Two American Embassies were attacked yesterday. The first attack, which the administration called a protest of a small group of Muslim extremists, took place in Cairo. Thousands massed outside of the embassy, eventually scaled the walls intimidating embassy staff and tearing down and burning the American flag. Hillary Clinton referred to this as merely a protest demonstration. Apparently she has forgotten that the taking of the American Embassy in Iran a few decades ago started in pretty much the same manner.
For its part, the embassy released the following statement which the Obama campaign is now saying was not authorized by the White House.
"The Embassy of the United States in Cairo condemns the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims -- as we condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions. Today, the 11th anniversary of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States, Americans are honoring our patriots and those who serve our nation as the fitting response to the enemies of democracy. Respect for religious beliefs is a cornerstone of American democracy. We firmly reject the actions by those who abuse the universal right of
free speech to hurt the religious beliefs of others."
Within hours of the ‘protest’ at the Cairo Embassy, a protest began at the American Embassy in Libya. Unfortunately, the protesters did not carry signs and chant slogans; they employed rocket launchers and grenades to attack the embassy. Many were injured and one American embassy employee was killed.
By international law, a country’s embassy is considered part of its sovereign territory. An attack on its embassy is considered no different than an attack against the country itself. The Obama Administration and the re-election campaign can label what happened yesterday as protests or isolated incidents but that doesn’t change what they were.
Nor does it change the fact that the President was silent.
Except for the apology to Muslims issued early in the day and a few diplomatic-type comments from Hillary Clinton, the administration in general and the President in particular were missing in action. Even Bill Clinton had more to say than President Obama but then, it seems that Bill Clinton is the surrogate candidate for president these days.
It was very late in the day when the President’s re-election campaign finally issued a statement. Unfortunately, it wasn’t to denounce the attacks on its embassies, it was to deplore the Romney campaign for trying to politicize the issue.
“We are shocked that, at a time when the United States of America is confronting the tragic death of one of our diplomatic officers in Libya, Governor Romney would choose to launch a political attack.”
I’m not sure what they’re smoking and drinking at the President’s campaign office but criticizing him for being invisible when his nation’s embassies are being violated and Americans are threatened, injured and even killed is not a political attack. It is a legitimate questioning of the President’s ability and willingness to lead when his nation is threatened, especially on the the anniversary of the worst attack on American soil by terrorists in the nation's history.
This lack of response by the Obama Administration is consistent with its erratic Middle East foreign policy. Iran continues its nuclear weapons program unabated and definitely unafraid of the current American administration; Syria is a bloodbath, Israel (America’s only ally in the Middle East) is confused by an inconsistent level of commitment to its safety and security by what had always been its foremost ally and now, two American Embassies have been attacked and an American embassy employee killed.
It would appear that the Administration's policy of trying to 'tone down' the seething situation in the Middle East isn't working out too well.
It would appear that the Administration's policy of trying to 'tone down' the seething situation in the Middle East isn't working out too well.
Where is the president in all of this; who knows? Clearly, however, it is a sad day when a former president has more to say than a sitting president from the same party and an even sadder day when the only statement to come from the President's campaign office is criticism of his opponent rather than of those who attacked American embassies.
The conventional wisdom of the chattering class is that it is the economy that will decide the election. I believed that up until yesterday but now I believe it will come down to whom Americans believe will stand up and defend their nation; Governor Romney or former President Bill Clinton. Clearly both Romney and Clinton were front and centre to speak to the nation while President Obama was not and did not.
I believe Americans not only deserve better, they had a right to expect better from the President's glib promises in 2008.
They were promised and expected leadership but the President demonstrated again yesterday that they are not going to get it while he is in office.
-----------------------UPDATE-----------------------
Since posting this commentary early this morning, the situation has evolved in the Middle East. The death toll at the American Embassy in Libya now stands at four, including the Ambassador. The statement of apology issued by the American Embassy in Cairo has been removed from the embassy's English web site but remains on its Arabic website. Perhaps the administration is hoping nobody who votes speaks Arabic or will notice.
In what can only be characterized as a day late and a dollar short, the President has finally spoken out against the attacks on his nation's embassies.
"I strongly condemn the outrageous attack on our diplomatic facility in Benghazi, which took the lives of four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens. Right now, the American people have the families of those we lost in our thoughts and prayers. They exemplified America's commitment to freedom, justice, and partnership with nations and people around the globe, and stand in stark contrast to those who callously took their lives.
"I have directed my Administration to provide all necessary resources to support the security of our personnel in Libya, and to increase security at our diplomatic posts around the globe. While the United States rejects efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others, we must all unequivocally oppose the kind of senseless violence that took the lives of these public servants."
One wonders why that statement could not have been made yesterday or why the President couldn't have issued a statement to the American people to assure Americans that he was on top of the situation.
