As always, Mark leaves nothing left to say regarding Sen. Lindsey Graham — though I am tempted to suggest that maybe the country would have been better off if he hadn’t exercised his First Amendment right to offer help beefing up the Libyan regime when he was a special guest in Qaddafi’s tent a few months back.
I would instead like to draw attention to the repugnant statement issued by General David Petraeus and NATO Ambassador Mark Sedwill:
KABUL, Afghanistan (April 3, 2011) – In view of the events of recent days, we feel it is important on behalf of ISAF [i.e., the International Security Assistance Force] and NATO members in Afghanistan to reiterate our condemnation of any disrespect to the Holy Qur’an and the Muslim faith. We condemn, in particular, the action of an individual in the United States who recently burned the Holy Qur’an.
We also offer condolences to the families of all those injured and killed in violence which occurred in the wake of the burning of the Holy Qur’an.
We further hope the Afghan people understand that the actions of a small number of individuals, who have been extremely disrespectful to the Holy Qur’an, are not representative of any of the countries of the international community who are in Afghanistan to help the Afghan people.
Notice he condemns the moron who torched the Koran — um, I’m sorry, the Holy Qur’an (including all its holy verses that command Muslims to strike terror into the hearts of unbelievers) — but not a word of condemnation for the sadistic jihadist killers who struck terror into the hearts of the unbelievers. Rather, there is just an expression of sympathy for the families of those who were slain. And, of course, there is not a word of condemnation for our great ally, Afghan President Hamid Karzai, the jihadi-pandering sleaze who did more to incite murder than the nutty Florida pastor did.
The warped moral universe we’ve turned into policy has become a national embarrassment. Leave aside the mind-bending idiocy of the Graham theory, under which it would have been condemnable to torch Das Capital during the Cold War. Our Middle East policymakers can no longer distinguish between evil and stupidity. They go out of their way to genuflect to the scriptures that catalyze our enemies while willfully ignoring bible burning, church burning and infidel burning, which are everyday events in Islamic countries. Their strategy prizes the lives of people who despise our country over the security of our troops. After a decade of our sacrifice, they have managed to birth states in which Americans are hated, religious minorities are persecuted, and people who attempt to convert from Islam face prosecution and — unless they get whisked out of the country — the death penalty. And now, they’ve decide the big problem is not their skewed value-system but our First Amendment.
Enough. Petraeus says, “we are in Afghanistan to help the Afghan people.” Is that why you thought we sent troops to Afghanistan? Is that what you think we should be doing in Afghanistan now? I am pretty confident that most Americans couldn’t care less about the Afghan people, and I know the Afghan people couldn’t care less about us — except to the extent they trouble themselves to dislike us.
We got in this to defeat our enemies, and we’re ending up defeating ourselves and the principles for which we once stood. We never had any strategic vision of the global war, we had no stomach to follow through on the Bush Doctrine commitment to eradicate the rogue regimes that were behind the terror networks, and we decided we could outreach and democratize them into submission. Now we are predictably hoisted on our own petard as Islamists exploit our rhetoric to make themselves the champions of “democracy” — meaning of elections that are bringing to power those who hate our country and whose ambition is to destroy Israel and the West. Obviously, no one in government is willing to change this policy, so let’s end it.
What should our new policy be? We should have as little to do with Muslim countries as possible. At home, we should focus on the political and legal terrain with an eye toward:
(a) distinguishing between our allies in the American Muslim community (i.e., those who do not want to impose sharia on public life) and those who seek to undermine our constitutional system, so we can marginalize the latter;
(b) excluding from the United States aliens who would support supplanting the U.S. Constitution with a sharia system (i.e., revisiting the hash Congress and the courts have made regarding the reliance on anti-American ideology — not just ties to violence — as a basis for keeping non-Americans out of our country); and
(c) cutting off immigration from, and sharply reducing contacts with, Muslim countries until they take it on themselves to reform — on separation of mosque and state, freedom of conscience, equality, interfaith tolerance, individual liberty, and unambiguous rejection of terrorism.
Not only is that a policy that can work, it is one an insolvent country can actually afford.