I’ve been watching with growing incredulity in the last 24 hours how people are blaming this Libya attack on some cheap movie made by someone unknown. Do people really believe that that this was all a coincidence on the anniversary of 9/11?
Come on…
This wasn’t the fault of some nutcase making a home movie. This was a coordinated attack on the anniversary of 9/11 by our enemy.
Plain and simple.
Although initial reports described the events as a demonstration that had spiraled out of control, there are indications that the attack may have been planned, most likely by Islamic radicals who have been gaining ground in Libya.
Stevens had gone to the consulate in still-restive Benghazi to oversee its evacuation after the demonstration had started. The building was then stormed by gunmen, who succeeded in setting it on fire.
The ambassador was well-liked by many Libyans, particularly the pro-democracy rebels on whose behalf he passionately argued during the conflict last year that brought down dictator Muammar Gaddafi.
An almost-simultaneous demonstration was held outside the US Embassy in Cairo, though events did not turn violent there. Both protests were sparked by a 14-minute trailer of the hour-long movie Innocence of Muslims, which was posted on YouTube and openly ridicules the prophet Muhammad – whom religious Muslims believe should not be portrayed at all.
The shortened version of the video is being promoted and circulated by Morris Sadek, an Egyptian-born Coptic Christian in the Washington area who has expressed extreme anti- Islamist views.
There are several indications, however, that there was a concerted effort to rile up emotions based on the crude video in the days before the attack, and that the demonstration may have been a pretext for a more serious assault.
The fact that it happened on September 11, coinciding with the 11th anniversary of al-Qaida’s attacks on the US, fueled speculation that it was a planned attack, rather than spontaneous violence.
If this had happened any other day I could entertain the explanation that these Muslim idiots got their widdle feelings hurt over a video but for this to happen on 9/11 over any other day explains everything to me.
And they know the weakest United States President in our history will do nothing. Maybe he will shoot a few drone missiles but no one, least of all members of al-Qaeda, are afraid of that. Hell, they have taken over Libya and Egypt while this President was shooting his missiles. What are they supposed to fear?
A man who explains away the fact that these Muslim animals paraded around our dead Ambassador as good samaritans dragging a dead body to the hospital?
Wow….just wow.
The action and inaction of this President over the last four years have made me so ashamed…I don’t think I have never been so ashamed of a President in my lifetime. (I was too young to comprehend the cowardice of Jimmy Carter so you have to give me a pass on that one).
See author page
@Greg:
It’s spin, Greg. Pure and simple. Good spin, but spin nonetheless. And yes, the right would spin it similarly as you just did, if a Republican was in office.
At the end of the day, though, it is just spin, and means nothing. Unless, of course, you believe that Bush sand-bagged on killing AQ and OBL, or that McCain wouldn’t have been as effective, or that Hillary would have made different decisions than Obama did(or didn’t, as it may be).
Props for continuing the war on terror. No props for suggesting Obama, alone, is responsible.
@Aqua:
As I said, Obama has problems. What remains to be seen is if the media will report on it, much less notice it.
Whether a backtrack on the statement, or lack of control, or lack of interest, in what our embassies are saying to the world, there is a problem. Lack of daily briefings and 600 hours of golf may be the cause, or just symptoms.
@johngalt, #105
So, it would make no difference if Mitt Romney were Commander in Chief?
I’m afraid I disagree. Bush gets credit or blame for whatever he did or didn’t do as Commander in Chief, because he was actually calling the shots. The same is true of Obama. And the same would be true of Mitt Romney–a prospect that makes me increasingly nervous. Romney seems to be making too many bad calls under pressure. As Obama has observed, he tends to shoot first and aim second. Fortunately the pressures of the moment only have to do with a political campaign. At least for Mr. Romney.
@Greg:
Except it’s different on domestic issues, is that it? Bush takes the blame, even now, when Obama is calling the shots, as you put it, for a lackluster economy and poor jobs report.
But, that is entirely beside the point, Greg. You spun it, plain and simple. And, as I said, good spin. But it doesn’t mean what you intended. That Obama got the job done and no one else would have. Or rather, the insinuation that Obama did what Bush couldn’t. Sorry, that just doesn’t fly.
Again, props to Obama for continuing the war on terror. No props that he, alone, was either responsible, or did what no one else could, or would, do, regarding the war on terror.
@johngalt, it seems that John Sexton at Breitbart’s heard your request for a timeline.
According to the events, as they lay it out, only the Embassy was tweeting comments. At 8:06pm (not sure which timezone, but these are all within the same, presumably), the AP reported on the ensuing attack in Libya. Two hours later, at 10:09, Romney sent out a message INRE both Egypt and Libya, but said they’d embargo the message until midnight.
