It is all about the need for money. I heard the embassy/consulate was under attack in June? So this is not the first time they knew there was trouble. Why on earth would the US think that the local security could be trusted? I just don't get it.

Mr Real. So what? The guy has a few aliases and was convicted of a crime. Big f'ing deal. If his movie was about Jesus NO ONE WOULD HAVE DIED. PERIOD. END OF DISCUSSION. Stop covering for Muslims behaving badly.

To the rest of the folks I say, do not bash the Libyans. They are some of the most pro-US folks around. They just got rid of a 40 year dictatorship and they have a few security weakspots, but in another decade or so it will be a prime vacation spot and a good business partner.

Couldn't say it myself it will all come down to money and ofcourse we will give it to them. How about keeping the money here and helping Americans out?

Attacks by foreigners, movie made by foreigners. So why are they pissed at America, again? Oh yea, like another overzealous religious nut, they like to jump the gun, before they actually have any facts. Why does that sound like a vaguely familiar politician?

Completely irrational logic. That's like saying the 9/11 attack was our fault since it happened right under our noses... Grow up and get a grip.

There is absolutely no reason why "foreigners" would have been needed for this terrorist operation against the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi. The eastern provinces of Libya are a hotbed of Islamic radicalism, plus they are battle hardened from the Libyan Civil War. There is no reason why foreigners would have been needed to do this.

There's an additional irony to this. To the extent Libya is friendly and grateful to the west for intervening in the fight to topple Gadhafi, it is the western tribes and provinces which are primarily providing that sentiment.
But it was the eastern tribes and provinces who were saved from ruin as Gadhafi's military was advancing toward Benghazi, winning every battle along the way. Had they reached Benghazi the eastern rebels would have been crushed. The United States saved the radical east and now the radicals there are stronger than ever. Western Libya is where Gadhafi had strong support and when I say irony I am referring to how this part of Libya was mostly free of radical Islamists and the people most secular and westernized. U.S. intervention didn't change the status quo in the west and Tripoli but it "liberated" the radical Islamists in the east and Benghazi where they are now roaming free, empowered to implement their terrorist agenda as they fit.

The attack on the U.S. Consultate in Benghazi was not very difficult for them. They far outnumbered the two valiant former Navy Seal defenders and of course the local Libyan police guards melted away soon after the assault began, or might've even been in on the plot.

The government in the west, where the capital Tripoli is, has very little control over the east. When they claim that they've got 50 names or whatever, forget about it. They may have some names of some members of that group Ansar al-Sharia (a homegrown libyan group by the way) but they do not have enough control over the east to do anything about it. Hopefully some good intelligence and a few well-targeted drone strikes will help in the future. It will take time though.

The "foreigners" talk though is just a way for the government in the west to deflect responsibility for their own inability to do anything about the radicals in the east who roam free and are accountable to no one at the present time. Hopefully that situation will change over time but

POTUS doesn't need to defend this jerk's right to make a movie - the U.S. Constitution does that. He can, however, be pissed because it caused so much trouble and lives. This whole thing is tantamount to "yelling FIRE in a crowded theater" which is NOT guaranteed by the Constitution.

dezhawaii

It wasn't us, really. It was foreigners. No, we don't know for sure who, but foreigners who were doing the attacks on our soil. Okay. Is everything okay with that? Good. Please send more checks for aid. We have a mess here to clean up after the foreigners did this to us.

9/11 it was foreigners, Jr. Bush told us so, did we cut off his funding? So where does this leave your argument? Foreigners did it and Mitt wants you to attack, are you ready to serve?

Okay,now I'm hearing more about this guy who supposedly made this movie last year.Allegedly he has 3 aliases,is not a US citizen either Israeli or Coptic Christian Egytptian,has been convicted of fraud in real estste and needed his probation officers' permission to make the flick(which from what I hear he never got).Now what I have ask is..Why are we as Americans even being targeted?We have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with this movie.The only thing we are guilty of in their eyes is that fact that he made the flick in America...So what? He could have made it in the Philippines or Japan or Russia for that matter.Would they have gone after those countries embassies if that were the case?C'mon guys read our Constitution.It says everyone is able to speak their views on anything.If you don't like that fact you don't have to like us but show some grumbaa and go after THE GUY WHO MADE THE FLICK.Duuhhhh..We have about as much control over the guy who made the flick as you all over there do.None.I'd be pissed too if someone made a movie about Jesus being a womanizer and pedophile when obviously no one had any real facts to back the plot of the movie up so I can understand their anger but still,you dont go after the whole populus just because onbe of them who is not even one of us makes something thats not palatable to you.Get real..I would not waste a single American soldiers life over fighting about this because this kind of action IS NOT what America stands for and never will..

Flame77 - There is a difference between saying you shouldn't say something and you can't. Nobody's free speech rights were violated and nobdoy apologized for anything.

Beer Mug said:

Mr Real. So what? The guy has a few aliases and was convicted of a crime. Big f'ing deal.

Lar said:

And if he was a criminal would he still have the right to make the film?

JS in SD said:

That said, the person who made the video has every right to express his views, whether you agree with them or not.

Actually, there's the reason why he was puled in for questioning by federal parole officers. Since he'd previously engaged in fraud by stealing Social Security numbers, setting up accounts via internet and using that to steal money, part of the conditions of his parole was that his internet access should be limited and he would use no psuedonyms to gain anything under flse pretenses.

If he indeed was the one who uploaded the 15 minute trailer to the Internet, then he is in violation of his parole. If he signed checks for the actors he duped into making/working on the film, he is also in violation of his parole. If he deliberately deceived the actors into thinking it was going to be a historical, 'Lawrence-of-Arabia' type film (and it appears he did since the actors all claim they were hired to act in a film called 'Desert Warrior') that is fraud and it is also a parole violation.

Although we can argue whether or not this movie is protected under freedom of speech, it's a moot point because he was not allowed near a computer without supervision anyway, in much the same way a person accused/convicted of child molestation can't see their own kids again without supervision. Depending on what the federal parole board investigators find, he certainly seems guilty of parole violations.

So, if I create more video and incite Muslim to attack more and more, does that mean I still in "free speech" knowing that I would get more American kills by what I am doing?

When you go to any public place and yell "fire" to incite the crowd, is that free speech? Or go to school and said "I'll kill you all if you stare at me", does it free speech also?

The video maker clearly creates this video for one sole purpose only, it is to incite Muslim. That doesn't cover under free speech.

Ooohhh, a parole violation. That hardly ever happens here. Puhlease, if the guy had made a movie about anything else on the Internet, his parole officer would've had him in and gave him a stern talking-to and that would've been the end of it. This is nothing more than a witch hunt and appeasement to the radical Islamists. How many OWS protesters or Tea Party demonstrators violated their parole and how many were picked up for that? Right, that's what I thought. How many illegal immigrants who are actively committing a federal offense got picked up during their bus tour and demonstrations? Huh? How many again? What? Really? But the Feds sure are cracking down on that parole violator aren't they. How much money is that costing us, the taxpayers.

And you know, the trailer was pretty funny, albeit lame acting. I watched it and found it humorous and I have absolutely nothing against Islam or Muslims, if it was about Jesus I would've found it funny too.

And if you watch the actors, a lot of it is NOT dubbed. They were speaking the words and it is obvious to anyone with a brain that it doesn't look like a Chinese Kung Fu movie (of which I am also a huge fan) and the words made it pretty damn clear what it was about, unless these actors have no freaking clue about the Islamic religion.

This was not a result of the video as the video was out 6 months ago and some of the media reports from Arabic and Russian TV have indicated that the signs by the demonstrators reference 9/11 and Revenge for Bin Laden. The attacks were planned to correspond with 9/11. The people were stirred up by the various religious leaders leading up to those days to provide cover for the groups who led the assaults. Wake up people, this is not about some stupid video. It was coordinated across countries.

We've given billions of dollars to these countries and telling Egypt if you don't apologize/condemn this we will not give you billions of dollars IS STUPID! It should be you didn't apologize and condemn this on your own so you are not a friend and you don't get the money! You can't buy love.

Arresting (taking in for questioning) the video producer is BS. We deeply value free speech here and the video didn't "incite a riot" any more than our killing of Bin Laden, should we have not done that because it upset people?

Finally, why isn't the media showing protesters in other countries carrying around signs saying death to Obama, the US, Cheering on 9/11, supporting Bin Laden, etc etc. The mainstream media is also not reporting the videos of the US ambassador being drug through the streets or anything else that would make the president look bad. I'm not a Romney supporter but news is news.

I would have to question if a movie thats been out since July caused this. More recently during the convention Biden bragged over and over about how OBL was dead. I would have to say that probaly pisses them off just as much. However common sense tells me that an attack on 9-11 was a well planed in advance terriost attack. I really cant see why the media is fallen for this movie crap.

Cuong Nguyen said:

The video maker clearly creates this video for one sole purpose only, it is to incite Muslim. That doesn't cover under free speech.

And again, the argument whether this should be protected under free speech is moot. He violated his parole by using a pseudonym to hire actors to make this. He violated his parole simply by uploading the 15 minute trailer to the Net.

So whether he's prosecuted for violations of the free speech amendment or not, he's still in violation of the law for even making the film because he legally was not allowed to under the terms of his parole.

Way I see it, he will more than likely end up going back to jail.

Those who were offended by the video will settle down.

Those who simply used the protest as an excuse to try out their rocket-propelled-grenade-launcher-whatever will go on playing with their rocket-propelled-grenade-launcher-whatever because indignation over this stupid piece of trash vaguely called a movie was just that...an excuse.

Mike, you are correct, the movie angle is nothing but a media story. A lot of the protest signs talk about Osama. @CuongDNguyen - Obama said GM is alive, Osama is dead - According to your logic this is inciting a riot and has caused the deaths of 4 Americans overseas and therefore the President has committed an impeachable offense and should be arrested with all due haste, correct? I think that's why this movie cover story is out, the Muslim's anger is really about Obama killing Osama and then bragging about it, but that looks bad on the President so they've caused an uproar about this movie that's been out for a while and there's many other movies on the Internet that besmirch Islam that haven't caused riots. Kind of damn convenient timing doncha think?

One problem is that the new Libyan government is weak. They have no security forces such a police or anything of their own and have to rely on contracting with armed militias. Unfortunately, those militias often have loyalties to others than the government. That is not a very good way to do business. Eventually they will get their own security forces that are loyal only to the government. Then maybe things like this won't happen.

Gee, if you want all the details about who did what how, don't bother with reporting. Just read the comments section where posters obviously have the inside track of information.

No one on this board has a clue about what happened in Libya. But how we can be surprised by this turn of events? Libya was ruled for decades by a corrupt, oppressive dictator. During the fighting, we were even unsure of who was fighting Gaddafi, if perhaps they were al quaeda. I think it's true that there are terrorists in the Mideast who travel from country to country plotting attacks and stirring up mayhem. Gaddafi's death has left a huge vacuum in a country that is suddenly much different than it was two years ago.

I DON'T BELIEVE AND WE SHOULD NOT for one moment that this MUSLIM is telling the truth---IF he was HE would have said WHERE the "FOREIGNERS came from---THAT gets the HEAT off him and LIBYA!

SOME in the British government knew that an attack was eminent on 9/11 and notified the obama administration of this fact.
Obama failed to act on this by securing the embassy and and as a result we now have four diplomats murdered by these subhuman muslims. The question is why did obama fail to act?

People you need to understand this---THE FILM is just an EXCUSE----everything thats going on now was PLANED---PRE=PLANED to jump off on 9-11. THIS MOVIE has GOT NOTHING TO DO WITH IT OTHER THAN AN EXCUSE!!!

Obamas "Im SORRY for AMERICA" TOUR was where this started---IF you look real close this smells of MUSLIM BROS,TALIBAN and Al-Quids---also note that THERE IS NO NEWS about the GOVT of IRAN and its quest for NUKES---OR ISRAEL !!

ALL SMOKE and MIRRORS ---and another thing to look at is the POSSIBILITY of a "FALSE FLAG " move by OBAMA---Won't go into it but LOOK UP FALSE FLAG and LOOK real close at the EO--EXECUTIVE ORDERS and what the OBAMA can do with a PEN!

The Muslim world is playing with the government of the United States and the government of the United States, with the help of much of the American mass media, is playing with the American public.

Any American who believes that these attacks on the American embassies in Cairo, Libya and throughout the Muslim Middle East were triggered by a particular Youtube video is sadly mistaken, to say the least. At any given time, there's any number of hateful videos on Youtube! Videos critical of the Muslim religion have appeared on Youtube before. Furthermore, it's perfectly clear that these attacks, particularly the one that led to the assassination of the US ambassador to Libya, were planned for some time and therefore were in no way a "spontaneous" reaction to the particular Youtube video being named. It is not the job of the US government to take responsibility for the statements of any crackpot who wishes to post on Youtube.

The masterminds behind the present Muslim anti-US violence would like us to believe that good upstanding Muslims were innocently browsing Youtube and were horrified when confronted with this terribly insulting video they could just not ignore. In fact, what had to actually have happened was the exact reverse of that. The planners of the coordinated attacks that are just beginning to escalate against the United States were designed by those who planned them to commemorate 9/11. They began with the plan to do violence against the United States, then set about searching for the proper vehicle on which to pin it, and they found a good one in the said Youtube video. They’re playing us, pure and simple, and that an individual who was shrewd enough to get elected President of the United States should be so ridiculous as to be played in this manner is an extremely serious matter. This is not the first time that his arrogant incompetence has revealed his lack of concern for the loss of American lives. How can we forget the attempts by the Obama administration to cover up the events surrounding the murder of ATF agent Brian Terry as a result of the incompetently designed operation known as “Fast and Furious”?

Whereas many idealist Americans fail to analyze Obama’s incompetence, those who wish to harm us have assessed our President very accurately. Those who wish to do us harm know an opportunity when they see it. That opportunity is called Barack Obama’s presidency. They’re laughing their rear ends off.

THE OBAMA IS NOTHING BUT A COWARD and HE IS NOT BLACK!!!

HE is an AMERICAN/ARAB---and A MUSLIME !
My Name is African Swahili - NOT EXACTLY, your name is Arabic and 'Baraka' (from which Barack came) means 'blessed' in that language. Hussein is also Arabic and so is Obama.

Barack Hussein Obama is not half black. He is the first Arab-American President, not the first black President. Barack Hussein Obama is 50% Caucasian from his mother's side and 43.75% Arabic and 6.25% African Negro from his father's side. While Barack Hussein Obama's father was from Kenya , his father's family was mainly Arabs.. Barack Hussein Obama's father was only 12.5% African Negro and 87.5% Arab (his father's birth certificate even states he's Arab, not African Negro). Go to:
http://www.arcadeathome.com/newsboy.phtml?Barack_Hussein_Obama_-_Arab-Americ

Amanda, and again, there are many parole violators and people actively committing federal offenses that are not in jail and are not picked up. If they put him in jail then it means that we as a people will do nothing to retain our freedoms and will bow and cave and give all of our hard-fought freedoms away in the name of security. I could blather on about the quote that those who give up their freedom for security deserve neither, but hey, we're well on our way with that one, so I guess we'll get to experience that first hand. It will be interesting to see who the first American dictator is and how the people react when the Constitution is abolished, in the name of security and political correctness, of course. It'll be for our own good you understand.

Once again if the video isnt covered under free speech neither would Biden saying over and over that OBL is dead. Biden has to be blamed for pissing them off too. Thats all were heard durinng the convention and I think they even made a bumper sticker as well.

The Islamic world is not going to embrace American "values." The use of military force will not inspire them to embrace American "values," either, but it will inspire them to resist us violently. America is just going to have to accept the fact that its way of life is not the only way of life on planet Earth, that our way is not necessarily the best way, and that it is not our place to Americanize every other culture in the world. Give it up and go home already!

@ 1.3 Lar-345817

And tell Obama to stop apologizing for someone expressing their freedom of speech. . .

Obama did not apologize for the video.

