American Consulate Attack in Libya
 

I didn't see a thread on this so thought I would start one.

I've been following this closely for the last couple of days and am just sick for the family of Chris Stevens and the 3 others killed in the attacks. Also sickened by the anti-Muslim rhetoric that I am seeing all over Facebook.

Now, I'm reading about a second attack in Yemen and that the attack in Libya might have been coordinated to commemorate 9/11. The Pentagon has just moved 2 warships closer to the Libyan coast as well.

I hate that people are taking the opportunity to paint all Muslims as extremists but even further, am concerned about the larger implications for war. And if Mitt Romney doesn't shut his fucking face.....

Yeah this is a very sad situation .LOL agree with about that Romney( full of hot gas) guy.

I totaly agree medusa , I also have been watching the developments,,, after 911 I was in NYC and if u have ever been there u would know 99% of their cab drivers r muslims.. They feel the need to apologize for the leaders of their countrys .. I responded with , I am sry as well, we have an ignorant leader .. BUSH.... Freedom of speech unfortunatly has a price..when ignorance speaks ~~ There should be a filtering system , that ingnorance of this nature should be banned... Now theres a great job for a techy to develope !

I am so disgusted that rather than take the first moment to focus on the real tragedy of the situation, the death of Chris Stevens and others, the focus is on political bashing.

Shame on not just Romney, but a lot of the media. I saw more coverage on the idiocy of Romney than I did on the true victims of this horrific act.

I feel so sad for all of those who lost a loved one. It makes me sick that they have to witness the death of their family member/friend being used as a vehicle for political chest thumping.

I am worried about what is going to happen in response to these attacks. The whole thing really makes me sick to my stomach.

Peace and prayers for the lives lost and those affected by the loss.

I am really worried too, tantalizing. I hope that the violence doesn't escalate but am not feeling very hopeful after seeing how it escalated at the Yemini consulate.
I don't care if extremist people want to get pissed off and burn our flag and shout "Death to America". That's an expression issue to me and doesn't feel much different than what Fred Phelps does over here on our own soil but the minute a representative of the US got killed along with 3 others, I felt that ugly nervous-tummy feeling.

I hate to think of this in political terms but this is going to be a shitty situation for not only President Obama as he makes a decision about what to do or not about this, but for the men and women who are still in consulates across the world AND for the potential danger that our soldiers are entering as warships move closer to Libyan shores.

My Brother is military. Every incident like this makes me feel like he is an inch closer to putting his life on the line because of idiots.

Had a reply, deleted it. Need to think it out more clearly. But to respond to this, I agree with it all. I am afraid that the responses to this are going to further endanger everyone and escalate to a catastrophic level.

I am trying not to let the anxiety I feel go haywire...

Watching the President address this tragedy on the tv yesterday was rough. Hillary looked so sad, like she was in physical pain and that means something to me, the people that die everyday means something to me, and my administration means something to me. I fear for any Muslim in America. I felt this way before 9/11 and it was crystal clear for me on 9/11 as I sat in a queer bar the night of the tragedy and listened to some of my own community embrace hate rhetoric out of fear. I would have thought after such a tragedy and presently feel watching continued tragedies throughout the world that we would embrace peace with a decline on the importance of religion to accomplish that, but we don't. Until that happens I am not sure there will be an end in sight to this particular type of violence. Our local news is focusing on Terry Jones and his cult clan. They are the Quran burning gang down in Gainesville and have somehow found themselves mixed up in this by supporting an anti Muslim/Islam video and refusing to recant. He locally promotes more Muslim/Islam hate here and gets people going. Again, this is what we are hearing locally in the media. I know there are other stories out there about why, what and who is responsible for this recent tragedy, but you don't see them on the local news here. The Mitt ads have been running like crazy focusing some on this but I am sure it will get worse as this situation develops. No matter how it develops the Mitt camp is gonna try and use it against the current admin. It somehow seems to only mean something for so long then it seems like it meant nothing as people continue to die all over the world everyday for the same reasons.

Why do we have to take care of the rest of the world. Why cant we just bring our Americans home. Why do we even have our flag hanging in other countries. Why is there so much hate against America and our beliefs of freedom of speech, religion, etc. Why, Why, Why.. so many questions. *sigh* I keep feeling this is another war about to escalate once again for pretty much the same reasons. With beliefs and disagreements such as these, it seems to never end and people have to not only fight about it but bring out full blown war and attacks. :(

Ruff-

I think I can answer to why there is hate toward America in a lot of other countries at this time.
I wouldn' characterize the disdain that some other cultures/countries/sects feel toward us based on our freedome of expression or beliefs. I think their disdain is much more centered around the idea that many Americans don't think twice about stomping on someone else's right to believe what they want in the name of "you don't know any better" and "our way is the only way".

