If you will recall, last week I told you about this United Nations request for “the precise facts surrounding [Obama’s] killing” for the purpose of determining its legality.  What a crock.  So where does this go from here … other than the improbable chance that Barack Obama tells the UN to go pound sand?  Academics have weighed in (oh this ought to be good) and determined:

On Friday, two professors and part-time U.N. “experts,” Christof Heyns and Martin Scheinin, issued a joint statement on Bin Laden’s killing. The two academics claimed that “the norm should be that terrorists be dealt with as criminals, through legal processes of arrest, trial and judicially-decided punishment.” They also insisted that the U.N. was entitled to receive “more facts” “to allow an assessment in terms of international human rights law standards.” Those standards would be violated, they claimed, unless “the planning of the mission allowed an effort to capture Bin Laden.”

In other words, if Barack Obama is true in his statement that this was a kill operation, then the United States would be in violation of international law.  Now I’ll leave all of the particulars up to this opinion piece by Anne Bayefsky, but just the mere suggestion that the United States is potentially criminally at fault is insulting on so many levels.  Then again, you have to give a damn in order to be insulted, and I’m really not quite sure who in the United States even gives a damn what the UN thinks at this point.

And for the record, Pakistani and US officials are now coming out and saying that there was an agreement made between the two counties back in 2001, which allowed the US to conduct unilateral raids within Pakistan if it meant targeting Osama bin Laden.  Who knows how credible this information may turn out to be, but the fact is that the guy was a war criminal and we took care of him.