Osama bin Laden: One Gangster Down, Many Waiting in the Wings
As a boy, when I was growing up in Tehran in the early 1960s, I was proud to watch each American TV series twice a week, once in English on the American Armed Forces Television, and then again, dubbed into Farsi on the Iranian station. Among my favorites were Combat!, The Fugitive and Bonanza, but my absolute favorite was The Untouchables.
The American gangster series, in gorgeous black-and-white, was based upon putatively real events of the Prohibition era and the exploits of Elliot Ness as a gangbuster. Yet Ness, played by Robert Stack, was of little interest to me. I was fascinated by the bootleggers, whose aging bosses exited black shiny cars like heads of states and issued to their young lieutenants orders to kill.
On Saturday, the killing of Muammar Gaddafi's youngest son and his grandchildren reminded me of those films and how the world has come to resemble the Roaring Twenties—minus the prosperity—with oil instead of liquor as the desired liquid. Sunday night, before going to bed, came the news of the hit on Osama bin Laden.
Even as I write this piece a few minutes after the announcement, the neocon reprobate Richard Perle is gloating on the BCC, to be followed by another lackey who speaks with great admiration of "America's reach."
The Untouchables' fight against bootleggers did not stop gangsterism. Quite to the contrary, its self-congratulatory, largely symbolic and ineffectual efforts have endowed us with a legacy of gangstas who now infest every slum in the world. Indeed, Ness and his boys constituted a gang of their own, just as every police organization justifies its existence in rivalry with criminals.
The gangsters of the 1920s and their minions were not so mournful to celebrate martyrs. Yet the desperate millions who idolized bin Laden as their savior thrive on martyrdom and revenge.
The bin Laden hit was quintesstial gangsterism, a sleazy offering by the suspect Pakistani intelligence, a lifesaver thrown to President Obama at a low ebb when he is being challenged by the likes of Donald Trump, a source of pride to a financially spent and morally rudderless America.
Osama bin Laden was wealthy, spoke a remarkably literate Arabic, and was "civilized" by many measures. His vengeful successors are not going to live up to these standards by any means. His second in command, the lunatic Ayman al-Zawahiri, is alive and well. Should he be dispatched in a "surgical operation," there will be more lunatics to replace him than there are baby gangstas awaiting to join the ranks of the Bloods or the Crips.
This hollow victory will not address the dire straits of millions of Muslims in Southwest Asia and North Africa for whom an American fabricated "Muslim Spring" is a mere palliative instead of a solution. It will not make us any wiser about our public servants who in fact serve their wealthy masters and consider us as no more than a nuisance. It will not begin to address the problems of a world as it plunges deeper into poverty and chaos, no longer looking to state leadership to save it.
Upon hearing the news of the assassination, crowds gathered outside the White House to wave American flags and to shout "U.S.A! U.S.A.!" Then came voices that spoke of "closure" for the 9/11 families, as if the death of a single misguided soul can make up for the thousands of lives and families shattered.
When I watched American TV in Tehran, I laughed and considered it a great sport, little realizing that in time American influence in Iran would alienate the majority of Iranians, send me into exile and lead to wars that would engulf the entirety of Southwest Asia.
I am watching American TV still, with President Obama posing as Elliot Ness and an Arab dying in a hail of bullets instead of Irish or Italian bootleggers. This reality TV show, accentuated by a late-night presidential address, only augurs a more contentious world whose fractious and fearful components target each other to the delight of vested business and political interests who thrive on all the blind, masochistic zeal.
Celebrating death, even that of our worst enemies, will not make us any wiser or more secure. This macabre jubilation only moves us away from realizing that the imperial ambitions of our political and corporate leaders have consequences that make each of us a target, while leaving them untouchable.
- Share and Email |
- Print |
Anonymous
Posted May 1 2011
Good announcement
Anonymous
Posted May 1 2011
This was a confusing and misdirected analogy with "the untouchables." The death of bin Laden is a celebratory event, in that his demise highlights the reasons why we are at war and what it will take to end the war that have cost many hundreds of thousands of lives on both sides. This is war, not a birthday party. Hitler's death marked the end of a terrible war. We can celebrate that maybe bin Laden's death will signify the beginning of the end of this current war.
Anonymous
Posted May 2 2011
This was a confusing and misdirected analogy with "the untouchables." The death of bin Laden is a celebratory event, in that his demise highlights the reasons why we are at war and what it will take to end the war that have cost many hundreds of thousands of lives on both sides. This is war, not a birthday party. Hitler's death marked the end of a terrible war. We can celebrate that maybe bin Laden's death will signify the beginning of the end of this current war.
Anonymous
Posted May 2 2011
To the previous (double) poster. Though I agree that the analogy was somewhat weak, Mr. Saba raises a very serious and legitimate concern on two fronts: firstly, if Al Qaeda is as widespread and connected as we (speaking as an American) have been led to believe, then it's ridiculous to think that the death of Bin Laden will lead to anything other than a swift and brutal reprisal. Secondly, I find it very hard to believe that the American government would dream of passing up such a great diversion, when it could be used to a) raise a president's flagging popularity rating, or, b) cover up something more sinister.