Someone from our Cairo embassy sent out the apology before the attacks. Romney heard about the apology and went on one of his idiotic spewings without knowing any of the facts. And even after the attacks, when he knew the facts, and that he'd screwed up, he would not back down or take responsibility for his usual stupidity after our embassy was attacked and the American lives lost.

When he was told it did not come from Obama he continued on his tirade and said that if someone representing the U.S. says something then those words come from the President. And then he has just continued on with the lie, among many he throws out there.

He made a royal A$$ out of himself this week regarding the attacks and definitely showed he's not presidential material

Republicans feel if you repeat a lie enough times it will be believed, Romney and Ryan are pros at it. One would expect someone running for office would check their facts before speaking out. But then again, as we're talking about lying Romney and Ryan, facts, and as they've said, fact checks, don't really matter.

Fortunately those facts and checks matter to the American people.

Romney/Ryan - Slip Sliding Away

Obama/Biden 2012

. . . enjoy you weekend!

I grew up at a time when news journalists were top tier trusted. If it was reported in a newspaper, it was cold hard facts for use in research. No questions asked.

Now, there are so many instances of journalism being used to inflame with name calling, being used to manipulate through complete misrepresentation, and, journalists wagging their fingers at some man named Mitt Romney, while people are screaming in US embassies for help and my POTUS hears the cries and looks at his watch to get to a Las Vegas campaign function on time. And, five days later, journalists are still not demanding answers from the POTUS.

Why were not other embassies protected once the violence started? Is this related to the security breaches that Diane Feinstein referred to months ago that were emanating from the White House and putting lives at risk ... and, then she immediately shut down. My POTUS is at this moment in time, the only person who can deal with the situation. So, why are the media pointing at Mitt Romney's one comment for hours on end, and, not my POTUS, I ask myself. People throwing rocks and storming embassies probably do not even know who Mitt Romney is. They, however, DO know who the POTUS is. They scream his name.

There was a time when this made me angry. Being manipulated. Being played for a fool. Being told to watch the wagging finger as it points to the woman at center stage whining for $10 per month birth control pills. And, not women in Afghanistan being stoned for being raped. Not being allowed to drive. Not being allowed to learn to read. Not being allowed their face to even be seen. Afghanistan women must think US women saying they are suffering a 'War On Women' must be insane. (Side note: You'll pay the difference through losing another healthcare service through Obamacare ... duh).

Now, I realize this control of the media, this trusted top tier that protected me from crooked politicians, is the story. The burning in the Middle East, and, deaths, and coffins draped in US flags coming home, are each just one in a long line that have been occurring and will continue to occur until there is truth.

Which at one time, I thought, journalists doggedly hunted for the truth. Forced the truth. Snooped for the truth ... not a for a gotcha moment from a political candidate.

Deaths mattered. US people screaming for help in embassies under attack were an immediate problem that journalists demanded be handled by politicians with the power.

Journalists were legends because they made a difference. Or, maybe history has no truth, and, politicians and journalists have always been in bed, together?

Have news organizations always chosen who they wanted for POTUS and misrepresented that candidate's 'truths and half truths and no truths' in a positive light ... while, panting for 'gotcha' moments from the other candidate?

What once angered me ... not being told the truth ... not having heroes chase crooked politicians for answers ... not protecting the public good ... now, frightens me. Who is controlling the media?

Anilof said:

Ooohhh, a parole violation. That hardly ever happens here. Puhlease, if the guy had made a movie about anything else on the Internet, his parole officer would've had him in and gave him a stern talking-to and that would've been the end of it.

Depending on the prior offense and the severity of the new offense, parole violations can be serious things. A parole violation that would be considered a reflection of the original offense is treated harshly--in my municipality. If a paroled child molester moves within a few blocks of a school, it's a parole violation. A registered sex offender bringing ice cream to a neighbor's cookout where he was not invited to give to children is a parole violation and said offender will go back to jail.

As his previous offenses were serious--fraud, identity theft, grand theft of large sums of money--and the vehicle by which he committed these crimes is the internet, any internet access he has that is not supervised or given permission for would be a reflection off his prior bad act and would be dealt with most likely by sending him back to prison.

Now yes, there is a chance that he won't--they spoke to him today but did not arrest, detain, or otherwise hold him, and he was then released. Which seems to indicate that the government is merely looking at his movie as barely worth mentioning in the grand scheme of things.

This is nothing more than a witch hunt and appeasement to the radical Islamists.

That's as it may be--I'm not speculating on government motives here. But there is prior precedent--Feds couldn't get Al Capone on his syndicate's crimes, but they managed to get fraud charges to stick and he spent the rest of his life in prison, breaking the back of his crime family. And rather more recently, when the New Black Panther member put the $10k bounty on George Zimmerman's head for the Trayvon Martin shooting, the Feds arrested him...on weapons charges. But it effectively served to silence the New Black Panther Party, and the rest of the organization quickly hurried to distance themselves from the one who'd been arrested---and the bounty.

God bless this President for standing up for US, God bless this President for not trying to Spin this on some Film, and you can pick any God you want !

I wonder how many of the folks on this site that are calling for this guy to be prosecuted or worse for this crappy excuse of a movie also were in support of a mosque near ground zero of the WTC, regardless of the emotions that was stirring up.

Many Americans in this country seem more than willing to compromise our hard fought liberties while making concessions in our own country for similar activities. I do not approve of the movie or premise of the movie, but if you want to condemn the Florida pastor, the Westboro cronies, or the director of the movie, then you might as well say goodby to movies that could be considered offensive by other parties as well. And who will be judging what is offensive and what isn't?

At least independents like myself would no longer have to hear the rantings of either the Fox OR MSNBC crowds. No more Maddow or Limbaugh. No more PBS. No more controversial views of any sort. Well, depending on who's in charge of the Czar of Offensive Media matters at the time. Free speach, we bid you adieu.

Let's get just one thing straight: oil-rich Libya receives no financial aid from the US or any other country. The assistance we recently gave--which never has been specified--was presumably in training, logistic and intelligence support as well as enforcing a "no-fly" zone against Qaddafi's air force.

@RealAmericansFirst

Egypt and Libya are under the control of the muslime brotherhood and al-qaeda.

The new "government" is just their puppets.

The only person I see lying here is you.

You must be one of Obamas paid propaganda posters.

Real Americans have a brain and use it unlike the idiots that believe your crap.

Obama has sent over 2.5 billion dollars to the muslime brotherhood and al-qaeda under the guise of aiding Egypt and Libya.

Real Americans will not stand for Barack Obamas traitorous actions any longer.

I say we give Libya to the republicans, let them clean the place out, make it their new "south" where they can wave their confederate flag with pride and we all live happily ever after.

Frank. we are the real Americans, and we don't believe your sht. shoo be gone pest.

WheresCongress said:

And, not women in Afghanistan being stoned for being raped. Not being allowed to drive. Not being allowed to learn to read. Not being allowed their face to even be seen.

Actually, in case you didn't notice, that's been changing too.

The Summer Olympics this year was the very first Olympics ever in which each country had both males and females competing. Prior to this, there had been one country who did not allow women to compete for them even if the woman qualified per the IOC. Know who the sole holdout was? Afghanistan.

This year's Olympics was the first time that a woman was able to march in the Afghani delegation, not wear a burka (she was allowed to wear her headscarf but not required to wear the burka) wave the Afghani flag, and compete for the honor and glory of her country (and countrywomen). It was also the first time that many Afghani girls were able to see the Olympics, to see one of their gender compete, and I am of the opinion that it will inspire a whole new generation of girls, and while it may not happen within the next twenty years, I firmly believe we will eventually see Afghani female runners and gymnasts and they as a country will move past their era of repressing women and womens rights to eventually grant them equality--just as we in the US have.

What once angered me ... not being told the truth ... not having heroes chase crooked politicians for answers ... not protecting the public good ... now, frightens me. Who is controlling the media?

Homeland Security now includes the Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, the National Communications Center, the National CyberSecurity Office. Have you bought a new DVD lately? Seen that Anti-Piracy warning that flashes up at the beginning of the video? Used to be it had the FBI logo on it. Now its the FBI and Homeland Security. Bootleg videos are now a national security threat.

Sir you sound like a bigot to me.I am American as is he.I am of Scottish,Native American descent.So what if he is,YOU LIVE IN AMERICA.You are an immigrant and your ancestors were problably thrown out and hated at one time too..He has not given any indication of what you describe above and so you say 'incompetent' but what would YOU have done?How many fundamentals of the Constsitution would YOU have broken to achieve your goal such as your past WASP president GW Bush did hmmm?..I do not caare Where Barack came from,what actions he has done so far are legal and abide by Contitutional law regarding overseas events.

But Amanda, as good as that all sounds, the question becomes why is there a witch hunt to begin with and what exactly are the government's motives and should they not be important to us, the people. How is a guy making a movie exercising a basic human right (at least according to our current Constitution) the same as a crime syndicate that was complicit in extortion and murders or someone who has offered a bounty (read conspiracy to commit murder)?

Well... well... well... lookie here:

Muslim Cleric Tears Bible at Protest outside the US Embassy in Cairo

By Dan Wooding
Founder of ASSIST Ministries
CAIRO, EGYPT (ANS) -- During the demonstration which was held in front of the American Embassy in Cairo on Tuesday, 9/11, a Muslim cleric named Abu Islam tore and burned the Holy Bible in front of thousands of Muslims. His action was met with applause and anti-Christian cheers from the demonstrators.

A clip from the video

According to Mary Abdelmassih in a story carried by the Assyrian International News Agency (www.aina.org), the cleric, before leaving the demonstration and getting into his car, told the crowds "next time I will urinate on it."

The video -- -- shows the Muslim cleric tearing the Bible and says:

* 0.02 "the overwhelming Book, the Book of Truth and Peace. The place for these words and this book is over the heads because it is the real inspiration. (He places the Koran on his head) voices chanting Allahu Akbar.
* 0.30 He Says: message to the Egyptian Christians. Out of respect and politeness to the Egyptian Christians we will not do the same like what they did to our God's book, we will be generous towards you today and say we will respect you "momentarily." We will respect this book which is in the Arabic language.
* 0:54 Demonstrators' chants "Coming, Coming O Islam"
* 1.09 Abu Islam holds another Bible and says: This is the book the dog Terry believes in, as well as those dogs with him the Egyptian Christians in America.
* 1.19 Abu Islam: Today I can only TEAR IT APART. He starts tearing the bible and throwing the leaves towards the mob, amid chants of Allahu Akbar and "Khaybar, Khaybar, O Jews, the army of Mohammad is coming."
* 2.06 Abu Islam saying: to all the cross worshippers around the world we will not keep quiet . Today, we tore it.
* 2.13 a man in blue beside him burns the bible raising it for everyone to see.
* Abu Islam: Salamu Aleycom (Peace be with you) and leaves, with mob chanting "Khaybar, Khaybar, O Jews, the army of Mohammad is coming." "Governing, governing, O Koran." "Coming, Coming O Islam."

The cleric with supporters

Abdelmassih went on to report that Dr. Mustafa Maraghy, professor of law and Islamic law at Cairo University, filed a complaint with the Attorney General against the cleric, whose real name is Ahmed Abdullah. The complaint cited Abdullah, who is the owner of the TV channel the Islamic Nation, for contempt of religion, disturbing public security and peace.

Dr Maraghy, who is the chairman of the Coptic Coalition, said that tearing and burning the Holy Bible, which all Christians in the world believe in, is a "villainous and barbaric act." He added that it is not permitted at all to defame religions. "The same hurt feelings we felt by the film which insulted the prophet is the same that we felt by this criminal act," he said.

He vowed that the Coptic Coalition will not ignore such "ignorant people" but will prosecute them. The Maspero Coptic Youth Union has called on President Morsy to intervene immediately to put an end to any efforts which would kindle the fire of sedition between Muslims and Copts.
Another complaint was also filed this morning against Abu Islam by Karam Gabriel, lawyer with the Copts of Egypt Coalition, for his recent burning of the Holy Bible as well as his previous insults to Christianity through his books and through his Islamic Nation TV Channel.

Abdelmassih then stated that the Coalition, which has among its members Muslims and Copts, has issued an official statement condemning the film insulting the Prophet of Islam. Magdy Saber, spokesman for the Union, condemned Abu Islam's tearing and burning of the Bible in front of the Copts who were present before the US Embassy, where they had gone in support of their Muslim brothers regarding to prophet's film.

Saber demanded from officials to take the necessary measures to prevent sedition among the Egyptians. "If we condemn the film-makers of the prophet film who live outside Egypt," he said, "we should also condemn this disgraceful act in Egypt, stressing the need to punish Abu Islam for his irresponsible actions."

In an interview today with The Mohit newspaper, Abu Islam denied burning the Bible, saying, "I tore it apart and threw it to the demonstrators to step on it with their shoes." He added, "Next time I will make my grandson urinate on it, as the saying goes, an eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth and the starter is at fault."

Commenting on the fact that the film producers do not represent all Copts and the masses of the American people and therefore their holy book should not be insulted in response, Abu Islam said "if someone one did something, everyone bears the guilt and bears the outcome. Did not all Muslims bear the pain of what Osama bin Laden did? Did not all Muslims bear the pain of Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman being described as a terrorist? Let them taste from the cup the Islamic world had to drink."

Coptic activist Mark Ebeid said, "Until now we have not heard any condemnation from any Muslim organization or Al-Azhar, as our church did concerning the Prophet film. We have hope that the Church will say something about our Holy Book."

Dan Wooding, 71, who was born in Nigeria of British missionary parents, is an award winning British journalist now living in Southern California with his wife Norma, to whom he has been married for 49 years. They have two sons, Andrew and Peter, and six grandchildren who all live in the UK. He is the founder and international director of ASSIST (Aid to Special Saints in Strategic Times) and the ASSIST News Service (ANS) and he hosts the weekly "Front Page Radio" show on the KWVE Radio Network in Southern California and which is also carried throughout the United States and around the world. Besides this, Wooding is a host for His Channel Live, which is carried via the Internet to some 192 countries. Dan recently received two top media awards -- the "Passion for the Persecuted" award from Open Doors US, and as one of the top "Newsmakers of 2011" from Plain Truth magazine. He is the author of some 45 books, the latest of which is "Caped Crusader: Rick Wakeman in the 1970s." To order a copy, go to: .

Where are all the Christians looting, pillaging and murdering about this outrage? I guess there is a definite difference in cultures, huh? I think so too.

Also Amanda, I hope you are right about Afghanistan. Remember we are pulling out and who knows what will happen in that country with the power vacuum that occurs when we are no longer directly enforcing the current Afghan government. But I really, really hope that the Afghani's continue along the path to freedom. It would be a great achievement to all of the coalition forces to see Afghani women given the same rights as men.

Anilof said:

If they put him in jail then it means that we as a people will do nothing to retain our freedoms and will bow and cave and give all of our hard-fought freedoms away in the name of security. I could blather on about the quote that those who give up their freedom for security deserve neither, but hey, we're well on our way with that one, so I guess we'll get to experience that first hand.

You think. I know.

I was adopted internationally as an infant, never told before my parents passed away in a car accident. 18 years after my adoption, USCIS finds they've lost my adoption paper and comes to me for a copy. I can't give them one since I never knew I was adopted, so they decided that made me illegal and placed me in deportation.

Then they found out there was no where to deport me because I was undocumented as an infant--abandoned at an orphanage with no birth certificate saying who I was or where and when I was born. I had a legal BC that had been filed after my adoption, I had a legal SS card and a brand new DL, but although that sufficed to get me through school and got me a college scholarship, apparently the missing adoption paper made me enough of a national security threat that they couldn't let me go on an ankle monitoring bracelet till I could find the paper.

Instead Homeland Security kept me in deportation for three years on taxpayer dollar while I wrote letters to every courthouse in every state I'd ever lived in with my parents trying to find that paper. I did finally find it, and they let me go, but I had a really really good view of what happens when the need for security trumps liberty. There was nowhere I could go, after all; I have no extended family, no ties outside the country, could prove I'd been in the country all my life with school records and my parents' tax records, etc., graduated high school on the honor roll, never been in trouble with the law.

