Noam Chomsky on Osama death....

[karnac]

http://www.guernicamag.com/blog/2652/noam_chomsky_my_reaction_to_os/

In April 2002, the head of the FBI, Robert Mueller, informed the press that after the most intensive investigation in history, the FBI could say no more than that it “believed” that the plot was hatched in Afghanistan, though implemented in the UAE and Germany. What they only believed in April 2002, they obviously didn’t know 8 months earlier, when Washington dismissed tentative offers by the Taliban (how serious, we do not know, because they were instantly dismissed) to extradite bin Laden if they were presented with evidence—which, as we soon learned, Washington didn’t have. Thus Obama was simply lying when he said, in his White House statement, that “we quickly learned that the 9/11 attacks were carried out by al Qaeda.”

Nothing serious has been provided since. There is much talk of bin Laden’s “confession,” but that is rather like my confession that I won the Boston Marathon. He boasted of what he regarded as a great achievement.
.......................................

[NYC_SKP]

1. Oh, Bullshit, Noam. Says Osama was a victim.... Bullshit.

"There appears to have been no attempt to apprehend the unarmed victim, as presumably could have been done by 80 commandos facing virtually no opposition—except, they claim, from his wife, who lunged towards them. In societies that profess some respect for law, suspects are apprehended and brought to fair trial."

The unarmed victim.

Bullshit.

x(

[lutherj]

3. Not saying bin Laden was a victim. He's saying there is such a thing as rule of law.

He's saying WE are the victims of an imperial policy that denigrates constitutional principles and international law. He compares the killing of bin Laden to Iraqi commandos parachuting into Dallas and killing GWB and dumping his body into the Atlantic. GWB would not be the victim here. But how would it make you feel?

[PSPS]

4. Um, everyone including the white house has already admitted he was unarmed.

[NYC_SKP]

6. Unarmed, yes, but "victim"?

My point hasn't got anything to do with unarmed. Noam calls Osama a victim. I call bullshit.

[rfranklin]

7. The bottom line is that there has not been a credible investigation of 9/11...

Even Tom Keane said the 9/11 commission did not really get to the facts--“Lee and I write in our book that, uh, we think that the Commission in many was set up to fail. Because we had, um, not enough money, we didn’t have enough time. We had been appointed by the most partisan people in Washington, um, the leaders in the House and Senate.”
http://dprogram.net/2011/03/06/thomas-kean-the-911-commission-was-set-up-to-fail/

[Hardrada]

2. Food for thought.

Some intriguing insights as usual.

[OHdem10]

5. The TV Clip of Osama Bin Laden and a friend sitting joking

and laughing about the Twin Towers --he was reported to
have said... and it was even bigger than imagined .

Bin Laden Fatwa' saying they would bring America to
her knees financially. (Twin Towers was the symbol
for destroying America financially.

Both Chomsky and Moore seem to foget, Bin Ladin and
Al Qeda declared war on America when they did 9/ll,
They were the major war target.

Our Ambassador to UN under 3 Administrations said
there UN Rules laws which covers this type action.
He could think of 2 off hand and belies there may be
others.

[n2doc]

8. recommend

Even if you don't agree with him, he still is worth reading.

[bluetex]

9. "Unarmed victim"

Kinda' ironic...ain't it?


What were the folks in the first Twin Towers bombing? The folks in the planes, and the buildings the planes crashed in to on 9/11? The folks in the embassies in Africa?


Karma's a BITCH.

[Carolina]

21. And what were all those innocent Iraqis

bombing when the US unleashed Shock and Awe. I daresay, our nation's karma will be a bitch, too!

[Mojorabbit]

27. We are supposed to have a rule of law.

It is a slippery slope. You allow this, then next thing you know it is citizens who are assasinated by the govt. We already have citizens held without charges. Bad precedent.

[NavyDem]

30. Which US citizens are being held without charges?

Serious question.

[Mojorabbit]

32. Here are some examples

U.S. Can Confine Citizens Without Charges, Court Rules

By Jerry Markon
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, September 10, 2005

A federal appeals court yesterday backed the president's power to indefinitely detain a U.S. citizen captured on U.S. soil without any criminal charges, holding that such authority is vital during wartime to protect the nation from terrorist attacks.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/09/AR2005090900772.html



Al-Marri and the power to imprison U.S. citizens without charges
By Glenn Greenwald
Of all the constitutionally threatening and extremist powers the Bush administration has asserted over the last seven years, the most radical -- and the most dangerous -- has been its claim that the President has the power to arrest U.S. citizens and legal residents inside the U.S., and imprison them indefinitely in a military prison, without charging them with any crime, based on his assertion that the imprisoned individual is an "enemy combatant."

