Actions against dictators and terrorist leaders like Osama bin Laden should be legal or we risk the consequences.
Anti-Gaddafi fighters look at the drain in Sirte where Colonel Gaddafi hid before his capture Photo: REUTERS
By Con Coughlin
9:08PM BST 27 Oct 2011
145 Comments
It is hard to feel much sympathy for Col Muammar Gaddafi, despite the fact that his end was gruesome even by the brutal standards of the Arab world. Now that the Libyan dictator has been laid to rest in his anonymous Saharan grave, we can safely discount the interim government’s initial assertion that he was killed by crossfire when his captors came under attack as they made their way to a hospital in Misurata. The grim truth is that Gaddafi was murdered in cold blood, after his captors had indulged in an orgy of violence against his defenceless person, including sexual assault. So much for the brave new world of democracy that David Cameron and Nicolas Sarkozy promised us once he had been removed from power.
Given Gaddafi’s well-documented support for international terrorism and his savage repression of his own people, the instinctive response of many of us will be that he had it coming. Moreover, the vengeful justice meted out by his captors means that we will be spared the discomfiting spectacle of Gaddafi standing trial for war crimes at the Hague, where embarrassing questions were sure to surface. Mr Cameron has had much sport at Tony Blair’s expense over his dalliance with the Libyan despot. But only last November, the Coalition sent a high-level military delegation to Tripoli to negotiate an arms deal: among the numerous items on Gaddafi’s shopping list were high-velocity sniper rifles.
Gaddafi’s demise is convenient for all concerned. Western leaders can sleep secure in the knowledge that their indiscretions will not be exposed, and the newly liberated Libyans can get on with the business of rebuilding their country, free from his baleful shadow. Who now cares that the killing of Gaddafi amounts to a war crime, and that the perpetrators should be brought before the International Criminal Court? That, after all, was the fate that awaited Gaddafi, had he survived the chaotic journey to Misurata, after his summary executions of anti-government protesters earlier this year.
Last night, the country’s new rulers suggested that Gaddafi’s killers would be put on trial. Let’s hope they’re as good as their word. For apparently, we find that the rebels have conducted their own summary executions. Apart from murdering Gaddafi and his son Mutassim, the rebels are accused of killing 53 loyalist fighters whose bodies were found in Sirte with their hands bound behind their backs and a single bullet wound to their heads. There are fears that hundreds more may have suffered a similar fate. Yet no one in London or Paris is making any serious demands that the perpetrators be called to account. All that really matters is that Gaddafi’s regime is history, and that the task of rebuilding Libya can now begin in earnest.
A similar disregard for the norms of international justice was evident last May, with the assassination of Osama bin Laden. The testimony subsequently provided by the team of US Navy Seals that carried out the daring raid on his hideaway in Pakistan demonstrated unequivocally that they had no interest in capturing the world’s most wanted man. From the moment they landed at his Abbottabad lair, they had a single objective – to kill bin Laden. As with Gaddafi’s death, no one questioned whether President Obama, who personally sanctioned the “kill” mission, had acted illegally. What counted was that bin Laden was no more, and the world was a far better place without him.
Related Articles
UN ends mandate for Nato operations in Libya - 27 Oct 2011
Libya rulers vow to prosecute Gaddafi killers - 27 Oct 2011
Tunisia frees former Libyan PM Al-Baghdadi Ali al-Mahmoudi - 27 Oct 2011
Libya: stockpiles of chemical weapons found - 27 Oct 2011
North Korea bans citizens working in Libya from returning home - 27 Oct 2011
Libya: Saif Gaddafi 'trying to broker surrender deal' - 26 Oct 2011
Another example of the West’s growing appetite for extra-judicial killing was evident in the recent drone attack in Yemen that killed Anwar al-Awlaki, the al-Qaeda mastermind behind a number of plots, including the infamous underwear bomb in Detroit in late 2009. On this occasion, questions were raised about the mission’s legality, not least because the victim happened to hold American citizenship. But the human rights lobby’s assertion that Mr Obama had broken the law by ordering the assassination of a US citizen made little headway against the majority view that a significant threat to America’s national security had been eliminated.
