Secretariat moves to legitimate the plans by making some of them a public request to the Security Council, the question remains: on whose behalf, and for whose benefit, did the UN Secretariat engage in this planning?

Beyond the ongoing split in the UN Security Council between the Westerners -- European four plus US and its allies -- and Russia and China, with IBSA (India, Brazil and South Africa) in the middle: there have been demonstrations in Libya against any international peacekeeping force.

Inner City Press' sources describe a fight inside Ban Ki-moon team as to which official would be sent to Tripoli, Martin or Al Khatib? It's said that Martin is winning, and the Al Khatib may simply withdraw.

Like Martin, Al Khatib jumped the gun and went to Benghazi with an already made plan: a five person structure, two from the rebels, two from Gaddafi, one from neither. It was rejected.

Now Martin has developed a detailed plan, apparently without a mandate. Watch this site.

Ban & Ian Martin - nouveau L. Paul Bremer?

From the UN's transcript of its August 26 noon briefing(the UN canceled its August 29 briefing)

Inner City Press: ...the [Ian] Martin report on Libya. It’s a 10-page document, and among other things, there is two things I want to ask you about... there is a statement, apparently it’s a UN statement saying that NATO’s role will continue to have responsibility after the fall of the [Muammar al-]Qadhafi Government, and saying that for this UN planning, including for 200 military observers, that no further mandate is needed from the Security Council. I wanted to know, what is the Secretary-General’s position on this, on those two statements?

Acting Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq: As far as that goes, I wouldn’t comment on the text of this document, which was an internal document for the Secretary-General’s information and for the information of his advisers. The Secretary-General will be talking to regional organizations at 3 p.m. this afternoon to coordinate planning, and he will talk to the press after that.

Inner City Press: how would you characterize this pretty detailed planning with the idea that Mr. Martin and Mr. al-Khatib went out to hear what the NTC [National Transitional Council] wanted or that on the video conference today he is going to hear? It seems to be a pretty detailed plan. Is this a preliminary plan? What adjective would you put on it, because it looks inconsistent with this outreach after the fact?

Acting Deputy Spokesperson Haq: No, not at all. The sort of efforts that we have been doing and the sort of efforts that Ian Martin was in place here at the United Nations to do is to plan for a possible transition down the line. We are now at the stage where we need to talk with our various partners about that. But it helps to have concrete ideas about the way forward. And those are what, for example, Ian Martin and Abdel-Elah al-Khatib were talking with people in Doha. This is what the Deputy Secretary-General has been talking with people in Addis Ababa earlier today, and this is what the Secretary-General will discuss with the regional groups this afternoon.

But Haq and Ban Ki-moon refused to take Press questions about the exclusively published report on the afternoon of August 26. Asked more directly, Ian Martin refused to answer questions, telling Inner City Press that "it's an internal document." The UN canceled its regular noon briefing on August 29.

URGENT: - United Nations post-conflict deployment to Libya (Ian Martin and UNDP)

CLICK HERE FOR DOCUMENT

UN/UNDP Office in Libya still not reporting on what is happening on the ground. Praises Gaddafi and its development foundation!

While the United Nations Secretary-General has already "fired" Aicha Gaddafi as it Goodwill Ambassador for Libya, the UN and UNDP Office in Libya has still to report this fact in its website.

As you can see here, the UN/UNDP Libya website still praises the "fruitful relationship with Gaddafi's Government".

While on another page it still shows that Gaddafi Development Foundation is still UNDP's and United Nations Observer.

Why was President Obama last to speak up on Libya?

CLICK HERE TO VIEW THIS ON WASHINGTONPOST.COM

President Obama's full remarks on Libya

President Obama speaks from the White House on the civil unrest in Libya threatening the rule of longtime strongman, Moammar Gaddafi.

» LAUNCH VIDEO PLAYER

ONCE AGAIN, an Arab dictator is employing criminal violence in a desperate effort to remain in power - and once again, the Obama administration has been slow to find its voice. This time, the tyrant is one of the Middle East's most evil men - Moammar Gaddafi, whose regime has staged spectacular terrorist attacks against Americans in addition to brutalizing its own people. Having apparently lost control of most of the country, Mr. Gaddafi has unleashed an orgy of bloodshed in the capital, Tripoli, using foreign mercenaries and aircraft to attack his own people. Like Saddam Hussein, he has retreated to a bunker, and he has vowed to fight to "the last drop of blood."

Governments around the world have been condemning this appalling stance and the terrible slaughter it has caused. The European Union has agreed in principle to impose sanctions, and the Arab League has said Libya will be excluded from its meetings. British Prime Minister David Cameron, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi all condemned the regime's violence. Said French President Nicolas Sarkozy: "The continuing brutal and bloody crackdown against the Libyan civilian population is revolting. The international community cannot remain a spectator to these massive violations of human rights."

By late Wednesday only one major Western leader had failed to speak up on Libya: Barack Obama. Before then, the president's only comment during five days of mounting atrocities was a statement issued in his name by his press secretary late last Friday, which deplored violence that day in three countries: Yemen, Libya and Bahrain. For four subsequent days, the administration's response to the rapidly escalating bloodshed in Libya consisted of measured and relatively mild statements by Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Administration officials explained this weak stance by saying they were worried about U.S. citizens, hundreds of whom were being extracted by ferryWednesday afternoon. There were fears that the desperate Mr. Gaddafi might attack the Americans or seek to take them hostage. But the presence of thousands of European citizens in Libya did not prevent their government's leaders from forcefully speaking out and agreeing on sanctions.

