Showing posts with label Osama Bin Laden. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Osama Bin Laden. Show all posts

Wednesday, May 4, 2011

Osama bin Laden: Painfully shy, gentle and soft

New York Times columnist David Brooks (and his editors) thought the occasion of Osama bin Laden's death would be the perfect time for an image makeover for the world's most famous terrorist.   While most news outlets and pundits were (rightly) recalling the evil deeds of the mass murderer, Brooks recalled bin Laden's childhood in a column called "What Drives History": 
"Osama revered the father he rarely got to see and adored his mother. As a teenager, he “would lie at her feet and caress her,” a family friend told Steve Coll, for his definitive biography “The Bin Ladens: An Arabian Family in the American Century.”
Like many people who go on to alter history, for good and evil, Bin Laden lost his father when he was about 9. The family patriarch was killed in a plane crash caused by an American pilot in the Saudi province of Asir. (Five of the Sept. 11 hijackers would come from that province. His brother was later killed in a plane crash on American soil.)
Osama was an extremely shy child, Coll writes. He was an outsider in his new family but also the golden goose. His allowance and inheritance was the source of his family’s wealth."
Father killed by an American pilot. Brother killed on American soil.  Is Brooks trying to justify or excuse bin Laden's mass murder on 9/11? 


Brooks continues building the case that bin Laden had some admirable qualities:
"As a family man, Bin Laden was interested in sex, cars and work but was otherwise devout. He did not permit photography in his presence. He banned “Sesame Street,” Tabasco sauce and straws from his home. He covered his eyes if an unveiled woman entered the room. He liked to watch the news, but he had his children stand by the set and turn down the volume whenever music came on. 
As Coll emphasized in an interview on Monday, this sort of devoutness, while not everybody’s cup of tea, was utterly orthodox in his society. He was not a rebel as a young man."
 A family man and devout Muslim.  And, it turns out, he had something in common with President Obama:
"After the Soviets invaded Afghanistan, he organized jihadi tourism: helping young, idealistic Arab fighters who wanted to spend some time fighting the invaders. He was not a fighter himself, more of a courier and organizer, though after he survived one Soviet bombardment, he began to fashion a self-glorifying mythology."
In other words, bin Laden was a community organizer!  
 "We think of terrorism leaders as hard and intimidating. Bin Laden was gentle and soft, with a flaccid handshake. Yet his soldiers have told researchers such as Peter Bergen, the author of “The Longest War,” that meeting him was a deeply spiritual experience. They would tell stories of his ability to avoid giving offense and forgive transgressors.
We think of terrorists as trying to build cells and organizations, but Bin Laden created an anti-organization — an open-source set of networks with some top-down control but much decentralization and a willingness to embrace all recruits, regardless of race, sect or nationality."
He was gentle and soft and embraced diversity.  How can you not love this guy?  Meeting him was a "spiritual experience"?  If true, those spirits were demonic. 
"We think of war fighters as using violence to seize property and power, but Bin Laden seemed to regard murder as a subdivision of brand management. It was a way to inspire the fund-raising networks, dominate the news and manipulate meaning."
 Really, he wasn't evil.  The murder business was just a side job to raise cash and enhance the "brand."  It reminds me of a line from The Princess Bride.  Westley, disguised as the Dread Pirate Roberts explains why he must keep up his menacing image:
"I mean once word leaks out that a pirate has gone soft, people begin to disobey you and it's nothing but work, work, work all the time.'"

You know, once word leaks out a terrorist has gone soft, the "brand" is completely worthless.  Brooks has completely jumped the shark here.  And "manipulate meaning"?  What does that even mean?  Brooks concludes:
"In short, Osama Bin Laden seemed to live in an ethereal, postmodern world of symbols and signifiers and also a cruel murderous world of rage and humiliation. Even the most brilliant intelligence analyst could not anticipate such an odd premodern and postglobalized creature, or could imagine that such a creature would gain such power.
I just wish there were a democratic Bin Laden, that amid all the Arab hunger for dignity and freedom there was another inexplicable person with the ability to frame narratives and propel action — for good, not evil."
So there we have it.  If bin Laden could have just channeled all that evil and treachery into the right kind of community organizing,  this Saudi Messiah could have brought peace to the Arab world. He was just misguided, a victim of his difficult childhood and failures as a young man.  


