Image via Wikipedia
There is no way to know that today is a day that will make history. A year ago this weekend, life in my city was savaged by a 500 year flood, the impact of which is still rippling across our burg. Almost 10 years ago America woke to a beautiful September morning that saw the sun set on a nation at war. And yesterday, a major chapter in that war was closed.
Even as I write this, news is continuing to break. Osama bin Laden, the mastermind behind terrorist attacks in the US and abroad, is dead. It is reported he was located in a compound in Pakistan, surrounded by Navy SEALs, given the chance to surrender and killed when he declined the offer. His body was buried at sea to prevent his grave becoming a shrine and a place of pilgrimage.
Most disturbing about the matter is the reaction of so many Americans. I remember the revulsion I felt when I saw video of people rejoicing in Middle Eastern streets because of the 9/11 attacks. I feel the same revulsion at the rejoicing I perceive taking place in my country at the death of bin Laden.
Justice is not a cause for jubilation.
I feel a deep and abiding sense of satisfaction that the man who murdered so many has been found and been held accountable for his crimes. I am amazed at the commitment to justice my country brings to the fight which resulted in the extension of mercy and an offer of surrender to a man such as bin Laden. I feel proud to be protected and represented by the men and women of the various branches of the US military and our intelligence services. Their bravery and professionalism deserves praise beyond what can be granted here. What I do not feel is joy at the death of bin Laden.
Osama bin Laden was acting in accordance with his faith when he murdered over 3,000 Americans on 9/11 and in murdering so many others, from all faiths, in other attacks around the world. I cannot act other than in accordance with my own faith in my response to his death. Christianity teaches that even Osama bin Laden was created in the image of God; he had a purpose and a destiny for his life that God intended even if he did not live it out; he was loved by God enough that Christ died for bin Laden just as he did for me. The part of the heart of God that loved bin Laden as one of His creations does not rejoice that he is dead.
Christianity also teaches that every man has the freedom to choose. That means that despite God having a plan for our lives, we can reject that plan and go our own way; we can and do choose sin and destruction over righteousness and restoration, and; when we do, we accept the full responsibility for our own actions and must abide by that decision. If our actions are sinful and godless, there is justice to face, both in this life and the next. The part of the heart of God that is holy and just does not shrink from dispensing justice. But neither does He rejoice in the dispensing.
It is surreal that President Obama, who blames George Bush for everything, is taking credit for the one thing that George Bush actually did do that remains into this administration – the successful pursuit of Osama bin Laden. As President Bush so quietly and purposefully stated on September 20, 2001, “Whether we bring our enemies to justice or bring justice to our enemies, justice will be done.” Thank you President Bush for your commitment to justice that was strong enough it extended beyond your administration to accomplish its purpose.
Osama bin Laden is dead. Justice has been served. That is a good thing. It is cause for introspection to determine our motives. It is cause for satisfaction and contentment should we find our motives pure and our commitment to justice well served by the events of the last 48 hours. It is cause for motivation as we move forward into the next chapter in facing down the terrorists who would destroy us. But it is not now, nor should it ever be, cause for rejoicing.
We believe different than that. We believe better than that. We are not our enemy. We are Americans.
#1 by Webutante on 05/01/2011 - 22:44
Ken, all very well said. A different and very Christ-like view. Thank you.
#2 by Kay Brooks on 05/01/2011 - 23:14
Very well put, Ken.
#3 by C. Richard Archie on 05/01/2011 - 23:30
Your comments mirror my own thoughts that we as Americans should hold ourselves to a higher mark than the "Arab street" did in the aftermath of 9/11.
#4 by Daniel Lewis on 05/02/2011 - 00:56
Overall I agree Ken, but I am not sure launching a full blown war (without Congressional declaration of war), was the best approach. It would have been better to use letters marque and reprisal. I also wonder now that we have met one of the objectives set out when we sent troops into Afghanistan, if any of those troops will come home. Another area of grave concern should be the fact that within the Al Qaeda structure surely someone will take ben Laden place. We also should be on alert for possible retaliation from Al Qaeda for us taking out their leader. In the long run we will have to see if this act actually makes America safer. Yes justice is a good thing, but the use of force never resolves anything.
