Steve @ Riehl World News:
Libyan Ambassador Ali Aujali declared Thursday night that exercise of Constitutionally protected free speech in the United States in and by a civil society makes one a terrorist if, in some un-civilized society, violient animal jihadists use said exercise of free speech as pretense for murder, mayhem, rape and violent destruction. (H/T: Pat Dollard.)
Libyan Ambassador to America, Ali Aujali: “But I believe now that Terry Jones and his colleague, the one who is responsible for this movie, to me, they are terrorists like anybody others. Because they are responsible for what happening in Bengazi. They are create hatreds among the people.”
Let’s get something straight here. Neither the idiot pastor Terry Jones nor the American… errr… Israeli…. errr… Egyptian errr…. [you pick one!] filmmaker nor anyone else “create hatreds.” Those hatreds already exist. Perhaps Ambassador Aujali has missed the last 1200 years of regional history.
Terrorists, Mr. Ambassador, are people of and from an un-civil society who bomb, blast and attack embassies and who rape and murder ambassadors. If a movie incites such beastly behavior, it is much less a reflection on free speech – even that which we may disagree with – than the animals who can’t help themselves but to burn, rape, behead and maim other human beings. In short, it’s not the movie, sir. It’s the murdering men.
But the ambassador wasn’t done. He went on to elaborate on what he thinks the United States government should do about these “terrorists.”
“What Terry Jones try to get out of this movie? I think that the American government or any government, when something happens like this, when somebody he involved in work or act or whatsoever, lead to the killing, murder of other people, I think they should be investigated.”
Mr. Ambassador, while it remains unclear just how things do (or don’t) work in your country, that’s not the way it works here. We don’t have an all-powerful central government to react against the People on the whims of a leader, not even an ambassador from some country still awaiting a constitution of its own. Or do we?
Why is our Justice Department leaking the name and address of a man – good or bad, saint or felon – no matter what film he made, wrote, financed or directed? Have we truly reached a whole new line of brazen departure from our own Constitution? Is our own politicized Justice Department, apologetic State Department and pandering White House more closely aligned with Ali Aujali than with the Framers of our Constitution? Aparently “All animals are equal. But some animals are more equal than others.”
Does the Libyan Ambassador plan to rape & Murder them too? Like our Ambassador Stevens?
While it’s reprehensible to think that irresponsibly exercising your free speech rights can lead to a federal investigation, can we also ignore the possibility that the release of this film – it’s deliberate timing for Arabic dubbing, the not-so-intricate fabric of lies that the filmaker wove (attempting to lay the responsibility for it’s creation on Israel) – indicates it may have played a part in the planning for the attacks?
i.e., most Muslims would not be taking part in the assault of any of the US embassies. But give them an excuse to stage a protest crowd, enhancing the numbers of participants and feeding the emotions – it’s a perfect way to give cover to any strategic assault with weaponry. They would be concealed among many, out there just to “protest”. This is no different than staging one event to draw attention away from the main event…. or a part of the overall attack plan.
I don’t see this as impossible one bit… especially as tidbits of info come out each day.
I posted this on another thread, but the questions, intent and allegiance of the “filmmaker” bear repeating here.
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 outlet knew that “Bacile” – an Egyptian Coptic – was lying about his false claims of Jewish/Israeli status immediately… and all before the US media knew? Especially a news outlet that includes segments devoted to Islamic scholars that deliver edicts? In fact, why would a Copt, and enemy of the Islamists, hand over an anti-Muslim film to a hardliner Islamist broadcaster for airing prior to Sept 11th?
Today over a dozen countries are attacking the WESTern interests in their lands.
It CANNOT be from that video.
Germany’s interests are being attacked.
The British interests are being attacked.
Private businesses (based in the WEST) are being attacked.
It is pretty obvious that tiny movie was just an excuse for MURDER.
It was not WHY the murders happened.
I recalled a court case from Australia when a Muslim man converted into Christianity.
He used the koran and hadith in church to explain why Islam could not be from the same god as described in the Bible.
He was arrested for hate crimes.
In court he attempted to USE the koran and hadith to prove that he was not lying whatsoever about the things he said Mohammad said and did.
The prosecution disallowed his quoting from these books because, that, too, was called hate crime by Muslims!
So, the verses were not read.
He was found guilty.
He was sent to prison.
Then a higher court insisted on having the reading of all the verses he wanted in the record.
That court overturned his conviction and he was freed from prison.
A big problem in dealing with Muslims is that TELLING the TRUTH is not a defense against their accusations of disparagement.
