Dana Loesch @ Big Peace:
An American has been killed on the 11th anniversary of 9/11 as Islamist mobs attacked and burned the U.S. consulate in Libya.
A US official was killed and another wounded on Tuesday as an armed mob protesting over a film they said offended Islam attacked the US consulate in Benghazi, an official told AFP.
Libya’s deputy interior minister Wanis al-Sharef said: “One American official was killed and another injured in the hand. The other staff members were evacuated and are safe and sound.”
He could not say if the dead man was a diplomat.
It is so far the only death from mob attacks in Libya and Egypt over Islamist anger at an alleged film in production by Coptic Christians focusing on Islam. The United States spent 9/11 apologizing for hurting Islamists’ feelings in Egypt which incited protesters to desecrate our flag and storm the walls of the U.S. embassy.
From the Fox News story:
People know that Islamic fundamentalist extremists are a powder keg waiting for a spark, correct? And people pretty much know what sort of spark sets them off, correct?
So, the extreme Muslim Egyptian Christian jackass in the U.S. has innocent American blood on his hands, and should be summarily deported back to Egypt, or to any country foolish enough to give him asylum. Personally, I don’t much give a damn what happens to him afterward.
Resident aliens have no business using the freedoms of a nation that has generously allowed them to enter in a manner that gets citizens of that nation killed.
@Greg:
So, as a progressive, you subscribe to the policy of “freedom of speech” as long as it is speech you approve of? And we should not do anything that pisses off radical Islamists why? They might hurt us? Burn our consulates?
Funny, I don’t remember you complaining about the statements of CAIR, who is constantly preaching hatred against the United States, and gets accepted for visits to the White House since the Kenyan is now president. Perhaps you can link to one of your statements on this blog where you criticized CAIR, or any Muslim who speaks against this nation?
Or is it your philosophy to kiss radical Islam’s ass hoping that alligator will eat you last?
I’m sorry, but Islam is full of a bunch of bitches.
I’d bet this American official never heard of the film being protested before those bitches started protesting about it.
Here’s a thought. If you think you won’t like it, or that it might offend you. THEN DON’T GO SEE IT!
The world cannot go around bending over backwards, checking every statement, film sequence, printed word, or electronic message, ensuring that the precious, fragile sensibilities of muslims are not infringed upon.
And if there is any better evidence showing that the intolerance of Islam threatens innocents, then I don’t know what it is.
As for the apologizing;
Who thought this up?
Or this;
Granted, my rights only extend as far as the point at which they infringe upon another’s rights, but talking about feelings, religious or otherwise, is just plain stupid. If that was the case, then my religious feelings are hurt by some woman killing an unborn child, who some claim would be practicing her own freedom of choice, or healthcare rights.
The point is, where does it stop?
From:
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2012/09/11/Obama-Backed-UN-Free-Speech-Restrictions–With-Egypt–in-2009?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
@Greg:
What?!
I know you have a screw or two loose, but siding with muslims based on their “feelings”, over someone who is practicing a right considered one of the most important rights in America?
Please!
The people who have blood on their hands are the ones who killed the American, just because their oh, so fragile “feelings” are hurt.
@Greg:
I’ll remember this statement the next time I see you complain about illegal aliens availing themselves of free healthcare and college tuition.
That’s not how I see things. If you incite a lynch mob to violence, you’re as much to blame as the animals who carry the rope.
This guy has blood on his hands, just like Florida minister Terry Jones. His incitement cost 20 people their lives.
@Greg:
So, by that reasoning, the good Doctor of Death, Dr. Tiller, is as responsible for his own death as the person who pulled the trigger? For dumping on another man’s religious “feelings” and inciting that man to violence?
Stupid reasoning, if you ask me.
People are responsible for the consequences of what they say. The religious fanatic that gunned down Dr. Tiller in his church had likely been influenced by the words of others, who then disclaim responsibility and take refuge in exactly the sort of argument that you’re advancing.
@Greg:
Using your standards, then Obama, and Nancy Pelosi, are responsible for the deaths that came about because of the Own Wall Street protesters since Obama and Pelosi supported that movement. Or do you ignore the murders that happened in the protester camps because it doesn’t fit your agenda?
“This guy has blood on his hands”
Now, just what “guy” would you be talking about?
And the religious fanatics who murdered almost 3,000 people on September 11, 2001 were influence by the words of the very people you seem hell bent on defending.
@retire05, #10:
I’m not defending anybody. I’m refusing to ignore the obvious fact that there’s wider responsibility here than some want to acknowledge.
@retire05:
Oh, Greg isn’t defending the muslim murderers, retire05. He just believes that the guy who made the film is just as responsible.
