by Jack Lee
Our embassy was attacked in Benghazi by hoards of angry Libyans coming fresh from a bloody revolution that installed the Muslim Brotherhood. The Obama Administration has echoed the deep thoughts of Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, “I can’t believe this has happened. How could they do this after we helped free them?” Then you’re bunch of fools – how could you not see it coming?
Four American’s brutally murdered in cold blood – Obama’s response tepid.
In response, Mr. Obama, I can not call him President Obama, issued one of the most tepid responses in history. He showed more anger and emotion when his pal was detained by the Cambridge Police Dept. than when these terrorists attacked our embassies. I was ashamed of him. I’m surprised he didn’t call for a candle light vigil to “punish” the offenders.
Issuing a “protest in the strongest possible terms” won’t cut it with people like this.
An insult unpunished is the parent of many others. THOMAS JEFFERSON, letter to John Jay, Aug. 23, 1785
We have a declaration of war by a bunch of crazy Muslims running wild in the streets, thinking they can kill American’s with impunity. Their attack on a defenseless embassy, on American soil, is a supreme insult.
America has but two choices, respond forcefully or not. We shall either respected or feared or we shall encourage more violence against Americans. Respect or fear, it’s what primitive people understand.
A failure to defend ourselves is the same as saying we are weak and fearful. This may be Obama’s style, but it’s not mine – I’m ready to kick some butt! I’m ready to show them what happens when you come looking to kill Americans in our own house.
Why wasn’t the massacre designated as an act of terror?
This was a premeditated terrorist attack and everything points to it, why doesn’t Obama call it an act of terror? Why?
It could not have occurred without the knowledge and consent of many people and people in power inside Libya and Egypt. It required great planning and careful timing by hundreds of people in two countries.
The pretext for the attack was a stupid You Tube video depicting Mohammed as a false Profit and child molester. However, this video has been on the internet since July and nary a word was said and then this sudden attack happened on 9/11 at two embassies in two nations? That required a lot of coordination. You’ve got hundreds of heavily armed attackers using precision timing to overwhelm the embassies before the US could come to their aide, assuming that would, and I’m thinking we probably would not have done anything, even if we had ample warning. Actually, I believe we did have ample warning and we chose to play it down for fear we might offend the governments of these two countries.
Obviously those Muslims in Libya and Egypt that attacked us need to be brought to justice, but I also hold those who used a video to incite these fanatics as having some culpability. Some…like having the smarts to know when not to use your freedom! I’m talking about the idiot Minister in Florida who seems to relish in the attention his provocations bring.. he doesn’t use his freedom very wisely and others pay the price. I know, it’s his free speech right, but I have mine too and I find fault with his! He and his pals have deliberately incited these mental cases, knowing full well what could happen.
I want to address what happened in Egypt in more depth, but for now I am waiting on the facts and when I have the time to write, so trust me, there will be more to follow for sure!!!!
But maybe if we send them anther ten million dollars and apologize they will be nice to us.
Great post, Jack!
It’s also very scary to see just what the US future will be like when we too have lost our freedom of speech and let the government have control.
We do need to give credit to those who did try and help and took their bodies to the hospital so they could be brought home to their families and not met unthinkable doings at the hands of those in the mob.
My only question is, was this an act of a few like the LA riotrs and the OWS’s attack on Oakland, or did this reflect the actions of the majority? I want to be careful before condemning a whole country for the actions of a minority mob.
The minister in Florida is also not the only one respondible. The producer and writer of this film is even more accountable for their deaths. The knew full well the reation the muslims would have. They have even gone into hiding to protect themselves and their families.
If I were the actors I’d also be very concerned. I’m sure their names are now on a hit list.
You are right Jack about how other countries no longer respect and fear the US any more. Hopefully, we will soon have a leader that not only knows how to lead our country, but will be perceived as a respected leader for the rest of the world instead of a weak apologist.
Rush just reports that as part of its official 911 statement and prior to these events, our embassy issued an apology for the obscure homemade film trailer made “by misguided individuals” that might have hurt the feelings of Muslims. This echoes the limp noodle policy of our leadership.
