http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/05/201152121358887979.htmlRead the whole thing , it isn't right , but it is wrong in an interesting way.
Those Muslims who celebrated bin Laden's acts of mass murder are guilty by association. The doctors of Islam should have declared the age of war between Islam and the abode of non-Islam as null and without foundation in the Quran, or in many an exegesis in diverse schools of Islamic thought.
Osama's Galatea was sculpted, conveniently, out of a love with the ideal of "defence" of the "Umma", the global Islamic community.
To that end, he sculpted not an object of love, but maybe a counter-barbarity pitted against the barbarity that he thinks the capitalists, the secularists and their clients heaped on his "Umma", as if he were the "commander of the faithful".
Obama, ex-officio commander-in-chief, another type of faith, may be not as guilty as his predecessor in the grotesque violations of human rights in Iraq and Afghanistan, but sculpted his own barbarity out of the rallying myths (for country, sovereignty, compatriots, God, liberalism, democracy) – a brand of "love" – in the name of civility.
Countries had to be invaded (under Bush) and maintained by Obama, an incarceration system had to be invented (Guantanamo Bay), also still continuous under Obama – and a senseless war against "terror", authored by the neo-cons and sustained, in the name of a similar idea of love for country, and its sanctity.
