Dead Diplomats? Trashed Embassies? Try the Napier Plan

By | September 17, 2012 | 0 Comments

Unless you just recovered from a coma, you know that a mob invaded our embassy in Cairo, Egypt, climbing over the wall, burning our flag – and replacing it with the black flag of Al Qaeda. And you know that another, coordinated mob invaded our consulate at Benghazi, Libya, and killed Ambassador Christopher Stevens, then dragged his body through the streets. Also killed were three Americans on his staff: Sean Smith, Tyrone Woods, and Glen Doherty. The last two were former Navy SEALs. An unconfirmed report claims that Stevens was tortured.
Ironically, Ambassador Stevens was active in aiding Libyans to overthrow the Kadaffi regime. Similar ingrates desecrated the graves of British soldiers in Libya earlier this year. Just as Stevens helped to free Libyans from a tyrant, the British liberated them from Nazi tyranny in World War II. Gratitude? We don’t need no stinkin’ gratitude.
Ambassador Stevens and his three aides were KIA – killed in action. Our enemies know they are in a war. Do we?
Mobs also attacked our embassies in Tunisia, Yemen, Sudan, and even Britain and Australia. The purported cause of the mobs’ rage is a little-known video on YouTube that insulted Muhammad. The video was made by a shadowy figure with a criminal record. He claimed to be an Israeli Jew but isn’t. He apparently is a Coptic Christian. He surely is a fool. So what? If all fools vanished, it would be a lot easier to find a parking place, especially in Washington, D.C.
Speaking of which, our ambassador to the UN, Susan Rice, claims the attacks were spontaneous. Machine guns, rocket-propelled grenades, and armored vehicles arrived spontaneously? The attacks were scheduled for Sept. 11 – a coincidence? The president of Libya states that the attacks were planned for months. Whatever else he may be, he is not a fool.
The video is an excuse for violence. The cause is anti-American, anti-Christian hatred that permeates much of the Muslim world. Afterward, our Cairo embassy and Secretary of State Clinton bent over backward to soothe the feelings of radical Muslims. President Obama condemned the attacks in tepid language.
Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman General Dempsey phoned an obscure pastor who was rumored to support the video, and asked him to withdraw his support. General Dempsey is our top military officer, sworn to defend the Constitution – including the First Amendment. When generals tell pastors what to say, we are in deep trouble. Apparently the “wall of separation” between church and state has a door that opens only one way.
That’s how the leaders of our nation, which was formerly a bastion of freedom, responded to the embassy attacks. But what didn’t they say?
● No one pointed out that killing innocent people is not the way to defend the honor of Muhammad, or anyone else.
● No one threatened to cut off aid to nations that allowed our embassies to be invaded. No one threatened to terminate diplomatic relations with such nations.
● No one pointed out that diplomatic relations – and world peace – depend on the sanctity of embassies and diplomats.
● No one pointed out that embassies are legally U.S. territory. Invading them or killing diplomats are acts of war – with all the terrible consequences that this implies.
● No one pointed out the absence of Christian mobs invading the embassies of Muslim nations to protest persecution of Christians, or the absence of Jewish mobs protesting the persecution of Jews, or the absence of American mobs protesting the killing of American diplomats.
● No one pointed out that there are 314 million Americans, and our government has neither the power nor the desire to control what they all say and do. And every day, some of them will probably say something offensive to someone. So what?
● No one said bluntly, “Stop acting like bratty children who throw a tantrum whenever they don’t get their way. Stop acting like unruly teenagers who become violent whenever they feel ‘disrespected.’ Take your rightful place in the world of responsible adults. Grow up!
We are being forced to face the consequences of “multiculturalism.” A society is defined by its culture. A society may be multiethnic and allow diversity of religious and political views. America did famously well at this for over two centuries, because millions of immigrants were taught to become Americans. But we have stopped Americanizing immigrants. We have even stopped Americanizing our own children.
What does it mean to be “multicultural”? Some cultures allow, or even encourage, polygamy and violence against women. These cultures see disagreement as treason if it comes from one of their own, and as an attack meriting lethal retaliation if it comes from “infidels.”
Our schools, our universities − sometimes even our clergy − teach that our culture is no better than others. They ask, “Who are we to judge?” The word “judgmental,” in the sense of self-righteous and hypercritical, dates only from the 1960s. From the dawn of English until then, great thinkers expressed themselves without using that word.
What changed in the 1960s that necessitated the introduction of “judgmental” and its opposite “nonjudgmental”? The world didn’t change. We changed. We lost faith − faith in ourselves, faith in our culture, faith in our future, faith in Judeo-Christian values, faith in God. We stopped passing on that faith to the next generation.
In Britain, this loss of faith has gone so far that the Lord Chief Justice − the highest judge − and the Archbishop of Canterbury − the highest official of the Church of England − both agree that Sharia law is inevitable for Muslim citizens of Britain. Polygamy is now officially tolerated in Britain and Canada – husbands receive multiple welfare payments. Criticism of extremist Islam is punishable by law in Europe and Canada. If we can’t criticize harmful practices, how can we hope to end them?
Nature abhors a vacuum. The vacuum of our lack of faith was filled by the strong faith of others − others who believe in abusive treatment of wives and children, female genital mutilation, forced marriages, “honor” killings, stifling of dissent, persecution of “infidels,” and murder in response to perceived insults.
We try to counter these destructive beliefs, but we find that in the culture wars, we have disarmed ourselves. We can’t counter something with nothing. We can’t fight strong beliefs with no beliefs.
We have forgotten the lesson of General Napier.
When the British gained control of India, they outlawed suttee, the Hindu custom of burning a widow alive on her husband’s funeral pyre. The British commander-in-chief in India, General Sir Charles Napier, was informed that suttee was an ancient and accepted custom with a religious basis, and that suppressing it would evoke anger. (Sound familiar?) Unimpressed, Napier replied:

You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours.

I am not an admirer of multiculturalism. But if we must have it, let us practice the kind advocated by General Napier. If they insist on their customs of domestic violence, “honor” killings, persecution of “infidels,” and responding to perceived insults with lethal violence, let us insist on our customs. In case you forgot, let me remind you:
● Our customs include respecting the embassies and diplomats of all nations, even those nations we view as potential enemies.
● Our customs include equal rights for women, especially in regard to education, career, marriage, divorce, and child custody.
● Our customs include freedom of to practice our religion, or convert to another religion, or become an atheist, or criticize a religion.
● Our customs include freedom of expression, including unpopular, foolish, and annoying expression.
● Our customs include standing up for these freedoms before the world, and if necessary fighting for them.
If they insist on following their customs, we must insist on following ours.
Dr. Stolinsky writes on political and social issues. Contact: You are welcome to publish or post these articles, provided that you cite the author and website.

Leave a Reply

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Social Widgets powered by