And, in Islam, accusations in many cases equal arrests, trials, sentencing AND punishments being carried out immediately.
Muslims do not want YOU, the infidel, reading to others about Mohammad, the human being.
Contrast that with all the warts we know were part of King David’s life.
God used King David both as a ruler over earthly Israel AND as an ancestor to Jesus on both parents’ sides.
In David and Bathsheeba (the movie) we see David send a friend to the front of a battle to die just to cover up his infidelity with the man’s wife.
In the Bible we learn that David went into the temple and ate foods sacrificed to God right off the altar!
We also learn that David danced so raucously that his private parts became visible to all the people.
There’s lots more, David was a mere human.
Neither Christians nor Jews get upset when you bring these truths up.
It does not insult us or our religion.
Does it surprise you that Zawahiri’s 2008 promises to go after Western interests, and to have Muslims rise up in defiance against the same, comes to fruition, Nan G?
The “reasons” are the same as they have always been. To minimize Western influence and discredit them in the eyes of all Muslims… not just the radical Islamists. Do not confuse the goal with the propaganda tools used to accomplish the goal.
@MataHarley:
Why do the majority of your posts start off like this?
I’ll take that as evidence you don’t give a flying fart as to whether this was done in cooperation with a plot to attack US interests, and to deliberately implicate Israel in it’s concept, GregSucks.
And why do you feel the need to choose a handle that is demeaning to another commenter forum member here?
@MataHarley:
I see you can’t attack the message so you attack the messenger.
I find it hilarious that you think it all happened because of, “The Film”
@MataHarley:
So what you’re saying is, Zawahiri knew about “The Film” in 2008? Make up your mind.
Hard to combat such an asinine and juvenile statement, but I’ll give it the ol’ college try… If you read my comment to Mike O’Malley on another thread (comment #131) you’d understand that I was speaking of Zawahiri, detailing how the radical Islamists would go about removing apostate Muslim rulers and replacing them with fundamentalist rulers… which is what is being done exactly as he said would happen in the wake of the US, slowly leaving the ME and Iraq.
Again, as I said to Nan G… do not confuse the goal with the tools used to accomplish that goal. Doesn’t matter if it’s Bacile’s film today, Terry Jones Qu’ran burning last year, or the rhetoric that flamed during the days of the Cordoba House. Any and everything they can use to demonstrate that the West is filled with those that hate all of Islam is their tool to bring moderate Muslims into their fold as the lesser evil.
I responded to your unkind comment with the fact that, with all I’ve seen, I believe that Bacile’s intents and allegiances are highly questionable, and may actually be a part of the planned assaults. Your curiousity, apparently, doesn’t extend that far. But that also points out your reading problems…. because I’ve never said this all happened because of, “the film”, but that using the film is a part of the overall strategy of the bad guys.
Ergo, they were handed a propaganda tool, and I believe it was handed to them deliberately for that reason. Why else would a supposed Coptic Egyptian/anti-Semite turn over the film to a fundamentalist Egyptian TV news outlet to broadcast prior to Sept 11th? And additionally, that fundamentalist TV station knew full well that it was the work of a (allegedly) Coptic Egyptian, and not an Israeli Jew.
Odd alliance, don’t you think… assuming, of course, you think at all.
And yes.. your handle is what I consider personally offensive since your first arrival here. So I hardly think you have any moral high ground to lecture about “attacking messengers” when your handle specifically attacks a particular commenter who weighs in regularly on this forum.
@MataHarley: @MataHarley:
What does Mike O’Malley have to do with it? Pick a side of your mouth to talk out of and stay with it. Just saying.
It’s interesting how subtle peculiarities of syntax and phrasing can sometimes be recognized after a while. Just saying.
@Greg:
That made me LOL out loud. It took you a while? I’m still LOLing out loud.
I’m taking it you weren’t that good at “Name That Tune”
@MataHarley:
Unf’nbelievable, you’re a mind reader too? Maybe obama should replace Leon Panetta and David Petraeus with you. It would save the tax payers some money, one person doing the job of two.
One quick question, when you make a new hat do you use new foil or do you recycle?
In all fairness of the ambassador wanting to distinguish the filmmaker as a terrorist, us americans do the same. Examples being that we wish to prosecute BC marijuana growers and, not to mention Obamas drone killings, though the two are very different in nature. I believe that the film was used as an excuse for irrational behavior. And hatred justified by certain people could make many feel justified
@MataHarley:
Mata, I’m usually pretty good at connecting the dots, but I am not following you here at all. Are you saying an Egyptian-Coptic Christian collaborated with Salafists to drive up tensions in the ME? Or are you saying he did it intentionally to piss off the radicals and the Salafists just used it as an excuse; knowing it was coming?