On a side note: It's been said that when a person brings up Hitler in a debate, they automatically lose. Setting that aside...the nazi party didn't operate as independent cells. 'Nuff said.
Samuel Brooks
brookssr@charter.net
Anonymous
Posted May 2 2011
To the previous (double) poster. Though I agree that the analogy was somewhat weak, Mr. Saba raises a very serious and legitimate concern on two fronts: firstly, if Al Qaeda is as widespread and connected as we (speaking as an American) have been led to believe, then it's ridiculous to think that the death of Bin Laden will lead to anything other than a swift and brutal reprisal. Secondly, I find it very hard to believe that the American government would dream of passing up such a great diversion, when it could be used to a) raise a president's flagging popularity rating, or, b) cover up something more sinister.
On a side note: It's been said that when a person brings up Hitler in a debate, they automatically lose. Setting that aside...the nazi party didn't operate as independent cells. 'Nuff said.
Samuel Brooks
Anonymous
Posted May 2 2011
I disagree with the article...while I understand the "hit man" analogy, bin Laden made himself the icon of a movement/philosophy which only operates clandestinely and with cowardice.
There is no "clean" way to deal with terrorists. Hopefully the world will understand the necessity for dealing with the problems which create the desperation which makes terrorism a reality. In the meantime, there will be others waiting to take his place, but this icon is removed, and thousands of people feel closure. ,
What fills the void, hopefully policy change is more important than Osama bin Laden.
Anonymous
Posted May 2 2011
This is replete with rancid and hateful misconceptions. Why was not taking out bin Laden an obligation of honor"? Unlike the stupidity of the prior president who thought he had a "mission accomplished" nobody thinks killing bL is the end of the story. If bL's victims had to cry for 10 years, and the rest of the world undergo costly protective measures against suicidal madmen, it doesn't seem so wrong to let the victims and the rest of us feel that a megalomaniac killer.
Anonymous
Posted May 2 2011
We need voices like the brave writer of this column who dares to think beyond what the powers that be and the media want us to think. The writer is right on in his analogy that says that this "justice" is much like that of gangster wars and such. It's a very graphic and disturbing vision but horrifyingly true what the writer said, " there will be more lunatics to replace him than there are baby gangstas awaiting to join the ranks of the Bloods or the Crips. " Our security lies in improving the lives of people everywhere including here in America
Anonymous
Posted May 2 2011
I have to say this piece is an entertaining breath of fresh air. I wish my children did not have to "get excited" about a political assassination and feel compelled to celebrate bloodshed. What do we tell them when more terrorism strikes? Cops and Robbers is a game that children understand -- their simplistic way of making sense of the world. However, adults taking to the airwaves to congratulate themselves about a successful kill further perpetuates a foolish, losing approach to international politics in pursuit of world peace.
Maybe, its not peace that we seek at all -- just WINNING our endless game of Cops and Robbers.
Anonymous
Posted May 2 2011
I have to say this piece is an entertaining breath of fresh air. I wish my children did not have to "get excited" about a political assassination and feel compelled to celebrate bloodshed. What do we tell them when more terrorism strikes? Cops and Robbers is a game that children understand -- their simplistic way of making sense of the world. However, adults taking to the airwaves to congratulate themselves about a successful kill further perpetuates a foolish, losing approach to international politics in pursuit of world peace.
Maybe, its not peace that we seek at all -- just WINNING our endless game of Cops and Robbers.
Anonymous
Posted Mar 3
OSAMA BIN LADEN IS DON HE FOUGHT FOR ISLAMM AND I THINK HES A G I DONT=TTHINK HES DED THOUGH CAS THERES NO EVIDENCE HES DEAD
Anonymous
Posted Mar 3
bin laden is don i dont think hes dead though becas there is no clear evidence that he is - he fought for islam and stiill is
Anonymous
Posted Mar 3
bin laden is don i dont think hes dead though becas there is no clear evidence that he is - he fought for islam and stiill is
Disclaimer: Comments do not necessarily reflect the views of New America Media. NAM reserves the right to edit or delete comments. Once published, comments are visible to search engines and will remain in their archives. If you do not want your identity connected to comments on this site, please refrain from commenting or use a handle or alias instead of your real name.
Related Articles
Obama and Same-Sex Marriage: Thank His Kids
A couple of years ago I watched two friends, both Indian, get married in a…
Hate Groups Rise Against Blacks, Obama
There are 65 known white supremacist groups in the state of Georgia – racist organizations…
The Big Chill - the Coolness of Loverboy Barack Obama
Barack Obama, I thought you were different.It turns out that at 22, you were just…
A View From Inside the Tea Party’s Voter Suppression Confab
Just two weeks ago a Rasmussen poll showed 64 percent of Americans believe voter fraud…
Want To Report Airport Racial Profiling? There’s an App for That
Since Sept. 11, Sikhs have been subjected to ethnic and religious profiling at the airport…
As SB 1070 Heads to Court, a Father’s Case Reveals the Larger Problem
A New York father faces deportation to Argentina, likely because he went into diabetic shock…
Comments