It's very ethno and Euro-centric, the way we do things a lot of times.

I think that in certain Muslim-heavy countries, there is the perception that "those arrogant Americans" think they can tell the rest of the world what to do and when to do it. Because honestly? We've operated like that before. And we've done some shitty things like busting up into other countries under the guise of "we're looking for weapons" when we were really looking to pilfer oil supplies. That kind of dirty dealing is a stain on our reputation, but also leaves the impression with folks that we want what we want at any cost.

With that, even if President Obama doesn't want to operate in a shady way, the history of the American political system is still in the memories of the folks who have been a victim of it.

Now, the idea that a movie about Mohammad gives people the right to act a damn violent fool and kill folks is not only ridiculous but it is the same mentality that causes people to murder Gays, rape women, and commit violent acts of racism in the name of "what they believe in". It is fear-based, aggressive, mob-mentality behavior and it is very, very dangerous.

I was working at a hotel in Ocala, Florida when the World Trade Center was hit by both plans. My boss at the time was from Pakistan, and was a nice gentleman. I feel that some Muslims are grouped in with the one's who are extremists and for some reason, we cannot differentiate between the two groups. As far as ol' Mitt goes, it was the Bush Administration that got us into the financial mess we are currently in. He wanted to make sure his friends in the oil business was well taking care of, while the middle class suffered and now Obama is getting blamed for it. I do believe Mitt does need to close his trap..

Zimmeh

I have been watching this since it happend and am sick over it all.To think someone from this country would make such a movie and use it to inflame someones religion is beond me.I pray this stops but in my heart I know it will be an issue for a while.It's bad enough this happened but Romney isnt makeing it a bit better,he needs to shut the "F" up and let Obama and Hillary take care of this.I doubt Romney will stop his comments all I do hope is he digs himself into a political grave he cant get out of.

bouncing off your post
 

If I am to apply this to my own country I could easily say that I can't tell the difference from a christian extremist or just a person that practices Christianity. I see many, many people that hide behind the guise of christianity do extreme things in this country to keep people oppressed and fearful. How many pastors do we know from this country that have gone to Uganda or some country that hates/kills gays and tries to help organize them to create legislation against our international community. That is some extreme lengths to go to in order to hate on the queers. Extremists are not just limited to the international community they are born right here in America. Can I tell the difference? Yes they are all over the TV and web. My point is I am sure if we were to understand Muslim/Islamic culture we would very easily be able to tell the difference but it is because we lack that knowledge and sensitivity that we can't. I am sure Muslim/Islamic people who are just practicing their faith don't wish to be confused with that kind of extreme practice just like any other person that practices a religion for positive gain.

These attacks happened at either the American embassy (Egypt and Yemen) or an American consulate (Libya). We have flags flying in those and other countries because part of what nation states *do* is have embassies and consulates in other nations. It is part and parcel of diplomacy to have diplomatic staff permanently in that nation. While we may not recognize the importance of diplomatic relations with other nation states they are important. Having an embassy in another nation is so important that when we *don't* have an embassy one of two things are true: either we are in a state of war or we have broken off all diplomatic relations with that nation. An example of the first is what happened at the start of WW II. Immediately after Pearl Harbor the Japanese embassy in D.C. burned their code books and then got out of the US. The US closed its embassy and we did not reestablish diplomatic relations with Japan until after the war. In the latter case, we closed our embassy in Tehran, Iran, after our embassy was taken and hostages held with the full knowledge and support of the new Iranian government (the government following the overthrow of Shah Reza Pavlavi). We have not reopened that embassy and so we *still*, almost forty years after the fact, we don't have normalized relations with Iran.

Not having embassies in the world means not dealing with the rest of the world. That means international travel can become very interesting. It means doing business in foreign countries becomes much more difficult. We fly flags in other nations because in order to deal with those nations we have to have diplomatic staff there who can build relationships with the locals. The day we start closing embassies around the world is the day the world becomes a much more unstable place.

I do not think it is accurate to say that people hate America because of our beliefs in freedom of speech or religion. This is not to say that there are not people who oppose those ideas but I don't think there's good reason to believe that they hate America *because* of those core commitments. Rather, I think they just hate the idea, generally, of freedom of religion or they either hate or do not understand the idea of freedom of the press. Most nations do *not* have written into their constitutions the kind of expansive freedom of religious belief or speech enjoyed in the United States. In all too many nations, if the press says something one is justified in assuming that the *government* has said it because either the state runs the press or the state approves anything that is published. Such is not the case in the United States. And I think that a misunderstanding of people who may live under a different form of media regime than we do is probably inevitable.

