Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Noam Chomsky: My Reaction to Osama bin Laden’s Death
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.
It’s increasingly clear that the operation was a planned assassination, multiply violating elementary norms of international law. 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. I stress “suspects.” 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.
There is also much media discussion of Washington’s anger that Pakistan didn’t turn over bin Laden, though surely elements of the military and security forces were aware of his presence in Abbottabad. Less is said about Pakistani anger that the U.S. invaded their territory to carry out a political assassination. Anti-American fervor is already very high in Pakistan, and these events are likely to exacerbate it. The decision to dump the body at sea is already, predictably, provoking both anger and skepticism in much of the Muslim world.
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. Uncontroversially, his crimes vastly exceed bin Laden’s, and he is not a “suspect” but uncontroversially the “decider” who gave the orders to commit the “supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole” (quoting the Nuremberg Tribunal) for which Nazi criminals were hanged: the hundreds of thousands of deaths, millions of refugees, destruction of much of the country, the bitter sectarian conflict that has now spread to the rest of the region.
There’s more to say about [Cuban airline bomber Orlando] Bosch, who just died peacefully in Florida, including reference to the “Bush doctrine” that societies that harbor terrorists are as guilty as the terrorists themselves and should be treated accordingly. No one seemed to notice that Bush was calling for invasion and destruction of the U.S. and murder of its criminal president.
Same with the name, Operation Geronimo. 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. It’s like naming our murder weapons after victims of our crimes: Apache, Tomahawk… It’s as if the Luftwaffe were to call its fighter planes “Jew” and “Gypsy.”
There is much more to say, but even the most obvious and elementary facts should provide us with a good deal to think about.
301 Comments so far
Show AllI would have been just as outraged if this farce had played out against junior.
due process is for all or for none.
We make our heroes out of clay. We laud their gallant deeds and give them uniforms with colored ribbons on their chests for the acts of violence they committed or endured. They are our false repositories of glory and honor, of power, of self-righteousness, of patriotism and self-worship, all that we want to believe about ourselves. They are our plaster saints of war, the icons we cheer to defend us and make us and our nation great. They are the props of our civic religion, our love of power and force, our belief in our right as a chosen nation to wield this force against the weak, and rule. This is our nation's idolatry of itself. And this idolatry has corrupted religious institutions, not only here but in most nations, making it impossible for us to separate the will of God from the will of the state.
Chris Hedges
As I read your post I was thinking 'Wow- this poster is good' -- and then I read that it was written by Chris Hedges. Well, you are good too for recognizing how good what Hedges wrote is. But the last line reminds me of another good writer, who should be read: Erich Fromm, who wrote ~The Sane Society~ decades ago. He too talked about idolatry in that book.
He said that it was, at root, man 'worshipping' that which he produced instead of his own spiritual nature and inner self -- the bane of capitalist production in which one becomes disconnected from the work he does -- a major part of his life, where capitalism has destroyed democracy (see Richard Wolff).
Bin Laden too had become an idol -- dehumanized, and so easy to ignore in what his human motivations (and foibles) were -- and so more easily destroyed (like a worker is fired as simply a cog and expense in the industrial machine), with considerations of justice and morality no more relevant than pulling down a statue for purposes of public relations and politics.
Writing this column without mentioning the double-edged sword of ideology is why I no long revere the good Doctor Chomsky.
To pretend Bin Laden was not guilty is to hold humans to a standard they cannot (and perhaps should not) reach.
I'd be gratified if Dr Chomsky would get up to date on cognitive science, but paradigms change when the old order dies out.
To demand that the accused be considered innocent until proven guilty in a court of law is a standard that has existed for the last 800 years. I don't think we want to go back to the Roman version of law, where you were guilty until you could prove you were innocent.
Ten points.
You raise the excellent intellectual point, in the sense that if the ends of law or justice are to be achieved, a process must be adhered to. The question is, would the process have produced a different result? Of course, we cannot know, Would the voices and evidence to support an effective defense of Osam Bin Laden been sufficient to prevent his death? We know they were not sufficient to stop the death and crucifixion of Jesus who was accused of cimes against a state exercising imperial power.