But Amanda, as good as that all sounds, the question becomes why is there a witch hunt to begin with and what exactly are the government's motives and should they not be important to us, the people. How is a guy making a movie exercising a basic human right (at least according to our current Constitution) the same as a crime syndicate that was complicit in extortion and murders or someone who has offered a bounty (read conspiracy to commit murder)?

First off, he broke the terms of his parole in order to make the movie, for the reasons I specified above. Secondly...I don't know if this movie would be protected under the 'free speech' clause of the first amendment. Per Wikipedia under "United States free speech exceptions":

"Exceptions to free speech in the United States are limitations on the First Amendment's guarantee of free speech and expression as recognized by the United States Supreme Court. These exceptions have been created over time, based on certain types of speech and expression, and under different contexts. While freedom of speech in the United States is a constitutional right, these exceptions make that right a limited one.

Restrictions that are based on people's reactions to words include both instances of a complete exception, and cases of diminished protection. Speech that involves incitement, false statements of fact, obscenity, child pornography, threats, and speech owned by others are all completely exempt from First Amendment protections. Commercial advertising receives diminished, but not eliminated, protection."

In my opinion, this would definitely fall under incitement and false statements of fact, if not also obscenity and speech owned by others if the three-hour movie includes quotes taken from the Qu'ran out of context. Se below the explanations to those limits:

Does the First Amendment mean anyone can say anything at any time? No.
The Supreme Court has rejected an interpretation of speech without limits.

Because the First Amendment has such strong language, we begin with the presumption that speech is protected. Over the years, the courts have decided that a few other public interests — for example, national security, justice or personal safety — override freedom of speech. There are no simple rules for determining when speech should be limited, but there are some general tests that help.

Clear and Present Danger
Will this act of speech create a dangerous situation? The First Amendment does not protect statements that are uttered to provoke violence or incite illegal action.

Justice Holmes, speaking for the unanimous Supreme Court, stated, “The question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent.”

Fighting Words
Was something said face-to-face that would incite immediate violence?

In Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, the Supreme Court stated that the “English language has a number of words and expressions which by general consent [are] ‘fighting words’ when said without a disarming smile. … Such words, as ordinary men know, are likely to cause a fight.” The court determined that the New Hampshire statute in question “did no more than prohibit the face-to-face words plainly likely to cause a breach of the peace by the addressee, words whose speaking constitute a breach of the peace by the speaker — including ‘classical fighting words,’ words in current use less ‘classical’ but equally likely to cause violence, and other disorderly words, including profanity, obscenity and threats.” Jurisdictions may write statutes to punish verbal acts if the statutes are “carefully drawn so as not unduly to impair liberty of expression.”

Libel and Slander
Was the statement false, or put in a context that makes true statements misleading? You do not have a constitutional right to tell lies that damage or defame the reputation of a person or organization.

Obscenity
In June 1973 in Miller v. California, the Supreme Court held in a 5-to-4 decision that obscene materials do not enjoy First Amendment protection.

In Miller v. California (1973), the court refined the definition of “obscenity” established in Roth v. United States (1957). It also rejected the “utterly without redeeming social value” test of Memoirs v. Massachusetts.

In the three-part Miller test, three questions must receive affirmative responses for material to be considered “obscene”:

1. Would the average person, applying the contemporary community standards, viewing the work as a whole, find the work appeals to the prurient interest?
2. Does the work depict or describe sexual conduct in a patently offensive way?
3. Does the work taken as a whole lack serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value?

One must distinguish “obscene” material, speech not protected by the First Amendment, from “indecent” material, speech protected for adults but not for children. The Supreme Court also ruled that “higher standards” may be established to protect minors from exposure to indecent material over the airwaves. In FCC v. Pacifica Foundation the court “recognized an interest in protecting minors from exposure to vulgar and offensive spoken language.”

Conflict with Other Legitimate Social or Governmental Interests
Does the speech conflict with other compelling interests? For example, in times of war, there may be reasons to restrict First Amendment rights because of conflicts with national security.

To ensure a fair trial without disclosure of prejudicial information before or during a trial, a judge may place a “gag” order on participants in the trial, including attorneys. Placing prior restraint upon the media usually is unconstitutional. In Nebraska Press Association v. Stuart (1976), the Supreme Court established three criteria that must be met before a judge can issue a gag order and restrain the media during a trial.

Time, Place, and Manner
These regulations of expression are content-neutral. A question to ask: Did the expression occur at a time or place, or did the speaker use a method of communicating, that interferes with a legitimate government interest? For example, distribution of information should not impede the flow of traffic or create excessive noise levels at certain times and in certain places.

Amanda

Thank you for telling me about the Olympics and the Afghanistan woman who participated. I hope that continues. I always see pictures of Afghanistan men on TV and I am thinking ... where are the women?

And, I am not sure, anymore, if the FBI and Homeland Security and US Government period makes me feel 'secure'. I cannot even believe I am making that statement. And, I do not like feeling that way. Maybe 24/7 news services are not such a good thing ... news overload.

In the end, when injustices are done, I want the truth. How to get there, I am not sure, anymore. Maybe my personal crisis will pass.

@ Anilof

Your counter-argument is pretty stupid to begin with. Obama is the president, he can say whatever he wants, but it also carry a lot of weight.
The situation are different. You are comparing two different situation with 2 different people.
So, does this mean I can compare Romney to attack to Iran? He is inciting riot and he is also the one that jump the gun to criticize Obama on something that he barely able to understand to begin with. Can we jail Romney? He is not the president, but he wants to start war with Iran, that is alone enough to jail him.

Amanda, the movie is a parody of a prior work of art which enjoys First Amendment protections as well as protection from COPYRIGHT infringement. To claim otherwise is to claim that the U.S. recognizes the Quran as a true history and therefore, according to its tenets, means the U.S. must become an Islamic caliphate. Otherwise, it must be considered a work of art which can be parodied under U.S. fair use law. (Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976)

But you are right. The Supreme Court has time and again determined that the government can take away our rights if they decide that it is appropriate to remove our rights. That's why it is technically illegal to grow your own vegetables instead of buying them from a supermarket, although most municipalities don't enforce this Supreme Court decision from back in the day (interferes with Interstate commerce since the vegetables at the supermarket are coming from out-of-state markets)

Many European countries have had Muslim immigration for years, they are now seeing the fruits of that. As are we, by a President who invites the Muslim Brotherhood into the White House, 20,000 muslims to the DNC and leaves God and Israel out of the platform until some dolt realizes he is alienating his base.... Obama knew days before our people were murdered there was a threat and stood by and did NOTHING.... Obama, in my opinion is just as guilty as the perpetrators of that crime, which BTW is an act of war...Obama has blood on his hands....

America deserves better leadership.

The Obama regime had warning and did nothing!

Wow, our president (and certain idiots herein) blame a well planned and coordinated attack on 9/11 on an obscure movie clip, and the Lybian president blames it on foreigners. Looks a lot like there are at least two hig ranking pairs of pants on fire!

Oh, by the way, thank goodness for the 1st Amendment, even if libs want it to be enforced only when it suits their agenda.

@CuongDNguyen - so you admit that what the White House says carries a lot of weight, which means that their request of YouTube to determine if the movie or trailers violated their terms of use WAS an attempt to squash free speech in our country! This it the U.S., we have the same freedom of speech that our President does. I am supposed to be able to directly contradict what he says without fear of persecution or retribution from the government, so my freedoms are supposed to be just as freely available as his are. He is not "above" me nor is my government and we all must adhered to the same laws and have the same freedoms (supposedly, or at least that was the original idea as I understood it) .

WheresCongress said:

And, I am not sure, anymore, if the FBI and Homeland Security and US Government period makes me feel 'secure'.

It's entirely subjective, and I will say that due to prior expereinces with Homeland Security, I am definitely not a fan,and I will admit I am terribly biased against them. However, when you look at their operating budget and how it's jumped in the last decade--$49 million in 2002, $58-$98 billion in 2011--and look at how many government agencies are now under their umbrella: USCIS, ICE, CBP, TSA, FEMA, the Secret Service, the US Coast Guard, just to name a few, plus the aforementioned Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, The National Communication Center, and the Cybersecurity office.

It seems to me (from my limited and admittedly biased viewpoint) that this was exactly what the Founding Fathers were trying to prevent--government with little to no accountability to the people they are supposed to be governing. Speaker of the House John Boehner also recently petitioned the President that his Homeland Security Oversight Committee of 33-or-so Congresspeople should have sole oversight of that $98 billion Homeland Security juggernaut--if someone should have a question as to what DHS or one of its component divisions was doing, they would ask his Oversight Commite rather than call the Head of Homeland Security in to answer (like they recently did with the Secret Service prostitution scandal.)

While I admit freely that I am biased, I will also say freely--that troubles me, that 33 people would have sole control over anything and everything to do with national security, both within our borders and without. It didn't escape my notice that the people who authored the recent controversial sections of the NDAA for FY2012, the slightly more recent and also controversial Restricted Grounds Act (research HR347) and the upcoming but not yet passed Enemy Expatriation Act (if you Google this be thorough--read the text of the bill carefully, then go and research all six of the articles of US code pertaining to citizenship that the EEA will make changes to.) Then think about where will the money to implement these new laws will come from, and where will it be going...

Oh, and one more thing...few people remember that when the SS were just getting started in Germany , they were called the Saal-Schutz--Home Protection.

Only later when they affiliated themselves witht he Nazi party and rose to power were they called the Schutz-Staffen--Protection Corps.

I suggest all folks read AMANDA's last post.. it is full of LAW and facts which most of you believe are your place to decide.. there is an investigation going on at this moment, so to those of you that have PHD's in foreign policy beware.. your lies will wither in the vine and of course you will never have to apologize..

I have seen many lies about our president and yourr racial slurs. the word is RESPECT.. and also why don't you ever mention ROMNEY/RYAN both first level novices in foreign policy. and they too lie about the prez and then they go into hiding..

if I could afford it I would hire a great law team to search out you scum bags and charge you with libel and slander

it's an election not a pissing contest and in just a few days wew will watch the great draft dodger MITT tell us what he knows in 30 seconds then OBAMA can speak.. Ryan is next I can't wait

@Anilof

It is a requested, not a implication under law. You seem to have confuse them. This request is out of concern that Muslim will continue to use this excuse to cause more Amercian death.

There are exception under free speech like yelling fire or say "I'll gun you all down". Read about it before you say anything else. Inciting a riot is also one of the exception not cover under free speech.

As for the president, no he is not the same as you, he is in fact above you on many things the concerning the state of this country. Just like Romney is. This is why we have secret service protecting Obama and Romney.

For example, Obama can say classify information and you can not because he has the power to declassify them. Which you failed to grasp. What he said carry weight and the public will judge him. However, what you say will be judge by the law.

Of course. pass the buck, blame it on foreigners not from Libya. That would look bad on Libya and it would stop all the aid and money we send them.....oh, wait, NO IT WOULDN'T!

George: Why? It's Obama's mess he should take responsibility for whatever has happened in the ME. It's his Administration i in power. Let him handle it so far he is an embarassment. While the ME burned he was in Las Vegas having a good old time hobnobbing with his Rich friends, the same people he attacks constantly for not paying enough taxes! He sweet talks them in parting with their money while at same time he berates them for being rich. Also, the South was Democratic for a long time, they bought and enslaved the black people, After the Civil War, they founded the KKK. Republicans set the slaves free, Lincoln was a REPUBLICAN in case you did not know it! Jim Crows laws were passed by the Democrats, too.

Magariaf did not identify where the foreigners came from but said he was sharing details with U.S. officials.

What do you want to bet that it is shared with President Obama and his "Administration" and it is determined that it was (wait for it) ... THE ISRAELIS.

This determination made of course after much unpublicized discussion communication with "the White House".

What better reason for Obama to ramp up his pro-Islamic agenda and refuse to meet with Netanyahu and insist on the '67 borders.

I don't feel sure that there is much that Libyan leadership can be trusted about; but in this case ... I have a gut feeling they could be telling the truth the best they know it. (They did not deny that there were Libyan citizens involved.)

@CuongDNguyne - I never stated that I did have the same rights as politicians - Of course I am well aware that all of our politicians, including the President, feel that they are above our laws. I reject this belief as an American but recognize that I am impotent outside of my voting power to change our government's squashing of our freedoms in any way. Thank you for pointing out that politicians believe they are superior to the rest of us and that the laws of our country do not apply to them, I already knew that. But, as an American, I still say that Obama and Romney are not above me and will never be regardless of how dictatorial our government has become. Honestly, my true opinion, is that, while politicians have political and military power and I only have my vote, I am still above them because I can always help to vote them out of office. I guess I'm a "die-hard" American in that sense and still whole-heartedly believe, whether warranted or not, that we have the greatest democracy in the world. Maybe I am naive in that sense and a little bit prone to nationalistic feelings.

But I must say the whole "it was a request" argument is a bit lame. When the FBI or Secret Service "requests" something of you (or anyone in authority as victims of sexual harassment in the workplace can tell you) it's a clear indication that you need to really, really look hard at what you're doing and see if you can "accommodate" their request because, you know, they can make life really hard for you if they need to.

Amanda-2017567, as to the SCOTUS's take on the first amendment through the years, it is correct to say that there are places where exceptions, such as FCC regulations on the use of certain words on the air waves have been upheld. However, political speech is also one of those areas where any encrotchments upon it has been the most suspect, and one of the most protected forms of speech around. A large part of the reason is political speech is considerered necessary to the healthy functioning of a democracy/republic. Also when talking about charges such as libel or slander, public officials (such as politicians) are not considered as protected as private citizens. It is they who chose to pursue a career in politics, they who chose to make their lives public, they who chose to get themselves into the media spotlight. If libel laws were to apply to them, the same as it would when things are said about private citizens, Obama [b]and[/b] Romney, along with their predecessors in the main would be as guilty as sin for every false and misleading political commercial that the respective campaigns have ever put out. Everytime Romney brings up the birther debate again, or Obama suggests that this or that action on the part of Baine Capitol means that Romney personally and with malice, individually intended to destroy the lives of this or that person, cause x person's death, etc; would fall under possible charge for slander. It does not; in large part because it's a. political speech and one of the most protected out there, and b. because it is they who chose to enter into the public spotlight in a big way. Celebrities are also much in the same category, as they have made an active choice to live, a public life...

Though some might not like it, though it might not be politically convenient, and though it might express some rather harsh feelings, ever since 9/11, ever since the acts of the terrorists themselves, there is a certain tension, and some harsh feelings about. And as it plays out, it might not all be on one side; but making everyone hush up, and supress what is actually going on, doesn't always result in a quick resolution; aka take into account when people start acting in a passive-aggressive fashion. There's difficult relations at work for instance, and someone can't say something outright, so they start giving the quick brush aside, or sound polite on the surface, but their tone of voice or body language suggests something else sneering beneath the surface, which could give one the chills, or the willies when just looking at each other, etc There's a lot of ways people can end up carrying a facade, and yet anyone who's observant enough can sense it's only skin deep, and there's something brewing jsut beneath the surface...

There's also another side to this, and that is that whatever one might say wrt this movie, not every depiction or cartoon that has come out of the Middle East wrt Jews (hinting at a lot of the Arab vs. Israeli sentiment) has always been exactly been a matter of taking "the higher road" if one will, wrt what is portrayed in the movie. There is also a legal doctrine of unclean hands (and this isn't to say that every individual there has unclean hands, anymore then every individual in the US would have unclean hands either). Basically if someone is guilty of something themself, they can't go charging another for acting no different then one's self. Unrelated to this, but I knew of 2 people who posted to a message board, that ended up getting involved in a flame war. THEY BOTH PARTICIPATED, and were both guilty of it. However one party took the rather hateful step of contacting the other parties employer (because they were also both posting at work) and ratted them out, while gleefully talking about how they could get the other guy fired for saying this or that. The problem is, they both said it, and all the other posters were not in the least impressed. They wanted the guy gone/banned, considering it below belt, and way too far. That they got in a flame war, they could have over-looked, but actually trying to get someone fired for something they were as much a participant in, was just too much. They wanted nothing more to do with him after that... We'd call it hypocracy, to call someone out for doing something one does themselves, but in legal parlance, the whole matter of unclean hands could be entered as a defence. And in many cases a judge would be like "get your garbage out of my court room, the both of you. You deserve each other, now go away, please" :o It also amounts to being a living example, of the standards one party would judge another by, rather then making one's self an exception to their own "rule"...

