Monday, May 02, 2011

Britain's reaction to bin Laden's assassination: surely some mistake?

William Hague and David Cameron have lavishly praised the Americans for assassinating bin Laden. Yet  when the Israelis were suspected (but never proved) to have assassinated Hamas front-man Mahmoud al-Mabhouh in Dubai, Hague and Cameron were so apoplectic with rage that they expelled an Israeli diplomat from London in protest.

This was despite the fact that Mahmoud al-Mabhouh was the person responsible for shipping Iranian weapons to Hamas in Gaza. His work posed a direct threat to Israel's survival. In contrast, bin Laden no longer represented any kind of analogous threat to the USA.

And here are some other differences worth thinking about:
  • in the bin Laden assassination several civilians were also killed
  • in the al-Mabhouh assassination no other person was harmed
  • the bin Laden assassination took place in a country that is supposed to be America's 'ally'
  • the al-Mabhouh assassination took place in a country that is a sworn enemy of Israel.
  • al-Mabhouh was personally responsible for the slaughter of several Israeli hostages.
  • as despicable as bin Laden was he had never personally murdered any Americans. 
 And while on the subject of British hypocrisy has anybody noticed the deafening silence when NATO airstrikes kill children in Libya? Funny how the argument about 'despots using civilians as human shields' is used as a valid defence in this case but is never allowed to be a valid defence by Israel.

Finally, while the news on bin Laden is obviously welcome, it has two extremely worrying long-term implications.

  1. It will enable Obama to claim a personal military victory that could propel him to a second term in the White House (notice his consant use of the first person in his speech today). Such a term will go a long way to achieving bin Laden's objectives anyway.
  2. The media blackout of all other stories will enable Assad in Syria to crush the rebellion there with even greater brutality and speed, thereby possibly ensuring the survival of the Syria/Iran axis which poses the greatest threat to the world.
Update: Guess who has condemned the bin Laden assassination decrying "the killing of an Arab holy warrior"? Cameron and Hague's new best friend Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh. What's the betting you won't hear about that in the British media?

7 comments:

Juniper in the Desert said...

Superb assessment. Thank you for putting it so succinctly!

KRASHKOWALSKI said...

as despicable as bin Laden was he had never personally murdered any Americans."

- BETWEEN THE ATTACK ON THE PENTAGON, THE PLANE CRASH IN PENNSYLVANIA, AND THE PLANES SMASHING INTO THE WTC IN NEW YORK CITY, OVER 3,000 PEOPLE DIED HERE IN THE USA, DIRECTLY ON BIN LADEN'S ORDERS!!!!
ARE YOU INSANE????!!!!

Edgar Davidson said...

Krashkowalski: you obvioulsy did not understand my posting. All I was saying was that, unlike the Hamas scumbag, Bin Laden did not personally slit the throats of his victims. Get it now?

juranimo said...

British sold out Poland to hitler in 1939, in 1948 they left ALL of the weapons to arabs when they left Palestine.
Than left Jews to defend themselves with sticks and pitchforks. They only move the way that is politically favourable to them, they are by no means friends of Jews.

Anonymous said...

False. The British Government was angry because passports had been stolen.

Anonymous said...

Not a few weeks ago. It was in Jan Last Year!

Anonymous said...

Aninymous said:

"False. The British Government was angry because passports had been stolen."

Hague called the assassination 'illegal' and an 'outrage' so whether or not the expulsion of an Israeli diplomat was due to the passport is irrelevant. And of course the British were subsequently found to have used forged passports in an operation in Libya.