There is so much to report and say…I feel like I’ve stepped into a time warp…its 1979 all over again! The press is using the word “killed” when clearly it was an act of murder…an act of war.
I’m not sure if I agree with Jack about the movie since I haven’t seen it. There is an issue of free speech and thought involved. If the movie is a mindless rant denigrating Muslims and Muhammad then yes, it should be condemned in the strongest terms. If, however it is an historical piece about Muhammad and the religion then this act of violence is something for which we had better be willing to take an unapologetic stand. Murdering people, burning buildings and desecrating our flag is not an appropriate response to a piece of art that is experienced as insulting. Radical Muslims use bullying tactics to silence people and further their radical agenda to intimidate them and bend them to their religious/social/governmental will. America cannot appear to condone this in any way. Appeasement does just that.
Andrew McCarthy at National Review posted and had this perspective:
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/316633/no-its-ishariai-and-assault-us-missions-andrew-c-mccarthy#
We had better wake up to reality while we still have some ground to stand on in defense of freedom.
From Sarah Palin.
Sarah Palin:
Apparently President Obama cant see Egypt and Libya from his house. On the anniversary of the worst terrorist attacks ever perpetrated on America, our embassy in Cairo and our consulate in Benghazi were attacked by violent Islamic mobs. In Cairo, they scaled the walls of our embassy, destroyed our flag, and replaced it with a black Islamic banner. In Benghazi, the armed gunmen set fire to our consulate and killed an American staff member. The Islamic radicals claim that these attacks are in protest to some film criticizing Islam. In response to this, the U.S. embassy in Cairo issued a statement that was so outrageous many of us thought it must be a satire. The embassy actually apologized to the violent mob attacking us, and it even went so far as to chastise those who use free speech to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims. (Funny, the current administration has no problem hurting the religious feelings of Catholics.)
But where is the pr
esidents statement about this? These countries represent his much touted Arab Spring. Hows that Arab Spring working out for us now? Have we received an apology yet from our friends in the Muslim Brotherhood for the assault on our embassy?
Its about time our president stood up for America and condemned these Islamic extremists. I realize there must be a lot on his mind these days what with our economys abysmal jobless numbers and Moodys new warning about yet another downgrade to our nations credit rating due to the current administrations failure to come up with a credible deficit reduction plan. And, of course, he has a busy schedule with all those rounds of golf, softball interviews with the Pimp with the Limp, and fundraising dinners with his corporate cronies. But our nations security should be of utmost importance to our Commander-in-chief. America cant afford any more leading from behind in such a dangerous world. We already know that President Obama likes to speak softly to our enemies. If he doesnt have a big stick to carry, maybe its time for him to grow one.
– Sarah Palin
The woman who posted the following is retired CIA. It was posted prior to the news of the ambassador’s death. the portion of the article I’m posting begins with the 911 statement made by our embassy:
http://www.radicalislam.org/analysis/attacks-us-embassy-egypt-consulate-libya
September 11, 2012
We need new leadership in DC and the sooner the better.
Here is Obama’s statement:
“I strongly condemn the outrageous attack on our diplomatic facility in Benghazi, which took the lives of four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens. Right now, the American people have the families of those we lost in our thoughts and prayers. They exemplified America’s commitment to freedom, justice, and partnership with nations and people around the globe, and stand in stark contrast to those who callously took their lives.
I have directed my Administration to provide all necessary resources to support the security of our personnel in Libya, and to increase security at our diplomatic posts around the globe. While the United States rejects efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others, we must all unequivocally oppose the kind of senseless violence that took the lives of these public servants.
On a personal note, Chris was a courageous and exemplary representative of the United States. Throughout the Libyan revolution, he selflessly served our country and the Libyan people at our mission in Benghazi. As Ambassador in Tripoli, he has supported Libya’s transition to democracy. His legacy will endure wherever human beings reach for liberty and justice. I am profoundly grateful for his service to my Administration, and deeply saddened by this loss.
The brave Americans we lost represent the extraordinary service and sacrifices that our civilians make every day around the globe. As we stand united with their families, let us now redouble our own efforts to carry their work forward.”