"Thank your God that I have restored America's image to the rest of the world, or this could have been a whole lot worse!"- Barack Husein O'bama

This is all obama's fault.

J. Sh., actions within the Middle East have been going on far longer then one presidential administration. Policy decisions have been made that precede the year in which I was born, aka 1972... Many of the problems faced are old, very old... Much of the conflict is a continuation of, arguably crap over the last several millenia. Putting it all on one individual, is not reasonable.

This said, what we will do today, is what people should be asking themselves. Yes the world has been around a long time, yes conflict among cultures and what have you has been going on for centuries, or even millenia. People can nit pick about this or that, as some are about, what amounts to a movie, however well or ill thought out it was. Though and this said, that some would kill over a movie, is troubling to say the least. But what will people do moving forward? Because not everything has to be a mere reflection of the past. We all have free will, and we can all make choices in the here and now. Perhaps on all sides of whatever situation that can all too often sound like a re-play of the story of the Hatfields and the McCoys, people should be asking themselves if this is the world they want to live in, and if this is the world they want their kids, and grand kids to grow up in.

Basically if people could grow up a little, and stop reacting badly every little thing that might come their way, without making an active choice in the matter; perhaps, just perhaps we'd see a bit of an improvement in much of this. Ya know? When Wiki-leaks leaked many of the communiquies (sp?) that quite frankly were as childish as "this ambassador thinks the ambassador of that country is ...... (insert blank here)", what made it such an issue had nothing to do with any rationale threat to national security. Perhaps if some of these people could take their own egos a bit less serious, and not get so easily offended over every little insult, they'd actually be able to do a better job at representing their respective countries, and communicating with each other. So what if the ambassador from country x thinks the ambassador from country y is a petulant brat who gets easily offended. Is one going to chose to reinforce that idea, by the way they react? Seriously guys; you're supposed to be the fricken leaders here. Grow up a little, and stop acting like a bunch of rowdy kids, on the playground, sheesh.... But children where the toys they have at their disposal isn't just the baseball they might pelt at the nose of the other child who annoyed them, but instead is a 2 ton nuclear warhead they can shove the other guy's direction, or a molatav cocktail they throw over a fence to burn the other "kid's" house down...

Sheesh, with leaders such as this, and in this the political parties and our reps in Congress are a shining "example" of just how stupid it can get... Really? Sometimes they seem the least mature among many of us :o

Oh no......what happened to the "Movie" comments ? According to Mr. Obama, the SofS, and surrogates, the "Movie" was responsible for the attack and "protests" all over the ME and N. Africa.

Yep, is might be Mr. Obama's fault.

Voted for Mr. Obama in 2008 ? Embarrassed yet ?

Romney-Ryan 2012 to take back America from the Progressives and the Radicals.

Well all I know is that 4 years ago the problems were centered in the central ME, now its half the globe, is someone on vacation that is supposed to be taking care of this stuff? and we still have that problem with Iran to deal with,its no better. but on the other hand the First Lady is happy that they killed a KC and a Hardies, better living through better eating, Obama is pissed he missed at least two golf games and a little 21 over this and his advisers are at a loss at how to make that up to him. and Hollywood has not come through with a program for him. the man is a professional he needs his script. and if Clooney wants to direct he has to at least show up. I see that diplomacy works as well today as it did in the days of Kissenger and in Truemans administration, that means it don't work.

here is a scenario the mouthy kid is dead wrong, so he mouths off more, the bigger kid that is in fact right ignores him, so the mouthy kid mouths off even more, and still the other kid does nothing, after a while the mouthy kid gets brave and mouths off even more feeling pretty good about himself, and the other kid decks him, the mouthy kid stops mouthing off and they become friends, they apologize and go on. there is no politically correct there is only politically STUPID.

Libyan or not, quick death should follow. A few missiles should be good.

@ Anilof

Your argument is crap as usual.

Freedom of speech doesn't mean you can do whatever you want regardless of consequences. Your freedom of speech stop where it actually cause physical harms to others. There are exception and that is where you failed to understand.

You blame Obama and then you said he is above the law. Guess what? Your argument sucks again. It is his appointed power to do such thing like declassify information and guess who gave him that power? It's us people.

It has been this way long before Obama took office and yet you single out him and cry foul while promoting your political side. Romney is not a president, that means he has not given any power and yet he is acting like one, promising to support Israel to attack Iran, jumping ahead without any solid information to condemn Obama and made fool of himself in the process.

Let's me ask you, Romney said he will cut deficit, but how?

1. He wants war with Iran.

2. He will increase defense budget from current 700 billions to 1.8 trillion each year.

3. He will provide 700 billions more for 10 more years of tax cut for the rich.

1, 2 ,3 when you add them together, we will spend trillions more. How is his going to cut deficit by spending more? Either he is math challenge or he plans to put America to more wars, that is the only logical plan from what he is saying.

CuongDNguyen: I see you are spouting off points for Obama again.

Freedom of speech doesn't mean you can do whatever you want regardless of consequences. Your freedom of speech stop where it actually cause physical harms to others.

You just destroyed your own argument. Just because the people in the muslim countries hated the video doesn't mean they can go out and cause physical harm to others in the embassy and claim it was the movie that should get the blame. Really, we are all adults here. We know this to be a lie.

You blame Obama and then you said he is above the law. Guess what? Your argument sucks again. It is his appointed power to do such thing like declassify information and guess who gave him that power? It's us people.

Actually it should have been Congress. But when he went to attack Libya he didn't bother to check with them for their approval. So yes, he does think that he is above the law.

“The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation,” Obama told the Boston Globe in 2007.

How is his ( Romney) going to cut deficit by spending more? Either he is math challenge or he plans to put America to more wars, that is the only logical plan from what he is saying.

Actually the best way to cut the deficit is by reducing spending. I doubt Romney would give so much to muslim countries just so they could stab us in the back again. And there is no need to forgive their debt either. He will be able to take that money and put it back into our defense fund.

@CuongDNguyen - So you're still saying that the administration - GM is alive, Osama is dead - can say such a thing that inflames the Middle East, but a common person cannot? What's up with that? I know the politicians feel that they are "superior" to the rest of us, but you know what? They still have to take a crap just like the rest of us. They're not superior, regardless of how much "power" we give to them and I still reject that Obama or Romney or any other person is my superior. Until you come up with some other supernatural claim for the President or any other politician, I will still say that they have the same rights and responsibilities as the rest of us humans.

I do not blame the President any more than I blame some obscure movie for the violence that has occurred. I blame the people who perpetrated the violence for the violence. It's called taking responsibility for one's actions. Unusual concept in modern day America where McDonald's can be sued for having hot coffee or hamburgers that make you fat, but there it is.

Obama and Team America killed Bin laden.

Bush quit.

Romney wouldn't cause it cost too much!

Under Bush jr 12 embassies were attacked...yes 12.

Nonsense Starboy Just Because Your Kind Keep Spewing This Crap Doesn't Make It True!

Once Again Extraordinary Claims Requires Extraordinary Proof Where As Team bin NOBODY Obama Has Provided No Proof At All!

Only An True Believing Obaman Or A Believer Of Magic Could Accept A Professional Liar Like Bumbling Barry's Word For ANYTHING Let Alone Without Proof and Yet You / They Expect US To Believe Broken Promise Barry's Psychopathic Nonsense once Again!

RA RA Swish bin NOTHING!

Yep You Have Diffidently Been Drinking Too Much Rot Gut And Poppin Too Many Of Those Psychotropic Drugs!

starsailing Wrote MUW.....won't be long...you will be gone....

Psst.....You Still Gonna Disappear Me?

Hahahaha You Got To Love The Wacko Trolls Hiding In The Vines! Like I Said They Have A Room At Wall Streets New FEMA CAMPS Just Waiting.......For All Of US!

At Least I Will Go For Defending Americans Rights......You'll Just Go!

I thought Mexicans were too lazy to cross oceans?

Psst Rabid Dog.....

According to senior diplomatic sources, the US State Department had credible information 48 hours before mobs charged the consulate in Benghazi, and the embassy in Cairo, that American missions may be targeted, but no warnings were given for diplomats to go on high alert and "lockdown

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/revealed-inside-story-of-us-envoys-assassination-8135797.html

Pompous Obama & Billary Knew These Attacks Where Coming Yet Did NOTHING TO PROTECT OUR PEOPLE....Why? To Provide Macho Photo Opportunities and To Sneak Start another Not War Just To Get Re-Elected.....Since Syria & Iran Are Obviously "Non Starters"?

Aug 1, 2012 – ... support for rebels seeking to depose Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and his ... Turkey had established a secret base near the Syrian border to help direct ... some of them connected to al Qaeda or its affiliates,

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/08/01/us-usa-syria-obama-order-idUSBRE8701OK20120801

Obama inks 'secret order' to aid Syria rebels ... Syria : Obama approved covert CIA support for al Qaeda Rebels....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aXTaRVf0BuU

Libyans See al Qaeda Hand in Embassy Attack

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444517304577653680320732176.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

Pro-al Qaeda group seen behind deadly Benghazi attack

http://articles.cnn.com/2012-09-12/africa/world_africa_libya-attack-jihadists_1_qaeda-al-zawahiri-al-libi

At What Point Do You Die Hard Obamans Realize You Have Put A Monster In The White House? Say What You Will 48 Hours Would Have Been Plenty Of Time To Re-Enforce Or Evacuate Those People Instead Barry Bush (Wacker) Used Their Deaths For His Own Political Gain!

Barack H Obama Has Brought Indefinite Detention And Assassinations Of Americans Without Trial and Flying Killer Drones To America.......What Else Does It Take For You To Wake Up And Accept The Fact That He Has Betrayed YOUR FAITH The Most?

AMERICA REFUSE TO REWARD FAILURE & BETRAYAL! Refuse To Re-Elect ANY of Wall Streets Corrupted Political Elite Incumbents.....Especially Not I Don't Need No Stinking Proof bin NOBODY Obama!

Psst.....I Post Content With Links....Watch What They Post In Response! But If You Really Want To Know What Is Going On and Why Watch.....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RC1Mepk_Sw&feature=g-all-f

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1l-8PFk8j5I

Next Let US Send Obama Bush & Cheney To The Hague For Not War Crimes / Crimes Against Humanity In 2013 And Start Working On Undoing The Damage Wall Streets Terrorists Have Done To US!

This movie was made by an Egyptian. He was convicted of a crime and is on probation and paying off a $750,000 fine. Yet, I saw the reports showing his home and he lives in almost a mansion, that should have been the frist clue something was up. Seriously, when a foreigner is convicted of a crime here in the USA, they should immediately be sent back to the country they came from and put on a list preventing them from ever returning. We have enough home grown criminals, we don't need more moving here from other countries.

JS in SD

@RealAmericansFirst - You need to do a little research yourself. The ambassador did not

I am getting sick of hearing the administration defend the Islamists right to be upset about the video... There is no reason for the president of the US to be apologizing for an American exercising his right of free speech. Being upset over someone exercising their right of free speech is not any justification for the violence and killing of American citizens that has occurred. Obama should be making it clear that even when we disagree with what a person has to say that we defend his right to say it and that no amount of violence is going to change that. You have a right to disagree with another person's views, but you do not have the right to use violence to express that disagreement.

You should do more research. That IS what both the President and Clinton have been saying. They have said that the film did not represent the views of the United States of America (you disagree?). They have said that no matter the video, violence is NOT a tolerable reaction (you agree?), that no amount of violence will change the fundamental beliefs and freedoms of the United States (you agree?), and that we WILL hunt down those guilty of killing the Ambassador (is THAT okay?)

Yes, there's a clear difference in vitriol and hate and an eye towards calming the current violence, but THAT's called being "presidential". And, yes, there was ONE early embassy release that distanced itself from the video to calm things down BEFORE the demonstrations.

But I see ABSOLUTELY NOTHING wrong with the initial embassy response or the follow-on responses of the President or Secretary of State.

I see ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING wrong with the unqualified uninformed un-presidential and downright DANGEROUS reaction of Romney and Ryan and "the right" and challenge those questioning every f@#king move of the United States to stand behind their President for a change... these people are starting to live and believe the bull@!$%# they dish out.

Deep in your minds, but far from your mouth, you realize that you KNOW Obama will hunt these asses down and kill them. You know it, we know it, the terrorists know it, the Libyan's know it...

Deep in your minds, but far from your mouth, you're telling yourself that, "Damn, I'm glad the likes of Bush or Romney aren't in there right now". You know we'd be considering war right now.

And you that claim that this prick movie maker is so righteous... in your minds your saying "unless he was in collusion with extremists that intended to incite violence"... we don't know one way or another on that score yet. You're getting the mantra of rushing to judgement... the very thing you claim to despise from the left.

theboys

I heard the embassy/consulate was under attack in June? So this is not the first time they knew there was trouble. Why on earth would the US think that the local security could be trusted? I just don't get it.

There is an American consular office in Benghazi, where the attack occurred, and an embassy in Tripoli, the Libyan capital. Two different cities, two different installations. American embassies are essentially fortresses. It is far easier to attack a consular office. The attackers might have known the American ambassador would be in Benghazi.

Every embassy on the planet uses local security in addition to its own people. The same holds true for the foreign embassies in Washington, D.C.

Ten Libyans died protecting Ambassador Stevens, and others have demonstrated in solidarity with the U.S. Don't paint all of Libya with a black brush.

dave-1582577

Okay,now I'm hearing more about this guy who supposedly made this movie last year.Allegedly he has 3 aliases,is not a US citizen either Israeli or Coptic Christian Egytptian,has been convicted of fraud in real estste and needed his probation officers' permission to make the flick(which from what I hear he never got).Now what I have ask is..Why are we as Americans even being targeted?We have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with this movie.The only thing we are guilty of in their eyes is that fact that he made the flick in America...So what? He could have made it in the Philippines or Japan or Russia for that matter.Would they have gone after those countries embassies if that were the case?C'mon guys read our Constitution.It says everyone is able to speak their views on anything.If you don't like that fact you don't have to like us but show some grumbaa and go after THE GUY WHO MADE THE FLICK.Duuhhhh..We have about as much control over the guy who made the flick as you all over there do.None.I'd be pissed too if someone made a movie about Jesus being a womanizer and pedophile when obviously no one had any real facts to back the plot of the movie up so I can understand their anger but still,you dont go after the whole populus just because onbe of them who is not even one of us makes something thats not palatable to you.Get real..I would not waste a single American

It might be worthwhile, dave, to remember who we are dealing with.

Leaving Libya aside (where the attack on the American consulate was apparently pre-planned, not a demonstration) and focusing on Egypt, we are talking about a population that is backward, uneducated, so poor that there are countless beggars in the streets, so poor you will see children eating garbage. These are people who have been under the rule of a brutal dictatorship for their entire lives, people who have no concept of 'freedom of speech'. They don't believe such a thing exists.

These are people who have been kept down their entire lives. Their anger and frustration is overwhelming. Do you remember what the Egyptian mob did to Lara Logan? These are not people who read our newspapers, or would believe the American news if they did. They have been incited to riot. They are not behaving rationally. Dealing with an angry mob by reading our Constitution to them is ridiculous.

Heck, many of the educated Americans-- people with ready access to information and facts-- who post racist, religious and cultural hatred on the internet are no better. In fact, they are worse. They have no excuse.

At a time of crisis, we should stand behind our country's able leadership and be grateful for our freedoms. This is not the time for the ignorant and uninformed to second-guess, assume, or create another riduculous conspiracy theory.

kaybeetoys

Good post!

Heck, many of the educated Americans-- people with ready access to information and facts-- who post racist, religious and cultural hatred on the internet are no better. In fact, they are worse. They have no excuse... At a time of crisis, we should stand behind our country's able leadership and be grateful for our freedoms. This is not the time for the ignorant and uninformed to second-guess, assume, or create another riduculous conspiracy theory.