Well therein lies the head scratching reasons to suspect “Bacile’s” actual allegiance and motivation, Aqua. Just why would Egyptian Coptic Christian deliberately provide anti-Muslim propaganda fodder to the Egyptian press, falsely claiming it was the product of an Israeli Jew, just before planned attacks and Sept 11th?
And why, when the Muslim hardliner Sheik, knew it was from a Copt, was their ire not directed to the Copts in Egypt along with the US, since Bacile and Sadek are both American Coptic Christians? Well, in theory anyway.. Sadek is a Copt, but Bacile? Even Sadek or Jones never heard of Bacile prior to him contacting them for help in distribution of his creation. For all Jones and Sadek know, they could have been handed propaganda created by a terrorist, distributed thru the proper channels to have the desired effect.
There are only two reasons why a Coptic Christian would provide Egyptian media – including the hardliners – Arabic translated anti-Muslim propaganda:
1: Because even tho the Egyptian Copts and Muslims hate each other, they share as much hatred for the US and their Jewish ally as the Muslims,
2: It is actually someone who was aiding the attacks, and creating the propaganda specifically to assist their cause.
What people miss is that altho there is friction between the Copts and Muslims, they actually tend to co-exist and negotiate more easily with Muslims in Egypt than they do with US or Jews. Coptic Christians are vehemently anti-Semitic and always resent the US support for Israel. As far as Egypt, and even AQ’s Zawahiri, attitudes towards Egypt’s Copts, I can again only quote Zawahiri himself from his Open Meeting Interview back in late 2008/early 2009.
So it seems that hardliners find them somewhat easy to control in the area, and that Zawahiri, himself, actually communicates with the Copt leadership in Egypt in his writings.
Then there’s the fact that Zawahiri’s brother, Muhammed al-Zawahiri, was released from prison and has emerged as a self-professed “moderate”, willing to use elections and the system to gain power. This shouldn’t be going over well with his big brother, since Zawahiri’s disdain for the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas – because they also used that route – is unmistakeable in that same document. The true hardliners, such as the Salafists, and Jihadi Group etal, do not believe in elections since that indicates “compromises” on the installation of Shari’ah… which should never be questioned or an issue, according to them. But the younger Zawahiri was upfront during the Egyptian protests on the US Embassy.
Let’s put it this way… either both Copts and radical Muslims are willing to fight a common enemy, then battle out some details themselves later, after that common enemy is exorcised. Or else “Bacile” is not who he says he is.
INRE Bacile. Consider the realities:
1: “Bacile” is virtually invisible, and has no footprint for his past as a “real estate developer”, or other lies he told. Neither do terrorists.
2: Just who was the beneficiary of his bank fraud? Or, indeed, of any money they supposedly received for his South Park anti-Muslim farce? The CS Monitor is starting to catch on.. Plus as one of Curt’s Most Wanted posts show, he was also working with a ring leader, Eiad Salameh. Who is this guy, and where does his allegiance lie? Prior to Bacile’s bank fraud crimes, he was also arrested for meth related charges back in 1998.
3: The film crew were deliberately deceived, and all anti-Muslim dialogue was dubbed in during the post-production stage.
4: The original intent was to tie this to Israel and the Jews… that, however, backfired.
5: The Arabic translations were conveniently done and released in the week prior to Sept 4th. It does not take 3 months to get translations and subtitles for a 13 min flick. The release time was deliberate for max effect.
5: Both “Bacile” and Morris Sadek were responsible for getting it to Egyptian news outlets. Would be foolish for them to believe they could limit it to the small amount of Copt media alone, and that hardliners such as Sheik Khaled Abdalla wouldn’t also see this. Did Bacile and Sadek believe such a pathetic excuse for anti-Muslim propaganda – which did little but mock Muhammed – would not backfire on the Copt population there? Or did they not care because of a wider cause?
6: Since the propaganda film endangered Western and Jewish interests, and on the surface could also cause a backlash on the Egyptian Copts, the only beneficiaries of it are the Islamists
7: Despite the fact that Sheik Khaled Abdalla knew that the source for the received propaganda was an “immigrant” Egyptian Copt, that backlash on the Egyptian Coptic Christians has magically not come… why is that?