I’m not sure what more you want, Jack. A declaration of war? After all of your articles about how we got in too deep in Iraq and Afghanistan, that would surprise me. What do you think should Obama have said?
Leave it to Romney to lie about this tragedy for political gain. Jake Tapper reports:
“Before news spread that four Americans had been killed in Benghazi, Romney yesterday issued a statement saying in part: Its disgraceful that the Obama administrations first response was not to condemn attacks on our diplomatic missions, but to sympathize with those who waged the attacks.
This is an attack that does not stand up to simple chronology.
Asked what Romney was referring to, his campaign Tuesday pointed to a statement from the US Embassy in Cairo issued a statement condemn(ing) the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims referring to the anti-Muslim movie allegedly inflaming the demonstrators, rioters, and attackers but that statement was issued before the attacks on the diplomatic missions.
Romney was not the only one who took issue with the statement, which was criticized for redefin(ing) and limit(ing) freedom of speech to that speech which others, and, explicitly Muslims, do not find offensive, in the words of Nina Shea of Freedom House.
The White House also seemed to take issue with it. Tuesday night An Obama administration official ABC News that no one in Washington approved that statement before it was released and it doesnt reflect the views of the U.S. government.
Also Tuesday night, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton issued a statement saying, Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet. The United States deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. Our commitment to religious tolerance goes back to the very beginning of our nation. But let me be clear: There is never any justification for violent acts of this kind.
Facing criticism for the rhetorical attack on the Obama administration literally before the dust had settled and by their own initial explanation based on an inaccurate timeline Romney and his campaign on Wednesday updated their explanation, pointing to tweets by someone at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo standing by the original statement even after demonstrators had breached the compound.
The embassy in Cairo put out a statement after their grounds had been breached, Romney said. Protesters were inside the grounds. They reiterated that statement after the breach.
Romney, according to aides, was referring to a tweet from the official U.S. Embassy in Cairo twitter account one which has since been deleted stating This mornings condemnation (issued before protest began) still stands. As does our condemnation of unjustified breach of the Embassy.
The U.S. Embassy in Cairo (@USEmbassyCairo) also wrote: Of course we condemn breaches of our compound, were the ones actually living through this. And it stood by its previous statement, tweeting Sorry, but neither breaches of our compound or angry messages will dissuade us from defending freedom of speech AND criticizing bigotry.
Romneys opponents are questioning the propriety of the attack. After it was known that at least one American had been killed in Libya, Obama campaign spokesman Ben LaBolt last night said We are shocked that, at a time when the United States of America is confronting the tragic death of one of our diplomatic officers in Libya, Governor Romney would choose to launch a political attack.
Romney wasnt the only one Republican National Committee chairman Reince Priebus tweeted Obama sympathizes with attackers in Egypt. Sad and pathetic.
The evidence that the president sympathizes with attackers in Egypt was not immediately apparent, likely because it does not in any way exist…”
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/09/the_politics_of_the_attacks_on_the_us_consulate_in_benghazi_and_cair/
Mark Steyn recalls a passage from his own book regarding free speech and the court case about the Danish cartoonist who dared create an image of Muhammed:
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/316655/re-free-speech-free-speech-free-speech-mark-steyn
The embassy attack in Cairo, Egypt and the the embassy attack and murders in Benghazi, Libya were sparked by YouTube clips of the film “Innocence of Muslims” made by American film maker Sam Bacile. Both riots were led by the Muslim Brotherhood who find the film offensive.
Both events were not the result of a small number of extremists rioting. The rampaging crowds were large, thousands(or more in Cairo), if not tens of thousands (in Benghazi), were involved.
You can find video clips of this film by searching YouTube for Sam Bacile or Innocence of Muslims.
Welcome to the “Arab Spring”. Obama’s “Arab Spring”.
Evidently President Barack Obama, who has spent more time on the golf course than attending security meetings which he regularly skips.
http://www.aei-ideas.org/2012/09/has-obama-spent-more-time-on-the-golf-course-than-in-his-daily-intelligence-meetings/
Reading minutes, hours or days after the fact, is NOT the same as a daily face to face meeting. Evidently Obama has not attended a single security briefing for at least the past 7 days.
http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/09/12/obama-skipped-presidential-daily-briefings-in-the-week-before-the-middle-east-attacks/
This is a pattern for him. Do you really want a president who spends more time working on his golf game than on national security?