Imagine you live in a nation where if it is printed or broadcast you know some state censor has given their blessing to whatever the utterance is. Then you find out that some filmmaker in America has put out a movie insulting to your religion. Working within the only frame you know, you assume that if some American filmmaker put out a movie, *someone* in the US government *must* have given it the official OK. I mean, *your* nation has a Ministry of Culture that approves movies so how can it be that the USA doesn't? So you're angry not just at the filmmaker but at the United States government since it must have approved the insulting film.

I think some variation of that understanding is at work now.

I would also suggest that much of the anger at America is due to her *policies*. Every time an Israeli soldier tosses a tear gas grenade at some protesters and the canister has a 'made in the USA' stencil on it, it makes people angry. Every time the United States speaks about 'freedom' and 'democracy' while simultaneously propping up some kleptocratic dictator (Mubarak of Egypt leaps to mind here) it makes people angry. We support Israel against the Palestinians no matter how egregious Israeli malfeasance might be. We support dictators because they are geostrategically convenient for us while telling their oppressed people that we stand for democracy and the right of peoples to live in liberty.

My point is that *long* before we get to "they hate us for our freedoms" there are much better explanations for why some people hate the United States.

That said, let me make a couple of points about the last 72 hours. While the protests in Egypt appear to have been, more or less, genuine expressions of outrage (as misplaced as I think they are) the protest and attack in Libya appears to have been planned. The Libyan people, despite what some on the American Left would have us believe, are actually *very* favorably disposed to Americans right now because it was American jets that swatted Gaddafi's planes and helicopters from the skies over Libya, allowing the rebels to overthrow their dictatorship. When an American pilot was shot down over Libya, the Libyan people rescued him and got him to safety. Yesterday, Libyans turned out to protest *against* the attack on the consulate and to mourn Chris Stevens because they knew he was on their side while he lived.

Cheers
Aj

I'm going to take a somewhat contrary take because what Mittens did was so entirely outside the norm of American presidential politics . There are three, more or less, unspoken but well-understood consensus rules in national politics and they are these:

1. We have one President at a time and so one foreign policy at a time.
2. Politics stops at the water's edge.
3. You don't play politics with the lives of Americans killed overseas.

Mittens broke all three of those rules and he did so in the most craven and mendacious fashion. This isn't a matter of 'both sides do it'. I'm a politics junkie and I've watched every national election since 1980 with fanatical interest. In those three decades, I have never seen a major party candidate jump up and try to make foreign policy from the campaign stump by contradicting the sitting President and/or the Secretary of State. Yet, that is what Team Romney did last night.

As the consulate in Benghazi was under attack, Team Romney claimed that the POTUS sympathized with the attackers. While there were still protesters on the grounds of the embassy in Cairo, Team Romney criticized the embassy staff for a tweet that was sent out before the protests even started. That is a particular kind of scummy behavior. I think it is entirely right and proper that Mittens et. al. are pinned in the klieg lights of the media a startled squirrel on a country road seeing its last few moments of life barreling toward it.

Up until yesterday morning, I wanted Mittens to lose and lose badly not because of him but because of his party. I wouldn't have said that he didn't *deserve* the office of the Presidency, just that I didn't think he should be or would do a good job. Between Tuesday and Wednesday, however, Mittens showed himself undeserving of the Presidency. His lack of judgment and his utter disregard for consensus American values makes him unworthy of our trust. Utterly and completely unworthy.

Cheers
Aj

Medusa, thank you for stepping up and starting this thread. I too am disturbed by this latest round of events. Cairo, Libya, Yemen. I am confounded by the total lack of regard the fellow who made this film had for the potential consequences of his action.

I agree with Dreadgeek, Diplomacy is a necessity. There is no moving backwards and going into some sort of isolation. Our,(the USA) "interests" and security are inseprable from global events.

I was touched to see everyday people in Libya holding up signs telling America this tragedy was not the work of the people. I even saw one sign with an apology. The geopolitical situation is complex. I do make a concious effort to remember all people have families, loved ones of some sort, aspirations and dreams.

I think it goes back farther than that, even, at the end of WWI when Great Britain, France and the U.S. cobbled together Iraq and many other countries without consideration of cultural, ethnic and religious differences. Yugoslavia was another example, in which it took a dictator to hold hostile factions together until it fell apart in a civil war.

Plus, our penchant in the 50's and 60's for setting up truly awful rulers (Saddam was one, the Shah of Iran was another) whose main qualification in our eyes was that they weren't communist. This was also true in SE Asia and in Central America, and even Cuba and the Dominican Republic.

It's a long, tragic story all around.