David Brooks, allegedly the conservative voice on the New York Times staff,  sounds like a rank and file bleeding heart liberal.  Rather than placing the blame squarely on the shoulders of bin Laden and saying plainly that the man was evil, Brooks attempts to understand and find a reasonable explanation for such hate and vengeance.  In doing so, he fails to acknowledge that the vast majority of human beings on the earth who have difficult childhoods do not turn to lives of terror and mass murder.   All the psychobabble in the world cannot explain away this evil in the human heart. 


Human reason alone cannot give us answers for the bin Laden's of the world, but God tells us that it begins in the heart:
"The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked; Who can know it?" (Jeremiah 17:9).
Though we all have desperately wicked hearts, some act on that wickedness and commit heinous crimes against humanity.  There is no excuse. 

Monday, May 2, 2011

Usama Bin Laden is Dead

Usama Bin Laden is dead, and so ends a 10-year manhunt across Afghanistan and Pakistan.  He was discovered in Pakistan, in a mansion eight times the size of the other houses in the neighborhood.  Significantly nicer digs than the spider hole they pulled poor Saddam Hussein out of a few years back.  


As I'm watching the cheering crowds at the White House and Times Square in New York, I'm having a hard time getting into a celebratory mood.   I am glad they finally got him and I'm incredibly proud of our U.S. military for conducting what seems to be a flawless surgical strike on the compound.  But this event raises some difficult questions and should be cause for much concern.  


The big question is why Bin Laden was apparently given refuge in Pakistan, which is supposed to be our ally in this "War on Terror."  We are giving them a LOT of foreign aid to buy their friendship - $7.5 billion over 5 years - which technically, we're borrowing from countries like China. 


The other question in the air is whether there will be retaliation for the assassination of Bin Laden.  If the radical Islamists responded to a Koran burning in Florida by rioting and murdering innocent U.N. workers, what will they do about the death of a fellow Muslim at the hands of American soldiers?  Add to that the fact that his body is in m U.S. custody and photos of his corpse are already circulating on the internet.  U.S. officials are saying they will bury him by sundown tomorrow, in accordance with Islamic requirements.  Where will they bury him?  We're being told a burial at sea is being considered.  Add Muslim burial ceremonies to the every-growing list of functions of the Federal government. 


UPDATE:  CNN is reporting that U.S. officials say Bin Laden has been buried at sea.    Who had the unfortunate job of washing Bin Laden's body in accordance with Islamic law?  That's a disturbing visual image, isn't it? Let the conspiracy theories begin.


We need to pray fervently for our men and women in uniform and for missionaries in Islamic countries.  This will be a very dangerous time for them.


The other elephant in the room that no one seems to be discussing is the curious timing of the shuffling at the Department of Defense and the CIA.  You may recall that last Thursday, in the midst of this operation, the President appointed CIA Director Leon Panetta to be the new Defense Secretary and appointed General Petraeus to head the CIA.  In the middle of what will possibly be the most important military operation of the year.   There will be many months of fall-out from this event and the Obama administration decided it was a good time to mix it up.  Why?  




Now, I'd like to share a summary of some of the articles and blog posts about Bin Laden's demise:


"May 1st, the day that Usama Bin Laden's life came to an end and the day that he found out that the story about the 72 virgins waiting for him on the other side was bunk" (John Scott, Fox News).

Oh yes he did say that!  