Sam Bacile, who has gone into hiding, may well be the next Theo van Gogh. Van Gogh was a Dutch filmmaker killed by a Muslim extremist in 2004 after making a film that was perceived as insulting to Islam.
The National Endowment for the Arts once used your tax dollars to fund the competition that picked homosexual photographer Andres Serrano’s “Piss Christ” as a winner in the Southeastern Center for Contemporary Art’s “Awards in the Visual Arts”.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piss_christ
I am not aware of any connection between The National Endowment for the Arts and Sam Bacile’s “Innocence of Muslims.”
Sorry about the slop in the above. I edited haphazardly without re-reading, but I think the points are made.
Again it is Chris who is the liar. And in his usual logorrehic style.
Romney’s response was timed to the official Obama administration Cairo Embassy representatives’ statement on Tuesday, which was the first official response from the Obama administration.
Because of the political ramifications of that statement, the Obama administration has now conveniently disavowed it.
Romney’s initial response to the Cairo Embassy statement was withheld for release until midnight September 12, after the anniversary of 9/11 on Tuesday.
You have admit Chris is learning his progressive lessons well. Lying, half-truths, and misrepresentation are at the top of the list for progressive activists and he has shown excellent proficiency. William Ayers and his wife Bernadine Dohrn would be as proud of Chris as they are of Obama. Perhaps some day they will launch Chris’ political career too.
Occupy Cairo!
http://washingtonexaminer.com/photo-egyptian-rioters-were-wearing-guy-fawkes-masks/article/2507732#.UFCScI1lQ19
Well, what do you know, the progressive Occupy movement has infiltrated and influenced the Middle East. Birds of a feather.
Associated Press photographer Charles Dharapak captured Romney smirking as he left the podium last night after he attempted to politicize the deaths of American ambassadors in Libya.
This is gruesomely cold, even for Romney.
https://twitter.com/CharlesDharapak/status/245893711257563136/photo/1
Jim, this is Romney, it’s how he looks, even when it may not be appropriate to smile he does, okay, so his campaign manager should slap him around for doing it. Heck, it’s just a habit and it’s not a new problem. But, to try and make something out of it…now that’s reaching. How does anyone know what is in his mind, but him? Is it a smirk or just his normal face?
And politicizing it? Give me a break, how could it not be politicized? It’s politics. It began with Muslim’s religious-political zealotry and it is followed by Obama, Romney, Clinton, any politician, or any talk show, or any blogger or any commenter saying anything about it…can’t fault Romney for that.
Lastly, if you want to make a case against Romney, then I suggest you try to measure the man’s words with Obama’s. That’s certainly more reasonable than to pounce on Romney for how he looks (smirks). Course this is what liberals always say, remember how they treated Bush? He was called the smirking chimp.
Libs like those buzz words like smirk…
The Cairo Embassy statement was also posted on the WH website, but has since been removed.
If it wasn’t the WH’s approved statement, why did they post it? If I’d seen it there I would have thought it was too.
I’m sure copies of it exist out there and will be posted soon.
Pie, I heard Obama missed five really important security meetings at the White House in the past few weeks. Then a day or two ago, he tells Israel’s Prime Mister he’s too busy to see him? He won’t even talk with our best ally in the Arab world?
These are events just prior to the terrorist attack.
So, we are attacked… again…. on 9/11….on his watch and Obama acts like he’s so surprised, and he can’t believe? And Hillary can’t believe it and democrats in high office all over can’t believe it? It came as such a shock!
How did thousands of ordinary Muslims in two countries manage to completely blind side the Obama Administration and all our intelligence agencies and all our Arab friends to the point nobody saw it coming? Are we really that stupid?
I would like to hear your thoughts on this.
Hot Mic Moment? Reporters Heard Planning Questions for Romney Before Presser
[T]odays press conference was really an example of how the media sometimes just doesnt deserve [access to a presidential candidate]. Let political consultants talk about the timing and tone of the statement. The candidate should be grilled on policy, on issues, on what he thinks is the right course going forward, not politics and strategy, she adds.