Considering I question his allegiance, I don’t know that it was done to “piss off the radicals” since that’s not necessary. The Islamists live in a perpetual pissed off state and need no anti-Muslim film to act. However what this does is give them justification for their violence in the eyes of more moderate Muslims, whom they are always attempting to pull into their fold against the Great Satan and Zionists. Some are actually out there to protest the film. There were, for example, two different areas of activity in Cairo. One was the violence at the US Embassy site, which was numbered in the 100s. In Tahir Square, there were thousands protesting, peacefully.
Ergo, moderate Muslims, protesting for what they feel is a great injustice (as they always do when this crap arises), provide great cover for violent elements during an operation. Safety and perceived strength in numbers.
The last thing to know is that the MB is detested by genuine hardliners, such as Zawahiri and the Salafists… so they don’t care that the MB has high government presence in Egypt’s new government. They may be slightly more acceptable than Mubarak, who was viewed as a pure apostate corrupt leader and a puppet of the US. But the MB doesn’t enjoy much higher status with them, and Egypt will continue to stew – just like Libya, Yemen, Sudan etal – until they force the installation of Shari’ah. If that doesn’t happen, they will remove the “new boss” with yet another rebellion. But in all cases, their first quest is to remove all US and Western presence from Egypt and the Arabic Peninsula.
Mata:
I’ve been very clear about this same thing for a long time, Mata.
Excuses are required in Islam for hostilities.
Their koran/hadiths/sura DEMAND they claim to be only/merely responding to attacks….never the ”instigator.”
That is why it is IMPOSSIBLE to please them.
Hoping the crocodile eats you last still gets you eaten!
Just ask Ambassador Chris Stevens, tech expert Sean Smith and the two ex-Navy SEALs.
Remember Osama used the loss of SPAIN 700 years before his own birth as the attack he and al Qaeda were ”koranically rightly” responding to.
In Islam, with its 1,500,000,000 people there is ALWAYS something to rouse the rabble.
A little retarded 14-year-old Christian girl supposedly desecrated the koran!!!!
She should DIE!
And people who would protect her should die first.
A teacher who let her Muslim class name their teddy bear Mohammad.
Idolatry!!!
She should die.
And people who would protect her should die trying.
Medical personnel vaccinating Muslims against polio (probably making them either infertile or something).
They should die!
There is no corner small enough into which you can pait yourself so as to NEVER offend all Muslims.
The Copts learned that the hard way.
Now both Lew Rockwell, and Prison Planet can be added to CS Monitor as those who, like me, are sniffing this film as a contrived fraud with questionable intent.
From Prison Planet:
Only one comment as to the last paragraph… the preplanned attacks can only be tied to Libya, and possibly Egypt. The ensuing violence in these days following in other countries cannot be categorized as the same. Again, hardliner Islamists are able to use the propaganda tool to their advantage to stir up moderate Muslims in protest as cover while they go for their desired targets.
It’s ridiculous to discount this propaganda piece as not influential or involved in these events. It is not possible for this to be an all or nothing, black and white assessment of “blame”. One can no more count the film as the *only* reason for the uprisings then you can discount the part it plays in the overall strategy. There is a larger quest, and the film is used to achieve that larger quest.
The only question that really matters is if this was an unintended gift, or a deliberately manufactured gift, laundered thru predictable channels for distribution, as part of the overall strategy.
You can view an interactive map of the protests from The Atlantic Wire, which they hope to keep updated.
From Lew Rockwell:
@MataHarley: #19,
It is now clear with brief hindsight that it is both.
From the beginning it smelled like a fraud, but it has had much more impact, and caused more harm, than I’m sure the scum who maliciously produced it ever expected that it would.
This garbage also is not, nor ever was, intended to be considered to be protected under the umbrella of ‘free speech’ IMHO. The hateful, spiteful, intent to foment violence has to be punished.
And, BTW, great summaries in #17/19.
@ Aqua, . . . keep in mind, Copts are Arabs first, and Copts second.
I should also add, given the broader mess in the ME and with respect to Iran, Arabs are Arabs first and Muslims second. Iranians are Persian.
Ah, now we have Lew Rockwell and Alex Jones chiming in on the situation in the Middle East and what caused it.
So let’s look at who these players are:
Lew Rockwell, associated with the Von Mises Institute, but also close friends with Ron Paul, and was selected to be Ron Paul’s running mate when Dr. Paul ran as an Independent. Rockwell was also close to the late Murray Rothbard, a self loathing Jew if there ever was one. Rothbard considered himself the preeminent economist in the nation, often slamming Milton Friedman and saying that Friedman was just a poseur and that he, Rothbard, is the true inheritor of the Hayak philosphy. Rothbard was responsible for creating both Rockwell’s and Paul’s opinion on the Middle East. Remember, Dr. Paul thinks that we should sever ties with Israel financially and is basically a Jew Hater Extrodinaire. Paul also thinks that Iran should be able to have nukes if they want them, and that Iran is simply trying to protect itself from a violent Israel.