In other words, you can say, or express yourself however you want. But if someone becomes enraged, or upset, by what you say, and then commits a violent crime, or any crime, because of it, then you are just as responsible.
In other words, you have freedom of speech, except when it might cause someone to do something. Then you shouldn’t say or express that viewpoint.
@Greg:
You most certainly are trying to defend the actions of murderous Islamic thugs by placing the blame on someone else. That is typical left wing thinking.
So then, do you agree that by lending their support to the OWS crowd, Obama and Pelosi are responsible for the murders that happened during the protests?
Maybe you should find a lawyer and ask for a brief explanation of the term “fighting words.” Ask about the Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire decision.
@Greg:
No, you are deciding that freedom of speech is something that can be subject of the feelings or sensibilities of someone else. But then that isn’t freedom of speech, is it?
@Greg:
If a bunch of Hasadic Jews storm a mosque in Falls Creek, Virginia and kill Muslims because the Imam preached that all Jews are dogs and pigs, under your standard, the Hasidic Jews would have a right to do that because their feelings had been insulted.
So, I am insulted by the things said about Americans by the members of CAIR. Does that give me the right to storm their offices and kill them?
Again, by Greg’s ”standards” the very imam who went around inciting Muslims to such violence over the so-called Danish Mohammad cartoons is to blame for all of the dozens of dead, right Greg?
After all the Egyptian press published the original cartoons three months before the riots and no one was offended in Islam.
But the imam wanted blood.
So he added three more cartoons to the mix.
They were AWFUL!!!
One depicted Mohammad as a pig. (And unclean animal in Islam)
One showed Mohammad as a dog (another unclean animal in Islam) mating doggy-style with a Muslim man in ”prayer position” in a prayer mat!
The last showed Mohammad as a physically excited man, dragging Aisha while she was still a child with a doll in her hand, off to have sex with him.
Only after the Muslims saw these three ”Danish” cartoons did they get offended enough to riot.
So, no Danes made them.
Muslims made them in order to inflame Muslims to murder white people.
Who is to blame?
The WORLD blames the Danes!
I bet Obama blames the Danes.
Who do you blame, Greg?
If a person chooses words or actions that they know are likely to provoke fanatics to acts of violence, they share blame for the violence their words or provoke. This should be simple enough for anyone to understand.
It should also be simple to understand that pointing that out isn’t taking the side of the fanatics.
Did we expect any less from our Apologist-N-Chief? Can anyone name ONE time when Obama condemned a Muslim in America for killing a member of their family because they offended them, or when the Muslims killed because their law says to?
Greg google Feb 22, 1939 New York Madison Square.
The events that happened that day, while infringed on Jewish feelings, is still considered protected speech. Your logic is fail. By your own logic you would be responsible for someone taking a blunt object to you because they might find your points of view offensive and deemed into that range of action as suitable as that persons feeling might be hurt. Who ever would do that is both an idiot and someone needing medication. Your words offensive or not does not make you the person responsible for an action. The person who does act instead of ignoring it is responsible. The First Admendment does not give a promised audience or force people to listen to a point that offends, do if someone gets butthurt over words either man the hell up and admit it offends or walk the other way.
AP reports:
The U.S. ambassador to Libya and three American members of his staff were killed in the attack on the U.S. consulate in the eastern city of Benghazi by protesters angry over a film that ridiculed Islam’s Prophet Muhammad, Libyan officials said Wednesday.
Ambassador Chris Stevens was killed Tuesday night when he and a group of embassy employees went to the consulate to try to evacuate staff as the building came under attack by a mob…….
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-christopher-stevens-ambassador-libya-20120912,0,4288354.story
Will Obama dither?
Well, DUH!
There is no one at fault except those that decided to riot. Now we have four Americans dead. If congress sends one more dime to Egypt or Libya, every member that votes in the affirmative, regardless of party, should be voted out.
@Aqua:
Obama doesn’t let Congress stop him!
Obama spoke of his intention to implement his economic policies with or without the approval of Congress.
Said Obama, ‘And where Congress is not willing to act, we’re going to go ahead and do it ourselves.’… It now appears that such a mindset applies not only to economic matters but to the distribution of foreign aid as well–in particular, foreign military aid for the Muslim Brotherhood, who now hold the reigns in Egypt…”
Congress “has restricted and, in fact, halted military aid to Egypt until and “unless the State Department certifies that Egypt is making progress on basic freedoms and human rights.”
More:
http://dailycaller.com/2012/09/10/obama-aids-egypt-as-it-tries-to-buy-u-boats/
Our Ambassador was forced to stay in a car filling with smoke until he suffocated to death.
Suffocation is one of Islam’s approved way of executing homosexuals.
In Iran, for instance, they are put in nooses attached to construction cranes.
The cranes raise them at a snail’s pace.
