The brutal murder of Ambassador Stevens in Benghazi and apparent mutilation of his body after (what has been reported as) brutalized torture may well have been replaced with the sanitized version of rocket-propelled grenades ending his life to spare his family and the rest of the world from the occupational hazards of Westerners doing business in Libya today. But is the sanitized version of events (assuming the CNN,Fox,BBC and Sky versions are knowingly doctored) doing a service or dis-service as we try to make sense of the chaos in North Africa today,who is fueling it and how it will impact our diplomatic,trade and cultural ties with the new Islamic regimes? How have we reached a point where the sanctity of an Embassy (let alone the bestial murder of diplomats and their guards within the confines of their own territory) is now beginning to be regarded as 'matter of fact'. This is the first issue which the Western mass media fails to address because it is largely 'staffed' with status quo 'embedded' reporters who have no independence of thought,no knowledge of the profound nature of diplomatic immunity and where 'honest' and 'truthful' analysis is more often met with heavy censorship at the sub-editorial level. I should also add at this point that we ourselves are not immune to criticism for debasing the value of this much-cherished tradition of diplomatic inviolability by our treatment of Ecuador whose London Embassy is still being 'punished' for offering political asylum to someone who is now,in effect, a political prisoner -perhaps the world's foremost political prisoner, at this point in time. I mention this international diplomatic incident because it yet again highlights the risks to our own embassies when our adversaries perceive diplomatic immunity as only applicable as and when global super-powers so determine-with smaller and poorer nations treated with contempt when asking that the same rules and standards be applied-in this instance with an offer of diplomatic asylum to a 'political dissident'.
Going back in time,what struck me about the brutal murder of Colonel Gaddafi was the 'matter-of-fact' way it was reported by our media in the West. Almost as if we were saying to our own public and the world: 'well, he deserved it,let his own people butcher him. See what we can do when you oppose our wishes.' Again, in my opinion, we made a critical mistake here. Too many political careers were at risk if Gaddafi lived-and talked. But allowing a Salafist Jihadi Militia brigade to torture then murder and mutilate him-and ensure that the whole world saw the end result of NATO's (humanitarian) intervention-Gaddafi's mutilated naked body on public display-is a far cry from the high and lofty values of both the European Union and NATO-as a peace-keeping organization seeking to assist the Libyan people free themselves from tyranny and establish a democratic state.
Secondly,the CIA and MI6 'rendered' Libyans for interrogation and torture to Libya during the Gaddafi era. To think that the Libyans have any shorter memories than any other race of people - brutalized through repression of their politics or faith - is either naive or the height of arrogance and ignorance. From what I have observed,I would think the latter. This arrogance in itself created a false sense of security-which was very easily exploited. It was assumed that,with one tyrant out of the way-and giving the 'nod' to a 'reign of terror' against former Gaddafi henchmen and prominent supporters by the new tyrants in power, the remaining populace holding any lingering support for Gaddafi would now be so brutalized,fearful,traumatized and docile, that Libya would be open for 'business as usual' again.
This fails to appreciate the recent history of a country brutalized under Italian colonization then handed by the victorious Allies after World War II to another repressive tyrant-to do the West's bidding by proxy.
For brevity, I will only go on to mention one further miscalculation which,in my opinion,contributed to the murder of Ambassador Stevens: As I discovered in my travels in Malaysia (in particular) after 9/11, while Americans mourn that day,others rejoice. I said it then and I say it again, Osama Bin Laden has been elevated to the status of a 'saint' or as someone close to the right hand of the Prophet in the eyes of many Muslims-especially after the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq as more and more Muslims saw 9/11 as a U.S. (Judeo-Christian) conspiracy to conquer and occupy Muslim lands in the name of oil and gas. This has become more and more apparent to me in my travels and discussions in Muslim lands. But the mass media ignored this and chose to portray Bin Laden as a hated and reviled figure-even to his fellow Muslims-or apologists will say that of the 1.4 billion Muslims very few have time for the likes of Bin Laden. In my opinion this is not true and is a very over-simplistic overview. For many Muslims in the Middle East and elsewhere, Bin Laden is seen (and indeed portrayed in their eyes) as a modern Muslim 'Joan of Arc'.
We often forget that Islam is not just a religion but a way of life. Bin Laden should, in my opinion, have been 'brought to justice' and yes,dare I have the temerity to say it,tried in a court of law in the United States - giving some real sense of closure to victims of 9/11. I said so much in 2002 and I repeat it again.
So far have we ventured into the jungle beyond the rule of law than any thought of an option other than a swift execution was unthinkable.
But even settling for that (revenge),the world (in particular the Muslim world) would have had more respect for the United States if at this very testing moment,the capture of Osama Bin Laden,it had lived up to Jeffersonian principles rather than those of the Taliban, Salafist and Wahhabist fanatics.