One minute after Romney’s embargoed statement, an unnamed WH official put out a statement that disavowed the Embassy statements as official. Fifteen minutes after that, Romney un’embargoes his message and sends it out early…. on both Egypt and Libya.
Thirteen minutes after Romney’s message goes out, Hillary tweets, condemning the attacks. By 11:40pm, the Embassay is busy deleting tweets. That’s where the Breitbart ends the timeline since this was a yesterday AM article.
Carrying on with the timeline via my watching the news, all this back and forth is before Hillary’s scheduled Rose Garden statement, and the joint statement with Obama later… and brings us back to Romney, packing a room with the press, for another statement on Libya at the same time that Hillary is supposed to speak. I remember CNN saying they’d go to Romney first, but if Hillary came on they’d have to cut away.
Next thing I knew, they were showing pictures of the press being ushered out of the Romney press room, and the cameras cut to Hillary. After Hillary, Romney’s press filed back in and he did his dog/pony show. After that, an hour or so later, Obama/Hillary came out to the Rose Garden.
Where Sexton is correct is instead wanting to push the scrutiny onto the Obama admin for being so slow in official responses. As I pointed out, Reagan was on the air within hours of Beirut’s Embassy attack. But then, a day late and a lot of substance short is what we have come to expect from Obama’s admin… except when it came to announcing the death of UBL. I’m sure they’ll probably chalk this up to wanting to get some intel on the possible culprits, but in this day of instant news, you have to be on top of it. Obviously, a skill Obama doesn’t possess.
Obama was wrong to be so slow on the official level. Romney was wrong to jump ahead with both his embargoed statement and his presser. And that’s our two choices for leadership come Nov. whoopee…/sarc
@Greg:
So, Greg, since you are of the opinion that the guy who occupies the Oval Office gets the credit, or the blame, for what happens under his watch, are you willing to admit that Obama is responsible for 43 months of 8+% unemployment, for lower average person income and lower average wealth, for more people being dropped from the work force rolls, for wages decreasing and for the mess that the Middle East is rapidly turning into?
Come on, let’s see just how secure in your belief that what happens is the fault of the guy whose watch it happens on.
I think I accidentally wrote that the film maker was an Israeli.
Not true.
As Mata points out above he had multiple identities and claims multiple nationalities.
(All these typos….faulty wireless keyboard or bad setting?)
He hasn’t made money on his film, so what was his motive?
Nakoula Basseley Nakoula/Sam Bacile/????
If he is not out to make money (as a capitalist) and he hates Coptic Christians in Egypt enough to create a firestorm against them via this film, what is his political leaning?
He hates business, he hates Christians.
Who does that remind me of?
Just wondering….
Don’t forget hating Israel, and attempting to make them and Jews responsible for the funding of this production, Nan G. Plus making sure the Arabic translations were made public worldwide, and promoted, in the run up to Sept 11th. Plus thru virulent anti-Islamic Christian groups, which does disservice to most Christians. As Debbie Schlussel once wrote, there’s little difference between the hatred for Jews by Copts or the Islamists.
Stinks to high heaven, IMHO….
@retire05, #110:
We were talking about a Commander in Chief being responsible for the results of what he orders to be done by the military, I believe. Nobody can command the economy to behave as we wish it would. The two topics are completely different.
If you want to persist with your argument that responsibility in two entirely different sorts of issues must be assigned in the exactly the same way, I suppose it could be pointed out that the economic train wreck that Obama has had to deal with actually began in 2007.
@Greg: I am aware the role of CiC. I’m also aware of how targeting works. You are asking us to believe that the AQ big shots wouldn’t have been killed under Bush when in fact they were most likely listed as High Value Targets (HVT’s) by our military and intel folks on Bush’s watch. The exceptions would have been the ones who rose to prominence on Obama’s watch and were then categorized as HVT’s.
There are no doubt some who don’t give Obama the credit he deserves for continuing GWOT. His policies are for the most part a continuation of Bush’s. Just as I supported Bush’s policies, I will support Obama’s as long as they are effective. Hence you don’t see me criticizing his use of drones because Bush would have done the same. However, just as there are those who don’t give Obama his due, you have given him too much credit sometimes at the expense of those who are there doing the deeds and underscored what occurred on Bush’s watch. Your earlier post of how he was mobilizing the Marines and sending warships made it sound like there was a huge movement of forces going on. Unless you have seen something different, all I have come up with is 50 Marines, not the 1st MEF and 2 destroyers, not one or two carrier groups. Perhaps that is coming, but as of now it was a big exaggeration. Mobilizing is a term usually reserved for a big operation or a war, both of which are highly unlikely in this case. If the assholes who did this are identified, they will most likely meet Allah via another OBL type operation or a drone strike.