Seeing the sign from Libyans apologize touched me deeply. Too often, we Americans assume that the rest of the world is either one way or another way and the reality is far more complicated than that. That the Libyan people wanted to let the American people know that the attackers did not speak for them and did not enjoy their confidence or support moved me. Provided that we are cautious and restrained in finding the people who attacked our embassy I think that we will have made friends with the Libyan people for a while. My hope is that any actions we take will be limited and focused *only* on those armed groups that were responsible. We *must* answer this attack on our soil, however and it is a well-respected tenet of international relations that the embassy is the soil of that nation.


Cheers
Aj

God, me too, Aj. It serves as such a deep reminder that the people of Libya are not the Borg collective of extremists as some of our American news outlets would have us believe. They are human beings just as scared of war as we are. And yes, they have their crazy assholes just like we do.

I cringe to think of how we look to the Muslim community with the uprising of overt racism with regards to our own POTUS. White folks all over tv hanging the President in effigy and spouting the most hateful and ignorant shit imagineable. How in the hell are other countries able to respect us when our own people do things so disgusting.

My hope and wish is that many people see the photos circulating on Facebook and that it sparks their humanity toward "they are more like me than I thought" and away from "Let's get those terrorist Muslims".

I have a Muslim friend who lives in the Middle East and also a dear married lady friend's husband who has been serving on the front line (Adriatic coast). I am deeply worried for both of them (and of course, all of them) who are involved in the newest outbreak of conflict.

This is heartbreaking for Arabs and Muslims overseas in the Middle East, here in America, and in other places of the world too.

My heart goes out to Arab and Muslim people who suffer persecution and are disenfranchised members of societies because they are being denied equitable access to communal, life sustaining resources and opportunity to lead as peaceful a life as possible.

I was in Israel at the time of the Twin Tours attack and found it very interesting how the Palestinians differentiated between the American Government and the American people. On the one hand, yes, there was a feeling of 'FINALLY, someone has dared stand up to the American Government and show it that, in its arrogance, its completely forgotten that it's not invincible'. On the other, however, there was genuine sadness at what doing this had cost in terms of human life. In other words, they saw the attack on the US Government as something completely different from the attack on the American people in general and those who were killed/injured in particular.

I know it's hard for Americans to believe or understand that, but I witnessed it first hand and can attest to it - with a very few exceptions - being true.

Words

I know that most Muslims do not hate Americans. But I do think we have a very questionable history in the regions -- North Africa, the Middle East and Central Asia. There are reasons that some ordinary people support Al Qaeda and other extremist organizations.

I want us out of Iraq and Afghanistan. I understand that Al-Qaeda has infiltrated -- deliberately -- the Afghan police force, and that the murders of U.S. service men and women are not an expression of Afghan popular sentiment. I also respect the efforts of Afghani civil servants to re-vet police and armed service recruits. I KNOW that there are efforts being made on the part of Afghan nationals, Egyptian nationals and others to keep citizens of other nations safe.

NEVERTHELESS, I am tired of hearing of the senseless deaths. And I truly think they are senseless. I no longer think that U.S. influence in Afghanistan is salutary in any respect. It's time to go.

I am happy that both Obama and Romney have agreed to the 2014 deadline. It can't be too soon as far as I am concerned.

Re Libya, of course we should continue to have a diplomatic presence there. Also in Egypt and Yemen. But we need to provide better security for our people. When the risk is too great, we need to pull them out, as we have in the past in a number of different circumstances.

My understanding is that Al Qaeda controls or is influential across that corridor between northern Mali and southern Libya -- including southern Algeria and northern Niger. I don't know if it's a stronghold, but they are very active there. And we know they have control of areas of Afghanistan and Pakistan.

We aren't going to change that on the ground. Economic and cultural change, supported, we hope, by U.S. diplomatic efforts -- that is what we can hope will aid residents of those areas to create healthy social and political change. But we need to get the hell out of Afghanistan and keep our people safe around the world.

I think it is terribly sad that most Americans don't realize that distinction. On 9/11 I was teaching at a business school in Portland and I had students asking me why this had happened and why people in Palestine seemed so pleased with it. I told them that I wouldn't answer their question no that day but that I would try to explain it on Friday when things had calmed down. That night I almost lost my job giving the following explanation. I told them:

Imagine that Mexico annexes the West Coast of the United States and creates a new nation calling itself Northern Mexico. We are all displaced and are now second class citizens on the lands that our fathers and their fathers before them toiled on. The Mexican government has the backing of Canada in this endeavor such that we know, with the certainty of things that have actually happened, that should we step out of line the whole weight and force of the Canadian military will fall down upon around us. How long does it take you to start hating Mexicans and Canadians? I then explained that in this thought experiment, California, Oregon and Washington were the Palestinians, Mexico was Israel and Canada was the United States.

I went on to explain that this did not justify the attacks but it explained why Palestinians seemed celebratory that it had happened.

