I was reminded of Osama's death today...someone told me another joke: Hey there, did you hear about the latest Bin Laden cocktail? No, man, what's in it? Two shots and a splash of water!
I suppose these jokes are expected to run rampant but should they? Most people would no doubt agree...why the hell not? The man was a monster. He was responsible for killing thousands. 9/11 and its aftermath was brutal. We were left with anxiety, uncertainty, and insecurity. Our innocence was lost. It spawned a more paranoid style of politics and the Bush administration ran away with it...blank check in tow. Wars without end surfaced the international scene. America was running around like a chicken without its head. And one mistake after another, America lost its stature as world leader. Therefore, it's not surprising that there were thousands of people in New York City's Times Square cheering and celebrating the death of one man. It got me thinking, and in the end, I was shaking my head.
Uh...time for a reality check folks! Not all fear will disappear with one man's death. Most Americans will tell you, there's a huge difference between good patriotic fun and sinister nationalism and the distinction sets the good 'ol US of A apart from other countries. Really?
You mean the kind of sinister nationalism that demonizes "aliens" at home and abroad? You mean the kind of sinister nationalism that stereotypes Muslims (or anyone who "looks" Middle-Eastern) post-9/11? You mean the kind of sinister nationalism that raises deep suspicion, prejudice, and violence directed against Native Americans, African Americans, Latinos, Japanese Americans, and European immigrants?
I am not denying the fact that Osama Bin Laden was an evil man and was guilty as sin, but how do we find the legal basis for killing him? Self-defense? According to a pronouncement by Philip Alston from the UN, "targeted killing can be legal...the killing of suspected terrorists is permissible only in self-defense or in the defense of others." BUT Alston also chided Washington for "failing to provide a credible public accounting that would clarify whether the Bin Laden raid or, for that matter, the CIA-conducted drone attacks met the standard."
Could we, then, make Bin Laden into an "enemy combatant?" We invented the term, but we did it without international law status. We only invented the term to get around international law while pretending to stay within its bounds. Since most Americans believe America is an exceptional country, then it's only reasonable that exceptional people create their own rules, right? Hmm, we would most definitely condemn others for doing it, but hey, they're not exceptional, right? Aw, but alas, this kind of thinking has it's own consequences. Really? What?
Let's just put it this way: When we make it a habit to exempt ourselves as exceptional people from international standards, in other words, when we (through our actions) tell others "do as I say and not as I do," we give leaders elsewhere (good and bad) a justification for conducting their own kill operations. The bottom line is: "We may think we are serving justice, but the more likely consequence is frayed international trust and cooperation and ultimately less security for the U.S."
Remember, "the world has always been more impressed by the power of our [America's] example than by the example of our power."--President Bill Clinton
Just sayin'.....