@MataHarley:
I keep being reminded of Brewster’s Millions and ‘None of the above’.
Somehow, I think even if the entirety of November’s vote were to go that way, we’d still lose.
@another vet, #114:
Did I bring up Bush? The comment that started this digression didn’t even mention Bush. It had nothing to do with Bush. People interject Bush into everything, and then jump on anyone who takes the bait. I should kick myself every time I allow myself to be sucked into the same pointless old arguments.
@Greg:
Yes, they are. Except when Obama makes a post-inauguration promise and statement on unemployment and passage of the Stimulus bill. Then he owns it. Except, of course, when it’s inconvenient for him to own it, and unemployment doesn’t act as he promised/stated it would, and then it’s “blame Bush” time, once again.
As for the military actions, another vet just answered your assertions the best.
I give Obama credit for continuing some(all? I don’t know) policies on the war on terror that Bush instituted. And without that continuation, no doubt less AQ leadership would have met their maker, and OBL still on earth alive. But it is a stretch, a rather large one, to assert that Obama deserves accolades that others wouldn’t have, or don’t deserve.
Can you admit that with McCain, the same, or similar, results might have/would have occurred? Or a Hillary presidency? If not, you are purely breathing fantasy vapors(or working off of a fantasy “tingle”?). If yes, then your intended assertion is broken.
Where did I suggest that he does?
@Greg:
You didn’t need to bring up Bush, Greg, for your rhetoric to include him.
Your statement;
You state Obama “is the guy”. Meaning, there was someone else who wasn’t. You say he “methodically”, meaning, someone else went about it haphazardly.
Who is the someone else, Greg, if not Bush?
Sucked in? You made the statement, Greg. Live with it.
Maybe you should consider the possibility words sometimes mean just what they say. I’ve generally been able to articulate my thoughts about Mr. Bush in a rather straightforward manner, when that’s been my intention, and haven’t been especially reticent about doing so. Bush was not the topic.
Tomorrow is Friday prayers throughout the Islamic World. Escalation. The imams are going to amp up the fervour and hate. Expect more riots and violence. Could get seriously ugly. I expect a huge conflagration, hope I’m wrong.
@mossomo:
Good point.
The imams of the various mosques wield a lot of power.
The people read very little and rely on their imams to tell them relevant news during Friday prayers.
Just tampening it down to a dying ember is in their hands.
I could cite a few koranic verses that they could use to this end.
Or, they could whip it up into a huge conflagration.
There are many other koranic verses they could use to this end.
I wonder which way they will go.
“Consulate attack planned as 2-part militant assault, Libyan official says
A Libyan official said Thursday that the deadly attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi was a planned, two-part operation that included a raid on a supposedly secret safe house – an account that comports with what the top U.S. lawmaker told Fox News a day earlier.
On Wednesday, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers told Fox News that the strike was a “coordinated, military-style” operation.
Wanis al-Sharef, eastern Libya’s deputy interior minister, then said on Thursday the attacks were suspected to have been timed to mark the 9-11 anniversary and that the military used civilians protesting an anti-Islam film as cover for their actions.”
Source: foxnews.com
“Attacks on Tuesday against American missions in Cairo and Benghazi fit into a familiar pattern of Islamist intimidation and Western appeasement that goes back to the Salman Rushdie affair in 1989. The Obama administration’s supine response to the murder of American diplomats increased the likelihood of further such assaults.
The Rushdie crisis suddenly erepted with the ruler of Iran, Ayatollah Khomenini, put a death edict on a novelist for having written a magical realist novel, The Satanic Verses, declaring that the book was “against Islam, the Prophet, and the Koran.” That incident was then followed by a long list of similar assaults – concerning a U.S. Supremem Court frieze in 1997, American evangelical leader Jerry Falwell in 2002, Newsweek in 2005, the Danis cartoons in 2006, Pope Benedict XVI also in 2006, Florida preacher Terry Jones in 2010, and U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan early in 2012. In each of these cases, the perceived insult to Islam led to acts of violence, sometimes against Westerners but more often among Muslims themselves.
Indeed, the 2010 incident caused some 19 deaths in Afghanistan, prompting David Goldman, then of First Things magazine, to observe that “a madman carrying a match and a copy of the Koran can do more damage to the Musluim world than a busload of suicide bombers….What’s the dollar value of the damage from a used paperback edition of the Koran?” Goldman speculated how intelligence services could learn from Jones and, for a few dollars, sow widespread anarchy.