#5 by Daniel Lewis on 05/02/2011 - 01:03
I just got a link to this article
http://www.freepatriot-press.com/2011/05/thin-blu…
While it is a different story, I think it raises some important questions about the bin Laden story.
#6 by RedHatRob on 05/02/2011 - 01:07
Daniel: "I am not sure launching a full blown war (without Congressional declaration of war), was the best approach"
This is a canard.
"The Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002, Pub.L. 107-243, 116 Stat. 1498, enacted October 16, 2002, H.J.Res. 114) is a joint resolution passed by the United States Congress in October 2002 as Public Law No: 107-243, authorizing the Iraq War"
It passed 77-23 in the Senate and 297-133 in the House.
It was/is a declaration of war by Congress.
#7 by Daniel Lewis on 05/02/2011 - 05:13
What about the Afghanistan War. I am not sure but I do think an authorization is not the same as a declaration of war. I am also not sure that we can declare a war on Al Queda or the Taliban, since they are not a country.
#8 by RedHatRob on 05/02/2011 - 06:57
"The Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists (Pub.L. 107-40, 115 Stat. 224, enacted September 18, 2001), one of two resolutions commonly known as "AUMF" (the other being "Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002"), was a joint resolution passed by the United States Congress on September 14, 2001, authorizing the use of United States Armed Forces against those responsible for the attacks on September 11, 2001. The authorization granted the President the authority to use all "necessary and appropriate force" against those whom he determined "planned, authorized, committed or aided" the September 11th attacks, or who harbored said persons or groups. The AUMF was signed by President George W. Bush on September 18, 2001"
Passed the House 420-1; Passed the Senate 98-0.
There is no "magic formula" that makes an authorization to use force something other than a declaration of war.
#9 by James Baird on 05/02/2011 - 01:13
Agreed. America is a better place than the ones where people partied in the streets jubilant over the 9/11 attacks. America is wiser and better than that. The mostly-young people celebrating in our streets are ignorantly sending the world a wrong message about us. The seasoned reporters on our major television stations who are similarly reveling in this combat death are once again pandering to their perceived unintelligent audience. Sadly, too much of that audience is eating it up.
We are missing a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to display decorum and represent our great country properly and beneficially.
#10 by Daniel Lewis on 05/02/2011 - 08:15
That may be true but letters marque and reprisal would have been less costly (money and lives) and more effective.
#11 by Matt Bonner on 05/02/2011 - 01:19
A good, well thought out response Ken. I agree in all respects. I would add that not only is it not time for celebration, but it is time to get serious about the real enemy: the Muslim Brotherhood who predates Bin Laden (est. 1928) and is literally an international insurgency with hundreds of thousands of operatives in 110 countries, all working toward their stated goal of re-establishing the global Islamic caliphate, complete with the Sharia. The MB is THE mother ship and has birthed over 70 Islamic terrorist organizations including Al-Queda, Hezbolla, Hamas, etc. It's long past time our government and military leadership get serious about declaring war against the MB and the caliphate. If we had any integrity, ethics or objectivity left in journalism today, we would be unmasking and exposing their wolf-in-sheep's-clothing operation led by hundreds of front groups posing as peaceful Muslim organizations all across America. CAIR should be the first to be shut down, followed by the Muslim Student Association, ISNA, etc.
#12 by Josh on 05/02/2011 - 01:25
Well said my brother. I was thinking the same thing last night and this morning when I saw the people in NY and DC cheering and chanting USA, USA, USA. I am happy that we got him, but I am not celebratory. GREAT POST!
#13 by Blue Collar Muse on 05/02/2011 - 01:27
@ James Baird and others …
Not only that, but the incessant and insatiable maw of the news cycle demands more and more information. It is reprehensible that it was broadcast that the Navy SEALs were involved. A couple of hours ago, I heard reference to a specific SEAL team. Why don't we just report the name of the soldier who pulled the trigger so our enemies have all the information they need to retaliate.
At some point in the not too distant past, The Media lost its objectivity. It decided that not taking sides was the best way to be objective. While this seems to be true, it is really another one of the canards that Red Hat Rob loves to dissect.
For instance, to merely report that one group says one thing and another group says something different would seem to be objective. However, if one group's statement is demonstrably false or inaccurate and is left unchallenged in the name of objectivity, what service has The Media done its readers, viewers or listeners?