Indeed, so long as human rights activists seem more concerned with upholding the interests of terrorists at the expense of governments trying to protect their citizens from attack, public support for such extra-judicial killings will only increase. In Britain, the Home Secretary was recently forced to release two British Taliban suspects after they were apprehended by an SAS team in Afghanistan. The two were accused of planning bomb attacks against Britain, but were released when human rights lawyers threatened to challenge the Government’s actions in the courts. Theresa May had no alternative other than to let them go.
Cases such as this make the argument for increased drone strikes against terrorist targets all the more attractive. As one senior security official told me: “What’s the point risking your life to capture these people, if they’re going to be set free within a few days?” The public’s tacit support for summary justice is reflected in its unquestioning acceptance of the killings of pariahs such as Gaddafi and bin Laden.
Sadly, it could also lead to more trouble in the years to come. As we know from Guantanamo, the failure to observe proper legal procedures can become a gift horse for the human rights lobby, with a number of former British detainees having recently become millionaires as a result of their detention.
When it comes to taking out the bad guys, I fully support the heroic efforts of all those involved in tackling terrorists and rogue dictators. But I also want us to make sure that all the actions we take are legally justified. Otherwise, we are storing up a multitude of problems for the future.
________
Showing 1-25 of 184 comments
spudeater
29 minutes ago
Tony Blair and George Bush are terrorists. Killing them should be legal.
pilotwhale
30 minutes ago
In relation to the Bin Laden killing the Americans could easily have just fired a drone missile at the house Bin was staying in. But instead the Americans sent in special forces who risked their lives in order to capture or kill Bin Laden. The reason, I believe, they went in was to ensure that they really got him, dead or alive. A drone strike would just mean Bin's allies on the ground could just hide the body and then say he survived the strike and got away.
Bin Laden himself would have known that an armed assault on his compound would in all liklihood lead to his death. That was a situation of his own making, of course.
If one remembers the aftermath of the Madrid train bombings in 2004, the Spanish police went into an appartment to arrest the culprits only for one of them to set off a bomb which killed all the culprits and a policeman. This would have been the very possible situation for the American special forces who attacked Bin laden. In the room next door to him there could have been a terrorist on permanent stand-by ready to press a button at the first shouted command by Bin Laden. No wonder the mission ended in shots being fired. Bin Laden's death was almost merciful compared to what happened to Gaddafi.
If Gadaffi had been killed in a Nato air-strike the UN might not have complained. The UN must bear in mind the victims over 40 years of the Libyan dictatorship before demanding an investigation into the circumstances of any one person's death. And they must bear in mind recent European history: Mussolini was also brutally killed.
Mastro63
53 minutes ago
This was a very dirty war and the end should not be a big surprise.
I think the killers should get a big sentence- then get quietly pardoned after a few years.
uberwest
Today 06:06 PM
We are not responsible for the depravity of those people
_______ mrmchenry
55 minutes ago
and exactly how are they different from the killers of Bin Laden?
nest
Today 04:48 PM
The unemployment benefit in Libya at Kaddafi was 730 dollars.
The salary of the nurse – 1000 dollars.
Newly married were given 64 thousand dollars on apartment purchase.
On opening of personal business the single help – 20 thousand dollars.
education and medicine - free.
store system for large families with purely symbolical prices for the basic foodstuff.
FOR the FAKE of MEDICINES - the DEATH PENALTY
The rent was absent.
Payments for the electric power for the population weren't
loans for purchase of cars and apartments in Libya were … interest-free!GASOLINE cost cheaper than WATER! One liter of gasoline – 0,14 dollars.And now think people, who needed the revolution and wanted to kill Gaddafi
Jack Sinclair
Today 03:44 PM
What it boils down to is that the UN mandate was to enforce a no fly zone.
Instead we got:
A central bank tied to the international debt system;
NATO taking sides in a civil war and bombing civic infrastructure and civilians who flew the wrong flag;
Qatari special forces pretending to be rebels for Al-Jazeera while US and European special forces with paler complexions hid behind the cameras;
An interesting tactical alliance between NATO and Al-Qaeda affiliates;
Lynchings and beheadings;
The beating, sodomising and execution of the leader of one faction of the civil war thus ensuring a tribal blood feud;
The return of Sharia law to replace Muslim socialism;
The lessons that when in doubt, Russia and China should use their vetos and other emerging powers should get WMDs as soon as possible or be hanged like Saddam or be beaten and sodomised like Gaddafi;
"Humanitarianism" becoming a curse word.