So far, the 2012 spasm has led to four American deaths, with more possibly to follw, JOnes and Sam Bacile can only cause deaths at will but they can also put a wrench in the U.S.-Egypt relations and even become a factor in a U.S.presidential election.
As for the Obama administration: acting in its usual appeasing and apologetic mode, it blamed the critics of Islam. “The Embassy of the United States in Cairo condemns the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims…We firmly reject the actions by those who abuse the universal right of free speech to hurt the religious beliefs of others.” Then Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, (“The United States deplores any intentional effort to denigrat the religious beliefs of others”) and Barack Obama (“the United States rejects efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others”) cinfirmed the initial cringe.
Republican presidential candidate, Mitt Romney, right retorted that “It’s disgraceful that the Obama administration’s first response was not to condemn attacks on our diplomatic missions, but to sympathize with those who waged the attacks.” The argument has very large implications, not so much for the elections (Iran is the key foreign policy issue there) but because such weakness incites Islamists again to attack, both to close down criticism of Islam and to impose one aspect of Shari’a, or Islamic law, on the West.
Terry Jones, Sam Bacile, and their future imitators know how to goal Muslims to violence, embarrass Western governments and move history. In response, Islamists know how to exploit Jones, et al. The only way to stop this cycle is for governments to stand firmly on principle: “Citizens have freedom of speech, which specifically means the right to insult and annoy. The authorities will protect this right. Muslims do not enjoy special privileges but are subject to the same free-speech rules as everyone else. Leave us alone.”
Source: Danielpipes.org
More and more it is coming out that the attack on the Benghazi Consulate was a planned attack, even planning for the removal of Ambassador Stevens to a safe house where the attackers were fully aware he would be. Attacks of this nature are not created in a vacumn, they are planned, organized and orchestrated. And by the time the Cairo riots had started, the movie in question has already been removed by Egyptian authorities from the internet available to Egyptians.
The movie in question did not cause the riots, or the deaths of our Benghazi diplomates, it was simply used as an excuse to hide the already planned attacks, rileing people who subscribe to the Religion of Perpetual Outrage. How many Libyans even own computers to be able to view a movie that has been found nowhere but on the internet?
So what is the answer? To limit our First Amendment rights in order to appease the beast? To blame others for the actions of 7th century cretins?
To seek scapegoats to lay the blame at their feet when it is the assassins who are to blame for American deaths. It seems that some believe so.
@retire05:
President Obama said:
in his walkback from fully backing the Cairo Embassy apology.
But Obama took $1 million dollars from Bill Maher and, over time, has been asked to think about giving it back or to charity for a variety of reasons.
Now, a new reason: Maher made much of that money by MOCKING religion!
Mostly he mocked Christianity, but in his movie, Religulous, he mocked and scorned organized religion.
Of course, lest we forget, Obama has mocked Christianity on occasion, too.
Obama is the best President you will ever see in your life time! God bless Obama and America!
Arab Spring is a clean sweep…. US embassies are under assault in Egypt, Yemen, Tunisia and Libya. Yet only Libya is supposed to be an “organized assault”… which I have no doubt it was…. ergo attempting to divert attentions away from the filmmaker who can’t keep his bigotry straight, nor his facts.
So how about all the rest of the embassies, still under assault? Is all that just a Sept 11th pre-planned protest that is going on for days, and spreading?
Only the most naive would suggest that radical Islamists wouldn’t seize upon the mention of Muhammed having a hang nail as an excuse to justify their violence to the moderate Muslim world.
Count me with Schlussel… anti-Semetic Copts are little better than the Islamists in their hatred. And the more I learn, the more I believe this was deliberate to foment more hate and violence against Israel and Jews to tag team the usual increase in risk that happens on Sept 11th. You will not find me siding with anti-Semites under any circumstances.
Arab Spring was a bad joke from the start. Today has pounded that final nail of logic into the coffin.
@MataHarley:
I agree with your sentiment, Mata.
In a weird way the Copts are suffering from a permanent Stockholm Syndrome (or is it the other city?) .
They are like Winston Smith in the novel 1984 when he was going to be tortured by his worst fear and he screamed, don’t do it to me! Do it to Julia!
Copts cannot see past their constant victimhood (and they are far more REAL victims than, say, African-Americans in the USA).
So, they look around to anyone else – also hated by their tormentors – and they scream, do it to them! Don’t do it to me!