There is a deeper question in this event that goes to Man's ability to wield absolute power in the manner that we normally reserve for God. Perhaps, we should not wonder so much on the "Mystery" of God as we should the "Mystery of God in Man".
We have been admonished that "power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely". The execution of Bin Laden, Pirates and possibly Mr. Khadafy if he fails to understand the messages he is being sent, effectively establishes a new pattern where absolute power is actualized. Each succeeding act becomes easier.
These are troublesome times, What is the determining force in the Universe? Is that Force an external God or is the Force internal to man as God? If the latter, Mr. Obama's actions can be understood. The question of the corrupting influence of absolute power is left now to time.
"Øbama, to be accuser, judge, jury, and executioner, without due process."
I seem to remember the Congress ruled that there would be NO terrorist trials in the US courts.
..."the administration’s decision to bring five Sept. 11 detainees onto United States soil for prosecution in the civilian legal system drew immediate fire from members of Congress as well as relatives of victims and neighbors of the federal courthouse."....
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/14/us/14terror.html and
"In announcing the decision, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. said he will return the case to the Defense Department “reluctantly” and blamed the move on Congress, which has erected a series of barriers to bringing detainees to the United States, even for prosecution."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/khalid-sheik-mohammed-to-be-tried-by-
military-commission-officials-say/2011/04/04/AFhlS8cC_story.html
Obama did not then and still does not now have the votes to affect changes through Congress. He must compromise. It it an ugly process but it is our democratic republic. Our Constitiution.
Democrats are exactly the same as Republicans? Sure they are so the same on so many things corporate and capitalist levels, but it is the culture of the US after all. We've allow corporation to be people/citizens. It is still our creation, our system of Gov't. I see a difference however slight. Dems were working on helath care change, (lousy end result in my eyes because it was not single payer but the Dems didn't have the votes.) What party is trying to restrict access to abortions? What party is restricting collective barganing for Union members? Who is discouraging same sex marriage?
Obama is scared S-less that he won't win the presidential election. Or loose the Congress totally. If you don't win you don't lead. BUT YOU NEED THE CONGRESS TO IMPLEMENT YOUR AGENDA. I, too, see regression but it is due to the resistance of the Republican Party to all of Obama's initiatives and the resultant compromise that was made. That is regressive to me. he needs the House back with a 2/3 majority and the same with the Senate. Then I will believe.......
"Øbama, to be accuser, judge, jury, and executioner, without due process."
Politics by assassination is always bad.
What do you mean pretend? Most people will be pleased, as Chomsky is not a skeptic about 9/11 perpetrators, but here is being fair. OBL was never indicted, just assumed by W et al, plus Obama, to be guilty. of course he claimed credit after a time-as he said, it is easy to terrorise the mercans.
Otvos...you missed the whole point. You are a moron.
Dear Ormond
Noam Chomsky does not hold Ben Lodin guilty of the 9/11 disaster, possibly because Ben Lodin has never been placed on FBI's most wanted list. In addition he points to the double standard in the US policy where it commits act of murder, such as killing (directly and indirectly) one million Iraqis and calling it a heroic act.
USA society is instilled with the propaganda of mindlessness. It is a society of narcissistic, consumerist, gluttons which are its idols. These idols serve up self glorification, narcissism, with sociopathic, psychopathic, happy talk psychobabble optimism. Mindlessness is recited by the MSM and has been institutionalized by the government, business and pretend christians[Biblical Harlots} with false doctrines[the rapture], babel. This institutionalization gives mindlessness legitimacy which allows the pretend christians appeal of "Im not responsible god told me to do it and/or Satan made me do it but I'm not responsible", ala G.W. Bush et al. to be used by the above institutions.
Impossible to separate the will of God from the will of the State? Hardly.
Jesus Christ, who most of us believe to be the ultimate interpreter of God's will, had something to say about rendering unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's and to God the things that are God's. There was a definite separation of God and State in that statement. He wasn't here to bring States to God, he was here to bring us all, individually, to God.
And He had some things to say about that as well - about turning the other cheek, about loving ones' enemies, about forgiveness. He said that 'greater love hath no man than to lay down his life for his friends', and then he did it - not in the exercise of military operations against a foe, but as the most vulnerable victim of state injustice.