Part of the problem is a matter of "being informed". We used to be divided mostly by the informed and the uninformed. Now we have three distinct levels... informed, uninformed, and MISINFORMED. In my mind, only those that are out of touch completely or misinformed, like Romney, can possibly look at this without some kind of "empathy" (currently a dirty word)... or at least understanding. Empathy doesn't necessarily change right and wrong, it just affirms that "nuke-'em" isn't the answer and that making peace with them is and will always be the answer.

Thanks, LMarcT.

You are right about Romney's lack of empathy, both for the Americans inside our embassy in Cairo as it was under attack, and for the downtrodden poor of the Middle East.

The frightening thing is that so many Americans have been lied to, brainwashed, and fed a steady diet of bigotry under the banner of the GOP that some of our own people are now our worst enemy.

God bless America, indeed.

starsailing Under Bush jr 12 embassies were attacked...yes 12.

You need to get your facts straight. You are including attacks that did not occur at an "Embassy". There were 4 consulate/embassy attacks under Bush:

June 14, 2002 Karachi, Pakistan
Dec. 6, 2006 Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
Jan. 12, 2007 Athens, Greece
Sept. 16,2008 Yemen

There have been Embassy attacks listed on the web that go back as far as 1920 under about every President. Embassies have always been known to be dangerous in various parts of the world. It isn't about the number its about how the President handles it. Right now, it's out of control. Not one here or there every year or so, but now we are facing several simultaneously. And it isn't about any film that was published on Youtube over 6 months ago, that had less then 1000 views prior to these incidents. Its not like most of the people in those countries have internet access 24/7. And still wouldn't have been watched if it were not for the News Media & Adminstration using it as their new found excuse.

View the map. Does this look like our President has any control over the situation? No...he lost control, not yesterday, not last year, but the day he addressed the Arab Nation April 23, 2009 and tried to appease them.

maps.google.com/maps/ms?hl=en&ie=UTF8&oe=UTF8&msa=0&msid=201645180959880549419.0004c9a894dfb66defab9

Hello folks,

USS Liberty was attacked in international waters by Israeli forces on June 8, 1967, killing 34 Americans and wounding another 174. When Israel can't get the U.S. to do its bidding in attacking the countries they want attacked they perpetrate covert military attacks against the U.S.

General Dempsey, Chairman of America’s Joint Chiefs of Staff, the man who flew to Tel Aviv and informed Netanyahu that America wanted no part of his scheming against Iran was the subject of an assassination attempt in Afghanistan.This wasn’t an act of terrorism or Taliban militants. It was a mob hit by Israel’s Mosaad against someone who failed to kiss the feet of Netanyahu. His response was to unleash killers, not a fact for the public but a fact just the same, one the American military knows very well. Netsayahoo is pathologically insane.

Israel is an evil entity and must be kept at arms length as they will try and lead us into WWIII.

Next Let US Send Obama Bush & Cheney To The Hague For Not War Crimes / Crimes Against Humanity In 2013 And Start Working On Undoing The Damage Wall Streets Terrorists Have Done To US!

Incredible, MUW... except for your obviously incorrect inclusion of Obama's name, I actually agree with your statement! (As they say, even a stopped clock is right twice a day.)

Please consider this:

LMarcT posted a link to an article about Mitt Romney that describes his role at the head of the Wall Street Terrorists. Must reading for Romney/Ryan supporters...for those who still haven't decided, and for supporters of President Obama (we knew we were right about Romney):

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/greed-and-debt-the-true-story-of-mitt-romney-and-bain-capital-20120829?page=5

THe closest analogy to the reaction the U.S. has had to Islamic anger can be found in the world of epidemiology. In 1918 there was a worldwide flu epidemic from which countlesss thousands died. THe means of their demise was in many cases their own immmune systems. I.E. the immmune systems of the youngest and strongest with the strongest immmune systems would generate such a response as to flood the lungs of the affflicted person with the by products of the batttle with the pathogen - thus killling that person. THe U.S. since the invasion of Iraq could be aid to be doing the same thing. Rather than an apppropriate cleansing response the country decided to rise helll in the MIddle East - ruining the economy and creating the international situation we have now. THere is stilll time not to overreact to this sort of stufff - and if We retain President Obama as President there is a goood chance we won't sufffer the catastrophic consequences of someone who acts first and thinks later.

George pauljohn:

I say we give Libya to the republicans, let them clean the place out, make it their new "south" where they can wave their confederate flag with pride and we all live happily ever after.

That's a great idea, George. While we're at it, take the liberals and move them over to Greece, make it their new 'republic' and leave America to us Independents. That way, independent thinkers don't have to listen to your radical BS either. THEN we can all live happily ever after.

Kaybee, you talk about Americans being lied to, brainwashed, etc, then post a link to a Rolling Stone article about Mitt Romney? Not exactly a bastion of journalistic integrity. I'm not a Romney fan myself (voted for Obama the first go round, will not do it the next), but you don't exactly enhance your credence when you seem to spout all of the talking points from the left. An open mind lets ALL ideas in, and that's the only tact that will get this country back on track.

Psst kaybeetoys....Your Mass Murdering War Criminal Is NOT Better Than Their Mass Murdering War Criminals So Sorry Sweetie We Agree On Nothing (That I Am Aware Of Anyway)!

What Is Amazing To Me Is That There Still Appears To Be People Like You That Cannot Accept That Obama Is Actually Worse Than Either Bush Or Cheney!

Why? Because Bush & Cheney Sparked Outrage With You So Called Liberal Humanitarians & Overt & Covert Racists Where Obama Breeds Insane Complacency!

Again Bush & Cheney Would Not Have DARED To Implement Indefinite Detention And Assassination Of American Citizens Or Given Their Bankster Gangsters On Wall Street Trillions Of Our Dollars Yet Obama Does It With A Smile And A Lie Then You People Go All Wet Inside!

So Until Your Kind Can Accept The Shear Hypocrisy Of Your Words, Beliefs & Evil Deeds A "Broken Clock" Makes More Sense And Has More Value Than Any Of You OBAMAN Hypocrites!

Once Again America....None Of These Wall Street Incumbents Liars Work For US So Refuse To Re-Elect ANY OF THEM No Matter How Much These Wall Street Monsters Offer You Cow Patty Candy!

PS kaybeetoys....I Read Your RS Link Which BTW Is A Wenner Media Corporation And An Out Spoken Propagandist For The Obomination. Besides All It Does Is Confirm Romney Is A Suspected Liar......Did You Bother To Read ANY of My Links Proving Obama Is A Liar & Mass Murderer?

Nope Didn't Think So.....Well Here's Another Couple More PBS Links Showing Who The REAL Wall Street Support Thief Is...... As Liberal Humanitarian You Trust PBS Don't You? Or Are You The Other Kind Of Obama Support?

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/need-to-know/economy/the-true-cost-of-the-bank-bailout/3309/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqpfVRq_wF4

And Once Again Ben Bernanke Robs US (3rd Time) Simply By Printing Money To Give To The Banksters On Wall Street With Obumba's Blessings!

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443524904577649952284412644.html

calmbeforethestorm

Kaybee, you talk about Americans being lied to, brainwashed, etc, then post a link to a Rolling Stone article about Mitt Romney? Not exactly a bastion of journalistic integrity. I'm not a Romney fan myself (voted for Obama the first go round, will not do it the next), but you don't exactly enhance your credence when you seem to spout all of the talking points from the left. An open mind lets ALL ideas in, and that's the only tact that will get this country back on track.

I have an open mind...but not so 'open' that my brains have fallen out. Read the article before you pass judgment, please. As someone said, "an open mind lets ALL ideas in".

MUW

Psst kaybeetoys....Sorry Sweetie We Agree On Nothing (That I Am Aware Of Anyway)!

Aw, c'mon MUW... there must be something!

Do you like puppies? :)

THere is stilll time not to overreact to this sort of stufff - and if We retain President Obama as President there is a goood chance we won't sufffer the catastrophic consequences of someone who acts first and thinks later.

That is an admirable comment, Pernell Meager, Jr.

I hope certain hotheads (GOP!!) will take it to heart and let the smoke clear before they commence firing at an ill-defined target.

A word of advice, friends: Don't go hunting with Dick Cheney!

Yeah, and for sure don't be an ambassador to Libya under Obama's watch. Far more important for Obama to campaign with Beyonce and Letterman than to attend to affairs of state. Sorry little Obamabots, your 'leader' is beyond inept or else he wants to create an Islamic Caliphate. Where was he when the Iranians were protesting? Nowhere to be found. Intresting how he didn't ramp up any security for said embassy, especially on the eve of 9-11 and more importantly, after the terrorist attack had been warned against over 48 hours prior to the event!

Now there is a video on youtube showing a crowd with the ambassador's body, shouts of Allu Akhbar and interesting as well how reports are surfacing that the ambassador was sodomised. Not too great being an ambassador under Obama and Hillary, especially when he goes missing for almost twelve hours and then resurfaces in a Libyan hospital, drug there by the crowd. Gotta love Obama, keep on supporting the man who loves the Muslim Brotherhood and attempts to appease crowds destroying embassies and flags. Obamalove, the best the media can provide...by deflection and promotions of lies and agendas. Yup, gotta love Obama and Hillary, spike the 'I killed Osama football' like a million times and then pretend that had NOTHING to do with the current bonfire that is the middle east.

And if the above posts are examples of open minds, one would hate to see a closed mind.

@RealAmericansfirst

well friends dont murder your embassy staff. yea we should be more careful who we call friends because the majority of the Libyan people are not. We dont need "friends" like that and "friends" that bite the hand who feeds them. I read how the seal and others died and it was not from "smoke". Every protester involved who entered the embassy property needs to be charged with murder.

Could say the same thing about some people in this country.

There's a certain church in Topeka, Kansas that probably doesn't deserve its tax-exempt status.

lol--NONE of them deserve tax-exempt status IMO.

After reading hundreds of posts since this began on 9/11 I have come to a very disturbing conclusion. Right wing factions and the Republican Party in general have completely gone to the dark side. I've have never seen so many anti-American comments being spewed out by Americans. They should be ashamed of their behavior but instead they keep doubling down day after day.

Lies are lies, repeating them over and over again doesn't change that fact.

Yes they have and it is sad.They have forgotten completely 'bout one of the four founding articles of the Constitution that adheres to #1 separation of church and state and #2 the freedom to follow whatever God you choose to.And I think the events of the past few days make that completely clear in my eyes who is fit to run the state that we call America and it aint the elephant.I agree Big Al and I hope after this election cycle is over that the Grand Old Party needs to take a good hard look at it's core values and what it actually stands for because from what I've seen lately on these blogs it seems many of them have an extremely narrow view of what makes America what it is..

can you name a religion that's not stupid?

@Big Al - for a given definition of "anti-American". The same claim can be made about many on the left, depending of what your view of "American" is.

BLADE from what I just read you probably already your man's dick, and I bet you are good at it, remember don't spit but swallow''' I know many women who have had abortions, their choice, according to the law..

you and many others are attempting to shove your religon down everyones throat.. if you are cathloic then change your direction and get the CATHOLIC priests, bishops and monsignors who are child molesters. and have destroyed far to many lives.. help bring them to trial instead of protecting them, cause they'll only do it again. time for you cathloics to own up and step up to your responsibility

since I am on a rant.. santorum keeps popping his head up.. and he beliweves that his religion should be an intregal part of our gov't.. when we should not even be saying the lords prayer..IT"S THE LAW

.now as you wrote about abortions ,, do you realize that MITT actually owns the lions share of a company called steri cycle.. guess what they do to make a great deal of money..... they sell aborted fetuses and miscarrigages for scientific purposes .. a bit of a double standard I'd say

fortunately other religions

They say , 40% of Americans do not pay taxes. I have to wonder if maybe most of you complaining about the Church's tax exempt status are not in this category your self.

I would rather see more people going to church than going to divorce court . Lack of morals by nit wit know it alls seem to be a bigger problem for America than Foreigners could ever be .

No Maggiver, I'm NOT a dick sucking democrat..Nor am I Catholic..but please dont assume that you can tell me to "Change' the direction that I'm going in even if I were Catholic..What those child mollesting Priest do is a hundred fold more evil in my eyes that whats happening right now over seas so please do us both a favor and dont go there..You give several answers to problems that have been fought out in the courts and have become law..BUT..Just because they are law dont make them right does it??..Let me enlighten you on something..The reason our founding fore fathers had SEPERATION of Church and state, wasnt because they didnt want to have religion encluded in government{most if not all were learned practicing CHRISTIANS, and like it or not, this country is founded on christian principles},they didnt want religion in government because they didnt want a STATE sponcered RELIGION just like the one they left in England that told them when,where,how and why to worship.They wanted FREEDOM to worship as the individual deemed fit..I dont give a @!$%# if the law says otherwise or not.Same with abortion..NOW I'm ON A RANT..I'll agree that there are CERTAIN circumstances that do warrent abortion---Life of the mother, incest, rape..I'll give you that...But for a woman to get pregnant, and then turn around and have an abortion because they use the excuses that they are too young to have it, or it will hurt my life style, or I want to have fun before I have kids is pure and simple WRONG...I dont give a rats a$$ if it is a womans body and they git the right to choose...NO THEY DONT.., WHO gets to stand up for the Fetus?..Do you think THEY would decide to get aborted?..Ask yourself where YOU would be if your mother decided to abort you..We wouldnt be having this conversation right now..Look at all the peoples lives you've made a difference in over the years good or bad that wouldnt have happened..If your mother HAD decided to abort you and someone, someway could have got your opnion on whether she should continue aborting you or let you be born, I wonder what you would have said..NO WAIT..YOU WOULDNT HAVE GOT A SAY BECAUSE IT WAS YOUR MOTHERS RIGHT TO ABOUT BECAUSE IT WAS HER BODY AND ITS THE LAW....I'm through ranting now...sorry

Real American you are both a communist and a realist, that doesn't make any sense you cant be both, you are socialist and then at times sensible that is not in the liberal program, to be a true liberal you are not allowed to think outside the collective, if you don't start behaving like a true liberal we will be forced to send you to a indoctrination camp for conditioning.

maxgiver, alan, dave, Beer Mug, BigAl Los Vegas, Joe, and RealAmericansFirst,

So all you guys think Christians should be ridiculed, taxed, killed and their beliefs destroyed...Jesus was treated as such by your kind and told his follows that they would be treated the same way. So it is no surprise to us. It is not a surprise from the liberal progressive Democrats who are spreading the same lies their father told about Jesus. What is amusing is the overwhelming self deception you embrace calling yourselves more intelligent, more compassionate, educated, the big tent party, inclusive, scientists, accepting, the future of man kind, the keepers of the flame of freedom. I know you think highly of yourselves...so highly no one who chooses to live or believe differently than you is vilified and criticized. Must be nice to live so high up in your Ivory Tower and look down on the rest of us peasants.

What kind of world do think we will have when other people line up with your narrow minded thinking? Just look at the Middle East for your answer. That is not enlightenment that is repression...something Christians don't believe in. Your represent the thinking of the Dark Ages in new skin.

I have never seen a group of posters where the term small minded bigot was such an appropriate description. You are an embarrassment to the nation and yourselves. Your are not progressive...you by your word and actions are haters who have deluded themselves into thinking you are above it all. People who think like you are the problem not the solution...talk about stone age beliefs and actions. You are frauds to your own "beliefs". America is based on principals that provide you the freedom to destroy those principals...yet in your ignorance you can't understand how you are participating in wrecking the very vehicle that allows you your freedom. Truly a sad representation of America or American process or thought. The Middle East is calling boys...why don't you head the call. You are repulsive to any free think human on the planet.

Next

I have to agree with the tax free status thing any one can claim to be a church and get a tax free status if they wanted to, and all donations are a wright off, that to is wrong and the same goes for the other charities that collect $1.00 and pass on 10 cents. the CEO lives in a mansion and the skid rowsoup kitchen gets run by volunteers and supplied by local markets the CEO's keep the money we donate. we need a law to maintain status 90% has to go to the cause, 10% to collect and deliver, no Mansions allowed. give 100% to the stores for donations and, allowances for volunteers. the sorry fact is that the money gets sucked up before it gets to where its supposed to go. hell just look at the POPES HOUSE! he is not living in poverty, he even has his own currency. check out the mansion the top CEO of UNICEF lives in, I'm stopping here because there is no end to the scum trail.