That would be leadership. Invisible silence is not.
The film that supposedly sparked the attacks was produced in the U.S. by an Egyptian Coptic Christian who goes by the name Sam Bacile, and backed by Terry Jones, the wingnut Florida pastor who outraged Muslims two years ago by threatening to torch the Qur’an. The film has been in release for months and it is becoming clear that it was used as an excuse to forment attacks on American embassies on the anniversary of 9/11. The film maker has since gone into hiding. There is a film being shown at the Cannes Film Festival that features a young woman lugging around a statue of the Virgin Mary and masturbating with a crucifix. I seriously doubt that we will see Catholics storm an American Embassy and kill Americans because of it.
For its part, the United Nations has typically made no statement about the attacks.
Many are now blaming Islam and all Muslims but that would be no different than blaming Christianity and all Christians for the actions of the IRA or wingnuts like Terry Jones. The simple truth is that more Muslims have been killed by radical Islamists than any other group. Earlier today, Muslims Facing Tomorrow released this statement.
"The Council for Muslims Facing Tomorrow is saddened by the killing of the US Ambassador and staff in Libya and the unprovoked attack in Egypt. We at MFT strongly believe in individual freedoms, freedom of speech and even the freedom to offend. As such we strongly condemn any violence and killing in the name of religion however controversial the reasoning may be.
Since the fatwa on Salman Rushdie, Muslims should stop being hooked by publications or films that they find offensive and as a personal choice can avoid viewing them."
© 2012 Maggie's Bear
all rights reserved
The content of this article is the sole property of Maggie's Bear but a link to it may be shared by those who think it may be of interest to others
used to be that an attack on an embassy was a declaration of war. i guess this has not been the case since jimmy carter was pres.
ReplyDeleteI also see the ghost of Jimmy Carter's presidency creeping around in the White House again; incompetent and impotent, afraid of being the man America elected him to be. Our president is obviously far more concerned about offending Muslims than he is Israel or the people of the United States. If during an election season our commander-in-chief is unwilling to defend America, what can we expect from him in the next four years, when there is no other election to be had? I'm afraid "Vladimir" knows more what to expect from our president than most Americans do. All I see is a military soon to be reduced by a total of one trillion dollars (and, God help us, the disasters that will come upon America with that reality), and another five trillion borrowed Chinese dollars which our children and grandchildren won't be able to pay back, shoveled out in entitlements, and the bailing out of failing but politically correct, hand-selected businesses.
ReplyDeleteWith only a few exception, like John Kennedy, one of the overwhelming failures of the left is its unwillingness to accept that there are some situations that you can neither talk nor apologize your way out of. Sometimes, in order to protect your nation and to prevent an even worse situation, you have to stand tall and be strong.
DeleteCarter demonstrated an inability to address certain situations with strength and it led to the take over of the American Embassy in Iran. Bill Clinton's foreign policy was equally inconsistent.
It is a sad reality that in this day and age, there are still nations and cultures that only respect strength and who will take advantage of every sign of weakness they see. The Middle East has such a culture. It has nothing to do with Islam and Muslims generally are not the issue. This is political and the President's handling of the politics of the Middle East has been abysmal.
Finally, much too late, the American Flag has been lowered in Washington. Listened and watch O's statement today and there was no emotion in his speech. Could have been reading some ad for birth control, instead of trying to calm the American people. What would he have done had he been Pres when Pearle Harbor was attacked.
ReplyDeleteMary T
I agree with you. He never once looked into the camera and spoke directly to the American people, he read his speech, turned Ms Clinton around and retreated into the White House.I don't think his statement helped him or the American people today.
DeleteAs the sun slowly sets on the American dream and its moral authority in the world we are witness to Obama telling these rogue regimes: "Bad, bad. Not nice, now how much money do you want. The Romans tried to buy off the barbarians and look where it got them.
ReplyDeletePowell Lucas
I don't think President Obama is a bad person nor do I think he is stupid. I simply think he was a man ill-prepared for the reality of being President of The United States and I think his economic and foreign policies have shown that. I think his response to this crisis merely confirms what we already knew but too many are trying to deny.
Delete"I strongly condemn the outrageous attack on our diplomatic facility in Benghazi, which took the lives of four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens. Right now, the American people have the families of those we lost in our thoughts and prayers. They exemplified America's commitment to freedom, justice, and partnership with nations and people around the globe, and stand in stark contrast to those who callously took their lives.
ReplyDelete"I have directed my Administration to provide all necessary resources to support the security of our personnel in Libya, and to increase security at our diplomatic posts around the globe. While the United States rejects efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others, we must all unequivocally oppose the kind of senseless violence that took the lives of these public servants."
This is a tough situation. One not helped by the idiot Terry Jones.
This is a tragedy and should not be politicized.