Good call Cameron and Sarko. The oil better be worth it.
sophocles
Today 03:29 PM
Did the west have any say in the death of Gadaffi, was the west given an honest response to where Bin Laden was by Pakistan, the answer to both is no so natural reaction and action took over, most people who suffered under Gadaffi would have shot him, the same applies to Bin Laden, sometimes it is necessary to take extraordinary action when dealing with people like these because that is the only way to deal with it.
lordbarnett
Today 02:57 PM
Hague and Cameron should be put on trial,they started it.
lobrio
Today 03:44 PM
Lord : Correct ! It was none of our business ! With a little luck though, the more guilty of all Gadaffi's sons will survive to tell his tale in The Hague ! I also hope that he sings like a canary if he gets there, about the association between his father and Blair and co !
random_observer_2011
Today 02:44 PM
No one wept for Mussolini, whose dictatorship was arguably less bad for his people and whose method of waging war against the Allies at least involved open warfare. Qaddafi should not have had any better treatment.
You make your bed, you lie in it. You choose to seize power and rule extra-legally and through murder and terror, you earn the same if you are fool enough to weaken at the end. There have been plenty of genuine constitutional, legitimate rulers who paid horrible, and by this standard undeserved prices at the hands of revolutionary desperadoes like uncle Moammar.
There is a better case to be made that we in the west were better with him than what is to follow. But once we committed to his overthrow, he ceased to be a potential ally. We might as well remember the menace he was to us in the 1980s, and the vermin he always was, and celebrate with his enemies. He was a nice shade of blue.
Hamolinadir
Today 02:31 PM
the west , so-called, would have had to find the bugger to provide him with a body guard, but who says who allows what in Libya? you did not think it through Coughlin.
jeremiah
Today 02:08 PM
Since Colonel Qadhafi is still alive this article is moot. However the issue of extrajudicial killing by the Americans and the NATO countries for political purposes is bound to eventually lead to war crimes trials for all the leaders of these criminal adventures.
Though the mills of God grind slowly, yet
They gring exceeding small;
Though with patience He stands waiting,
With exactness grinds he all. (Longfellow)
______ Hamolinadir
Today 02:35 PM
you, 'personally', have seen him alive and breathing have you?
if not, don't talk bollox
____________ jeremiah
36 minutes ago
Why is it that being confronted with a contrarian point of view so many readers at the DT dissolve into personal abuse?
For that matter have you ever seen Colonel Gadhafi in the flesh dead or alive? Have you ever seen videos that have been created by psyops to fool the gullible?
We each of us use different means to ascertain as best we can the truth of a matter. We are all dependent upon our sources of information and we must decide whom to believe and whose information to reject. This is elementary.
Here is an article that will spell out the view that I personally hold to be true: http://mathaba.net/news/?x=629...
I doubt that you will believe it but the website itself is a source of good information.
Also here is a short compendium of quotes on how the controlled media (like the DT) are used to channel lies to their readers, lies that benefit the agenda of the intelligence services serving the ruling elites. http://wiki.mathaba.net/Media
Now, here is a list of reading for you to get up to speed on the most recent example of the perfidy of our titular leaders:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/i...
http://www.globalresearch.ca/i...
http://globalresearch.ca/index...
http://globalresearch.ca/index...
The most recent canard I believe is that Saif al Islam Qadhafi is negotiating to surrender himself to the ICC. My information would suggest this to be another lie. These people cannot help lying, it is their nature. Let us see.
Benjaminus Carmonius
Today 01:56 PM
Astounding piece of journalism, as always !
orraquine
Today 01:55 PM
Fighting is by its nature, out of control and brutalizes those who carry it out. Who could possibly have prevented this lynching?
Remeber what happened in Romania to Ceaușescu?
______ Hamolinadir
Today 02:37 PM
agreed, but shooting surely, lynching requires a rope. Coughlin is a bit dim.
lordlondon
Today 01:41 PM
Utter and complete garbage! As if "The West" had police forces all over Libya to protect Gaddafi from rebel attack under chaotic conditions of warfare!
Why does THE DAILY TELEGRAPH publish such nonsense
Hamolinadir
Today 02:38 PM
one can't argue with that.
seanchi
Today 01:27 PM
What sanctimonious rot. Would you have shot Hitler or any of his cohorts given the chance.