Could say the same thing about some people in this country.

There's a certain church in Topeka, Kansas that probably doesn't deserve its tax-exempt status.

REalAmericansfirst: Did they manage to take 1 billion from the US like they did over there? If not, stop comparing the two.

D Buck,

While I understand your point I would like to clarify a couple of things. First the Pope enjoys the protection of being the leader of a sovereign state...that is right the United States has an Ambassador in the Vatican since Ronald Reagan. The Catholic Church is an anomaly in the list of organized religions...they are the only one that thinks it has a right to determine the civil and political process and declares itself a sovereign nation. The more you know the more you realize they made a lot of their money during the Dark Ages when they ruled supreme in the then civilized world. The tax free status does not extend to any followers, pastors, priests, employees or related individuals hired by a church...they all pay taxes. So you want to tax the individuals who give of their own free will to a church that in some cases spends up to 90% of a given donation to the actual intended cause twice on their income...how is that fair? You want religious believers and supporters to pay twice the tax you pay? Yet when disaster strikes many of these same organizations give, food, shelter, aid, and comfort to the victims in advance to the government showing up.

Next UNICEF is not a church or religion it is a professional fund raising organization like MDA and a list of others. If you ask for their financials you will discover in many cases less than 10% of a donation reaches the actual cause after the organization pays for its bloated overhead. Not a good investment. The majority of organized religions do a much better job at keeping the cost down and delivering the actual money to the cause. If you taxed these guys they would have almost nothing to give to the actual cause.

In either case you can make a tax deductible donation to an organization or a church or even a political party. The tax codes could be changed and the majority of religions would simply pay the tax...but you might diminish the positive effect of a 90% efficiency.

I would rather see more people going to church than going to divorce court . Lack of morals by nit wit know it alls seem to be a bigger problem for America than Foreigners could ever be .

I'd a million times rather see people going to school than going to church.

Churches do good for some, granted, and some people need religion because without it they might have to think for themselves, and where might that lead? LOL

But unfortunately, many religions also divide us and attempt to control us with fear while they use our money only to perpetuate themselves.

We are at a time in the history of mankind where many have seen the value of truth over myth, of universal brotherhood over religious factionism. Are we at a tipping point? Hard to say... but religion might well destroy mankind unless we open our eyes to that very real possibility.

I'd a million times rather see people going to school than going to church.

Public schools are a cesspool or liberal degenerates . Not so much the kids, as the teachers.

Public schools are a cesspool or liberal degenerates . Not so much the kids, as the teachers.

Not sure where you live, rcg, but I received a fine education from American public schools. I am no degenerate either.

If you think American public schools are a 'cesspool', what is your solution to educating our children?

our children?

I would prefer a voucher system . If i do not believe in the system allow me to opt out aka send my kids to a private school. Oh and i may need a tax rebate to pay the difference. I also believe if a kid does not want to be in school let them go.

Why force someone who did not commit a crime to be institutionalized ?

The kid will only disrupt the rest of his/her classmates that want to learn. The individual will not learn anything .It just causes problems for the teachers and those wishing to learn something.

They will grow older being dependent on the left wing government

You know, the Democrats voting base aka poor people.

Let the village raise YOUR kids if you like.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t3e41prVDv4&feature=g-vrec

our children ?

No ! Your children maybe.

No ! Your children maybe.

OUR children...unless you live in a self-sustaining gated community on another planet. We are all together on this boat, the USS USA. I'd think a coast guard guy would be able to understand that.

Kaybee , if you only knew.

Being Human may mean having a heart . Being a adult means knowing where to draw the line.

I am proud of the lives i have saved . I am also proud of the foreigners i send back home. It is a Coast Guard thing and no i do not expect you to understand.

Rabid Dog.....indoctrination camp for conditioning......Why Is It You UN Americans Always Spew Such Toxic Nonsense?

Don't You Realize That Is EXACTLY What These Wall Street Sponsored Terrorists Have In Mind For All Of US?

http://info.publicintelligence.net/USArmy-InternmentResettlement.pdf

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_Inmate_Labor_Program

Yes UN Real American Is Clueless And Totally Toxic But So What? Nobody But An Obaman Would Listen To Its Dribble Away!

So Put A Muzzle On Your Yapping.....You're Disturbing The Neighbors!

America..... If You Want To Understand What This Has REALLY Been All About Watch......

This Democracy Now Story .....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RC1Mepk_Sw&feature=g-all-f

This New PBS Documentary....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1l-8PFk8j5I

Once Again....None Of These Wall Street Incumbents Liars Work For US So Refuse To Re-Elect ANY OF THEM No Matter How Much These Wall Street Monsters Offer US Cow Patty Candy!

Especially Not That Nobel Peace Prize Hypocritical Mass Murdering Back Door Specialist Obama!

Let US Send Obama Bush & Cheney To The Hague For Not War Crimes / Crimes Against Humanity In 2013 And Start Working On Undoing The Damage Wall Streets Terrorists Have Done To US By Beginning Their Prosecutions!

You and I have no idea what percentage of Muslims agree with these attacks. The media and the WH insist it is just a few. When Greta VanSustran, a democrat btw, was in Pakistan a year or so ago, she said the hate was everywhere. According to polls it has gotten much worse over the past 3 years.

Did Obama really think that killing OBL would not trigger more hate? I understand getting OBL, but his death and now 4 more Americans are dead because of the blind sheik, OBL, and the fact that Americans invaded Pakistan to take out OBL. Again, I understand the action, but we will pay the price for spiking the football since that event over and over again. The terrorists said to Obama this week, "we are all OBL". This is little about the video and much more about who is in jail currently and the invasion and death of OBL.

Fred, Your the only one who makes any rational comment. Thank You.

Osama bin Laden was killed over a year ago. I don't think the Arab world is that slow in showing its displeasure.

And it's just side-splitting funny that the right is now blaming Obama for stirring up the Muslims against us by killing bin Laden.

Maybe that's why Bush never did it? Worried about getting the embassies attacked?

Or was is just intellectual laziness? (which is a nice way of putting it)

The mental gymnastics the right can go through to blame stuff on Obama must mean they have some level of thinking ability. If they'd just put it to good use, maybe we could get somewhere.

Fred wrote:

I am angry about what has been done to American lives and US property, but it was done by extreme individuals, not 1.2 billion people. The general riots that are occuring, across the Muslim world, are, again, not representative of anywhere near the majority of the population.

It doesn't have to be a "majority" of all Muslims to constitute one helluva problem for the whole world, Islamic and Non-islamic alike.

The more pressing question is why the 1 Billion Muslims who are not extremists do not fight harder against the 200,000,000 Million Muslims are ARE radical fundamentalists?

Adam: The press doesn't report all their efforts. It wouldn't sell much.

Too many of them to arrest them all probably and the argument that there are 1.2 billion Muslims doesn't really mean much either considering there are differences between say Sunnis and Shiite Muslims.

Fact is the majority of this kind of religious intolerance is emanating from the Muslim side of the world.

They kill each other as fast as they will an outsider, take the bombing in Iraq that killed 100 people just last week.

@RealAmericansFirst... Considering your commentary on Bush, it sounds like you are a Obama fanboy.

The mental gymnastics the right can go through to blame stuff on Obama must mean they have some level of thinking ability. If they'd just put it to good use, maybe we could get somewhere.

So you are just as Blue as any of the Reds out there? People like you keep the division going. This isn't a game of capture the flag between Blue team and Red... this is Reality. Only when the two sides actually do their jobs and stop blaming each other will real progress be made. It's easy for you to criticize a past president since you weren't in that position. Hopefully you never will be.

I'm glad there's no religious intolerance in America! Whew! :D

Unfortunately you are not quite correct. A large percentage of Muslims in ME hate us.

A friend who's husband is in the airforce and who has lived in Bahrain says the hate

they feel for us is like nothing we can comprehend and it is forever... not just a few minutes

or a few days.. but ingrained... This is what we're up against... The one's that don't hate have

to fear for their lives because they aren't radical... a NO win situation.. God Bless us all..

Adam 44

It doesn't have to be a "majority" of all Muslims to constitute one helluva problem for the whole world, Islamic and Non-islamic alike.

The more pressing question is why the 1 Billion Muslims who are not extremists do not fight harder against the 200,000,000 Million Muslims are ARE radical fundamentalists?

Let me see if I can help.

It doesn't have to be a "majority" of all Christians to constitute one helluva problem for the whole world, Christian and Jew alike.

The more pressing question is why the 1 Billion Christians who are not extremists do not fight harder against the 2 Christians, Jr. Bush/Mitt, who are fundamentalists warmongers?

Any more questions?

To @theboys,you must understand one thing,that when it comes to conflicts such as this and I have reiterated this over and over again,the United States MUST stay as neutral as it can.And I hear a lot of 'yea we should nuke them,go in and take over the whole kitten kaboodle,kill millions of them and so on and so on,but you have to understand one important truth that every President since Washington has known.As tempted as we may be to go into religous conflicts such as this,and oh boy is this religous,the United States MUST under all circumstances stay out of the conflict.And yes that means that many Americans may be killed.Foreign service is dangerous,realize the rest of the world IS NOT the US and this is a prime example.The minute we get involved militarily in a religous conflict we will cease to be the United States of America because we will have violated our own Constitution.And that is why all over the world we are being taunted and yes losing American lives.What scares me as an American is hearing all this rhetoric about the Republicans who want to go in there willy nilly kill all of them because Christ the Lord told me so..Sound familiar?God I hope it does.We as a society have already been down this road,these guys overseas have not yet.We built this coountry on religous freedom,lets not tear it all down.

Isitreal sez:

It doesn't have to be a "majority" of all Christians to constitute one helluva problem for the whole world, Christian and Jew alike.

Except Christians aren't burning, bombing, and killing in the news of late, are they. Nope.

The more pressing question is why the 1 Billion Christians who are not extremists do not fight harder against the 2 Christians, Jr. Bush/Mitt, who are fundamentalists warmongers?

Because neither one was/is a "fundamentalist warmonger." Bush's intervention in Iraq was profoundly misguided but it was not gratuitious warmongering. Romney is determined to keep the aggressive, theocratic nutbags in Iran from building and using nuclear bombs and triggering a nuclear arms race in the Middle East. Probably the right thing to do if possible without putting American boots on the ground there.

Any more questions?

Okay, yes. Was Pres. Obama a "warmonger" for bombing Gadhafi out of power?

In reading your nonsensical reply I just have to ask what the hell "Jr Bush/Mitt, who are fundamentalist warmongers?" have to do with the topic for one, the events in Libya second and the events being played out in other Muslim countries that should really be left to their own devices. A Libyan CIVIL War was not a war that the US should have ever involved itself in. The intrusive or invasive nature of the Obama Administrations and its apparent need to intervene on behalf of what was actually an illegal war being waged by Islamic Fundamentalists against what was the legitimate government of Libya is nothing but an indication of the sentiment that Barack Obama leans toward in his support of the various factions of Rebels in these regions who have ALL proved to be Islamic Fundamentalists in the end. This has been the result in every instance of intervention by the US that once the dust settles the primary powers that remain or that have risen from the wreckage have all been Fundamentalist Factions that have either taken control or have highly influential position with the power structure that has emerged. What any of this means I can only speculate and in doing so I do not believe that Obama's agenda is one that is in the interest of the American PEOPLE. But to Back-Up a little to my initial statement regarding "Jr Bush/Mitt", Isitreal you may recall that Bush has been OUT of office for Four Years and Mitt has never sat in that office, so what you are basically saying is that you have a problem with Christians, and the fact is that religion has nothing to do with this mess, or I should say that the Christians have nothing to do with this mess, and that GREED has a great deal to do with the mess as do the Muslim Fundamentalist views that promote hatred and the butchering of ANYONE they feel are not in line with the philosophical views that the fundamentalists promote, even if that is fellow Muslims that they feel are not REAL Muslims.

For the people so sure all the hate and name calling is only on the right side - Please read Isitreal's post. The left appears to hate at least half of all Americans (the right) and is so closed minded as to lump all republicans in the so called 'right wing extremist' category. Don't hear a lot of republicans calling those on the left "Left wing extremists". Think about it before you respond. Haven't seen christians taking over private land to accupy and haven't seen many on the right pooping on cop cars.

@PangoBa, lol you're so spot on. That's the one thing I LOVE about most of the people that post, rather right or left, is the hypocrisy (It's why I stopped going to church). I have seen SOOOOO many people on the left that are the most close-minded group (which they spout is completely a right-wing phenomenon) of folks I have ever encountered.

@Real - Google GM is alive, Osama is dead to see how current or relevant the killing of OBL is to Muslims right now, during these riots. Actually just google the current riots themselves to read about the protesters signs that say that they would rather have Osama than Obama (I'm assuming they're implying which one they'd rather be dead?).

Really? I've been called a socialist, a communist, a libtard, an idiot, a retard, and those are just the names that are fit to print. I've been called some other names that are even less pleasant. So you can quit with the injured innocence. My President has been called a monkey, a n*gger, a f*cking as*hole, a communist, a baboon, a socialist, etc. etc. etc. I would be delighted if the worst thing they called me was a left wing extremist. That would be pleasant compared to most of the language I have heard. Are you delusional?

@underemployed - And what is "tea-baggers" supposed to mean? Isn't that some overt sexual reference? Right wing-nuts, blah, blah, blah. I was only agreeing and saying that the name calling is 50/50 on both sides.

To Isitreal...

I've heard this warmonger bull@!$%# to I'm blue in the face..You people think that its a Republican trait to go to war or something..lets me enlighten you to something...Who was President that sent us to war in Vietnam? ..answer..Lyndon Johnson--A DEMOCRAT...Who was the President that pulled us out of the Vietnam war??..Richard Nixon--A REPUBLICAN...We should have been in another war with Iran when they took our hostages and held them for 444 days but Jimmy Carter---A DEMOCRAT didnt have the balls to do anything about it..Who ended the hostage ordeal???..Ronald Regan --- A REPUBLICAN... The first gulf war was STARTED AND ENDED by George Bush Senior--- A REPUBLICAN..althought it wasnt much of a war..more like a skirmish, it lasted only 4 days...After bush senior came Slick Willie---DEMOCRAT....HE should have invaded Iraq AGAIN and finished the job that the world wouldnt let Bush senior finish, after Hussien put a contract out on Bush seniors life, but he, like Carter didnt have the balls to, instead opting to liberate Gernada and Yougoslovia..So I take that back..HE did start two skirmishes..and end them..Then comes Bush jr---REPUBLICAN...Handed circumstances that no other president had had to deal with up to that point...911...{you have to ask yourself what Gore would have done if he would have been president}..He opts to invade the wrong countries...Iraq and Afganstan..should have gone after Iran..He's out of office..New guy in town...Obama---A DEMOCRAT..didnt bring all the troops home from Iraq like he promised{still 30 thousand there} and what he did pull out he "surged" in afganistan with them actually ESCALLATING that war....so lets see, if we're keeping score..

Warmonging REPUBLICANS...started two wars/scirmishes,pulled out or ended three..

Democrats ...Started three wars/scirmishes ..pulled out or ended three...escallated 1...

Well Isitreal..you're right the REPUBLICANS are WARMONGERS... and what exactally does that make the Democrats?

@RealAmericansFirst,

Osama bin Laden was killed over a year ago. I don't think the Arab world is that slow in showing its displeasure.

And it's just side-splitting funny that the right is now blaming Obama for stirring up the Muslims against us by killing bin Laden.

Exactly, you have been busy writing and commenting on so many posts you finally stumbled on the truth. The bin Laden incident was over a year ago and this movie was out 6 months ago. So where is the connection to the current unrest?

Uh, the big signs that the protesters have that say "Obama, Obama, we like Osama!"? Maybe that was it, I'm thinking?