Exclusive: America ‘was warned of embassy attack but did nothing’
@MataHarley:
Count you with Debbie Schlussel? My God, Mata, do you not realize that Schlussel is certifiable? And if anyone has done countless harm by posting anti-Islamic tripe, like you accuse a film maker of doing, Schlussel’s your girl. Hell, she has threated to sue half of the conservative blogosphere for posting falsehoods about her when it is she that posts crap that is insane. According to Schlussel, Dr. Zudhi Jasser is a jihadist who is simply a stealth terrorist, Sean Hannity was guilty of bilking hundreds of thousand of dollars from a charity project, Mark Levin and Dennis Prager support Hezbollah, on and on and on.
And how nuts is Debbie Schlussel? This nuts:
last year I posted a response to a claim she made about Rick Perry being a Islamist. I was polite, but what I got damn sure wasn’t. Schlussel sent me a nasty, vile, hateful, profane email threatening me. I replied to her telling her not to email me again. But that didn’t stop lawyer Schlussel. For three days, I continued to get nasty, vile, hateful, profane and threating email from her.
The emails were so bad, and so threatening that I called my local sheriff who referred me to a mutual friend who is an FBI agent. I printed out the emails for the agent, and contacted my lawyer who sent her a ceast and desist email. But it seems I was not the only one she went after. A blogger, only known to a few Texans, had problems with her and was receiving the same type of vile emails from her about the same time I was.
Then there was YidWithLid, who defended John Hawkins in his battle with Schlussel at Right Wing News.
http://yidwithlid.blogspot.com/2010/06/i-defend-john-hawkins-so-debbie.html
You have said countless times that you believe the anti-Islam movie created the riots and protests in the Middle East. Do you not think the vile, hateful things that Schlussel has said about Islam has not done the same? Now, while I may disagree with you, I certainly don’t want you to ever go through what others have if you should ever decide to disagree with Debbie Schlussel who likes to throw her law degree around as a way to intimidate other conservative bloggers. No one is safe from her psychotic vitriol.
retire, just because I agree with her on the anti-Semitic reality of the Copt Christians, and that the real nutjob is Pam Geller, doesn’t mean I agree with everything else she writes. But I laugh at those that want to give the Copts a nod of approval, simply because they have the word “Christian” in their name. They are no better than the Muslims when it comes to the Jews. Simple fact of life… perhaps inconvenient to some, I know. But factual none the less.
If that is what you think I have written in my multiple comments, then I suggest a return to night school.
@MataHarley:
Frankly, I don’t give a damn about the Copts. They chose to stay in a nation that they knew were going to persecute them. Their choice. And their numbers are not big enough to fight back.
What the hell have you and I been debating about if not the film makers right to free speech? Go back and re-read your own posts. You have made it quite clear, to anyone even in night school (your bitchiness is showing again) that you think the movie was the motivation for the riots in Benghazi and the assassination of Ambassador Stevens as well as the protests in Cairo. Are you now going to deny that was your view?
As to Pam Geller; you win no points with me there. She, and her partner in crime, Robert Spencer, are nothing but alarmists who are trying to capitalize on their shouting “fire” in a crowed theater, although I will give Geller credit for helping an Muslim-born American teenager in her court battle to get away from her radical parents who she feared because she had become a Christian. There are two people that I trust to give the real scoop on the Middle East; Daniel Pipes and Bernard Lewis.
Actually, retire, you and I have not been debating. johngalt and I have been. And none of it had to do with the 1st Amendment. Don’t know how many times I wrote that anyone has the Constitutional right to be a bigot in the US, and freely express their bigoted opinion. However with that weighty responsibility of rights comes repercussions for being irresponsible. They aren’t legal repercussions since none involved… Bacile, Terry Jones, Sadak… can be prosecuted merely for being irresponsible bigots. Thus the reason I countered you with your reference to the “full weight to bear”, when it was just a mere phone call with no ability to bring any criminal charges. .
Anyone can reread my comments and see that while johngalt wanted an all or nothing, blame only on the Islamists, I pointed out that other influences (i.e. Bacile, providing a rally cry that allowed for larger influence on those who may not have been involved otherwise) also share responsibility… even if not an equal share. Certainly the lionshare of the responsibility is on the Islamists, but they were also handed a valuable propaganda weapon. This stuff doesn’t happen in a vacuum and, as I’m coming to believe, this propaganda weapon was deliberate in it’s intent.
However now I find it especially ironic that the “blood on the hands”, which johngalt feels exclusively belongs to the Islamists, is now okay to use in reference to Obama on another thread. I figure you all can sort out your disagreement there without me.
If there are only two people that you trust on ME information, then you are sorely lacking a wider perspective. The obvious would be the example of listening to Zawahiri himself, as I noted above. Hard for any of this to come as a surprise when Zawahiri was kind enough to point it out in advance, with such detail. So I listen to many voices, and end up discarding the more emotional and counterproductive rhetoric, such as Geller churns out.
