I suppose it’s old news, but since it’s big news, I thought I’d add my 2 cents. I’m talking about the fact that Osama bin Laden is dead. My take? Cool!
That’s the first time I’ve ever said “cool” in response to someone’s death. But I’m not uncomfortable saying it. His demise can only make our planet a better, safer place. Ergo, the “cool!”
I found it interesting how the media (I suppose I can be counted as one) has chimed in and given various suggestions on how we should react to the news. Viewpoints ranged from taking victory laps and chest-thumping to those which expressed just the opposite — a low-key, somber, business-as-usual approach.
The reasons for the opinions? All so that we don’t give the terrorists the impression that they “won.” That’s right. Apparently, some scribes and talking-heads are concerned how these self-righteous beardos might interpret our body language. I say: Really? If that ain’t a crap-load of poppycock, then I don’t know what is.
What are these people thinking? First of all, if you feel compelled to play the winner-loser game and put on a scripted facade — as opposed to reacting naturally — aren’t you going about the business of caving in and conceding your own instincts? And doesn’t concession impugn true victory?
Secondly, since we know that the terrorists’ sense of reasoning is askew (a subjective view — but different from ours, nonetheless), how can one possibly understand or know what their take is? No need to take the Dr. Phil route and assume we know everything.
Finally, and most importantly, who gives a rat’s behind as to what they think? Can they threaten us any more than they already have? The world is aware that “death to all Americans” is their manifesto. Once you’ve emptied that tube of toxic-laden objectives, you really can’t squeeze any more threats from it. The point is already maxed out. It’s like being sentenced to three consecutive life-terms in prison. Adding exclamation points and yelling it louder cannot intensify the original message. It is what it is (exclamation point here!).
I also have to respectfully disagree with syndicated columnist Froma Harrop (well ... that’s her name) whose column suggested that getting bin Laden wasn’t that big of a deal because he’d become “insignificant.”
She writes that “bin Laden did not seem to matter much.” (However, in an effort to not take her column out of context, she also states that “the big story was that they got him, not that he was stopped.”)
But there are threads of insinuations in her article that ask, “What’s the fuss?” I can answer that: Justice.
If the word vengeance makes you uncomfortable and sounds debasing, then simply call it what you want. The fact is — in my opinion — he got what he deserved. And that’s justice. I think Froma Harrop misses the point.
Justice is why accused and recently convicted former Ohio auto-worker John Demjanuk was deported to Germany. As a guard at a Nazi death camp, it mattered little that it happened almost 70 years ago. Atrocities don’t fade with time. We can never allow that.
So excuse me for saying so, but getting Bin Laden was very significant. And to think otherwise is poppycock.