As it turns out, two other night teachers--two of us veterans--had independently done something similar in our classes that same night. The head honcho of our campus took us all into her office that Monday and laid into us hard, culminating in a "if you don't like the United States you can leave".

At those words Bob, a retired Air Force officer (I think he'd made Colonel) jumped up out of his chair and in his very solid voice challenged our boss saying, "You served when and where?" To which our boss replied, "I was never in the military, Bob." At which point he took her to the woodshed saying, "Well then, I will thank you never to question my patriotism or the patriotism of this young lady (pointing at me) our years wearing a uniform on your behalf paid for our being able to say what we want about this matter." With that he turned on his heel and walked out of the door.

I always respected Bob but in that moment, I loved him.

Cheers
Aj

My son's last overseas term, before he got out of the Army, was in Afghanistan. It will be a good day when we leave that nation. I once read that Afghanistan is where imperial powers go to learn humility. I hope our foreign policy elites are more circumscribed after our experiences there. I supported the invasion of Afghanistan because they harbored people who attacked us instead of turning them over. I did not support our decade long occupation of that nation and I am convinced that the Iraq war will go down as one of the truly spectacular blunders of foreign policy ever.

Past time. We should have gone in on '01, found Bin Laden and his followers, captured or killed them, and then left. Instead we did the stupid thing.

Given that the GOP has gone insane and Romney's general fecklessness I don't know that he would abide by the 2014 timeline. Keep in mind that his party has gone *so* insane that they disagreed with the 2011 timeline Bush the Younger negotiated with the Maliki government in Iraq. I mean, there are GOP foreign policy hacks who are saying that SOFA (Status Of Forces Agreement) or no SOFA we should have stayed in Iraq. That this would be an act of aggressive war appears to make no difference to them. Since the Afghanistan SOFA requires us to leave in 2014 I fear that a Romney presidency (which, blessedly, I think is safely in the improbable column) could see us trying to hang on when we no longer have any buy-in from the local government for us to stay.

Agreed. I think we have a window of opportunity with Libya and, quite honestly, I'm rather pleased with how Obama has handled Egypt. Instead of doing the normal thing and propping up Mubarak, he recognized it was time to make good our claims to care about democracy and that it was time for the dictator to go. Then, when the Egyptian people did what anyone familiar with the region might have predicted and voted in a populist government in the form of the Muslim Brotherhood, instead of saying that the election was rigged because we didn't like the outcome, simply said that the Egyptian people had made their choice. That was the harder tack. I know that he has taken heat for that but really, that's how it works. Democracy is responsiveness to the popular will and if that popular will brings forth a government that is antithetical to our values or has geopolitical interests that conflict with ours, so be it.


Cheers
Aj

Tragic and horrible news events like this make me start twitching these days.

One thing the Bush-Cheney regime taught me was to not be consumed by the surface stuff in horrible, tragic events. It taught me to take a step back, and look and keep looking and keep listening.

I see lots of disturbing stuff here. I see a "film" being blamed for this starting.
This "film" has reportedly been circulating the net for weeks. So, why did it take so long for a reaction to develop?

Why is it that attacks in Yemen and in Egypt involve smashing windows, burning cars, and hurling stones while the initial attack in Libya was a military style attack with guns, mortar, and grenades? Kind of odd eh?

There are reports coming out about the film maker himself. Associated Press originally reported the film maker was a man named Sam Bacile, an Israeli Jew. Now, there are reports that the film maker may actually be someone named Nakoula Basseley Nakoula aka Nicola Bacily, Erwin Salameh and others according to Federal court papers. He is described as a "California Coptic Christian convicted of financial crimes who acknowledged his role in managing and providing logistics for the production." Story here. Hmmm, interesting.

Part of me also thinks....in a close US Presidential election, who gets the upper hand in a tragedy like this? Sitting Pres always gets the glory unless something goes really really wrong.

And, I am not saying the Pres or the government, per se, has any part in this. What I am thinking is there are many well connected, well financed people with much at stake in the outcome of this election on both sides of the aisle.

And, I also look for what else is going on that the people might need to either be distracted from or might be in need of some kind of convincing. And I find this:


"The White House will deliver to Congress a report on possible automatic spending cuts on Friday, spokesman Jay Carney said on Thursday.

The spending cuts would go into effect under a process called sequestration if lawmakers cannot reach a deal on preventing them by the end of the year. President Barack Obama is required under law to specify how funding for specific programs would be affected.

Cuts are expected to total $109 billion in 2013, to be split among defense and non-defense programs."

Well, kind of hard to consider military cuts if we have a "problem" to contend with. A "problem" to contend with would be justification of expanding the deficit even more. Expanding the deficit would impact the weak economic recovery that is sputtering already. A sputtering economy may need another whopper of a stimulus program. Funny how things can snowball sometimes.