Not long after writing that entry, The Right Scoop posted a video that appears to show that, yes, some of the reporters waiting to hear Gov. Romneys statement on the embassy attacks coordinated their questions specifically to address his tone and his timing and not his policy:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bubyh1Kc_4Y&feature=player_embedded
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/hot-mic-moment-reporters-heard-planning-questions-for-romney-before-presser/
Well … he don’t look like a President. He looks like a schmuck who goes off half-cocked and before he has all the facts.
Just what we need in the Oval Office.
I pulled this off Gawker:
“The film that’s thrown the Middle East into turmoil is a 14-minute trailer for the film “Innocence of Muslims” (or the “Life of Muhammed,” or “Muslim Innocence, depending on reports). It depicts Muhammed as pedophile and doofus, and is filled with slapstick insults at Muslims. The movie is almost hilariously amateurish, like a Muslim version of Life of Brian shot by second-year film students. The trailer was posted to Youtube back in July, but was recently translated into Arabic and broadcast on Egyptian TV by a popular Cairo television host, Sheikh Khaled Abdallah, according to the Guardian. Hence the new protests.”
So Jack … explain to us how this is Obama’s fault. This would seem to be some erstwhile “American” exercising his right to “free speech”, complicated by the Egyptians being, lord help us, “democratic”. We can expect further difficuties, and we’re just going to have to cope.
You and your candidate have made baseless allegations that are way up there on the heinous scale. Us schmuckly citizens can blather all we please, but your candidate is held to a higher standard and has done himself serious damage.
15 Photos Of Libyans Apologizing To Americans:
http://www.buzzfeed.com/jtes/12-photos-of-benghazi-citizens-apologizing-to-amer
How did thousands of ordinary Muslims in two countries manage to completely blind side the Obama Administration and all our intelligence agencies and all our Arab friends to the point nobody saw it coming? Are we really that stupid?
Nope, I do not believe “we” are that stupid. My bet is that these two situations came to the attention of national security organs but that Obama either ignored the warning signs or never heard or reviewed them because the DNC Convention, campaigning, and his golf game were more important. Also I suspect he either finds national security meetings excruciatingly boring and/or he has contempt for the people who prepare the daily briefs and present them.
Yeah, I know, pretty cynical and pure conjecture, but I think one or more of the above came into play. Oh, to be a fly on that wall.
It may be the poor diplomats at our embassy thought they needed to say SOMETHING since the President had said NOTHING prior to the anniversary of 911 BECAUSE he is too busy fund raising, campaigning, schmoozing with celebrities, and playing golf to bother about doing HIS JOB! Since the Presidents policy is appeasement and sucking up to the enemy the only thing the embassy could do is apologize for this unofficial, unprofessionally produced, obscure homemade video.
Romney is exactly right! The President is sending mixed messages to the world when he talks about religious tolerance out of one side of his mouth and disrespects the Catholic religion out of the other. When he makes time to welcome an Egyptian to the WH but tells Israel’s Netanyahu he doesn’t have time for him. (Then makes a phone call to diffuse the blow back as campaign damage control)
Obama hasn’t just missed a few security meeting lately, he misses most of them all the time, preferring to read a summary. A summary is no substitute for in person interaction with those responsible for keeping Americans safe.
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread880589/pg1
With respect to Romney speaking about events on the campaign trail Obama supporters should shut up. Obama inserted himself on more than one occassion while running AS IF
May 15, 2008 Bush remarks in Israel before the Knesset & Obama inserts himself:”Some seem to believe we should negotiate with terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along,” the President said to the countrys legislative body, “We have heard this foolish delusion before. As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared: Lord, if only I could have talked to Hitler, all of this might have been avoided. We have an obligation to call this what it is – the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history.” – Bush
Obama has been a disaster. Carter X 4 The ME is more radicalized than ever…those who were willing to work with us are now aligning with Iran (Carter’s baby)…our economy is weakened to a dangerous level…Iran is close to having a nuke…WMD may be loose in Syria:
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/07/cia_racing_to_find_syrias_wmd.html
Romney would stand head and shoulders above the amateur presently in the WH.