@ RealAmerian,

The mental gymnastics the right can go through to blame stuff on Obama must mean they have some level of thinking ability. If they'd just put it to good use, maybe we could get somewhere.

Nobody on this post can match your convoluted twisted mental gymnastics...even to the point of believing you are a real American. You are just a self proclaimed messiah of higher thought...that resembles a directionless train wreck.

Next

This attack had nothing to do with the film. It was an organized planed attack by pros to coincide with 9/11 and right under the nose of our POTUS and company. And some newspapers are saying we had forehand knowledge of a possible attack and did nothing. The on-going mess may be from the film but the initial attack was not. I have no doubt that it was done by infiltrators and not by an unorganized mob. Most mobs don't have RPGs and AK-47s.

You even look like an Occutard.

You bet your sweet ass I do!!!!!

And there goes another tolerant leftie.

Right, PangoBa. It's always amusing to hear people spew hatred at the people they call intolerant.

darciesdaddy,

PangoBa did not spew hatred...that was you...he was just complementing the lefties on how tolerant they are and you just proved his point.

Next

If you really want to know, and history is any indicator, it probably was outside agitators, the vast majority of the time they're CIA operatives.

Here's an example in Syria:

http://news.antiwar.com/2012/07/25/al-qaeda-infiltrating-syrian-opposition-with-us-support/

In Yemen:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/05/09/us-usa-security-plot-agent-idUSBRE84800G20120509

Here's how the CIA helped the Muslim Brotherhood infiltrate the West:

http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/94452/sec_id/94452

Still think the CIA, who does the dirty work for the Military Industrial Complex, wants peace?

HA!

It was the Jews.....they are responsible for everything the peace loving Muslims do.

yea the logic is so twisted.. "you made me mad so i killed all these people and my fellow brothers and sisters under my god! its your fault for making me mad see what you did! now i hate you and want to kill you and my brothers and sisters under my god" its delusional and irrational. we can not change these people that are so bent on destroying themselves and everyone else.

A riot mob is not a few individuals.. Large mobs saying "death to America" and "death to jews" etc then storming a United States embassy and overwhelming security forces was not "a few" why is there not a mob saying "death to the terrorist extremist who killed our American friends" ..? why is there not an out pour of support from them? I think the majority you speak of is actually a small minority.

If it wasn't that silly little film trailer it would be something else for the hair-trigger offense and rage response in the Muslim world to seize upon. In fact there have been numerous other examples of this already and there will be many more to come. Appeasing and apologizing over it will only bring more of the same.

We did that no appeasing/apology thing, remember Iraq and Afghanistan, remember Abraham Bush you are free speech. How well did that turn out? I understand coming out of a coma after 12 years the world can be bit confusing.

I liked your more of the same, more of the same is these countries involved will hunt down and try these criminals or kill them dead if they resist. Some how I could almost live with that, not like the way we hunted down and tried our criminals for falsely attacking and terrorizing a whole country. I like your post about the hair trigger, do you see anyone on the campaign trail that trait with the rage response? I guess now you know who not to vote for, would not want a hair trigger rage response for our foreign policy again. Who can afford it and who is going to pay?

I would reply if I could figure out what you are trying to say. It's almost gibberish.

@Cameron - Do you REALLY think this is the only parody of the Quran or a religion on the Internet? You really believe that? By the way, it was a funny video if you're a fan of spoofs on religions, which I am. I saw the trailer earlier this morning, but I would definitely buy the DVD if there was one (I have Monty Python's spoof of the Jesus story, The Life of Brian which is also a great flick from the 70's, very, very funny).

You assume this is the first instance of this type of propaganda I've come across? I suggest you reconsider your comprehension of what I posted. To come to that sort of conclusion is either a childish quip to start your post or a real lack of understanding...

The dutch cartoon, the preacher burning the book, even as far as little mosque on the prairie ( canadian television ), they all share the same precondition. They were all acts of individuals or groups who themselves were not attempting to grossly insult muslim faith. This is of a different accord. This is inflammatory. This is meant to cause unrest, and death. This is meant to incite a war.

How can you think this was meant to incite a war? Was there something in the trailers that I missed that stated this was to incite a war? How do you come by this conclusion? The other videos are not meant to start a war? In what way are they not meant to start a war that this video is meant to start a war? I completely do not comprehend how you can make this video somehow "different" from other videos. Do you think it has subliminal messages in it or something? Help me understand the reasoning, please. Also please include why this movie, released quite some time ago, is just now causing such a stir. I lack the comprehension of why this should be so, as well.

You clearly can't comprehend the anger this has caused and will continue to cause to the people who beleive muhammed to be the prophet of allah. You found it funny, they find it worth killing over. The people who made the video were commissioned by the same type of corrupt politicos and extremely wealthy govt financiers that plotted 9/11 and armed the libyan and now syrian 'rebel' groups...

I don't care what you take from it, to me its the exact same as fighting commis in the jungle to stimulate economic growth in all the right places. *( the pockets of those who pay the politicians salaries, and we aren't talking about on the book salary wages that are payed for in tax dollars either. ) You ask alot of questions that should answer themselves if you stand back and take a look at american history over the past 67 or so years, but you can trace it all the way back to the birth of America. And if you want to talk global terms, this sort of corrupt rabble rousing war igniting bull@!$%# has existed since the dawn of historical record. The romans , the greeks, the british, ... or if you prefer a different flavor, The crusades, the inquisition, the blitzkrieg,... All share common values. Empires or conquests started by the most powerful people in the country, either politically , or financially, in order to further their gains and assets.

I am totally against "fighting commis in the jungle" but again I don't see how this movie is related. The whole part about it being financed by some kind of "Zionist conspiracy" or "Coptic Christian conspiracy" has been debunked, has it not? And again, this wasn't condoned or supported by our government and its military-industrial complex, as far as I have seen in the news, unless you're going tin-foil hat CIA/Mossad super-human abilities 9/11 conspiracy on me here, which I do not think you are. So what ties this film back to some government or "group" like the Mason's or Magestic 12 or whatever? I'm not actually claiming to know anything about these things, I really don't. I did read on Wikipedia that our government/CIA though about destroying American towns during the cold war era in order to advance our "cause", but I'm not 100% certain of the accuracy of all that considering that Wikipedia is not a completely reliable source of information at an academic level.

The whole vietnam war and the cold war itself was a mission to make money. The richest people in this country finance the government and control every tax dollar given to it. a super PAC ( public action committee ) is just a few insanely rich people spending millions upon millions of dollars to cart the president or a nominee around to raise voter-ship. Please tell me you can understand that when these people fear losing their power, both political and financial, bad things start to happen fast.

War itself is a mechnism for profit. It always has been. You fight your enemy and take his energy ( oil, land, allegiance ETC... ) and you force your country into a spiral of production. Military assets are probably the most costly things on this planet to date, un-doubtedly. Combined they are responsible for the many trillions of dollars of debt the US govt is in with its financial aides...

I draw finally to the point that communism itself has all but died and America needed a new enemy to turn to for to begin a war of profit. This enemy became muslims, as their inflammatory attitude and violent ethic deemed them a perfect match for the type of scheme provided. Read about the gulf of tonkin incident or any number of 9/11 conspiracies and you can understand why smoke and mirrors are necessary to fan the initial flame of war. When the enemy has not sufficiently provoked you, force him. This is the way of the isralis, the Americans, and the European financial world since the end of the second world war. Even the soviets were in on it. War is money. Energy, profit and production are key benefeits of a good, long lasting military conflict. As is the technology associated with being the most powerful country on the planet ,... For now, at least.

When the soviet army invaded afghanistan , they were not just on a mission to save their brothers from muslim extremists. neither are the 50 marines stationed in libya right now. Sudan rejected the marines for a damn good reason. Sudan has too much oil to let the Americans just rape it like this. It will not let itself become an iraq, an afghanistan, or soon a libya, egypt , lebanon or IRAN. Sorry to bear the bad news...

You're arguing for the belief in a military-industrial complex wants WAR, I haven't denied that this exists. But doesn't that mean President Obama is part of the same conspiracy since it is still propagating under the current administration? And, again, is there anything that ties this to this no-rate movie that has been around for 6 months in and amongst other parodies that have existed in that time-frame and longer. All I'm asking for is some reasoning for why this film differs from the Danish cartoons or Rushdie's book way back when or the other videos on the Internet that reference Islam or its prophet. I'm still not certain how that ties into the Vietnam war and cold war we had with the Soviet Union.

Paranoid.

And anti-semitic.

You kidding me? Just ask anyone in the ME, James Bond has nothing on Mossad. They have super-secret spy invisibility cloaks. They could sneak a bomb in the presidential bedroom of the White House if they wanted to, they're that good (I'm attempting to use hyperbole here government minders, I don't mean that they should, I love the dear leader and would give my life for him). They can do anything. I think they were irradiated by gamma rays or something too, to make them super0human or super-soldiers or something like that. Or maybe it was genetic engineering that gave them psionic powers. You think the x-men are tough, hah, they have nothing on Mossad.

He might as well be.

The Libyan President reminds me of Jr. Bush after 9/11, same speech if I can recollect. It was foreigners and the CIA fault. Wasn't Jr. Bush a what? Oh yes Republican if I recollect correctly, did I get this wrong?

It was foreigners who attacked us on 9-11, what's your point?

His point it is it was probably foreigners inciting again this time. I thought the point was quite clear...sheesh!

We do know the movie maker is a foreigner and those over there looking to stir things up (both non-Libyans and Libyans) used it as ab easy recruiting tool. Just because one is free to do something, does not mean they should or that it is a good idea.

BTW - No here one carted the movie maker off to a firing squad, but they are looking into his actions to see if they were all legal. If not, then this lovely "artist" will be arrested for what he has done that is illegal.

I know it may be a hard point to grasp, but it would be legal and free speech to burn the flag in front of returning troops, but would it be the right thing to do? Would it be ok to hang an ethnic person in effigy in an ethnic neighborhood in the US or might that incite some hard feelings? I know people that practically froth at the mouth if someone wishes them Happy Holidays instead of Merry Xmas and think there is a big anti-Christmas conspiracy going on every year. Just so you don't get too high on your horse, I seem to recall riots that actually lead to a few deaths after major sporting event finals right here in the US..... Whipping up a crowd is sometimes easier than you'd think. Over there, you have people hearing that we have disrespected their most sacred book. They have little in this world other than family and religion. They live a lot more humbly than we do and have little room to advance their lives. They rely on their religion more than Americans do, so when you threaten that, the unstable ones go nuts. You also need to keep in mind that they don't have the access to mental health care that we have here, so we have some people suffering from PTSD and other ailments who are walking the streets not being treated. We can't control some of our mentally ill here, as evidenced by shooting in Colorado and way too many other places.

What I really would like to find out is who was behind the dissemination of the movie 6 months later. I know this Mitt was falling behind in the election, could it be that this has something to do with it?

His point it is it was probably foreigners inciting again this time. I thought the point was quite clear...sheesh!

Diana, unfortunately I didn't see your reply after posting my own.

I don't believe for a minute that "foreigners" were responsible in Libya. But of course "foreigners" were responsible for 9-11. So the whole comparison to GWB's reaction after 9-11 is foolishness.

Yes, the "movie"-maker is a foreigner but no one would've seen his silly little creation had it not been for the nasty, ugly cud exposed in this article from the Daily Telegraph:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/egypt/9545515/Middle-East-protests-meet-the-hardline-tele-Islamist-who-brought-anti-Islam-film-to-Muslim-worlds-attention.html

If you or someone else is still around to debate this further then i will engage. If not, it's not much use for me to continue with this. I will check in again tomorrow.

Your "Bush really did it" bush-sh$t doesn't fly, you know.

If, Bush was president when our spies found OBL, he would have made the same decision as Obama... he just wouldn't have strutted around like a peacock... he wouldn't have exclusively used "me" and "I" in announcing OBL's death... he would have given credit where it was due: with our spies and Seal Team 6.

The one good thing he has done & he wants to punish one of the REAL heroes for writing a book about it.

Martha, he did give credit to all involved, many times. why do you think he went out of his way to meet Seal Team 6 and thank them? You are listening to your own propaganda so much you are starting to beleive it.

he just wouldn't have strutted around like a peacock...

Cus no one here remembers Mission Accomplished with his big old sign and his big old s**t eating grin, dressed up in his Fighter Pilot Halloween costume.

The only foreign policy "accomplishment" Obama and his supporters cite is that he "got" Osama Bin Laden.

Senior Yemeni defense ministry officials meanwhile told The Associated Press that Shihri was killed in an airstrike. They said a missile was believed to have been fired by a US-operated drone.

What was that, Martha? Did you say something about Obama and his supporters only repeating the same old dribble?

Obama's policy of appeasing the “Arab Street" now lies in bloody tatters on the streets of Benghazi, Cairo, Sana'a, Tunis, Kabul, & other Arab cities.

What is Obama’s policy to deal with the “Arab Winter”? Why should we believe it will produce better results than his support for the “Arab Spring”?

Obama = The Amateur

Any other president would have made the exact same decision. Obama gets no special credit for making it... ANYONE would have made the same decision. What a joke that the centerpiece of Obama's foreign policy "achievement" is a decision that anyone in that office would have made. Pathetic.

I can tell you what the world and more importantly our allies thought of Jr. Bush foreign policy, They awarded Obama the Nobel peace prize for just replacing him. Need the world say more? Obama will be forever in Jr. Bush's debt for that freebie. Obama is so great because Jr. was so abysmal and hey Mitt has the same ad visors, So I guess we know who you will support now, would not want another Democrat to get another freebie Nobel peace prize in 2016.

Ya that story does not fly anymore Martha,Obama had the last call..Any other President WOULD have strutted around like a peacock,you do remember Bush with the ol Mission Accomplished sign in back of him when the mission basically had just started..c'maan...get real..Every President would have done what he did differently Obama wanted the world as well as us to see HIM WATCHING THE EVENTS UNFOLD LIVE AS THEY WERE HAPPENING.I do not think Bush would have even bothered..

So out of all of this, I understood that Obama is the same as Bush Jr. Probably not the message that was trying to be told here I would think.

Special shout out to Isitreal - Obama's only reason for getting Nobel Peace Prize was because he wasn't Bush. You're saying that no matter who was elected in '08 they would've automatically received the Nobel Peace Prize. Not a very impressive accomplishment then, to say the least. And of course this was done before the Libya skirmish, not saying I disagree with the U.S. involvement, just that I'm not so sure that Ghandi or Mandela would approve.

The best solution is to realize that we're all people, no matter what nationality or religion.

We have lunatics here just as the rest of the world does. And we all need to work together to keep them under control - everywhere.

fear mongering is actually more powerful than the AK47's or RPG's that flow uncontrolled through the streets of these countries , the fact that social unrest COULD spark off in such a place has largely held the population and their government powers at bay. The fact that they have given these people tribal regions and literally told them where to go to shelter , where the government would not go looking for them, has to tell you something.

If the fear of fighting back is so great that you let the extremists go unabated, it seems like they have already won.

It might be better for you and your health if you stepped away from the TV and these internet sites for a few days.l You are too stressed out and worried about conditions you really can't control. Immersing yourself too much in these kinds of crises wears on one as most psychologists will tell you. Just like after the first Gulf War when people got CNNitis as they could not stop watching it and were suffering the effects of the stress.

Will you be saying that when they are drafting because WW3 has begun?

RealAmericansFirst

The best solution is to realize that we're all people, no matter what nationality or religion.

I agree with you. Now how about telling the murdering fanatics who attacked the embassies and murdered people about that?

We have lunatics here just as the rest of the world does. And we all need to work together to keep them under control - everywhere.

Yeah that's right, we have crowds of Christians, Mormons, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Baha'is, etc, attacking embassies and murdering the personel here too every time someone makes a movie, or cartoon, or write a book, or burn pages of their Holy book, or insult their religion and/or prophet.

RealAmerican's real goal is to suppress the freedom of thought, speech, religion and assembly of all those who disagree with his proclamations. Just read his other posts bashing Christians and others here on vine...a real progressive stance there. Not real American but real progressive.