I expect as more and more info becomes available, things might get clearer.....or not.

The surface stuff is scary enough. The below the surface stuff is even scarier.

Since you mentioned the Borg collective, I wanted to run something past y'all. I'm writing a blog post for Skepchick and since this incident was on my mind I wrote about it. In it I said this about Mittens and I'm curious if the imagery 'works' for people (relevant bit in italics):

Mittens might have chosen to leave it at the customary expressions of condolences and outrage at the attacks. Nothing wrong with that. He had a chance to show that he was human and not the product of a particularly wild night between a member of the Borg and a Ferengi wherein they got their freak on and he was the blessed and unintended result.


I'm just curious what people's reactions are to that last bit.

Cheers
Aj

That is a very apt sketch of Mittens! Although I wonder if he is more "Borg Queen meets Data"?
But I guess Data's way of thinking is way too logical for a Mittens comparison.

I hate war.

I hate it.

Mennonites, traditionally, will go to prison, and some have even died, before they would pick up arms, and fight. Not because they weren't patriotic, but because they served God, first and foremost, and would not kill. Period. I hate war.

Truth is, though, war is a necessary evil. It exists for two reasons. Political or monetary gain, or humanity interests. Sadly, the wars we have fought in the Middle East, in the past few decades, have had more to do with the former, than the latter. Having said that, I agree with the idea, that when a nation "votes" in a government, (as long as the election spoke for the people) we, as a nation, MUST respect that outcome, whether we like it or not. However, the German people voted in Adolph Hitler. Thus, no case is ever as black and white as we want it to be.

So war is a necessary evil.

I am a huge WWII buff. Mostly because of being in the genetic line of Jews, but also because of the complete lack of humanity, that many normal ordinary people engaged in when it came to their hatred and fear of the Jews.

We, the USA, are in a very precarious position. We are damned if we do, and damned if we dont. If we don't address atrocities against human kind, then we MUST agree with it, or at least are seen as turning a blind eye to it. But when we DO address it, then we are "policing" and "forcing" our political and ethical and moral views on other sovereign nations.

Words from a Jew who "helped" gas his fellow Jews at a concentration camp... he remembers crying out..."God, where ARE you? Why won't you hear us?" When I first read those words, my heart broke, because his God, is my God. Then a revelation came to me... God did hear, God heard the cries of His people, and He responded. I know, full well, that had the USA not gotten involved in that war, we'd be living in a MUCH different world than we do now. We'd, quite possibly, be living in Hitler's Germania. We may have gotten involved in that war because Japan stupidly "awoken a sleeping giant" but when the atrocities of that war came to light...

Both sides did things no human should do to other human's. But the absolute extermination of men, women and children... had to be stopped. And it was.

I am sure that there are atrocities around the globe, happening today, that cries out for intervention. That screams out for humanity, and I agree, the USA can not answer all of those cries, but we cannot, we MUST not, ignore all cries for help, ignore all needs and simply tend to "our own" because, if we do, we become them.

Having said ALL of that... in light of what is taking place globally, if I had my druther's, the people responsible for this film, that was made and released in part, with the FULL KNOWLEDGE of it's creator's, the possible reactions it would get, should be held responsible. Freedom of Speech does NOT ALLOW for anyone to incite a riot. At the very least, this incited a riot. Maybe if the world see's that we can police our own, they will begin to see that while our freedoms are at the core of our beliefs, even WE have to respect our rights within that structure of law. Those men who created that film, had every right to make it, every right to believe, passionately, what they portrayed in that film. But in exercising those rights, they also took on the responsibility of what the consequences of putting that film out, meant and means.

I have every right to bear arms, but if I pull that gun up and shoot and someone gets killed, whether that was my intention or not, I will be held accountable for it.

The hatred of some extremists for America was the weapon. The few extremist American's who despise and disrespect the Islamic faith and beliefs were the bullets, and those men who created that film, with that film, pulled the trigger.

They should be held accountable.

I am not as politically savvy as some. I allow logic and my thought processes to be influenced, strongly, by my heart. I can't force my focus onto the political arena right now, it's too tied up in humanity, for those who are hurting because this "gun was fired". I have no "political" point in this. When I look at the world, I don't see economy or politics, I see people. It's those people I want to help. It's those people whose cries reach my ears... not the governments, but the people. I close this missive with the following quotes... they speak much for how I am feeling right now.

But what is liberty without wisdom, and without virtue? It is the greatest of all possible evils; for it is folly, vice, and madness, without tuition or restraint.

All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing

r we all forgetting this is all beacuse of someones ignorance.. insulting the muslims on u tube.. the person who started all of this should be punished as well..

There is no excuse for this violence. I am sure that many Muslims were offended, but the people charging our embassies are probably those with a political agenda.