Pie: History will give us the truth and my bet is we had all kinds of warnings that this 9/11 attack was coming. I feel just like you do, that Obama had his reasons for not acting the information and no doubt it was for his own personal agenda.
Another must read from Ann Coulter —
LIBYA COMMEMORATES 9/11
http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2012-09-12.html#read_more
Re Jim”
15 Photos Of Libyans Apologizing To Americans:
http://www.buzzfeed.com/jtes/12-photos-of-benghazi-citizens-apologizing-to-amer
That is heartening.
What should Obama have said? Well obviously I’m not privileged to what the president knows, so I’m not sure I could really make that call from here. I would need to know a lot more about all kinds of things that only the president knows. I only that what he said was too weak and nobody in the Middle East will be too worried over it.
I’ll take a chance and play your game Chris, okay, here goes…
He should have said something on the order of, effective immediately the Embassy of the United States will be closed in both Libya and Egypt, until such time that the safety of American citizens can be assured. This underscores how serious we take such attacks.
He should have said in clear terms, these attacks were acts of terrorism and a gross violation of international law that no civilized nation would tolerate and we expect the governments of Libya and Egypt to assist us in an investigation or we will have no choice but assume they were complicit.
He should have said right off, that these attacks were done by low cowards against unarmed, civilian targets for absolutely no justifiable reason. (He did say part of that, but doesn’t hurt to emphasize it)
He should have also said right off, that every person involved in this blood lust, is at the very least, an accomplice to murder and their crimes will not go unpunished, or something of that nature.
He should have said that because this was an “act of war”, we reserve the right to take whatever action deem necessary to insure our national security and protect American interests abroad. Adding that our response to this attack will be answered on our terms… and it will be in the most unmistakable and most unequivocal terms…that much can be guaranteed. For those responsible, there will be no safe place to hide…justice is coming.
Further, he should have said, as of this day, all travel to Egypt and Libya is prohibited until further notice. All American citizens living in those countries are directed to leave within 60 days or their passports for re-entry will be cancelled. And then add this…As of this date, no further entry visas for Libyans or Egyptians will authorized until further notice. Those here on temporary visas are ordered to leave this country within the next 60 days. The governments of these nations must understand we will not tolerate attacks upon American embassies that they were duty bound by treaty to protect.
I wished he had said…Effective immediately all foreign aide to Libya and Egypt has been halted while we review our foreign policies.
And I especially wish he had something to let them know that if any further acts of aggression of this vile nature occur against American citizens there will be immediate military response.
I would then investigate these terrorist acts as thoroughly as possible, and when I felt we have done all that we could to identify the responsibles, I would devise a measured response that would send a clear message to the world and our enemies that it’s not safe to threaten America or to attack our people.
What President Obama should have said he should have said quietly, privately and confidentially last week without leaking it to the press. He should have told the embassies to close and order the staff to leave Egypt and Libya until the immediate threat had passed.
But then he didn’t know about the threat, right?
Looks like those 15 photos were taken so it looks like a lot of people, but when you start examining it closer, there are only about 25 people at the most, and the photos contain the same quickly written signs on small pieces of paper passed around. Doesn’t look anything like the mobs that went after us, but I appreciate their sentiments nevertheless.
I bet those that love us verses those that hate us are outnumbered about 10,000 to one. The site where these pics were posted were name calling republicans all kinds of stuff like fu#%wads, morons, etc. Nice…just what I would expect from democrats.com
I heard Obama was preparing for his appearance on the Letterman show, which is why he can’t meet with Netanyahu.
Got to get them votes instead of making sure our country and our citizens working over seas are safe. Only showing up for less than 50% of the intelligence briefings puts this whole mess right in his lap with blood on his hands.
Jack it’s a bit late for this president to talk tough even if he wanted to and clearly he doesn’t. He doesn’t take this job seriously. He likes looking important. He needs the applause and attention. He’s desperate to win another four so he can inflict even more transforming damage on the country.
There are questions now about this film. The main person behind it is a ghost…they cannot place him in America or Israel. Nobody in Hollywood has ever heard of him or the film. A person with a similar name has a Facebook page.