- David W @cpaciz
It is a very tough situation and extremists like Terry Jones on all sides only inflame it. But there has never been a time when there weren't difficult situations to be faced and this one was not faced well by the administration. It showed indecisive and weak leadership which only encourages extremism, not defeat it.
DeleteYes, it is a tragedy, but yes...it is also an attack. An attack the President of the United States should have strongly condemned yesterday, instead of blaming Americans. If he does not respond to this forcefully, then he is inviting another terrorist attack.
DeleteI posted your rant on my Facebook page along with my own comment, which pretty much summarises what I have to say about it:
ReplyDelete"I don't know about you, but I'd rather have 4 short years of localised anti-gay and anti-abortion bush fires, than 4 more years of shame- and thoughtless pandering to Islam which will set the whole world on fire."
I'm not anti-Islam nor do I think all Muslims are responsible for this. In fact, Muslims have been victimized across the Middle East in the thousands by radical groups who hide behind Islam to justify their political agendas. Whether it is an American embassy employee or a thirteen year old Muslim girl in Afghanistan who has been shot because she went to school, the end result is the same. It is the murder of innocents.
DeleteBut I do agree with you about the choice this election. I don't believe the world is safer because of Barrack Obama. I believe it is more dangerous because the current administration is seen as weak and indecisive. I believe Americans need to consider that at election time.
Well, I guess I should have clarified that whenever I post on my personal FB profile about Islam, I usually mean the political ideology (which is what Islam is IMHO), and my "friends" are pretty much used to it and know that I don't attack the average Muslim.
ReplyDeleteIn fact, last month, I posted this:
"I am still convinced that the ideology behind Islam is dangerous, and should be opposed vehemently. I also still have problems recognising Islam as a religion, simply because of the fact that it is so closely entwined with its politicised ideology that it is extremely difficult to see the difference at times.
As a matter of fact, it is undeniable that in Islamic countries, people do NOT have the same degree of equality they have in most Judeo-Christian faith-based societies. It is undeniable that women are treated differently, it is undeniable that homosexual people are treated differently, it is undeniable that non-Muslims are treated differently. More often than not, this different treatment results in physical abuse.
For instance, it is one thing to call a homosexual a "fag", but stringing them up publicly is a wholly different act. They're both reprehensible, but at clearly different stages. A gay person might just laugh at a redneck insulting him and shrug it off, however he will have problems shrugging while he's dangling from a lamppost with a snapped neck after an official government ordered this to happen...
Furthermore, I strongly believe that people are free to believe in whatever they want, as long as they do not try to enforce their views and beliefs on others, especially not if those views and beliefs go against the general opinion of the society they're in. It becomes especially problematic for me when said society is forced to adapt to the "needs" of a minority, rather than have the minority integrate itself properly and adapt to the ways and culture of the place they now live in.
It is simply unacceptable that a guest, be it a temporary or a permanent one, changes YOUR house, YOUR way of life. That does not mean that I oppose change. I oppose opposition against indigenous values. I do not tolerate intolerance. I believe in the principles of equality, I believe in the democratic values we still enjoy.
I hate the ideology of hatred and intolerance, and the people who are trying to enforce it. It does not matter to me if it's Islamic, Nazi, or any other ideological hogwash. It does not matter to me if it calls itself a religion."
I think we pretty much agree.
DeleteI have several questions regarding the most recent Terrorist attacks:
ReplyDelete1) In the photos, Ambassador Stevens is obviously still alive. There is nothing to hinder his breathing. So how did he, "suffocate"?
2) In Egypt, we knew of the protests ahead of time and we knew they were going to be violent. In Egypt, they were got the Staff out before the attacks. The Ambassador was conveniently out of town. Libya would have had the same intelligence. How come NEITHER COUNTRY helped us protect our Embassy's? When this happened to Israel a few months ago, the Egyptian military guy in charge at the time, could not be found, so he couldn't stop the take over of the Embassy. Convenient. I think that was the plan here?
3) The attack in Libya was 2 fold. The 1st wave was to get the Embassy staff out of the Embassy. The 2nd wave was to get Ambassador Stevens at his safe location. Who told them where his safe location was?
I'll try to answer your questions with what information I have been able to uncover. First, it is my information based on various news reports that Ambassador Stevens died from smoke inhalation. He was alive in the ambulance but had died by the time the ambulance reached the hospital.
DeleteI have no idea what the Administration did or didn't know in advance of the attacks and can't speculate one or the other.
You assertion that neither country came to the aid of the Americans is incorrect. In Cairo, security forces did get involved once the embassy's perimeter had been breached and in Libya government forces allied with American forces to finally repel the attack.
I think any other speculation is merely that, speculation. My issue is with the response of the administration in general and the president specifically. I think it was weak, confused and sends a terrible message to those who seek to harm the United States.