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.