Instead of an instant broken neck and death, these homosexuals die over many minutes of slow suffocation.
After our Ambassador died, his body was traipsed through the streets by his murderers.
If Americans did this to any Muslim it would be an international incident, a desecration of a corpse.
But is Libya going to find each of these well-photographed murderers?
I bet not.
@Nan G:
Congress controls the purse. True, there’s nothing they can do if the administration decides to forgive a one billion dollar loan, but Obama will own that outright.
Obama has sent in the marines!
Marine Contingent Being Sent to Libya
Officials tell Fox News that a Marine fast team of about 50 is being sent to Benghazi, Libya, to secure the consulate, where US Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three staff members were killed. (FoxNews)
And a new front in this battle is forming:
President Hamid Karzai on Wednesday condemned an American-made film that mocks Islam, galvanizing fears among Westerners that the Afghan leader’s denunciation could be read as a go-ahead to stage violent protests. http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/world_now/2012/09/afghanistan-karzai-libya-film-fears-violence.html
Hillary’s statement had an interesting out in it for those who deserated the Ambassador’s dead body.
Without any proof she claimed they weren’t dragging his body around to show it off, but that they were trying to get him medical help.
Yeah, an obviously dead man, Hillary, have you even seen the photos?
The people who are responsible for this are the ones who did the killing, plain and simple. Those Americans who were killed are our first casualties from our intervention into Libya’s civil war. We became part owners when the decision was made to take sides in their war. The decision not to send in troops to secure what was gained via air power in order to stabilize the country or at the very least, to provide adequate security for the Americans who were there, put our people in harms way. Since there wasn’t any Congressional approval per the War Powers Act, the administration has sole responsibility. There shouldn’t be any doubt now as to who is running the show in Libya and Egypt. It’s safe to say we have lost ground in that part of the world.
@johngalt: By ‘bitches’, do you mean female dogs, or a term often used to demean women?
@Greg:
Yet “O” isn’t responsible for any of the times he said “amen” as his preacher cursed the US????? So, a woman speaking suggestively is equally responsible for her rape?????
Sorry, I try not to even respond to such drivel, but this is too much.
@liberal1(objectivity):
I mean it in whatever sense that it most hurts the muslim’s precious religious sensibilities.
@Nan G:
If things go further south in Afghanistan under Karzai’s watch “cap and trade” needs to be instituted. . . and I’m not talking about CO2.
Do you ultra-conservatives agree the freedom of speech allows someone the right to yell ‘fire’ in a crowded auditorium when there is none?
I woke up to news that even more Americans were killed over in Libya.
But, per Greg, the blood is on the hands of the man responsible for the film.
How many times in the past half century or so has Jesus been mocked, either through film, or print, or canvas? And how many of those resulted in rioting and death?
Islam is a religion of ‘peace’? Hardly. More like a cult of death. If not a film, there would have been something else touching off the “powderkeg” and sparking a riot. And if not a real incident, a manufactured one.
@Aqua: ##22
There are a lot of countries we shouldn’t be sending money to, including CHINA and the nonexistant country of Palestine.
@liberal1(objectivity):
Firstly, we are not “ultra-conservatives”, Lib1. We are conservatives. You mistake the far leftward movement of the Democratic party, to a point unrecognizable by most liberals, as a movement to the right by everyone else.
Secondly, yelling “fire” in a crowded auditorium invokes an immediate sense of threat to life and limb to those within said auditorium.
A film about Mohammed does not.
They are not remotely related, Lib1.
@Nan G: #23
Have any others finally figured out that Obama’s goal is a socialist or Islomic America? Those who don’t are still frogs in a pot of water that is getting hotter all the time. I wonder what boiled liberal tastes like. Not that I would want to try it.
@liberal1(objectivity):
How does yelling fire in a crowded arena equate to releasing a film about religion? Are you saying the only thing a religion needs to do is become violent to supersede the first amendment? So Catholics only need to start rioting every time someone talks about abortion or gay marriage? Are you advocating violence in religion as a means to an end?
@Nan G: #24
Look how many of our people died under Clinton’s watch, but he didn’t do anything about it. This is one reason why they got stronger. Their leaders bragged how afraid we are of them, and this helped recruit new members. The democrats allow the terrorists to increase, and the republicans inneciate a reduction in membership. I like a Marine sign that says, “It’s God’s job to judge the terrorists… It’s our mission to arrange the meeting!”
@Nan G: #26
The sad fact is that the United States government had nothing to do with the film, except to give the makers the freedom to make it.
By Greg’s standards, every American Christian has the right to find, and drag out of his home to killing him, the artist responsible for the “PissChrist”. After all, if insulting another’s religious is a solid basis for rioting and murder, then the “PissChrist” artist deserves to be drug through the streets of New York after he is dead.