I argue that true objectivity pursues Truth above all else and cares not who gets skewered in the process. If the government or just some guy is right, then report that. If they are wrong, then report that, as well. But enough with the equal time for all and no conclusions drawn from the facts and calling that objective.
#14 by Ned on 05/02/2011 - 01:52
Nice post Ken. I think that Obama and his celebrating fans can and will (credibly) claim that Obama brought focus to this objective in contrast to the imperialistic, warmongering, blahblahblah that preceded him. Whatever.
Like you, I was satisfied with the news, but in contrast to those at the frat party-ish gatherings shown on TV last night, I view the death of Osama Bin Laden as more of a symbolic "win" . . . the war against Jihadism is/was not about one person, it is not a mere law enforcement issue and OBL was not a reviled despot.
Thanks for the post.
#15 by Jay Wigley on 05/02/2011 - 02:07
I did not hear Obama take credit personally for anything, other than saying that he personally authorized the attack. Furthermore, to say that Bush's commitment to justice was "strong enough" to make this happen is incredibly misguided. Both presidents sought to bring him to justice, but neither are committed to justice as a principle. If they were, they would consistently seek the moral high ground in our treatment of prisoners captured in this war on terror, instead of the immoral path we have chosen: torture, unlawful imprisonment, and so forth.
#16 by Byron Chesney on 05/02/2011 - 02:40
Very good post. Much of what you stated was also going through my head as I watched update after jubilant update from Twitter and Facebook. I too am glad that justice was served but I can't help and think of the 1.2 million babies that are aborted in the U.S. every year. Folks keep saying "God Bless our country," do we really think God is blind and doesn't see what is going here? Perilous times indeed.
#17 by Sarah on 05/02/2011 - 02:59
If I may re-post what I already wrote on your FB wall . . .
I understand your perspective, but I disagree. I don't think that the celebrations were specifically to cheer the death of this evil man, but rather were a collective sense of the strength and resolve of America. It is a reaffirmation of what we portrayed to the world on 9/12. We use these moments to come together, and I think that is OK. I saw a lot of American flags waving and heard a lot of chants of "USA!" and did not see Osama burning in effigy or hear chants of "Death to al Qaeda!" To say that we cannot publicly rejoice now is also to say that citizens should not have taken to the streets for V-E or V-J day (not that bin Laden's death marks the end of the war, but it's a celebration of military victory all the same) because so many people died in order to reach that amazing moment.
#18 by Tom Guleff on 05/02/2011 - 03:16
Ken, I like what you wrote.
#19 by Blue Collar Muse on 05/02/2011 - 04:18
@ Sarah -
Thanks for your thoughts and perspectives. I agree that we did not see Obama burning in effigy but if the celebrations were about the collective strength and resolve of America, why do we not see them on a regular basis. America is no less strong or resolved today than last week or last month. In fact, one could conceivably argue that some of the Tea Parties were just such celebrations. But the displays last night? Hardly.
They were also qualitatively different from V-E and V-J day. Those celebrations, as you correctly note, marked the end of wars in the European and Pacific theaters. We did not celebrate (that I am aware of) when Tojo's plane was shot down or when Hess was captured and jailed. These were welcome events but not celebrated.
A man was killed. That killing was just. It was 10 years coming and that made the administration of justice the fulfillment of a long carried hope in the hearts of millions. But it is not a cause for celebration. To make it so incredibly cheapens the struggle and the cost which made it possible.
I'm unclear how it could be viewed differently. However, it is clear that many do so. If I am unable to convince you then we will have to agree to disagree on this.
In any event, thank you so much for the comment here and at FaceBook. Please come back and share your perspective from time to time.
#20 by Blue Collar Muse on 05/02/2011 - 04:36
@ Jay -
Thanks for coming by and sharing your thoughts. However, I could not disagree with you more.
To follow the President's claim of credit, all one has to do is remember the last 3 years of his rhetoric regarding the wars in both Iraq and Afghanistan and then compare that with his remarks last night. One would think that Obama had been on board with military activity, plans and tactics since day one. Instead, he has been critical and sought to reverse and undermine everything that led up to the events of the last 48 hours. That he would now reverse his field again and say nice things about a war and a military that he hates is patently hypocritical. But he is nothing if not a consumate politician.
