Questions, a Corpse, and the Firework Code

I've always felt that one of life's greater pleasures is wrapping oneself around a few bottles of sherry with a few like-minded chums and putting the world to rights: it can often be quite stimulating to the brain (even though it's giving the spongy fucker quite a hiding at the same time); it encourages the consideration of ethics, politics, and other high-minded matters - which makes a nice change from discussing "crisps vs pork scratchings" - and above all, it's totally harmless.  Nothing ever comes from these late night sessions, after all.  Whatever hellish dystopia you and your cronies end up fashioning from personal prejudice, a mixed bag of intentions, and the kind of inspiration that only eight cans can provide, you'll awaken to find nothing worse has come of it than a screaming headeache and perhaps a puddle of piss in the corner of the living room. The world carries on; nothing has changed, and despite the acclaim the suggestion received last night, riot police don't have big smiley faces painted on their shields to lighten the tone of protest rallies and the abuse of the crippled. Then you do it all again next week.
I was reminded of this pleasure today by a news report on the future of Libya: the provisional government now find themselves in almost exactly the same position of one of those crapulent caucuses - the only difference being that they're not saying "I'll tell you what I would do"; they're actually doing it.  Their discussions will have weight and will affect not only millions of Libyans, but also the world to a greater or lesser extent.  Being Moslems, they're doing it without booze as well; a terrifying thought, really - and not something I'd take a whack at.  Fuck me; I don't even like deciding which brand of Oven Chips I'm buying without having had a couple of lagers...They're also having to decide what to do with a dead body - which again, is something that most pissed-up social visionaries don't have to deal unless something's gone very awry during the evening.  "The Man With The Golden Gun" is currently lying in a meat-storage room, and before they can even think about laying the foundations of democracy in their country, they've got to work out what to do with him: should they get him under the ground, or should they drum up some quick cash for the national coffers by charging people a couple of dinars for a gander (spitting extra)?  Of course; another consideration is that they might need to produce Gadaffi's chilled carcass to some kind of international enquiry - which is what really caught my attention.
Why, exactly?  What purpose would an investigation serve?  The only one that leaps immediately to mind is that it would strengthen the international impression that the UN knows best, and that a bunch of sand-hugging savages can't be trusted to keep a straight bat and play the game "like a white man".  Perhaps those of you with long memories will recall the news stories and photos that accompanied the fall of Communism in Romania - disturbing pictures of Ceaucescu and his wife lying dead and blood-splattered in Wenceslas Square?  The headlines were in much the same vein as those that accompanied the news of Gadaffi's passing - "Death of a Tyrant!",  "Freedom!", "Tulisa and Louis In X-Factor Feud!" etc.  The general belief was that it was a Good Thing that a despotic dictator had been brought down by the righteous fury of the oppressed.  I don't recall anybody suggesting anything other than the cunt got what was coming to him - there was certainly no international outcry about "due process". Mind you; he was a Communist, and thus beyond the pale, wasn't he?  The people that killed him were also European and thus civillised and keen to learn all about market forces and the other blessings of Western Capitalism. 
It's a kind of double standard that we see in the International Community all the time: those anti-nuclear proliferation treaties always seem to be more about preventing African, Asian, or Middle-Eastern countries from getting their dusky, trigger-fondling fingers on nukes, while the US, the UK, and the ever-reasonable and soigné French are deemed wholly fit and responsible to have world-sundering arsenals at their disposal.  It's like a Dad looking after the fireworks on Bonfire NIght is what it is: he can lurch out to light a dozen rockets after a few liveners, but the kids can't have so much as a sparkler until they've proved that they can be "trusted to act responsibly".
Still; there's no point in jumping to conclusions just yet, is there? There's too much of this sort of carping mistrust knocking about; it sours people and probably does more harm than good.  Let's just wait and see, shall we? The UN will doubtless do their utmost to preserve the independence of Libya's nascent government - and to assist them in every way to find the same kind of freedom and democracy that we enjoy every day. It would be churlish and narrow-minded to suggest anything else, right?
I'd still like to sit in on the "What are we doing with the body" meeting though, I'll tell you that for nothing...