I do not care about the film. Last I heard it was a Coptic Christian behind it. That's an old fight. There are always going to be religious folks offending each other. That's no excuse for killing. Egyptians Muslims have been, IMO, persecuting Christians ever since Mubarak was ousted. They were before, but it has gotten worse. I try to read more objective sources on this. I know there are a lot of right wing assholes who try to exploit every incident. Point is that this is an old fight. And someone is always going to do something. I don't think the point is the film. The point is the violence.

Maybe that makes me very western or just an old lady. But I don't give a rat's ass about the film. I have no doubt it was offensive. So? Lodge a protest. Fight for laws that address such issues. Make your own film. I get feeling helpless. I am sure it's more offensive to be insulted by the people you see as having more power than you, a culture you see as potentially a danger to your own. Fight back in a way that can make a difference. This sure is not it.

But I don't think most of these people were losing their minds with rage and lashing out. I think they were extremists looking for an excuse.

http://www.twincities.com/localnews/...-us-ambassador

Ocean;

I found your statement chilling.

I have to ask three questions which I'll front load and then expound on. Who should do the punishment? What should the punishment be? What *crime* has he committed?

Each one of these questions is important and I'm taking you at your word that you believe he really should be punished. Should the US government punish him? If so, for what crime? Making a hateful video that insults this or that group isn't a crime in the United States. If it were, then D.W. Griffith would have gone to jail for "Birth of a Nation" which was horrifically racist. The person who made this film has a Constitutionally protected right to do so and can only be punished for doing so by our government under the most extreme circumstances. Are you ready to see Dan Savage driven off the air or out of the newspapers because I guarantee you that if we punish this guy for his insulting Muslims then we're going to, if only for the sake of consistency, punish Savage for insulting Christians.

Perhaps you think he should be punished by the people in Libya or Egypt or Yemen? If that is the case there's a word for that--it's called a lynching. Are you really going to sit there and say you are advocating mob violence? Perhaps you think we should turn him over to the legal authorities of a Muslim-majority nation. If so, again, on what grounds and do you want to open *that* can of worms? Are you prepared to turn over Salman Rushdie to, say, Pakistan which has blasphemy laws? Rushdie's "Satanic Verses" had him living under a fatwa for two decades and if he were turned over to the Pakistani courts he could be tried and put to death for violating Pakistan's *blasphemy* laws. If you turn over the maker of this film, whoever he turns out to be, you have to turn over Salman Rushdie and Ayaan Hirsi Ali who has also written and made utterances that could have her tried for blasphemy in any country that still has such laws on their books.

And then, what should the punishment be? Should he have jail time or should he be executed? These are all questions that are *inescapably* raised by your statement. While I understand that it is emotionally satisfying to shout for his head on a pike, don't you think that we should resist that urge?

I'm not defending his movie, I'm not even defending him because I think he made a movie that was bigoted with the intention of inflaming anti-American sentiment abroad and anti-Muslim sentiment in the USA. But that is not a *crime*, it is simply odious behavior. I am defending a principle and it is this: people have a right to make utterances that I find offensive and wish that they wouldn't make. Hell, I'll go so far as to say that, at times, I wish they didn't have the *right* to make those utterances but that is me in the heat of emotions. Today the government can shut down the speech of someone we all think is odious, tomorrow they can shut down the speech of someone we all admire, the day after that they can shut down *our* speech.

I am sympathetic to the protesters right up until they set foot on embassy grounds. But I do not think we should let ourselves be tempted to go down the road of censorship. There are people, fellow countrymen of mine in the USA, who think the very *existence* of this web site and every single word posted on it is a deep offense to their religion. They are free to blog about it, write songs about it, find the ISP that hosts the site and stand outside holding signs from now until the sun expands in a few billion years and vaporizes the Earth. But once we go down the road of censorship, they will shut this site down because it offends their religion and then, when we protest because our site was shut down, they will have us arrested for offending their religion because we protested their action. And when people speak up for us in solidarity they *too* will be arrested for insulting the religion of the censors.

You can tell when someone really believes in a right, it's actually rather easy. Ask them if they believe that right extends to the person or group they most oppose. If that person answers no, they don't really believe in that right on principle, they're simply advocating their self-interest. The easiest thing in the world for someone here to say is "I think that queer people should be able to write, speak and publish as they please". That tells us nothing about whether the speaker believes in free speech. The person who really believes in free speech is the one who will say "I wish this person did not have this right for their every word and utterance is odious to me and were it up to me, they would never be allowed to say such things. Fortunately, it's not up to me." That person believes in free speech down to the very atoms in the marrow of their bones for they are willing to pay the price of free speech, which is having to put up with speech you find repulsive.

Where do you stand?