Prison Planet: Owned by Alex Jones, a little known whacko talk show host until 9-11 when he became a trufer. Jones believes that George Bush was responsible for the destruction of the Twin Towers in New York on September 11, 2001 and that it was physically impossible for those planes to create such a hot fire to bring them down. But not to let that be his signature craziness, Jones also believes that FDR planned the entire Pearl Harbor attack, in conjunction with the Japanese government, that the Bilderbergers are planning a world takeover and the Illuminatti still exists and is working stealthly to take the world over, presumably with the Bilderbergers.
I would come closer to believing Jay Carney than Rockwell or Alex Jones. Both of them are conspiracy theorists who see black helicopters hovering over their houses at night.
I’m sure that CSMonitor and SmokingGun will be happy to be wear your proffered conspiracy theorists banner as well. I don’t suppose that James Raider will be losing any sleep either… just like me… for not making your list of respected opinions. And what was that about attacking the messenger that some love to lecture others about over and over?
Oh yeah… and how ’bout that “I’m through with you” promise, broken in just 24 hours? LOL
Hypocrisy… thy form is reflected in thine mirror.
It’s actually an interesting study in dichotomy, JR. On one hand, the 1st Amendment protects free speech, even – and most especially – unpopular free speech. On the other hand it is using the 1st Amendment to abuse another concept of the same 1st Amendment… a tolerance for freedom of religion, most especially unpopular religions.
@MataHarley:
When I am responding to you, personally, you will see your name above my post; otherwise my entries are for general consumption, not direct to any one specific person.
And I respond to you now because you seem to think you have caught me in a “gotcha” moment. The flattery you apply to yourself is not warrented.
Right… pretty thin there, retire, considering since your entire post was spent debunking credibility (in your opinion, of course) of the two additional sources I provided that are starting to smell the stench. This from a person who constantly lectures others about attacking messengers instead of the message. Funny about that… nothing to actually combat the reason they were getting suspicious. Just that fact that you didn’t like them (and I guess you classify Smoking Gun and CS Monitor in that same category?), and that I had added that information to an argument which your single dimensional perspectives can’t seem to grasp.
But right.. had nothing to do with me. /sarc LOL
@MataHarley:
Well if hateful, spiteful, intent to foment violence has to be punished, then let us start with the Koran, then the Haddith and thereafter the Sunna. MEMRI has identified a wealth of hateful, spiteful, materials written or spoken with intent to foment violence from which we can identify persons to punish. The irony of Islamicists and their apologists seeking to punish their critics who they claim are hateful, spiteful, and communicating with intent toward violence is not lost on me. It should not be lost on anyone here.
But if punishing what is hateful, spiteful, with intent to foment violence is wise and necessary and good public policy then let’s not stop with the Koran, the Haddith and the Sunna etc. Let’s purify American society. I can provide a list of that which is hateful, spiteful, intent to foment violence that should be punished, and a list you can expect to grow by the hour. A list that you can expect will target those with whom I disagree, those with whom you should disagree or at least those with whom I think you should disagree. 😉
As you said.. why stop there, O’Malley? How about movies, TV shows, books, art exhibits and theater that you, personally, find offensive?
The problem is, no one in the US is advocating a “punishment” for using one 1st Amendment right to abuse another concept of the 1st Amendment right. That is something that is confined to the lesser freedom oriented Muslim world, and perhaps a lot of acquiescent Europe. Wouldn’t be surprised if some of them cave…
But as we have all said here before, with those rights come responsibility for repercussions And that’s where many of us differ. Some of you apparently want rights, free from criticism or the repercussions. Sorry.. not going to happen.
Shall I assume that is a thinly veiled insult tossed at James Raider and myself, since it follows your cut/paste of our philosophical discussion? Are you attempting to take some sort of moral high ground on “tolerance”, and then pull in your fellow commenters for a mob type “hear hear” mentality?
@MataHarley:
We can break that down into manageable portions:
Question:
Answer:
No.
Question:
Answer:
No.
OK, now that we have cleared that up MataHarley, perhaps you can clear up something for me.
I’m not sure I understand you MataHarley. Clarify for me what you meant when you wrote above: “responsibility for repercussions” and “the repercussions”.
Tell me also, who is “all” in your first sentence above.