There is another way to look at Obama’s obsequiousness

Obama’s act of self flagellation, as well as his order to have the generals of the US army also castigate themselves before a murderous bunch of animal-raping misogynistic savages in Afghanistan and the rest of the Islamic world, is perceived by his critics as an act of surrender and appeasement. And certainly that is a likely reason for it as well as the notion that by doing so, one averts more hostility towards US and allied troops in Afghanistan.

The other possible explanation is that Obama is so utterly confident in his superiority to these people that he feels he and the other US commanders are in such a position of strength that the real cost of these acts of contrition are not measurable. And this might also be true. Despite the truth of all these analysis, it was the wrong thing to do.

The right thing would be to say that prisoners who defiled the Koran (if you buy into that narrative at all) by using it to write incendiary remarks or communicate plans to attack, or in fact the people who printed versions of the Koran, the implications being that Iran did it, with changed or modified text to create additional hostility towards non-Muslims, lose their privilege of having this fetid journal of a madman in their cells and they get burned. If they don’t like that, then don’t abuse the privilege of being allowed to have this crappy book in jail.

About Eeyore

Canadian artist and counter-jihad and freedom of speech activist as well as devout Schrödinger's catholic
This entry was posted in Burning Korans, Geopolitics, Mission to Afghanistan. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to There is another way to look at Obama’s obsequiousness

  1. Chris Jones says:

    The problem is that practically no one in the US knows anything at all about Islam. Remember when Newt Gingrich commented that the Palestinians were a made-up people, and everybody freaked out? Well, that’s what happens every single time anybody says anything truthful about anything to do with Islam. We have somehow been maneuvered into a position where acquiring any real knowledge of Islam, much less speaking of it, is more forbidden than any drug. How’d they do that? Winston Churchill said, on the subject of Muslims, “Either they are at your feet, or they are at your throat”.

    If you put yourself in a subservient position to Islam, they will only cross their arms across their chests and say, “Yes, this is as it should be.” Islam is the religion of slavery and Islam itself means “Submission”. Getting on your knees in front of the buggers is a very, very bad idea. And yet we have to listen to Kirsten Powers, God bless her Sunday School ethics, as she reveals that she knows nothing whatsoever about the subject, even though it has been the most important thing in the world since September 2001. TV people are good-looking retards – so many Ted Knights, no more capable of understanding theocracy than differential calculus. Why can’t people commit even five minutes a day to studying Islam? People talk a lot about critical thinking, but few practice it.

  2. wtd says:

    Adding disgusting insult to injury . . .that apology by Peter Lavoy, the Acting Asst Defense Secy, was made at the ADAMS center, a suburban mosque in Sterling, Va .

    Sultan Knish posted an essay addressing the hideous nature of this escalation. Islam Uber Alles

  3. Richard says:

    I still say his actions are designed to hurt the US, if they were the result of stupidity he would screw up and help us once in a while.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>