@another vet: #28
How you look it this depends on who’s side your are on. Who’s side do you think Obama is on?
@retire05:
More correctly, assuming Greg’s reasoning, it should allow Christians to drag the owner of the gallery the “art” show was presented in, out onto the streets after he/she had been killed. Meanwhile, the “artist” themselves would have been responsible for the death of the gallery owner, and the Christians written off as a “powderkeg” just waiting for someone to “light the fuse”.
@liberal1(objectivity): #33
I don’t conside myself an ULTRA-conservative, but the freedom of speech does allow it, but there is a law against it and similar things. I don’t know if it is a Federal law or if each state has their own. Unfortunately, freedom of speech and using common sense don’t always work together.
For the record, there are atheist liberals out here (“present”) who absolutely disagree with Greg’s original statement. Crying “fire” in a crowded theater is NOT an offense if you honestly believe there is a fire; there’s no way to see these as comparable scenarios. And anyone who feels that the US government should take any action against those who truthfully speak their beliefs, no matter how inflammatory, has completely lost touch with what it means to call ours a free country.
@johngalt:
Yep. And the people that bombed abortion clinics aren’t the only ones to blame. Planned Parenthood and pro-choice democrats need to be tried as well.
Same arguments, just another year. I can read these, or I can just read:
1: Curt’s April 2011 post, Terry Jones Burns a Koran and Dozens of Innocents Die
2: Wordsmith’s two posts in Sept, Who are we really hurting by burning the Koran? or his post three days later, Stupid S*** has Consequences.
Mr. Bacile proclaims he is an Israeli Jew however Israel has never heard of him. According to an AP article (which appears on the Huffpo site, despite it’s AP origin..), Israel wants nothing to do with him.
Israel, instead, has sought to distance itself from Bacile.
What Bacile has done with his 1st Amendment is also put Israel in a more tenable position. In fact, one might say that a stealth radical Islamist could accomplish what Bacile has done by creating such a furor, and then claiming to be anti radical Islam.
Kinda comes down to this… Mr. Bacile is an American Citizens, and has the right to express himself. Ergo, Greg… stupidity is not a viable reason for talk of deportation, nor can you “deport” a citizen of the US.
Expressing his intolerance may be his right, but… as Wordsmith says… doing so has consequences. Radical Islamists need little to inflame their hatred, so deaths occur. If his goal was to illuminate radical Islamists (like we’re unaware prior to his little productions?) and provoke healthy discussion and a advocate a disavowing of the religion by current Muslims, he’s an idiot to think his approach would accomplish that.
So I have no sympathy for Mr. Bacile. I’ll defend his right to be an intolerant jacka$$ ’til my dying days, but IMHO he remains a jack$$.. just like Terry Jones.
On the flip side, I don’t give radical Muslims a pass either. With them being human cockroaches with an utter disregard for life, and they don’t seem to care about their attacks on fellow Muslims going on world wide, plus Bacile being a jacka$$, that leaves only those in the middle for whom I have sympathy… those that suffer the repercussions of both Bacile’s and radical Islamists equally and extremely intolerant behavior.
There’s two quotes from the Terry Jones threads that I think bear repeating:
The second is an observation made by Sarah Palin about Terry Jones, via Ed Needham.
The same applies to California real estate developer, Sam Bacile.
Surprised to see no praise here for Mitt Romney. Here he is politicizing the deaths of four foreign services officers – on 9/11, no less – and to top it off, his statement wasn’t even factually accurate. That’s a solid day’s work. Very Presidential. Apparently he suffers from the same strangely ubiquitous compulsion to blather angrily and inaccurately about Obama in reaction to all stimuli that one sees out there in the far-Right blogosphere.
Read more http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2012/09/benghazi-and-cairo-polarizing-attacks.html#ixzz26HBfrxH6
@MataHarley:
I agree with almost the entirety of your posting, Mata.
Except where you include the Palin comment.
They are two entirely separate, and distinctly different, occasions. Never mind that they both led to innocent people being “put to the sword” over the petulant, and violent, sensibilities of muslims.
In the case of Terry Jones, his act is an overt attempt to incite outcry amongst the muslims of the world.
The movie, however, even if intended to provide offense, is also meant as an accurate portrayal of Mohammed. If we let religious sensibilities and “feelings” determine what one should, or should not, show to the world, then we may as well hold the services for the death of truth in our world.
That last may be what is desired by some, and acceptable to others. Not by me, however. I cannot hold any part of the death of the Americans on the person of the film-maker in question. Not if I believe in freedom of choice, as well as freedom of expression. Those people who committed the murders had the choice of whether or not to take another person’s life. They chose to do it, so the responsibility lies with them. And only them. No one put a gun to their head and made them do it.