Beginning with U.S. citizen Yasser Esam Hamdi (detained in Afghanistan), followed by U.S. citizen Jose Padilla (detained at Chicago's O'Hare International Airport), followed by Ali Saleh Kahlah al-Marri (in the U.S. on a student visa and detained at his home in Peoria, Illinois), the Bush administration has not only claimed that power in theory but has aggressively exercised and defended it in practice.

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2008/07/16/al_marri

U.S. citizen strip- searched, left naked, and held for 16 days without being charged


Daily Mail
March 5, 2011

A Muslim man who endured weeks of humiliation in jail before being released without charge is taking his fight to the Supreme Court.

U.S. Citizen Abdullah al-Kidd, who was detained in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, claims he was strip-searched repeatedly, left naked in a jail cell and showered for more than 90 minutes in view of other men and women.

He said he was also routinely transported in handcuffs and leg irons – which a federal marshall refused to remove so he could use the bathroom – and kept with people who had been convicted of violent crimes.

http://www.infowars.com/u-s-citizen-strip-searched-left-naked-and-held-for-16-days-without-being-charged/

[NavyDem]

37. Thanks.

Just making sure you weren't going to push the position that Bradley Manning has not been charged.

[coalition_unwilling]

35. No, karma is a motherfucker. But you are engaging in the 'Two Wrongs

Make a Right" ideology that the imperialists are relying on to keep support for the war machine at a fever pitch.

The 9-11 victims were unarmed, therefore it was only appropriate that OBL be executed without a trial while unarmed.

Also please do note that the U.S. government lied and said OBL was armed and "engaged in a firefight". TRUTH: There was no gunfire in the main dwelling. You ought to ask yourself why your government, the government your taxes pay for, thought it could lie to you and get away with it.

[sendero]

10. The whole..

... "war on terror" is smoke and mirrors. Trying to make any sense of it or believing you have any real understanding of what is going on is pointless. You know what you have been told by people who are not remotely interested in you knowing the truth.

As for Bin Laden, if they killed him I'm surprised I always assumed the was the "inside" man. :)

[TBF]

11. I agree with this post completely -

I always assumed the CIA was continuing to pay Bin Laden. Whether he was killed or died from kidney disease ... and I do believe whatever scheme Bush et al cooked up involved him as an inside player. The only thing I will say about Obama is that while I realize he is working for the owners, he did inherit a hell of a mess when he took this job and I don't blame him for putting an end to that particular chapter.

[sendero]

14. Agreed..

... Don't get me wrong, I have no sympathy for Osama either way.

[Blue Meany]

12. Regarding the question about someone taking Bush and

dumping him in the Atlantic Ocean, I would regard it as directly analgous to this: less than ideal justice. In the best of all possible worlds, trials of bin Laden and world leaders who have started wars and authorized killings would take place under the auspices of international authorities. But that world does not now exist. Systems of national and international justice are not equal; some people are protected from prosecution others are targetted.

[coalition_unwilling]

36. And some are executed without even the pretense of a trial - n/t

[riverwalker]

13. split seconds from being armed

he stuck his head out the bedroom door, they shot and missed, he ran into bedroom WHERE there was an AK-47 and other weapons, and he was killed. I don't think he dashed into the room to change his socks. Another second, and he would have been armed and we would have dead Seals. When surrounded by 30 Seals, anything less than 150% total surrender, IS resisting.
Chomsky got a few facts wrong in his rush to piss in the beer of President Obama. It was NOT called "Operation Geronimo".
The official mission code name was Operation Neptune Spear, with Jackpot as the code name for bin Laden as an individual and Geronimo as code for successful mission.

[marions ghost]

15. None of us know

what really happened, and we may never know.

:shrug:

[ima_sinnic]

16. that's what they tell us happened

how convenient there is no photographic evidence of any of it, including confirmation that "Osama bin Laden" himself was even killed.
The story has changed so frequently -- which one are you referencing? :eyes:

[Historic NY]

25. Well Reuters published pictures of the remaining 3 bodies left behind.

[bluestate10]

18. If you have been on DU long enough, you would know by now that the far left

doesn't give a shit about facts when people of that persuasion want to paint a situation to meet their ends. bin Laden got long delayed justice.

[Carolina]

22. what will be the long delayed

justice of those who allowed Shock & Awe against innocent Iraqis??? The far left cares a lot about facts that's why we are here on DU. And you???!!! Sheesh

You seem to forget that bin Laden was our guy once upon a time, as was Saddam and Pinochet. You seem to be ignorant of blowback, of the facts!