Late Wednesday afternoon, Mr. Obama finally appeared at a White House podium. He said "we strongly condemn the use of violence in Libya," but he did not mention Mr. Gaddafi or call for his removal. He said the administration was preparing a "full range of options" to respond but didn't say what those might be; he made no mention of the no-fly zone that Libya's delegation at the United Nations has called for. He stressed that the United States would work through international forums - and said Ms. Clinton would travel to Geneva for a meeting of the notoriously ineffectual U.N. Human Rights Council, which counts Libya as a member.

Mr. Obama appeared eager to make the point that the United States was not taking the lead in opposing Mr. Gaddafi's crimes. "It is imperative that the nations and the peoples of the world speak with one voice," he said. "That has been our focus." Shouldn't the president of the United States be first to oppose the depravities of a tyrant such as Mr. Gaddafi? Apparently this one doesn't think so.

IRAN PRESSTV: "Kill Gaddafi now": Says an Egyptian cleric

CLICK HERE FOR STORY ON PRESSTV.IR

Libya's ruler Muammar Gaddafi (file photo)

A top Egyptian cleric has called on Libyan soldiers who can shoot Libya's unpopular Leader Muammar Gaddafi not to hold their fire to free the nation of his oppression.

Yusuf al-Qaradawi, viewed as the spiritual leader of the Egyptian opposition Muslim Brotherhood, made the call on Monday through a fatwa (religious decree) against the 42-year-long head of state.

"Whoever in the Libyan Army is able to shoot a bullet at Mr. Gaddafi should do so," he told the Qatar-based news channel al-Jazeera.

Libya has been swept by pro-democracy protests inspired by popular revolutions in Egypt and Tunisia, which toppled the countries' presidents.

Such killing would "rid Libya of him," said Qaradawi. The scholar, who also heads the International Union for Muslim Scholars, returned to Egypt after three decades in exile following the revolution.

Gaddafi's government has deployed fighter jets to open fire on the demonstrators to prevent what appears to be an imminent revolution.

Forces loyal to Gaddafi are also said to have used live rounds against protesters amid reports, pointing to the arrival of planeloads of armed foreign mercenaries in the capital, Tripoli.

Libyan protesters, however, have reportedly managed to seize several cities.

The International Federation for Human Rights says as many as 400 people have so far been killed during the protests.

Qaradawi also told Libyan soldiers "not to obey orders to strike at your own people," and urged Libyan ambassadors around the world to dissociate themselves from Gaddafi's regime.

HN/MRS/MGH

How Britain did business with Libyan tyrant Colonel Gaddafi

by Graham Hiscott, click here to view this on Daily Mirror

BRITAIN’S decision to cancel eight export contracts to Libya smacks of too little, too late.

For while ministers condemn the massacre of hundreds of demonstrators, we have been busy forging close ties with Colonel Gaddafi’s regime.

And as Foreign Secretary William Hague was calling on the dictator to respect human rights, the Government was still waxing lyrical about the business opportunities in Libya.

The UK Trade and Investment website suggests there is big money to be made, describing the country as “potentially the fourth most attractive overseas market for UK exporters” over the next few years.

Foreign firms have enjoyed rich pickings since Libya came in from the cold with ex-PM Tony Blair’s “Deal in the Desert” in 2003, relinquishing its weapons of mass destruction to trigger the lifting of UN sanctions.

But the potential loss of lucrative business deals led to claims that British ministers backed the controversial release of Lockerbie bomber Abdelbaset al-Megrahi.

UK trade with Libya is worth an estimated £1.5billion a year, with British exports soaring more than 50% between 2008 and 2009. More than 150 UK-based companies operate in the country, many like Biwater, AMEC, JCB and Mott MacDonald supplying industrial machinery and engineering services.

And the country’s newly well-off have attracted other firms, including British high street chains Next, Monsoon, Accessorize and Marks & Spencer, which yesterday announced it had all closed its stores in Tripoli for security reasons.

Virtually all Libya’s foreign earnings come from oil and gas, with the country raking in more from oil than it spends on its annual budget.

At 1.7 million barrels a day, it is Africa’s second largest oil producer and is Europe’s single biggest supplier.

And the prospect of up to 42 billion barrels prompted more than 40 oil firms to stake a claim.

Yet it is Libya’s 53 trillion cubic metres of untapped natural gas reserves which could have the biggest impact on families here, where dwindling North Sea supplies have seen the UK become a net gas importer for the first time in a generation.

Much has come from stable countries like Norway but, increasingly, we are having to import from further afield and more dubious sources such as Russia. A UK Financial Investments Ltd report before this week’s unrest said Britain could be importing gas from Libya in as little as five years.

John Hamilton, a Libya expert with analysts Cross Border Information, said: “Obviously oil is important but I think Libya, if it turns out to have large reserves of gas, will be a major player in European gas supply.”

URGENT VIDEO: Libyan UN deputy ambassador speaks to AJE

CLICK HERE FOR VIDEO