Especially interesting was the Sun today. The Sun has to square a few circles over this one. On the one hand it supports 'our boys' in Afghanistan and has tried to convince us that our boys are dying for a good cause because 'the Afghans really appreciate us bringing them democracy and stability'. Since the riots clearly show the majority of the Afghan population simply want to kill us and remain in the stone age, the Sun had a problem. So its solution was to present the story as the work of 'the Taliban' (even though not even Al-Jazeera dared make such a nonsensical and blatantly false claim). And since 'fighting the Taliban to save the Afghan people' is one of the things 'our boys' are doing then it can be turned into the exact opposite of what it really was: a story to support the continued sacrifice of our troops rather than one which proves that not a single drop of British blood should be shed for these savages. By pinning it all on the 'Taliban' the Sun also manages to maintain its general cover-up of any Muslim atrocity, which has been a feature of the paper since James Murdoch took over control of NewsCorp.
After the Itamar massacre and this (not to mention the 17,000 other Islamic terrorist attacks since 9/11) I wonder just how bad an atrocity Muslims have to carry out before the western media start to realise there might be a problem with Islam itself? What is clear is that no matter how bad any future atrocity is, the western media will continue to find reasons to justify it. So, if word of this article reaches some Mullah in Afghanistan or Pakistan and if, as a result, a mob beheads say 1000 westerners, it will all be my fault.