COLUMN: Levant – Marines peeing shows media’s double standard

- January 17th, 2012

Tempest in a pee-pot: Fascinating response by Media Party to Marines’ urinating video

by Ezra Levant

NATO soldiers can shoot Taliban terrorists. They can bomb them from the air. They can fire missiles at them from remote-controlled drones.

But they can’t pee on their dead bodies.

That is the latest anti-American, anti-troops “scandal” being cooked up by the Media Party against four U.S. marines videotaped relieving themselves on terrorist corpses in Afghanistan.

The Taliban terrorist group — mass murderers — was outraged by the peeing. Its spokesman, Zabihullah Mujahid, actually said: “This is not the first time we see such brutality.”

So the murderers of thousands, and the enslavers of millions, condemn peeing as “brutality.”

All of which is reported with a straight face by our anti-war media.

It’s not just our enemies who are calling it brutal. So are our so-called allies.

Arsala Rahmani, part of Aghanistan’s “High Peace Council,” said the peeing video, available on YouTube, will “leave a very, very bad impact on peace efforts.”

Really? Is that really true? Is the peeing incident really the reason why Islamic fundamentalist terrorists want to kill westerners? Is it really the stumbling block — especially in a country where Internet access is a rarity except for the elite class? Is that really the problem and not, say, the incompatibility of a totalitarian Islamic theocracy vs. western liberal democracy?

Peeing has a great place in the annals of war. U.S. Gen. George Patton peed into the German Rhine River during the Second World War. He insisted he be photographed doing it — as a symbol of his contempt for the Nazis.

Could you imagine if President Franklin Roosevelt had denounced his top general and prosecuted him for celebrating a victory over a barbaric foe? And Patton was just a general.

British Prime Minister Winston Churchill made a point of peeing on the German Siegfried Line when the Allies breached that defensive barrier.

There is a moral difference between micturating in a river and a fortress and on a corpse. And an essential difference between our side and the enemy is we fight with certain basic rules of morality and civilization.

But do not forget the currency of war is killing, and peeing on dead terrorists is hardly a capital offence.

Which is exactly how the administration of U.S. President Barack Obama has treated it — loud, repeated national condemnations and calls for prosecutions to the fullest extent of the law. This after another round of lusty funding cuts targetting the Pentagon. But it’s not just Obama who is happy to defame the Marines. Much more fascinating is the response by the liberal media.

Remember, the same Media Party condemned former President George W. Bush for the violent misconduct by rogue soldiers at Abu Ghraib prison.

That, apparently, was Bush’s personal responsibility, and that of the defence secretary. The perpetrators were prosecuted by Bush. But it was hung around his neck.

Not so with Obama — the Media Party has not blamed Obama, the soldiers’ commander-in-chief. They imply Obama is the PR victim here, not the responsible party.

Allied soldiers shouldn’t pee on dead terrorists. But Obama shouldn’t throw the book at those exuberant soldiers.

And the Media Party needs to explain why it hanged one offence around Bush’s neck, but gave Obama a pass on this one.

11 comments

  1. Stephen Smith says:

    You smell that son, nothing in the world smells like that. You know that smell, that urinal smell. I love the smell of urine in the morning. Smells like victory.

    Why stop thee Ezra, how about rape, torture, mutilation, not to mention concentration camps, they have a great history is warfare as well.

  2. SurvivorAaron says:

    Maybe this site should be renamed maxi-pad, as you are posting a vile excuse for an article written by human waste.

  3. Jane says:

    Thanks for your views on this.

    I would like to suggest that Mr Obama listen to Albert Mohlers thoughtful report regarding the US Marines display . It begins at 6:30 and is about 4 minutes http://www.albertmohler.com/2012/01/16/the-briefing-01-16-12/ and he should read Sebastian Junger’s well written piece here http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/were-all-guilty-of-dehumanizing-the-enemy/2012/01/13/gIQAtRduwP_story.html

    I think that before he threatens to charge these young men with wrongdoing he ought to go out there and do what they do first.

  4. Eskimo says:

    If the soldiers wanted to organize a kegger to refuel their emptied bladders, I’d pony up the cash for the beer.

  5. Alain says:

    The day when these same people get equally offended by the actions of the terrorists instead of seeing the terrorists as victims, then I may be able to muster up a bit of concern about what these four Marines did.

  6. Scott says:

    This whole thing is ridiculous. We train these men to kill and that in itself gives them a different state of mind. In order to cope they treat it like a game and the peeing is part of the game. Do I agree no but I do realize that this is what comes naturally to them. The stupid part was video taping it.

  7. JR says:

    Well said, Ezra.

  8. Larry Bennett says:

    Well, it is a desecration of the dead; and that’s pretty philistine, but then it isn’t art is it. Submerging a crucifix in the “artist’s” urine is a most undeniable right. And apparently beheading a living person and putting it on the internet is pretty gross, some might say, philistine too; but of course that is a Muslim rite, or so it seems.

  9. Andrew says:

    Presumably they should have started a new sect and cut their victims heads off while they were alive like the terrorist do. Then the media would be talking about how we should be more sensitive to this new sect and not offend them in future. How we can adjust our society to better accommadate them. Of course they would also need to be minorities to get any sympathy.

  10. Ken says:

    The difference between the treatment of Bush and the treatment of Obama by the media is that one tried to downplay the incident and cover it over whereas the other did not.

    Soldiers, and especially Marines, are supposed to live up to a defined standard of behaviour. These guys didn’t. As such, they should be treated accordingly. I would hazard to guess that the court marshall, which is about as non-political as you get get, will be very harsh on these soldiers.

  11. Brian says:

    It would have been better if they could have pissed on these murderous bastards before they shot them.

Comments are closed.