Frivolous mayhem around Osama’s picture did get condemned by Al-Qaeda suddenly marching forward, confessing about its founder’s death and immediately soothing the tight albatross around Obama’s neck. Perhaps, all’s well that ends well.
But the problem is, this is not the end. Not even, the beginning of it.
There are several questions which are being silenced about the air raid, further adding to the political dimensions of legality and incoherent approach of the entire ‘rational’ attack.
1. Why was Osama’s body buried in the sea within 2 hours.
Reason: To avoid the body from becoming a shrine under the religious beliefs of Islam.
Question: The other two men, who were dead were also Muslim. Why was their body left behind, if the religious belief was so important? There has been no information about the other two bodies, after Pakistani TV released the gruesome pictures, messed up in blood, recently. What happened to the other two bodies?
2. Why was it broadcasted that Osama used his wife has a human shield?
Now see, there is a difference in Osama using his wife as a human shield to protect himself as an act of self defence and his wife, herself posing to be the shield, in her immediate reflex.
Was it a choice to portray ‘Osama’s image’ as a coward or just a mistake caused by overflow of information?
3. The 12 year old daughter’s statement
Osama’s 12 year daughter, born by the same Yemeni wife who chose to protect him, has stated that she saw her father’s death in front of her own eyes. Magazines like TIME and others have written explicit articles on how it might feel to be Osama’s child.
But my very genuine question is – why is the daughter, named Safiyah, not given the choice to voice her perception of the encounter? The Pakistani government has taken the charge of both mother and daughter, not letting US to have any form of communication until and unless a written request is sent.
It does not matter, if the encounter was a political assassination or a barbaric murder. Ultimately, Osama deserves it. If not for anything else, then for the Ground Zero September attacks, for sure.
But the legal constraints can not be ruled. In the International law perspective, murdering an unarmed man, is definitely a crime. So, lets see, what judicial actions, if any, would be taken in this case.
Credits: Photo from Reuters
shubhdachaudhary 