BTW, I tend to get “bitchy” when I have people paraphrasing my words into a completely false narrative. I’d say if you’d like to avoid my responding “bitchiness”, then don’t presume to speak or translate for me, telling me or anyone else what I said. If you want to reference something in particular, you need only provide a link back to the related comment for full context.
@MataHarley:
So now you are going to slam me because I listed TWO people whose opinions I value more than Schlussel, Geller and Spencer, who, btw, are all Americans? There are others; Walid Shoebat, Hersi Ali, John Bolton, to name a few. Want more or would that only cause you to pick nits again?
And I don’t “paraphrase” your words, generally. Most of the time I provide your exact quote. Seems you like to accuse me of what you are guilty of, like stating that I was supporting Terry Jones when I said no such thing. Honesty does not seem to be your forte. As to your “bitchiness”, I think it is just part of your DNA. Perhaps that explains why you never answer the questions I put to you.
John Bolton just said that the movie had absolutely nothing to do with the unrest in the Middle East. NOTHING. He said it was simply a diversion that the Administration was falling for.
retire, I really have neither the time, nor patience, to cater to your perceived victimhood. You’ll really just have to find someone else who cares.
BTW, retire… you said:
No… I did not. I said you were “defending” Terry Jones, which is entirely different than “supporting” Terry Jones. This was in reference to your belief that a phone call from Dempsey, asking him to defer to troops safety by not perpetuating the rhetoric, was “intimidation” and a threat. I’m quite sure that Jones just looked at is as it was… good publicity for a guy who’s been out of the limelight for a while now. He certainly was under no threat of criminal charges.
John Bolton on Fox today.
No, Retire, that’s not quit correct. What Bolton said was that it was a “pretext” not a “diversion”.
pre·text (prtkst) n. 1. An ostensible or professed purpose; an excuse. 2. An effort or strategy intended to conceal something. (To allege as an excuse.) 3. a fictitious reason given in order to conceal the real one 4. a specious excuse; pretence
pretext – From Latin praetexere, “to disguise,” from prae, “in front,” and texere, “weave”—as something serving to conceal plans.pretext – From Latin praetexere, “to disguise,” from prae, “in front,” and texere, “weave”—as something serving to conceal plans.
The video is being used by radical Islamist to fan the flames of Anti-American hate and incite violence. That’s is definitely not a diversion, it is a means to an end. Whether it was created by Coptic’s as hate speech or by radical Islamists specifically to motivate anti-American violence, it has succeeded in both.
What I would suggest, is that the Film-Maker be deported back to Egypt for performing anti-American acts, and let them know he’s coming.
@MataHarley:
defending…………..supporting…………..nit picking. But that seems to be your forte. That, and tag teaming anyone who has the audacity to not agree with you and accept everything you say as some intellectual brain explosion.
@Ditto:
Well, since I did not have access to Bolton’s exact quote, diversion was just as good as anything.
But I am glad you are here to play human dictionary. Your life must be rather dull.
@Greg Americans died because we have a President and Sec.of State whose arrogance and hubris cost four of their subordinates their lives.Madame Clinton’s Dept of State has a contracted security force of 5500 operators, more or less the size of an infantry brigade at a cost of 10 billion taxpayer dollars over the next five years. Why were they not used for security instead of locals? Why was no action taken when the existence of a viable threat was known? Why were Marines denied live ammo to defend the embassy in Cairo? Does Clinton expect anyone to buy her act and feigned indignation that Libyans would assault the US after we “freed”them? After all just last year she claimed that Bashar al Assad was a reformer, really? Why should Obama get a pass for ignoring more than 50% of his security briefings? Why can’t Obama make time to meet with prime minister Netanyahu if he can find time to fund raise and appear on Letterman? Americans died because their leadership failed them again. Keep plugging away,good lock justifying the failure the Obama WH to protect its subordinates, who trusted them to do so.
@retire05: #123
Obama misses about 40% of his DAILY security meetings. A warning is issued that the same group who took down the World Trade Center and did other attacks, might strike again during September 11. The week before Sept. 11, Obama didn’t attend ANY security meetings. Was he ignarantly thinking the meetings weren’t important enough to attend, or did he PURPOSELY miss them so he could say he didn’t get any warnings ahead of time before the attacks? I wonder.
It sounds a lot like the question of did FDR purposely let the Japanese attack Pearl Harbor so we would enter WW II. I still don’t have enough information to decide either way, so I won’t. Obama pulled out the Marines before the attacks. Why? FDR wanted in the war so we could help end it before it came to us. Could Obama have pulled the Marines out to aid our enemy?