In my opinion,a whole series of events, not entirely having their origin in Libya, conspired in the murder of Ambassador Stevens:United States offshore sub-contacted torture centers after 9/11-one of which was Libya itself;a total breakdown by all sides of the principles of The Geneva Convention for the treatment of prisoners of war in this 'War on Terror'(in the case of Libya,the 'treatment' of Colonel Gaddafi after his 'arrest' his brutal torture and execution- yet again denying all his victims their day of justice through a civilized and universally accepted due process-arrest,trial in a court of law and punishment.) The spurious and dubious claims that 'terrorists' in 'undeclared' wars do not qualify for protection under the Geneva Convention is simply further undermining and chipping away at foundations which have the potential to ensure that our own PoWs in the hands of 'terrorists' are unlikely to be ever afforded any sense of hope (if not dignity) rather than our men and women in combat having to fight to the last bullet,then take a suicide pill rather than risk capture at the hands of an enemy which will likewise show little mercy and has absolutely nothing to loose-either as suicide bombers or as mujaheddin fighters. It is likely that the perpetrators of the murder of Ambassador Stevens were Salafist Jihadis-but we will never be told this because,as with 9/11, the trail of the Salafists would lead back to Saudi Arabia and while blood is thick,oil is thicker. Some excuse (decoy or 'fall-guy') will be made to get the Saudis 'off the hook'. No number of murders of Western Diplomats or their bodyguards (or indeed Muslims seen to be weakening Islamic values in favor of the West or,to be more precise,in their eyes,'in favor of the Infidel') in mineral and oil-rich Muslim lands will alter our policy of involvement in the internal political affairs in these lands-hence we will continue to incur the enmity of ordinary Muslim men and women who are seeking less not more Western involvement in their political (hence also religious,social and cultural life-as Islam is a way of life not just a religion) affairs. Because of this,incidents such as the desecration of the inviolable sanctity of embassies and missions is,sadly,only likely to increase in the future in these turbulent lands.
A Marshall Plan for the Levant and North Africa in the 1960s in tandem with the European Coal and Steel Community would have, more likely than not,created peace and stability for centuries but sadly (Western Christian) racism,imperialism and religious bigotry at that time got in the way. It is clearly too late now for such a plan or any semblance of any economic initiative for impoverished Muslim lands coming from the Christian world. The ordinary Muslim people of North Africa and the Levant have now rejected Western values in their totality and will seek economic and political salvation through Islam henceforth.
Relationships with the Christian world will be secondary to the deepening of Islamic integration. The Arab Spring has just increased the momentum of integration.
The European Union is seeking greater involvement and looking at economic development projects-at a time when the ordinary people are no longer seeing Europe as a source of anything other than the EU representing yet another of many Christian (or Judeo-Christian) scheme(s) for exploitation and economic conquest of Muslim lands which, as they perceive, will be designed to keep the Muslim people impoverished en masse by catering only for a pro-Western (and 'unIslamic') elite in these Muslim lands.
This is the thinking behind the Jihadi extremists we have put in power in North Africa and are currently assisting to seize power in Syria.
The European Union is as remote from the changed realities in North Africa and the Middle East
as U.S. foreign policy more often than not appears to be.
It was somewhere in the vortex of such convoluted chaos,anarchy, failed hopes and dreams, that Ambassador Stevens was,to all valid accounts,very brutally slain. No doubt if such was indeed the case, we will yet reap another whirlwind to the anger created by one very badly produced and directed movie,'The Innocence of Muslims';if the trailer was anything to go by. (Indeed if it was not such a serious matter-the desecration of the Prophet's reputation-the movie trailer itself is so bad that it's farcical-also to the extreme.) It is generally accepted that that this badly produced and directed movie was simply Islamic extremists 'cover' for the premeditated murder on 9/11 of Ambassador Stevens. The likely videoing of this brutal incident and its future transmission over the Internet by the perpetrators is not beyond the realms of possibility. Again this would be 'eye for eye' (Islamic) justice ( revenge ) through the contorted lenses of Jihadi Salafists. How should we react if this also happens-apart of course by banning transmission by blocking servers where possible and practicable? Again my advice is not to play into the hands of these very evil individuals. Far too often we match evil with evil-which begets more evil. I can understand the hysteria and political pressure for revenge-especially in the United States-where Senators and Congress will be under intolerable pressure to do something.
We should always remember that these Jihadists who murdered Ambassador Stevens would like to see our world descend to their same level of inhumanity,bestiality,extremism and religious-political fanaticism and (Christian) societal control of the masses so that the 'playing field' is evenly matched-and we are giving them our world,it's values and civilization decapitated and served on a silver platter - if we play into their hands. To conclude, I have spent time trying to place into context some events which came before the invasion of the sovereign territory of The United States and murder of it's Ambassador to Libya. It is not possible to simply disconnect this event from the sequential descent from our Greek-inherited civilization of democracy into the total disregard for all manners of international laws,obligations and protections of basic human,civil and combatant rights-unless we (Europeans-the European Union- and the United States) determine who qualifies for them as such are the examples used to ignite passions and into which extremists can tap when recruiting novices into armies,warriors or martyrs of Allah (as Jihadists.)
.
We have gone far too far already in terms of rendition,offshore prisons for combatants,torture of prisoners of war (and yes,whether you want to hear it or not, captured Taliban, Al-Qaeda and Salafist fighters,however nauseating,are,when captured alive, prisoners of war or PoWs.);internal (State) surveillance,personal intrusion and loss of civil liberties and all under the banner of the 'fight against terrorism';lets hope we can not just refrain from knee-jerk reactions if confronted with such a heinous video but at some point start to reverse and tear down the walls we are building around ourselves,as blocks,countries,communities and as individuals as our advanced technologies renders us less rather than more safe it also renders our enemies as remote as the technology we use to attempt to eliminate them-equally rendering the prospects of peaceful transition of power without mass bloodshed and carnage on medieval scales less likely in future wars.
Bringing the perpetrators of this savage and cowardly murder of an Ambassador to justice in a court of law by trial and jury in the United States would be a more fitting tribute to the life and legacy of Ambassador Stevens and the principles of democracy,accountability and justice he represented than that of targeted revenge.
Patrick Emek 15.09.2012 6.00 a.m. 