[bluestate10]

23. The fact is bin Laden was involved with killing nearly 3000 people, the

majority fellow US citizens on our soil. Fuck bin Laden, I hope the deep sea creature that will get to munch on his filthy body enjoy their meal. If you followed any of my posts on Iraq, you would know that I feel that war was a mistake in many ways, the most important of which was the dramatic loss of life suffered by Iraqis and our troops in Iraq. I don't deny that the US sponsored bin Laden at one time and sponsored other bad people, but all except bin Laden did not attack and murder innocent people far from their shores. I don't approve of the fact that scum like Pinochet and Hussein murdered their own people, but each were brought to justice, with the US playing a leading role once a new era of leaders show how fucked up our policy was. I have full confidence in how President Obama is handling foreign policy, yes, he is stuck with regimes like the ones in Saudi Arabia and Yemen, but he is also exerting pressure on them to reform their treatment of their citizens.

[JonScholar]

28. George Bush committed far worse crimes. Should he be assassinated too?

[coalition_unwilling]

39. Absolutely not. He should receive a trial in front of a competent

legal authority.

No one should be killed or punished by the power of the state without first receiving due process of the law, not OBL and not GWB.

[Mojorabbit]

33. The point is he was not tried and convicted.

He was assassinated.

[coalition_unwilling]

38. That's not what his 12-year-old daughter says she eyewitnessed. For

the sake of your soul, you should pray that OBL's daughter is not telling the truth.

[bluestate10]

17. People like Chomsky give progressives a bad name and image.

And progressives on DU wonder why other DU members constantly counteract their claims. The fact is, there are americans that always view the US as the bad guy, regardless of how barbaric the adversary. Screw those people, fortunately, they are a tiny minority that is nothing more than a barely noticed pain in the ass.

[Ikonoklast]

20. When one gets their talking points ftrom the WSWS

they immediately lose any credibility as a 'progressive' of any type.


OBL caught a bullet, too bad, so sad.

Eff that bastard.

[inna]

29. truly vile comment.

[billh58]

34. The Far Left will

always consider the USA and its people the worst country in the world.

[eridani]

43. Whatchu mean "USA," kemosabe?

Is the "USA" just the elite policy makers who profit from dominating natural resources and making the world safe for dollar a day labor? Or might the rest of us poor saps who just live here have some claim to the title?

If you want to identify with the sociopathic shitstains who visit daily disaster on the rest of the world, including the 98% of us "Americans" who aren't part of their club, then go for it. Just leave the rest of us out of it, 'K?

[inna]

49. read the post #43 below. and then read it again.

[LooseWilly]

44. "regardless of how barbaric the adversary"? I think you've just demonstrated an "imperial mentality"

"The imperial mentality is so profound, throughout western society, that no one can perceive that they are glorifying bin Laden by identifying him with courageous resistance against genocidal invaders."—from the article.

"We" don't wonder for a second why others constantly counteract claims... no need to wonder when Chomsky lays it out so clearly. ;)

[aikoaiko]

19. Noam's concern is noted.

[seabeyond]

24. i stopped reading his stuff so long ago.... nt

[Historic NY]

26. Bin Laden: Yes, I did it.........

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/afghanistan/1362113/Bin-Laden-Yes-I-did-it.html

were now finding it fit his concept of bankrupting the US economic system. I suspect once all the stuff taken from his house is reviewed the smoking gun will be blazing in no uncertain terms. OBL seems to be caught up with himself so he has it in his files. (library)

[quaker bill]

31. It is over, he is dead

and the fate of this man was never worthy of much discussion.

[coalition_unwilling]

40. But the fate of such quaint and obsolete concepts as "due process of the law"

is worthy of infinite discussion, else why bother having a democratic republic?

[quaker bill]

41. How about all the random Abu Mustafas

(means father of Mustafa) or Abu Mohammeds that we have summarily shot on the streets for nearly 10 years, without a hint of "due process". Apparently, because they don't live in compounds or make any claims of command, they are less worthy? Are the guys targeted and vaporized by predator drones less worthy of due process? Why is this particular man more worthy of due process than the 10s of thousands of others we have killed without a trial?

Why is he special and the others not? Alternately perhaps you feel we should have arrested them all and brought them to trial.

Personally, I would have preferred that we never went there at all. That we had not participated in and often ran in 50 years of really bad policy, that GW Bush had not laid an ultimatim at the feet of the Taliban for Ken Lay's pipeline...

But now that we are there doing this, I can't wrap my head around why this particular killing amoung the thousands of others is an issue.

[coalition_unwilling]

42. He was unarmed and put up no resistance, according to the White House's

own revised account (alhough they may have revised their account yet again). I swear I heard one of Obama's flunkies say OBL was an 'enemy combatant' (the word a scourge of Geneva and most civilized opinion) and therefore not deserving of protections extended to legitimate combatants. Can't source it for you, but Sabrina 1 probably can, if she's reading this.

Since when is it kosher in military rule of engagement to shoot an unarmed man not offering any resistance? Do you think all of us referring to it as an extra-judicial execution bear Obama any animus or ill will? Or are we, to quote Satan, just a 'focus group'?

