The ever-volatile adherents of the Religion of Peace are incensed once again. When are they not? This time, the alleged reason for their habitually barbarous behavior is the inadvertent burning by American soldiers of four Korans that captured Afghani jihadis had been using to pass messages. What the riotous Faithful are actually upset about, of course, is the same thing that’s been riling them up for the last 1,500 years—the mere existence on this earth of non-Muslims. While the incineration of their own is cause for mayhem, the defacing of infidel devotionals is perfectly acceptable if it helps lead to Islamic hegemony:
TWO hidden copies of the BIBLE have been found at the house where Christian-hating terror chief Osama Bin Laden died. The books had been concealed at the building in Abbottabad, Pakistan, where Bin Laden was shot by US Navy Seals last May. They contain coded clues to future terror attacks, it was feared last night. (Bin Laden hid terror codes in the Bible | The Sun)
Conspicuous by their absence are the mobs of rioting Christians enraged by the desecration of their Holy Book…
And what would an international cause célèbre be without some self-righteous bureaucrat from the United Nations, that nest of anti-American vipers on the East River, appearing on cue to blast the United States for crimes that generally occur only in the fevered imaginations of unlettered third worlders? Speaking on behalf of the rampaging mobs, Jan Kubis, the U.N. Special Representative to Afghanistan, said:
“We were very concerned, as the UN, that the international military by mistake allowed this kind of desecration of the holy Koran. After this apology, after these investigations, disciplinary action should follow. Those that were behind this grave mistake should be held accountable for it…it doesn’t matter that it was a mistake.” (UN wants action against Koran burners)
The “international military,” of course, being NATO, the self-same body that our ‘friends’ in the Karzai government say has agreed to try the offending personnel:
“NATO officials, in response to a request for the trial and punishment of the perpetrators … promised this crime will brought to court as soon as possible,” Karzai’s office said in a statement.
Meanwhile, the Obama government chooses to offer its hindquarters to every flea-bitten Afghani capable of mustering a scowl, while tendering official threats to our soldiers:
No one…has noted the most remarkable aspect of this entire episode: the United States Government has, no questions asked, eagerly embraced Islamic law (Sharia) regarding the treatment of the Qur’an, and assured the Afghans that it will be enforced.
In his apology letter to Karzai, Obama said that the Qur’an-burning was “inadvertent,” but that nevertheless “we will take the appropriate steps to avoid any recurrence, including holding accountable those responsible.”
If it was “inadvertent,” why does Obama intend to hold them accountable? Accidents will happen. If he is going to adopt Sharia to the extent that he thinks that anyone should be held accountable for this at all, is he going to adopt Sharia punishments for this “crime” as well? Will he have the U.S. soldiers whom he finds to be responsible for the Qur’an-burning beheaded?
Despite riots that have been going on for over a week in Afghanistan over the accidental burning of the Quran by U.S. forces, President Barack Obama claimed that his apology has “calmed things down.”
A dead calm, apparently, as two more Americans were subsequently murdered by Obama’s freshly sedated Muslims. Elsewhere, it was reported by the Arabic-language newspaper al-Arabiya that the Appeaser-In-Chief has offered to spring Abdel Rahman, the incarcerated ringleader of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing:
Abdel Rahman is the infamous “Blind Sheikh” who was convicted in 1995 for masterminding a terrorist war against the United States that included the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and a plot to bomb New York City landmarks. According to the late Osama bin Laden, al-Qaeda’s founder, Abdel Rahman is also responsible for the fatwa — the necessary Islamic edict — that green-lighted the 9/11 attacks.
The alleged offer to release Abdel Rahman is said to be an effort to end the impasse over 16 American “civil-society activists” (including the son of Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood) being detained by Egypt’s interim government. (Releasing the Blind Sheikh? – Andrew C. McCarthy – National Review Online)
A criminal, duly convicted by a U.S. court, can be pardoned by the President—but I’ve never heard of one being traded. Of course, laws and the Constitution don’t mean much to the crop of miscreants who currently “occupy” the Executive branch.