Paging Gen. Charles Napier

Perhaps you’ve heard of the case of U.S. Army Sgt. Charles Martland, the Green Beret who put a beat down on a corrupt Afghan police chief who was fond of little boys and supposedly kept one chained nearby to satisfy the desire when it came upon him.

Martland is being forced out of the army because of this attempt to set things right. There’s some fuzz as to exactly why he’s being pushed out — disobeying orders or simply being mean to “allies.”

Obviously we can’t have soldiers, especially NCOs, taking matters into their own hands. After all, we live in the age of respecting other cultures, no matter how bad some of their cultural peccadilloes are. In fact, for the modern liberal, the crazier, the seedier the custom is, the more radiance one receives for “tolerating” it. Ironically, when it comes to his fellow Americans, a liberal has absolutely no tolerance for cultural differences. Everyone must conform to the liberal’s imperial cultural preferences.

But back to our story…

The question has arisen as to who might have issued orders to American soldiers that they weren’t to harm the Afghan pedophiles. So far the Obama administration has stonewalled on that query. No surprise there.

Is it possible that this ties in with the Obama administration’s insistence on inserting homosexuals and promoting homosexual conduct everywhere? It recently nominated an open homosexual, Eric Fanning, to be the next Secretary of the Army. (We’ve moved from ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ to ‘Shout It From the Rooftops’ in a very short time.)

Does the Obama administration not see any evil in this practice? Does it really consider this just some “cultural difference,” no different than liking different foods, dressing in brightly colored outfits and wearing funny hats or living in communal houses?

With that bunch, I would not proffer an answer.

I’m reminded of the response to a “cultural difference” by British Gen. Charles Napier when in the 1840s he confronted the then Indian practice of “suttee” — requiring (usually tossing) an Indian widow onto the funeral pyre of her late husband.

He allegedly said to some practitioners, “Be it so. This burning of widows is your custom; prepare the funeral pile. But my nation has also a custom. When men burn women alive we hang them, and confiscate all their property. My carpenters shall therefore erect gibbets on which to hang all concerned when the widow is consumed. Let us all act according to national customs.”

We’ve some a long way, baby!

Hot Air has some stories here, here, here and here.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s