When it comes to 'heroes', those Navy Seals were more likely to have been driving the nails, than hanging with their Lord on the Cross.
America needs to wake up, it's as far gone in tyranny, injustice and the love of power as Rome ever was. There is no way in Hell it's doing the will of God.
Thank you Noam.
"No one seemed to notice that Bush was calling for invasion and destruction of the U.S. and murder of its criminal president."
Must be a typo here--Bosch not Bush it would seem..
what the professor is implying is that by condemning nations which harbour terrorists the finger was also pointing at the U. S. of A.
Not a typo. Bush's doctrine was that nations that harbor terrorists (e.g. the U.S. harboring Bosch) open thesmselves up to invasion and destruction. So, following Bush's logic, the U.S. is one of those nations. Chomsky of course is being derisive of the stupidity and hypocrisy and criminality of Bush's doctrine.
Yes, Noam's "was" was supposed to be "wasn't."
No! He's saying that Bush's Doctrine WAS calling for an invasion of the United States if the logic of the doctrine is carried through to include everyone that harbors terrorists. It is not a typo! He's being clever, that's what Chomsky does.
at the time I said that invading Afghanistan for "harbouring" the Taliban made as much sense as invading Alabama for its tolerance of the KKK.
The vast majority of radio progressives were too eager to pound the chest with Obama rather than uphold principles of international law -- not to mention the elementary principles of evidence -- jettisoning any sort of credibility in order to help start rally the troops behind our current imperialist figurehead for 2012.
As ever, Chomsky writes with the calmness of a prosecutor sure of his facts & his case, providing a model few of us have ever been able to do justice to in our own work . . .
Radio progressives? there are such people?
mikemalloy.com - he was absolutely not chest-thumping about this.
"..radio progressives.."
Like I said before, these types a good game, but when its time to call a spade a space, they crawl back under their rocks. They know they'll have their plugs pulled in the blink of an eye.
Hypocrites.
Chomsky is not sure of his facts and his case. Our troops did not kill Osama and dump his body in the sea. Osama died ten years ago of kidney failure and had a funeral and burial that was listed in the Pakistani newspapers. We, here in the United States, only get the 'news' that our corrupt government and corporate media want us to know---------well, really they tell us what to believe. And in this case, as many others, we are fed lies and eat it up with gusto. The most damaging lie we believe with all our hearts and minds is that one of our political parties is more evil than the other one. Some of us think the Dems are the evil ones and some of us think the Repubs are the most evil. Joke is on us. They are equally evil as both are bought and paid for by the corporate elite. For a working person to vote for either of these corrupt political parties is flat out STUPID.
"Osama died ten years ago of kidney failure ..."
---------------------------------------------
Proof?
Well, the current Bin Laden shadow-play is hardly proof of the contrary.
If you've got time, listen to this interview with a high-level US govt insider, Dr Steve Piczienik. He confirms the Pakistani news story about Bin Laden's death in December 2001, says he read it in internal CIA memoes. And that's not the least of his claims.
http://www.infowars.com/top-us-government-insider-bin-laden-died-in-2001-911-a-false-flag/
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110503/ap_on_re_us/us_bin_laden_pakistan_congress_11
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110503/ap_on_re_us/us_bin_laden_pakistan_congress_11
you're right about the Dem/Rep stuff ... but are "Pakistani newspapers" the fountain of truth now? so a newspaper in Pakistan said bin Laden was dead. I mean even if that's true (that the paper said that) how is that any more credible than anything reported here or anywhere? Pretty sure Pakistan has its own issues with corruption and government lies and media manipulation.
People on dialysis can't live more than a week without it. Bin Laden could not have survived unless there was a dialysis machine in that cave.
I would believe Pakistani papers over our corporate media. Our media is lockstep propaganda.
Funny, his doctor said he was fine, just an infection.
Strong claims require strong proof. What you got?
None of the US govt's "strong claims" about any aspect of this affair, including the attribution of 9/11 to Bin Laden, have a single iota of proof to back them up. Just listen to the interview I posted above.
Yes, that's absolutely right (even though you intended it ironically): there is overwhelming proof that 9/11 was an inside job. Which far outweighs the mere assertions, and the cherry-picked "evidence," used to buttress the official story.