Let us never forget that Obama was the first president to BOW to anybody, and he bowed to the king of Saudi Arabia, a known Muslim first country. You only bow to those who you allow to rule over you. It is a symble of your recognizing that they have power over you. In my opinion, in the act of bowing to the Saudi king, he confirmed his alegiance to the king, and that means he will do whatever the kings tells him to do.
For those who say our Bower-N-Chief didn’t bow to the king, you either haven’t seen the picture, or you will believe your Liar-N-Chief no matter what, so lets not get into a discussion about it.
@Nan G: #124
It would have been nice if Obama would have put some feelings in his speech. I’m tired of hearing his computer voice, so I usually “MUTE” him when he is speeking. The “MUTE” button is the greatest thing since sliced bread. Before sliced bread, what was the greatest thing?
@G: #125
If he’s the BEST president I will ever see in my lifetime, it doesn’t give me much of an incentive to go on. You are looking at Obama’s graphs upsidedown.
@brian winkler, #138:
You don’t seem to have a clue concerning the actual function of the Marine Corps Embassy Security Group, or what restrictions apply to them. Maybe you should look it up. You also don’t seem to be aware that the embassy in Libya still had the status of an interim facility, which explains the absence of any Marines. It wasn’t because Obama pulled them out. Prior to 2006, there hadn’t been a U.S. ambassador in Libya since 1972. The offices that opened in 2006 were in residential buildings, because the Gaddafi government denied permission for anything else. Those were evacuated and destroyed during last year’s civil war. After Gaddafi’s fall the consulate reopened at its current location. You don’t just snap your fingers and suddenly have a permanent, fortified embassy complex.
Americans died because they were doing a difficult job in a dangerous place when things went seriously wrong. They should be honored for that–not immediately used in some opportunist’s effort to score cheap political points against the administration they worked with. Here are some rather more dignified photographs of the three Americans who lost their lives. They would probably prefer to be remembered this way.
@brian winkler: @brian winkler: #138
Have you figured out yet who’s side our Bower-In-Chief is REALLY on?!
@Colorado Girl: Well, Colorado Girl, come with me to the middle east and talk to some of these people. Maybe when you are not in your safe secure home protected by those who would do violence to protect you, only then will you be able to see the solution is not wearing a tie dyed teashirt and marching in from to the Pentagon.
@Greg: No Greg, you don’t snap your fingers and have a fortified embassy, but you can and people do snap their fingers and have a marine protection detail.
@Greg: As of Jan.1 Madame Clinton’s Dept. of State had under contract with multiple contractors over 5000 security personnel. “Interim Facility” or not the Benghazi consulate, given its location, was undermanned and depended on locals for what security it did have. If the consulate was an untenable location why were sensitive documents in the building? Given the history of the region and experiences in Iraq with a greater military presence, why were over three dozen staff operating in such an exposed position? Leadership is responsible for and to its subordinates. The Dept. of State and the WH failed to do everything that could be done to secure and to what ever degree possible protect their subordinates operating amongst the most violent, cretinous excuses for humanity extant. The President is too busy fund raising and putting out photo ops to attend the security briefings that would show how badly his policy has destabilized the middle east and imperiled Israel to a greater degree than at any time since 1948. With a president in perpetual 24/7 campaign mode and a Sec. of State who accomplishes very little besides wearing out airframes while touring the world with her MB girlfriend, I don’t see it changing. Of course I can’t expect someone with their proboscis firmly planted in Obama’s sphincter to see much of anything.
@Smorgasbord: Being a clinically obsessed narcissist he is on his own side but he leans heavily toward those who share in his beliefs and resulting actions towards reducing America to banana republic status.
Another head scratcher here as to whether this “film” was planned as part of the motivating force to get many involved in the protests who, otherwise, wouldn’t be.
According to a Reuters article by Mark Hosenball, and appearing on the HuffPo site, it seems that as early as Sept 8th… four days after “Sam Bacile” posted his Arabic version YouTube and it was being promoted by the sundry groups, the Egyptian TV network, al-Nas, *knew* that Sam Bacile was not the Israeli Jew he proclaimed, and that he was an Egyptian Coptic.
Now how is it that the Egyptian news outlets knew that Bacile was lying about his false claims of Jewish/Israeli status right off the bat, and before the US media knew?
@brian winkler, #146:
Correct. Contractors such as those who were charged with guarding the Benghazi facility. Contractors are locals. You seem to want to believe SoS Clinton has her own little private army. Who, exactly, do you think the 5,000 consist of? Where do you imagine they are? Travelling with Hillary? Guarding the Clinton compound?
