I was responding to Russel's original post and suggesting that because Usama was clearly deluded does not mean we should be dancing on his death bed. Clearly we should be glad not to have him as the figurehead of Al-Qaeda, perhaps now provides the opportunity for us not to make more of him.

The context in which Usama was created, that people like Bomber like to reinforce, is the knowledge that can help us, the citizenry, push against Government policy which props up Arab Dictators and supports the Imperial project ( read the link about just how many military bases the Americans now have around the globe - http://www.tomdispatch.com/archive/175338/ ) and so fertilizes the soil of radicalism.

Our response to Usama has caused enormous civilian death, he was evil, so was our reaction, particularly if seen in the light of Adam Curtis.

So who will the next baddie be?

To view Usama Bin Laden in the context in which he was created, to suggest that the chanting of USA USA USA and "Justice "has been done and to revel in somebodies death is counter productive and to suggest that an attempt to take him alive and put him on trail in order to try to salvage the moral high ground of the Liberal Western Democracies is not to pay tribute to Usama Bin Laden or attempt to agree with his obviously heinous crimes and philosophies.

I think perhaps it's Hitchen's rather than Chompsky that is informing this discussion.

I though Adam Curtis had a nice succinct take on it..
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/may/03/osama-bin-laden-soviet-union-baddie

And his documentaries on Islamofascism provide a valuable context..

Also Johann Hari walks a line that justifies the action against Usama but at least extends his analysis to include the failings of our reaction to him and what can be learned from this.

http://www.johannhari.com/2011/05/06/can-we-learn-the-real-lesson-of-bin-ladens-death

Blindly rejoicing and proposing those who don't accept this at face value are endorsing Usama's actions, is this the best we can expect?

We miss a lot of what happens in the world visually, advertising placement killing publications like LIFE. The internet allows us access again, and the iPad has the potential to transfer this further. The screen a perfect forum for photography- almost as good as a beautifully printed book. I believe TIME intend to make much more of the imagery they capture and can't justify printing, and now photographers are able to shoot video also, so the multimedia potential of the iPad is very exciting.
Now we just need to get the journalists un-embedded so we have some real visual dialogue, and then we might see the world through a prism similar to how we saw Vietnam

This New York Times blog delivers an interesting daily visual diary of international events.
http://lens.blogs.nytimes.com/