And the expression "Sheesh!" went out of style about forty years ago.
Clovis
Bingo! You nailed it. The theory that 9/11/01 may have been an inside job was certainly given a lot more credence when the Navy SEALS shot an unarmed man and then hastily dumped his body, like something from a Mafia movie, in the sea in order to apparently deter anyone from identifying who he was.
In theory the government's official fairy tale should have been dealt a crushing blow by their explanation of how the supposed bin Laden had died. If, that is, the corporate media was doing its job by carefully examining what the Obama administration and the military have been saying concerning this murder of this individual in Pakistan. But alas, they seem all too willing to believe almost without question what they have been told by those who are in power.
'The vast majority of radio progressives were too eager to pound the chest with Obama rather than uphold principles of international law...'
Yes, particularly upsetting are the widely aired and influential ones, like Thom Hartmann.
Earlier this week, Hartmann responded to a caller who questioned why Obama didn't capture bin Laden alive and put him on trial by saying that the trial would only be a circus. I didn't think he could sink lower than that ridiculous bit of double-speak, but then yesterday--the last day I will listen to the man--he actually went one step further and said that the idea of in bin Laden going on trial is being spread by REPUBLICANS and is a PROPAGANDA tool!
The man excels at creating talking points for the administration.
While I used to think that Hartmann's need to defend Obama's neoliberal policies (the very policies he rails against beautifully coming from the republican side) was pathological--that he had some kind of cognitive dissonance going on, or perhaps was suffering from a form of PTSD--his defense of obama's lawlessness shows him to be simply a garden-variety type fraud.
If you're disappointed by Thom Hartmann, you still haven't figured it out.
I figured out lots of stuff a long time ago but often have a difficult time accepting what I know is true--perhaps this is my cognitive dissonance.
Assuming that any part whatsoever of the Official Narrative is actually true just leads one down the rabbit hole.
"Assuming that any part whatsoever of the Official Narrative is actually true just leads one down the rabbit hole."
--------------------------------------------
*Assuming* that *every* part of it is false leads to the same place.
MSNBC just reported that the Pentagon has said that evidence seized in the raid prove that bin Laden was still very much involved in the tactical, strategic, operational and spiritual leadership of al Qaeda.
That he was able to do this with no access to communications beyond those carried by infrequent human couriers suggests the truly microscopic dimensions of al Qaeda as a terrorist organization.
MSNBC did not draw this obvious conclusion.
I am sure that the Pentagon would never lie.
They are from the government. We can trust them.
Tell me again Mr. Pentagon, how did Pat Tilman die?
And tell us again, Mr. Pentagon, about the heroic capture of Jessica Lynch.
Indeed, and the medals award to Pat Tillman for heroism. Disgusting.
Yeah, but neither was it Tillman's fault that his "buddies" shot him in the head for reading Chomsky.
Excellent point. I suppose they can still fool a sufficient number of sheep, but the Powers that Be have grown so arrogant that they behave like MASH's CIA Colonel Flagg, (without the laugh-track), issuing self-evident nonsense. The Obama slide, the upcoming ten-year anniversary of 911, the fact that bin Laden hasn't been on video for years, conflicting accounts of participants, the dumping at sea, etc., makes the whole of "Operation Geronimo" reek of rotten fish. Frankly, for pure political theater, this is surprisingly amateurish for a political slick like Obama. Madison Avenue's bogus dream team is slipping.
Once again, further investigation revealed a buried fiber-optic line to the hideout,
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/may/3/how-bin-laden-led-operations/
and of course there was a satellite dish.
You have no idea how frequent the couriers were. People from the compound attended Mosque weekly.
You do know you can SEND with a satellite dish... read /.
What flavor of Kool-Aid is that, anyway?
Since I live way out in the boonies and have DirecTV and Hughesnet and two dishes stuck to the side of my house, yeah, I knew that.
A news google search of... bin laden dedicated fiber optic... gets two hits, one the Washington Times article and the other is a CBS article that mentions the Washington Times article.
Frankly I would not beleive the Washington Times if they said $hi# Stinks.
"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."
I know how I'd be reacting. I'd be cheering and ordering a case of champagne for a party that would be replicated thousands of times around the world.