The entire republican response is beginning to make me feel slightly ill. Initially there were carefully measured criticisms of Romney’s statement, and I was beginning to think people were putting the country first and the campaign second. I expected Romney to tacitly acknowledge that he might have spoken prematurely, based on incorrect information or some such, and move on. Then somebody blew a silent dog whistle. By the following morning, Romney is doubling down on his attacks, everyone is on message covering his butt, and everyone is hell-bent on turning a tragic loss of three Americans and a growing international crisis into an attack on the man who’s job it is to deal with all of this. The three dead Americans have become nothing more than a means to that end.
@Greg:
Where does one buy one of these “silent dog whistles” of which you speak?
And, if said dog whistle is blown… and you’re the only one who hears it…does it really exist?
And, finally, there were four Americans who were murdered. Not three.
I had missed that sad bit of information along the way.
@Greg: Greg, you are right for a change. I have told you time and time again that the liberals believe any means to achieve the end. Obama knew there was going to be an incident 48 hours prior to the attack. If you watched TV today, you saw how presidential Obama looked hovering over the 4 coffins. I almost believed he gave a damn, but then I looked at what was happening. This was only one more attempt for Obama to look like the leader he should be but isn’t. You finally, you are right. Obama left an opening for a crisis. The crisis happened. He expected his “never let a crisis go to waste” to give him a bump in the pols. It is too bad that 4 people had to die to provide the means for Obama to look like a president in the end!
@Greg: I was mistaken the contracts will call for 7000 + and upwards of 15,000 support/ logistics.7000 mercenaries represents as a private army and the majority of contracted operators are most certainly not locals. Locals while commonly hired at much lower pay are less than a third of the State Dept. mercenary force. AKE Ltd,Armour Group, Dyncorp, Erinys, Global Strategies and all of Blackwater/Xe’s shell companies are built around ex-military personnel. That would be for a reason and the collapse of security at Benghazi illustrates that reason. Why were Stevens and others burning sensitive materials when they should have been making an effort to extricate themselves?Why were materials of that nature being kept in an”interim facility” if it could not be secured to prevent their loss? Why with the resources and manpower available wasn’t action taken to either extract the staff and material or reinforce their defense? You work so very hard at being the onsite apologist for the Obama regime. Is it a paid position? What is Axelrod paying for stooging these days?
@brian winkler: Per the State Dept. you are correct. Around the fifth question she was asked about security. She clearly states that there was a robust AMERICAN security force. The Libyans were responsible for the outside perimeter and the AMERICAN security force inside the compound.
http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2012/09/197729.htm
@brian winkler, #153:
A sense of duty, I imagine. They put that duty ahead of their personal safety.
Preventing sensitive materials from being lost, btw, is the primary duty of Marine detachments assigned to an embassy. Other things are secondary to that. Their own lives, for example.
@brian winkler: #147
No matter what term a person calls Obama, anyone with an open mind should be able to figure out that Obama’s intentions for the USA are not good ones. I’m not sure what the appropriate term to call him is, but we know that he is our own Bower-In-Chief. I loved the picture of Obama bowing to the Burge King.
@Greg: #155
I know nothing aobut the inner workings of an embasy, but I am guessing that the ONLY responsibility of the Marines is the SAFETY of the people in the embasy. The staff would be in charge of the information. The Marines would be protecting the staff while THEY destroyed information.
The media had a pre-planned storm of blame on Romney for his ”jumping the gun,” on his statement that agreed 100% with the statement Obama finally hectored into.
But the media has NOT said one thing about itself for its own JUMPING the GUN when it FALSELY blamed a Jew for the poorly made Mohammad video.
Turned out the Media jumped the gun.
Turned out it was NOT a Jew who created that video.
Where are the self-recriminations?
((Crickets))
The media did not blame a Jew for “Innocence of Muslims”, Nan G. They were just reporting the lie that Bacile told them – that he was an Israeli Jew – and apparently didn’t find it important enough to verify his story prior to print. But I will say that the first stories I saw about Bacile included his claim he was an Israel Jew, but also reported that Israeli spokesmen stated that not to be true. So I saw the caveats included in the same articles with his claim. It was further media digging that has exposed not only that lie, but a vast fabric of lies.
Smorg There was never a Marine Detail in Benghazi.
Randy Are you suggeting the Potus allowed these killings to occur in order to promote his re-election?
The incessant bashing of Obama and suggesting he “has blood on his hands” may play to the shark like choir here at F.A but will not help Romney.
As Tom points out the demographics favor Obama. I’ve suggested the politically motivated Q.E. 3 o.k’d by Bernanke also boosts BHO. It also saves Ben’s job.
With under 2 months to go both sides are pulling out all stops. Obama now favored. Hang on