Confusion
In these days there is so much going on that one does not really know how to asses the whole thing: Gaddafi is dead, the Americans withdraw their troops from the Iraq, the Iran is was accused of attempted murder on the saudi-arabian ambassador to the US, in Europe and the States people protest against the power of banks and the emergency parachute for Greece turned from a collapsible umbrella into a full-grown sunshade. Aye, and by the way King Abullah of Saudi Arabia announced the creation of 70.000 new jobs for women!? What? Is that not the country where women are not allowed to drive cars by themselves let alone to own a passport to travel the world?
The disorientation should not have been rarely bigger than now. Last thursday, October 20th, 2011, 40 years of tyranny came to an end with Gaddafi’s death. The ARD-Brennpunkt of the same day broached the issue that Gaddafi might have been still alive upon his arrest. A bullet in the head, they presume, should have been the dictator’s cause of death. The next day the report goes as follows, that the autopsy would not determine, who or what finally killed Gaddafi, that is to say, was it the NATO, was it revenge by the rebels or was he “only” badly injured in the cause of the fight and died of his wounds? One day later the UN came up with the claim for clarification of the exact cause of death. The organisation wants an analysis of the body in order to eliminate or expose an execution by the rebels. The suspicion, that again double standards are applied once again is obvious. Where was the UN in May 2011 when US soldiers killed Osama bin-Laden on pakistanian sovereign territory, instead of putting him in fron of a lawful international court, where the world could have participated in a trial and could have followed the sentencing of a mass murderer according to international standards? And: Has anybody seen the pictures of the alleged funeral at sea of bin-Laden by the Americans?
Questions are left unsettled also after the accusation of the USA that Iran government has planned the assasination of the saudi-arabian ambassador to the US in a restaurant in New York and has tried to hire a Mexican drug lord (besides other speculations) who is coincidentally a fink to the US. Klingt irgendwie schräg oder? Mechanically one is reminded of the year 2003 when another US-president absolutely insisted on Iraq’s possession of weapons of mass destruction and that is why one had to march in in order to defend oneself.
These consideration bring us back to the starting point of this article, back to Gaddafi’s death and the question whether the “West” is entitled to raise the bar on none-western countries with regard to breaches of human rights?
