Friday, May 6, 2011

Bin Laden Unarmed? Does It Matter?

By Mickey Homsey

When the news broke on Sunday evening that Osama Bin Laden had been eliminated by American Navy SEALs, Americans rightfully breathed a collective sigh of relief. Regardless of political affiliation, regardless of location, we all enjoyed that moment.

But true to form, the media just couldn’t leave well enough alone and now, cable news networks are concerned that perhaps Osama Bin Laden wasn’t armed at the time of his defeat.

I would argue that it doesn’t matter one bit.

Osama Bin Laden was a terrorist and arguably one of the worst this world has ever known. He has thousands of deaths attributed to him and were he to have been left alive, thousands more would have died.

Media outlets are concerned about the “rule of law.” Well, I would submit to you that Osama Bin Laden was a law unto himself, a man who felt that the only “law” he believed in was that which he created for himself and tried to force on the rest of the world.

TIME Magazine has a blog entitled “If bin Laden Was Unarmed, Why Was He Shot?” Perhaps the author has forgotten the great many lives of Americans, Europeans, Afghanis and Pakistanis who were slaughtered at the command of Osama Bin Laden.

Perhaps the author has forgotten that al-Qaeda is the most dangerous terrorist organization in the world and Osama Bin Laden was their leader.

In any event, Americans who still have the images fresh in their minds of the terrorist attacks brought about by the now dead terrorist join me in saying that armed or unarmed, the world is a safer place without Bin Laden in it.

Mickey Homsey is an Oklahoma City attorney and blogger.

Share |