Do you believe in 'due process of law' as an organizing principle of civilization? If so, don't you think it bears discussing by the populace? And, if not, what do you propose in place of 'due process of law'?

[quaker bill]

45. Since you can't address the question

Let me slow walk you through it.

I am fairly sure, perhaps to the point of certainty, that the various lethal methods we have been employing in Afghanistan and Iraq have in fact taken the lives of many who were unarmed and offering no resistance. My guess is that the tally was in the thousands by the time "shock and awe" bombing campaign in Baghdad was through its first day.

Why now the sudden deep concern for due process, in this particular case? Again, why is OBL worthy of some consideration we have not afforded so many others?

Secondly, try to be a bit realistic, just a bit for a moment. Bin Laden was dead the moment we caught him, as surely as the sun rises in the am. There was no tenable path to another result. The people would have demanded it and would eventually have put in power whoever would get it done. So if not this President, then the next. Retaining him alive would have changed the course of US political history, and not in ways I think either of us would favor.

This President and no imaginable President would run for office on the platform of staying Bin Laden's execution. It would not matter if one did run as defeated Presidental candidates never make policy. There was no other outcome.

So, reasonably assessed, what you are apparently concerned about is missing a show trial and media circus before the eventual hanging, electrocution, lethal injection, firing squad, disemboweling, or perhaps more creatively using him as chum for great white shark research. I am sorry, I do not find the fig leaf of due process sufficiently large to be compelling in this particular case.

Ask the people in Iraq or Afghanistan if this is a war or a police action. All the reports I have read suggest it has been a war, and from what I have seen of it and discussed with those who have been there, due process has been rather rare.

Due process is an organizing principle of civilization. Experience teaches that civilization ceases once the killing starts, pretty much everywhere the killing starts, regardless of cause. This is why it is good to avoid all the killing, before it starts.

[coalition_unwilling]

47. I think your central question is this:

"Why is OBL worthy of some consideration (that 'due process' be followed) we have not afforded so many others?"

Here's my answer:

We treat evil men decently not because of who they are, but because of who we are. (Tip of the hat to DUer EFerrari for this insight.) I grant you that many before OBL had died who were unarmed and offering no resistance. They too received no due process, a sad fact for which my twice- and thrice-weekly protests from 2001-08 seems to have provided little or no amelioration. But your principal argument seems to be that, because those thousands did not receive due process, that therefore OBL should not receive it either. This seems like the mirror image of "two wrongs don't make a right" thinking, specifically, "two wrongs do make a right". In other words, you seem to suggest, because the thousands did not receive due process (a wrong), OBL is not due it either (2nd wrong), and therefore some higher moral purpose is served (the right). Well, I'm not sure you really believe that but that seems the import of your words. Do note that your way of thinking increases the net amount of wrong in the world by adding a 2nd wrong to the first, without adding any further right to the world that I can see.

Realistically speaking, had we caught bin Laden and brought him under the rule of law, my guess is that he would have died while in captivity (a la Milosevic). We have managed trials for other such arch villains in our history and, I would argue, the principle that each man deserves a trial before being executed is an important enough one to run the risk of some damage to the course of our political history (which hardly can suffer more than it has during the reign of the Bush junta).

I cannot speak to the courage or cowardice of our current political leadership. I will say this (and perhaps this is a sign of how fucked up this whole scene has become): Early on (like Monday or Tuesday) there were apocryphal reports on DU that the right wing was advancing some sort of theory of a military coup d'etat that had forced Obama's hand. According to this right wing story, Obama had not wanted OBL assassinated and the military had overrode him (thereby accounting for Obama's overly stern expression at the podium on Sunday night). Crazy story, right? Except that there was a part of me wishing it were true, desperately wishing that Obama had indeed ordered OBL not be assassinated, only to find himself disobeyed by a military no longer bound to the laws of morality, mortality and human decency, but instead a monster unleashed and uncontrollable by any decent force.

[BzaDem]

48. Bin Laden was entitled to the due process of a bullet to the head, unless he affirmatively and

unambiguously surrendered. That is the law of war, whether people like it or not. It has nothing to do with armed vs. unarmed, but rather has only to do with declared combatant vs. not a combatant. Bin Laden declared war on the US, and was entitled to nothing more than a swift death, unless he wanted to surrender and did surrender.

[johnaries]

46. Nice try at rewriting history. Too bad most of us remember it

and remember what really happened.

[upi402]

50. this question...

"We might ask ourselves how we would be reacting if Iraqi commandos landed at George W. Bush’s compound, assassinated him, and dumped his body in the Atlantic."


uhhh :dilemma:

[Cleita]

52. Well, as satisfying as the thought is, at the end of

the day, I believe most Americans would consider it a violation of our nation and international law, even if it is George W. Bush.

[Cleita]

51. Noam Chomsky doesn't mince words.

I also feel that due process of law should have at least been attempted.