A trial would only have delayed the inevitable.
Gaddafi was guilty of the torture and murder of the Libyan people, on a grand scale.
His son declared on television that they would kill every Libyan citizen, rather than surrender power, which was a declaration of war, ergo when at war and you see an enemy with a gun you shoot him.
Gun or no gun I would have shot him
______ Hamolinadir
Today 03:21 PM
have you 'personally' seen any concrete evidence of all you allege?
or do you just credulously believe hearsay?if you don't know for_a_fact from your own knowledge and experience, keep your mouth shut.
billyrawmone
Today 01:26 PM
Exactly how do you suppose his very welcome disposal could have been prevented, you idiot?
Vaestgoete
Today 01:24 PM
I find it hard to believe Cameron and Sarkozy could have had any say in the matter. The rebels didnt look as if they had a direct line to no 10 and judging from interviews at the scene they wouldnt have understood much if they had.
Benjaminus Carmonius
Today 01:19 PM
"savage repression of his people"
How do you know? you were there?
Con, you speak like an ignorant fool. Yours are the rantings of a madman. You deserve no audience.
_____________
What do you think ?
Các anh chị nghĩ thế nào, có ý kiến phê bình gì qua bài viết "The West should not have allowed Muammar Gaddafi to be murdered in cold blood" cũng như "Actions against dictators and terrorist leaders like Osama bin Laden should be legal or we risk the consequences." và 25 ý kiến phê bình trong số "184 Comments" của độc giả ?
Những người VN BỊ MẤT NƯỚC vào tay bè lũ phản quốc CƯỚP NƯỚC DIỆT CHỦNG BÁN NƯỚC ĐỘC tài ĐỘC đảng Việt gian cộng sản VN học được thêm bài học gì qua Cuộc Cách Mạng LẬT ĐỔ cầm quyền ĐỘC tài ở Bắc Phi và Trung Đông ?
Có những "bình lọan gia" cứ mở miệng là "đấu tranh ôn hòa bất bạo động" với những luận điệu mà conbenho thấy, nghe rõ ràng họ đã tự nhiên nhổ ra liếm vào khi đề cập tới sự sụp đổ của 3 tên độc tài Ben Ali, Hosni Mubarack và mới đây nhất là Gadhafi với ngày tàn trong Ô NHỤC .
Những "bình lọan gia" này đã trở thành những con vẹt, không biết phân biệt PHẢI QUẤY, nhắm mắt nói càng mà cũng có không ít những kẻ vểnh tai ra nghe và cũng lập đi lập lại như vẹt không kém .
Cái THÓI hèn hạ đội thù, nô tài vọng ngọai đã ăn sâu vào cốt tủy khiến cho những kẻ bị MẤT NƯỚC mà KHÔNG BIẾT NHỤC, bị kẻ thù chà đạp trên đầu dân tộc mà KHÔNG BIẾT ĐAU, còn hảnh diện làm tôi đòi cho ngoại bang, ăn theo nói leo mà KHÔNG BIẾT HỔ THẸN .
Càng có nhiều "trí đủ" và "sĩ đờ" như thế, chả trách đất nước thân yêu của chúng ta đã và đang khốn đốn, bị lũ súc sinh csVN phanh thây xẻ thịt cho ngọai bang, đồng bào ruột rà của chúng ta đã và đang khốn nạn NHỤC NHẰN nô lệ, bị chà đạp dưới bàn chân bè lũ phản quốc BÁN NƯỚC csVN suốt 37 năm qua vẫn chưa thể đứng dậy nổi .
Chân thành cám ơn Quý Anh Chị ghé thăm "conbenho Nguyễn Hoài Trang Blog"
Xin được lắng nghe ý kiến chia sẻ của Quý Anh Chị trực tiếp tại Diễn Đàn Paltalk: 1Latdo Tapdoan Vietgian CSVN Phanquoc Bannuoc .
Kính chúc Sức Khỏe Quý Anh Chị .
conbenho
Tiểu Muội quantu
Nguyễn Hoài Trang
28102011
___________
CSVN là TỘI ÁC
Bao che, dung dưỡng TỘI ÁC là đồng lõa với TỘI ÁC
No comments:
Post a Comment