Osama Gets His Virgins - HUMAN EVENTS:
"But in reality, while the death of bin Laden is fine news, and is certainly a psychological blow to the jihadis and a confidence-booster for Americans, it really won't change anything. 
The role of al-Qaeda in the global jihad, and the role of Osama bin Laden in al-Qaeda, have both been wildly overstated. Al-Qaeda is not the only Islamic jihad group or Islamic supremacist group operating today, and Osama bin Laden was not some charismatic leader whose movement will collapse without him. The exaggeration of his role, in fact, was a result of the general unwillingness to face the reality that the global jihad is a movement driven by an ideology, not an outsized personality, and that that ideology is rooted in Islam. "
~~~~~ 

Although this is a time of exuberance, rejoicing and healing, America, as well as our allies, must be vigilant and on guard for retaliatory attacks from the extreme Islamic world.  What strongly concerns me is that bin Laden was not found hiding in a remote cave, but in an urban area of Pakistan where the Pakistan Army’s premier training institution operates. This is a war that is no where close to being over" (Rep. Allen West R-FL)..


At the Mets - Phillies game, the crowd erupted into chants of U-S-A after news started to circulate around the stadium:



~~~~~



Michelle Malkin says the following:

"Meanwhile, Democrat hacks are burning the midnight oil making this All About Obama.
It begins: “New DNC chief: Obama deserves credit for bin Laden killing.”
A Huffington Post reporter gloats: “Chants of ‘four more years!’ in front of WH.”
College kids in front of the White House are chanting “Yes We Can!” according to a beaming CNN reporter.
Spotted at the White House gathering: “Latinos for Obama” sign.
So much for that we-are-one unity President Obama invoked earlier tonight, eh?"

~~~~~

 "U.S. warns of anti-American violence after bin Laden death Why? Aren't moderate Muslims thronging the streets, dancing in celebration and handing out candy? Didn't bin Laden represent a Tiny Minority of Extremists™ despised by the Vast Majority of Peaceful Muslims?"

The U.S. government is also adding Muslim burials to it's every-growing list of activities.  Apparently, Bin Laden will be buried by sundown tomorrow, in accordance with Islamic laws.  Robert Spencer from Jihad Watch asks why:
 "After all, didn't Barack Obama say this tonight? 
'We must also reaffirm that the United States is not and never will be at war with Islam. Bin Laden was not a Muslim leader. He was a mass murderer of Muslims.'
 So why is the body of a mass murderer of Muslims being handled in accordance with Islamic tradition? Aren't U.S. officials thereby tacitly acknowledging that bin Laden was a Muslim leader, notwithstanding Barack Obama's protestations to the contrary? 
And if Osama was indeed a Muslim leader, what are the implications of that for U.S. policy?
There's a question no one in official Washington will dare to answer." 


~~~
~~

Finally, Denny Burke offers us a theological perspective on the death of Usama bin Laden:
1. Romans 13:4, “It does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath on the one who practices evil.” If ever there were a just use of force, this was it. The U.S. government carried out its God-ordained task and has acted as the minister of God bringing His wrath upon one who practiced evil. The U.S. government isn’t God’s only minister of the sword. But tonight was our night, and I am grateful that justice was served.
 2. Hebrews 10:31, “It is a terrifying thing to fall into the hands of the living God.” Isaiah 33:14, “Who among us can live with the consuming fire? Who among us can live with continual burning?” I shudder to think of what Bin Laden is facing right now. I do not question the justice of it, but I can hardly bear to contemplate the horror of it. If my thinking is defective now, it won’t always be. The day will come when God will command me to rejoice in His justice in the damanation of the wicked (Revelation 18:20). Until then, the horror should serve as a motivation to warn people to flee the wrath to come (1 Thessalonians 1:10; 2 Corinthians 5:18-21).
3. I think Christians are right to contemplate how jubilation (like we see on TV right now) is consistent with Ezekiel 33:11, “I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that the wicked turn from his way and live.” So I can understand why Christians may be asking, “If God is not delighting in the death of the wicked, then how can we?” I think there is confusion on this point because this verse is easily misunderstood. The second part of the verse is key to understanding its meaning. The text is not trying to say that God never delights in the death of the wicked. Rather, the verse means that God prefers for sinners to repent rather than to perish. If they refuse to repent, God delights in His own justice enough to punish them appropriately (Jeremiah 18:11). We have to be willing to praise God for His justice one way or the other (Revelation 19:1-3).