As to Bush's commitment to justice, I'm unclear where you find evidence to question it. It was he who stayed the course in the face of incredible opposition from all in the opposition party and some in his own party to keep the pressure on and the search going. His commitment to the military operations which resulted in bin Laden's location and killing are the basis for every speech the current President makes wherein he bemoans the financial and military situation which he inherited and for which he cannot be held responsible.
You reference torture. What torture? Abu Ghraib? Little worse than a frat hazing. And people lost their jobs and careers over it. Water boarding? Perhaps. But I'd rather be water boarded than really tortured – you know, fingernails and teeth ripped out with pliers and without anesthetics; genitals and other body parts wired and shocked; immersion in freezing water, fingers and other extremities amputated; being washed in meat juice and tossed in cages with starving dogs – or as the people in Iraq call it, just another day in the custody of Sadam Hussein …
Unlawful imprisonment? Are you talking about Gitmo? If so, I'm not even going to bother responding … If not, what are you talking about?
While I can appreciate your sentiments, it would appear that you have issues with the war and the search for bin Laden that go far deeper than the unwise and immature celebrations taking place across our nation at the death of another human being. I have no interest or time to deal with those issues here. Perhaps another post on another day.
I value the input of my readers and appreciate the time and effort put into any legitimate comment. But I do not always agree with their conclusions. I find myself unable to agree with yours but respect your right to hold them.
#21 by Rob Jones on 05/11/2011 - 07:08
For the record, there are a lot of folks that know more about Islam than I who would disagree that he was following Islam when he had people fly planes into the WTC, Pentagon, etc… but I guess we could still say he was following his religious beliefs, warped though they may have been.
That said, I suspect we all saw the parallel between the celebrations the night he died and the guys passing out candy when the news of 9/11 broke. It is worth noting they were at least jubilant about the passing of someone that had something to do with the reason he was being killed. The guys in the towers werent selected by their guilt or their politics, only by having been the ones that showed up in the building the day it was hit.
Me… I didn't feel like dancing, just breathed a prayer of relief that he was gone. No, it won't end terrorism, nor immediately end any wars, but more than a guy with a bad beard died that night. A symbol of defiance died. The myth of the untouchable terrorist died. Mostly, the idea you could violently murder 3000 of our citizens in one shot and live to tell the tale died. All of those are things the world's better off without.
Regards ~ Rob
#22 by Ben on 05/11/2011 - 22:20
Great, they killed Bin Laden, but I don't see people dancing in the streets as a suitable celebration – in fact I don't think there should have been a celebration at all.
This just incites more hatred and anger towards the western world. We should have taken the upper moral high ground here and quietly let Bin Laden become forgotten.
#23 by Rattan on 05/22/2011 - 15:05
I am Indonesian and I love my religion, Islam. I am absolutely agree with the article above. I know that Islam does not teach terrorism like what Osama did. I know it very well as I know that Islam in Indonesia was brought and taught by Very Peaceful and Great Hollymen known as Wali Songo. They did not teach us to do like what Osama did. They taught us that Islam is very peaceful religion. And…, I confess it that in the deepest place of my heart…, I am hoping that there will be no more terrorism after the death of Osama, although I believe it that it is more like something impossible. His death only brings us more hatred… Many Indonesian moslems condemned what America did to Osama. I know You can read it why… But…, can we call it justice when Osama was murdered in the place where American Soldiers must not be there as they say that those soldiers have no right to even do a footstep on that ground? I wish that this would end in better way…, but we cannot change what happened. All I want to say is that…, why can't we use love in our live? I am being taught by my beloved religion that I have to give my love to all God's creatures, even if they bite me… Thanks..
#24 by Regular Guy on 07/31/2011 - 17:39
Obama sold us out.(AGAIN).Its no way any democrat will put this on the people who cannot afford this.These aren't just numbers these are people's lives.I was 1 of Obama's biggest supporters.We need a democrat to represent us not a republican plant.Mr. Bernie Sanders,Mrs. Clinton,Mr. Allen Gracey former congressman from Florida please run for president 2012?OBAMA YOU SOLD US OUT YOU SOLD US OUT YOU SOLD US OUT.