A festering wound, yes, and Pres. Obama/Sec.Clinton did their best to unleash the haters who had formerly been kept under control by authoritarian semi-secular leaders who we helped shove out of the way, making way for Muslim Brotherhood and radical Salafist forces to take over.

In response to all the recent rioting across the Islamic world, Hillary Clinton said, and I quote:

"The people of Egypt, Libya, and Tunisia, did not trade the tyranny of a dictator for the tyranny of a mob."

Oh yes they did, Hillary, yes they did, and you helped pave the way for it.
Own It.

As with any mob(the United States included!)mentality,nothing changes until there very few of the mob left.Mob's have a unique tenedcy over time to denigrate to that idea we call 'democracy'.

Mob's have a unique tenedcy over time to denigrate to that idea we call 'democracy'.

Huh?

@dave - I hope you are right. I sincerely hope you are right.

And when people in the west poke them in the eye with movies made to incite more violence, peace gets even harder to achieve and further off in the future, if ever. The guy may have had the right to make that movie, but that did not make it the right thing to do.

Diana, then it wasn't right for "OWS" to block city streets or go into the BOA branch either? When we start squashing freedom of speech in the name of political correctness, where does it end? Do we start having to call the President, whomever that may be at the time, "Dear Leader" like the North Koreans? Please don't go down the slippery slope of unfettered censorship, it could lead to a very, very dark place.

I really find this interesting, we fought a war to give Iraq an Arab Spring which cost us billions and still is costing us big bucks and now Iraq is supporting Iran's interest. Egypt war for freedom did not cost us a dime more and our troops are still at home and has not increased our yearly cost a dime? Maybe Obama needs to give the Abraham Obama speech like Jr. Bush. Do you think that will make the difference? Would you be happier then?

Maybe GW should have left Iraq alone and we'd have 5000 more families together hmmm?

Maybe GW should have left Iraq alone and we'd have 5000 more families together hmmm?

I think that was a bad mistake too but is it really so different from what Pres. Obama has been up to with the so-called "Arab Spring?" Toppling dictators and replacing them with democracy; Isn't that what is supposed to be so good about what's happened in Egypt and Yemen? So why isn't it good when GWB did it?

Shareef, I totally agree. It seems very strange that so soon after President Obama has gotten high marks for foreign policy and that the republicans were so weak, this happens. With so much money in this election from outside sources it will be hard trace who funded. It's clear outside sources pulled this off and is trying to divert attention to the usual suspects. I don't trust the repubs after what they did to Carter. The ambassador wasn't supposed to die and it will be hard to pick up the trail of the dirty money. Romney is desperate to win at all cost!

What a bunch of BS. Obama supporters are getting scared and will come up with all kinds of conspiracies to help their Messiah win re-election.

ada person writes:

The ambassador wasn't supposed to die and it will be hard to pick up the trail of the dirty money. Romney is desperate to win at all cost!

So you're saying that maybe Romney helped direct or finance the attack on our American Consulate in Benghazi Libya? You're Nuts.

Shareef, Now that is paranoia at its finest! People trying to bash Romney as they are running out of ways to help Obama on his way out.......

While we're playing conspiracy theory, why not wonder if the left, worried about Obama losing the election because of the economy, set in motion a plan to take the economic woes off the front page and replace it with some good old extremist violence? No, I don't believe EITHER side planned any of this. And neither should any of you.

You know Shareef you may be on to something...Might want to follow a few money trails too...some of those trails could get pretty interesting but if they have done that it seems to be backfiring on them because Obama seems stronger in the eyes of many after all of this.Yes it may seem paranoid but people paranoid of losing have a tendency to do crazy things sometimes

@adaperson, the reason why this happened is because it was on 9/11 hello? anyone there?

"loose change"? .. yea anyone who has taken high school physics and passed should find that film quite hilarious. It was so stupid it was funny however i came away from the film with a deep and troubled feeling that i just lost a chunk of my IQ points :(

Rachel Madcow....... You have to be freakin kidding me.

Lets see... who to listen to??? Rhodes Scholar or readyornot ... Rhodes Scholar or readyornot ... Hum, tuff choice.

Respectfully, her name is Rachel Maddow. I suspect from your comment you are not bright enough to listen and understand at her level of communication. Bold, brave, and brilliant. Not for the likes of you. Go back to Fox.

Well I definitely think that Rachel Maddow and Ed have one-upped Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck in the contest to see who can spout the most unobjective and biased reporting in the U.S. today although I think that The Ed Show has surpassed Rachel Maddow in this regards. His piece on Obamacare the other day was very impressive and completely shamed Rush's ability for spreading dis-information. But yeah, Rachel is very good too. I would probably put her on Glenn Beck's level. Admittedly I've seen more of the Ed Show than I have of Rachel's and I haven't ever actually listened to Beck or Limbaugh but am basing my comments on what I've heard about them on the vine. If anyone even cares, my personal preference of journalists is Fareed Zakaria.

thank you for your post.

Our highest leaders constantly telling the rioters how horrible the movie is doesn't help, either.

Listen,if someone made a movie about your deity being a womanizer and a pedophile would not you be a bit upset?

@dave - Even if I was, I wouldn't go around killing people, rioting, and destroying other people's property.

The mainstream media would have us all focusing in on this silly little film as if it caused everything that happened. Ridiculous.

WHERE WAS THE SECURITY at our diplomatic installations across the world on the anniversary of 9-11 ??

He wasn't talking about the protesters, and can you really tell the difference between Libyans, Egyptians, Saudis, or Afghans on sight?

"Protesters," lol.

Bepatient: No, the protestors did not look like foreigners to me neither. They looked like Lybian teenagers and 20-somethings, idealistic and easily manipulated. It is no secret that our enemies work in deceiving ways. What better way to carry out the US embassy killings than to pose Lybian youth against the US by making it known that an offensive video insulting Muslims exists on Youtube. That action incited, as intended. When angry, Lybian youth protested... a perfect atmosphere for the real perpatrators to do their dirty work. The perpatrators were heavily armed and arrived under cover of a youth protest. Simple as that. We can bet that the CIA and NSA, plus other investigation arms of the US government are working overtime to get to the bottom of who is responsible for the killings. Be prepared for a big surprise.

Under Bush when we got the new of war fatalities everyday and how we were losing the Iraq War?

No new manipulation then either.

Well said Rob, I like the following also ;

If you missed this, Mark Steyn on 9/14/2012:

"So, on a highly symbolic date, mobs storm American diplomatic
facilities and drag the corpse of a U.S. ambassador through the streets.
Then the president flies to Vegas for a fundraiser. No, no, a novelist
would say; that's too pat, too neat in its symbolic contrast. Make it
Cleveland, or Des Moines.

The president is surrounded by delirious fanbois and fangurls screaming
"We love you," too drunk on his celebrity to understand that this is the
first photo-op in the aftermath of a national humiliation. No, no, a
filmmaker would say; too crass, too blunt. Make them sober, middle-
aged Midwesterners, shocked at first, but then quiet and respectful.

The president is too lazy and cocksure to have learned any prepared
remarks or mastered the appropriate tone, notwithstanding that a
government that spends more money than any government in the history
of the planet has ever spent can surely provide him with both a
speechwriting team and a quiet corner on his private wide-bodied jet to
consider what might be fitting for the occasion. So instead he sloughs off
the words, bloodless and unfelt: "And obviously our hearts are broken..."
Yeah, it's totally obvious.

And he's even more drunk on his celebrity than the fanbois, so in his
slapdashery he winds up comparing the sacrifice of a diplomat lynched
by a pack of savages with the enthusiasm of his own campaign
bobbysoxers. No, no, says the Broadway director; that's too crude, too
ham-fisted. How about the crowd is cheering and distracted, but he's the
president, he understands the gravity of the hour, and he's the greatest
orator of his generation, so he's thought about what he's going to say,
and it takes a few moment but his words are so moving that they still the
cheers of the fanbois, and at the end there's complete silence and a few
muffled sobs, and even in party-town they understand the sacrifice and
loss of their compatriots on the other side of the world.

But no, that would be an utterly fantastical America. In the real America,
the president is too busy to attend the security briefing on the morning
after a national debacle, but he does have time to do Letterman and
appear on a hip-hop radio show hosted by "The Pimp With A Limp." In
the real State Department, the U.S. Embassy in Cairo is guarded by
Marines with no ammunition, but they do enjoy the soft-power muscle of
a Foreign Service officer, one Lloyd Schwartz, tweeting frenziedly into
cyberspace (including a whole chain directed at my own Twitter handle,
for some reason) about how America deplores insensitive people who are
so insensitively insensitive that they don't respectfully respect all
religions equally respectfully and sensitively, even as the raging mob is
pouring through the gates.

When it comes to a flailing, blundering superpower, I am generally wary
of ascribing to malevolence what is more often sheer stupidity and
incompetence. For example, we're told that, because the consulate in
Benghazi was designated as an "interim facility," it did not warrant the
level of security and protection that, say, an embassy in Scandinavia
would have. This seems all too plausible – that security decisions are
made not by individual human judgment but according to whichever rule-
book sub-clause at the Federal Agency of Bureaucratic Facilities
Regulation it happens to fall under. However, the very next day the
embassy in Yemen, which is a permanent facility, was also overrun, as
was the embassy in Tunisia the day after. Look, these are tough crowds,
as the president might say at Caesar's Palace. But we spend more
money on these joints than anybody else, and they're as easy to overrun
as the Belgian Consulate.

As I say, I'm inclined to be generous, and put some of this down to the
natural torpor and ineptitude of government. But Hillary Clinton and Gen.
Martin Dempsey are guilty of something worse, in the Secretary of
State's weirdly obsessive remarks about an obscure film supposedly
disrespectful of Mohammed and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs'
telephone call to a private citizen, asking him if he could please ease up
on the old Islamophobia.

Forget the free-speech arguments. In this case, as Secretary Clinton
and Gen. Dempsey well know, the film has even less to do with anything
than did the Danish cartoons or the schoolteacher's teddy bear or any of
the other innumerable grievances of Islam. The 400-strong assault force
in Benghazi showed up with RPGs and mortars: that's not a
spontaneous movie protest; that's an act of war, and better planned and
executed than the dying superpower's response to it. Secretary Clinton
and Gen. Dempsey are, to put it mildly, misleading the American people
when they suggest otherwise.

One can understand why they might do this, given the fiasco in Libya.
The men who organized this attack knew the ambassador would be at
the consulate in Benghazi rather than at the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli.
How did that happen? They knew when he had been moved from the
consulate to a "safe house," and switched their attentions accordingly.
How did that happen? The United States government lost track of its
ambassador for 10 hours. How did that happen? Perhaps, when they've
investigated Mitt Romney's press release for another three or four weeks,
the court eunuchs of the American media might like to look into some of
these fascinating questions, instead of leaving the only interesting
reporting on an American story to the foreign press.

For whatever reason, Secretary Clinton chose to double down on
misleading the American people. "Libyans carried Chris' body to the
hospital," said Mrs. Clinton. That's one way of putting it. The
photographs at the Arab TV network al-Mayadeen show Chris Stevens'
body being dragged through the streets, while the locals take souvenir
photographs on their cellphones. A man in a red striped shirt
photographs the dead-eyed ambassador from above; another
immediately behind his head moves the splayed arm and holds his
cellphone camera an inch from the ambassador's nose. Some years
ago, I had occasion to assist in moving the body of a dead man: We did
not stop to take photographs en route. Even allowing for cultural
differences, this looks less like "carrying Chris' body to the hospital" and
more like barbarians gleefully feasting on the spoils of savagery.

In a rare appearance on a non-showbiz outlet, President Obama, winging
it on Telemundo, told his host that Egypt was neither an ally nor an
enemy. I can understand why it can be difficult to figure out, but here's
an easy way to tell: Bernard Lewis, the great scholar of Islam, said
some years ago that America risked being seen as harmless as an
enemy and treacherous as a friend. At the Benghazi consulate, the
looters stole "sensitive" papers revealing the names of Libyans who've
cooperated with the United States. Oh, well. As the president would say,
obviously our hearts are with you.

Meanwhile, in Pakistan, the local doctor who fingered bin Laden to the
Americans sits in jail. In other words, while America's clod vice-president
staggers around, pimping limply that only Obama had the guts to take
the toughest decision anyone's ever had to take, the poor schlub who
actually did have the guts, who actually took the tough decision in a part
of the world where taking tough decisions can get you killed, languishes
in a cell because Washington would not lift a finger to help him.

Like I said, no novelist would contrast Chris Stevens on the streets of
Benghazi and Barack Obama on stage in Vegas. Too crude, too telling,
too devastating."

J.C.- Holy cow man, why even make a comment that long? It was longer than the article. I didn't even read it but I am going to go out on a limb and say I disagree with you because you either put all the blame on Bush or Obama. Wow really? A whole book for a comment?

It seems the longer the comment, the more likely it to contain massive amounts of BS!

Even though it was pretty long, it was interesting reading. should have read it : )

JC you'd be great in North Korea..they need a writer like you right now,lol.First off,ambassadors ask the US government for the level of security they think they'll need.The Prez does'nt just 'order' the troops there,they are requested by the ambassadors in charge and the request is processed like any other.That has a direct effect on how things turn out there.The Ambassador in Libya problably did not think he required the level of security that was neccesary,though I do not fully place the blame on his shoulders,he was a nice man who truly did do a lot for the Libyan residents no matter who they were.Libyans problably did drag him thru the streets to hospital,obviously they did not think of him in kind..Too bad.

Brilliant, easily one of the best posts I have ever read. You are why liberals fear school choice.

To bad the progressives who claim the ability to read did not read the post. It raises real questions many of us have asked for days regardless of the party affiliation. Here is a sample of the questions for those to lazy to read.

The men who organized this attack knew the ambassador would be at
the consulate in Benghazi rather than at the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli.
How did that happen? They knew when he had been moved from the
consulate to a "safe house," and switched their attentions accordingly.
How did that happen? The United States government lost track of its
ambassador for 10 hours. How did that happen?

J.C.

That was awesome, took me a minute to read all of it but I am surprised, well put well said.

Read it if you haven't.

Dave you think with 9/11 some one above the Ambassador would have given temporary added security as a precaution.

Obama: "I promised to refocus on the terrorists who actually attacked us on 9/11."

-----------

For the naysayers who march in lockstep accusing Obama of being a Muslim and treating Muslims with a velvet glove: Most Al Qeada insurgents that Obama has had killed or captured were MUSLIMS. Most of Iraqis are MUSLIMS. Most Afghans are MUSLIMS. Drones have taken out Al Qeada heads in Pakistan. They were Muslims. He sure has ordered a lot of Muslim deaths in the mideast, huh? bin Laden was a Sunni Islam, the largest branch of Islam, making up more than 75% and as much as 90% of all Muslims. Have those facts ever entered your accusitory minds?

Good job Jc ..short and too the point. ;-)

You are an ass.

You clowns that vote for Obama will get what you deserve. Four more years just like the last 3 1/2 years.

Bull@!$%#, go smoke or drink something else!

Really, are you like nine and do not remember 9/11? The movie is like 6 months old.

I think the people in charge atm , not the people running to be in charge are to blame, and are using this to blind us from something like EH ?? Stimulus 3 ??

JC: Mark Steyn is a Canadian-born writer, conservative-leaning political commentator, and cutural critic. He has written five books, including America Alone: The end of the world as we know it. He is published in newspapers and magazines, appears on shows such as those of Rush Limbaugh, Hugh Hewitt, and Sean Hannity.

--------

Now I know where he gets his nutty hysteria that you seem to take as seriously as the bible.

Obama reads and-or listens to intelligence reports daily; and you don't, so you have no clue what warnings there may or may not have been.

Open your eyes, it's been getting reported that he wasn't attending them.

"it's been getting reported"

In the right-wing media and Fox, perhaps, but that doesn't make it true. What exactly do you think he is not attending. The intelligence briefings are for the President, so they do not exist separate from him. In fact, it turns out that he prefers to read them. He can always call in anybody he wants if he has further questions.

Like MSNBC and front page Yahoo which is another outlet for MSN now plus CNN would even report it.

Yosolo: A mind is a terrible thing to waste.