Cheers
Aj

I would put money on the Libyan attack being Al Qaeda seizing an opportunity to attack the consulate in Benghazi in retaliation for the killing of Abu Yahya al-Libi earlier this year.

Cheers
Aj

worth repeating:

I entirely agree with this.......plus it made me laugh...


As to the film and it's maker.......the hardest, hardest part of democracy is free speech. Yelling fire in a crowded theater is not free speech. Making that awful film is free speech. It could well be a film about Jews, Christians, __________. Our task as a country is to help others understand our brand of democracy and free speech....both secular concepts.

I also know that separating radical fundamentalism (Christian, Jewish, Islam, ______) from the feelings of the people is a difficult task. This country is not hated around the world. A small percentage of folks in the world hate everything and everybody that is not like them and will do their best to incite more violence. The answer to offensive speech is not violence and most humans understand that.

As the peaceful protests happen and we see violence occur, I would remind us all of what happened with the Occupy movement protests....particularly in the Bay Area. Very large peaceful protest with a small handful of anarchist violent destructive asshats. The asshats get the largest part of the news cycle and that leads to uninformed bullshit like what Mittens and Factless News are saying.....

------------

Just as an aside...........seems Pat Robertson told some letter writer to his show that he should convert to Islam or go to Saudi Arabia so he could beat his wife to get her in line with his rightful authority as head of the family........he really did say that.....

What a trip! Diplomacy via Twitter. From the NYTimes.

I found this blog article interesting. It discusses Indonesia struggling with the free speech issue in terms of religious teachers promoting hatred.

http://blogs.aljazeera.com/blog/asia...er-back-heaven

Commentary from a UC Irvine professor -- published in Al Jazeera. I don't agree with it all. But it was informative. I had thought, for one thing, that Mubarak had protected the Copts.

This guy writes:

Hi yotlyolqualli,

First off, I want to tell you that I have tremendous respect for the way in which you are open about your belief in God. We might not have the same religious beliefs but I appreciate your willingness to share yours even at the risk of coming under fire for doing so.

I would like to say this though. It is indeed true that someone responded to the plight of the Jews during World War II and that the absolute extermination of men, women, and children was stopped. The problem is....in stopping that, the world - not God - neglected to ensure that some of the atrocities that happened throughout the Holocaust were never repeated elsewhere, albeit on a smaller scale. In creating a homeland for the Jews, for example, it neglected to ensure that the Palestinians living in (then) Palestine would benefit from the same privileges as the thousands of Jews coming there not only from Poland and Germany etc. but also from all over the world. It neglected to ensure that the Palestinians living in (then) Palestine would benefit from respect for the same human rights as the Jews coming there not only from Poland and Germany etc. but also from all over the world. It neglected, in short, to protect the lives and liberties of Palestinians living in (then) Palestine period.

My point here is this. I believe - as all Muslims do - that what separates humans from animals is free will and that it was God who gave us that 'gift'. So in my opinion, it wasn't God that intervened in the case of the Holocaust, it was those He'd empowered with the ability to bring it to an end. And that's what the Muslims seek now...to be shown exactly the same consideration, the situation in Palestine/Israel being a prime example. And no, I'm not comparing the plight of the Palestinians with that of the Jews and thousands of others who perished under Hitler. But from a Muslim perspective, it does appear that there's definitely a double standard here in terms of how those with the ability to help them make use of their God given gift.

Words

P.S. As a side note. The God to whom that Jew cried out is also my God and that of millions of Muslims worldwide. Different name, same God.

From the Levine article again:

Actually, in my opinion, this touches on why there's an antagonism towards the USA across many parts of the world. It's incredibly arrogant for the USA to view itself as the world's policeman (or policewoman for that matter). No nation or collection of nations should think that they have the carte blanche right to interfere in the internal affairs of other parts of the world. Values are not absolute.


Added to this, where the US interferes overseas, whilst it may be under the rhetoric of human rights interests, there's invariably an underlying selfish strategic and / or economic motivation. Those parts of the world where USA interferes militarily represent only a small proportion of territories where human rights abuses are the norm. The USA picks and chooses not on the basis of the human rights abuses in the foreign parts but, rather, on the basis of its own short-term interests.


Why else would the USA be in such a close alliance with the despotic Saudi Arabia and why else is the US government now willing to bend over backwards to reach a settlement with the Taliban whilst, at the same time, allowing continued numbers of US men and women to be slaughtered in a hostile, foreign land. The US military funerals are impressive, as is the rhetoric of the importance of servicemen and servicewoman. The reality appears very different to me.


I should add that, if anyone things I'm coming out with some sort of deliberate anti-USA stance, nothing could be further from the case. I think the same way about my own beloved United Kingdom (and I am a strong British nationalist) whose approach to foreign affairs is along similar lines, just on a smaller scale these days.