Meanwhile the message first put out on 911 by the Egyptian Embassy is under scrutiny:
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2012/09/the-obama-blame-game-begins.php
Gotta get some Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Chris you are always seeking opinions here at Post Scripts as to what Obama should have done or said. How about on this issue you explain how you think about what should be done when we are attacked on US Embassy soil? Please I am curious about your thoughts.
Maybe Libby and Jim would address this question as well.
First … the actions of a mob are not, necessarily, the actions of a country.
Keeping to Benghazi, for the moment, there have been much and many subsequent demonstrations by Libyans decrying the actions of their Jihadi fringe. They have told everyone who will listen of their frustration with their government which cannot muster the guts to disarm the Jihadi militias.
Though they have made four arrests … of whom we are not yet apprised. But I’ll bet anybody on this site five bucks that the OA follows up … and gets … eventually … satisfaction.
Harold, you do not blame a whole country for the actions of a militant few. Well … we don’t anyway. Some of our more hormonal Islamic brethren are willing to blame all of us for the actions of Pastor Terry Jones.
But we will not react in kind … well … I will not. You, apparently, are another matter. And I can only sing praises to the Goddess, yet again, that you are still in the minority.
Libby, start reading the whole post first please. I asked “what would you do”? and please note, I never cast any blame toward anyone, those are your words not mine. I am curious as to what you think is appropriate action in the first strike response. Most of the time You Chris and now Jim comment solely on our posts, I seldom if ever read how you would handle a situation, and wonder what your thought process is toward resolving things, verse most all your snidely post toward our thoughts. I for one use Post Scripts as a debate of different ideas, trying to learn. Not a forum of pointless remarks(which I can do if the humor is there) such as “But we will not react in kind … well … I will not” which tells little of how you achieve a resolution verse just turning the other cheek, especially when it isn’t your life in immediate danger.
Harold, I’ve asked the same thing many times and rarely do I get an answer. Chris is more likely to respond, I’ll give him that. -Jack
“But we will not react in kind … well … I will not” which tells little of how you achieve a resolution verse just turning the other cheek, especially when it isn’t your life in immediate danger.
Hey, that’s what Christianity is suppose to be about, though one is hard pressed to find a Christian who actually practices. And again, you don’t punish a country, a people or a faith for the actions of a mindless few. Shall I remind you about Terry … again?
And there really isn’t any resolution, no quick fix, no response, except to batten down and wait for the squall to pass.
You know, communication isn’t just reading the printed word … there is thinking about it too.
And you’re right about the lack of response to the actual posts. Most of them are blather (rarely factual and intensely “spun”) re-posted from sources intent on inflaming the passions of the ignorant. There is rarely anything of substance to respond to.
But, alas, it is a sordid, shameful aspect of my character … that I do enjoy pointing up the fact that Jack just climbed right onto Romney’s (subsequently crashed) bandwagon, when the candidate laid into Obama, rather than deplore the pointless and irrational violence.
Smirk, smirk. (Think now. This might be an ironic reference to something else.)
Fact: Jack (or was it Tina?) fell for it, succumbed to baseless prejudices … again!
Harold, I think the way Obama handled the situation was appropriate. He said that he strongly condemned the attacks, spoke about the victims, one in very specific and personal terms, and said that justice would be served to those responsible for the deaths. At this point that’s all he should have said. It is way too early to take action against the governments of Egypt and Libya. I don’t remember any of you talking as tough when the Israeli military killed a young U.S. citizen on board the Gaza flotilla. And that was an act that was perpetrated directly by the Israeli government, not an angry mob.
“I don’t remember any of you talking as tough when the Israeli military killed a young U.S. citizen on board the Gaza flotilla.” Chris S
Chris, you’re right, because we don’t consider Palestinian’s our close friends and constant supporters, unlike the Israelis. As for the young US citizen on board the flotilla attempting to run the blockade, given the circumstances, stuff happens, too bad, but the Israelis were being attacked at that time, they didn’t just shoot him for the fun of it.
And further, re the blockade… It’s my humble opinion, that it was a completely justifiable act for their national defense. The crew on the ships caused the deaths, the Israelis on the other hand showed great restraint by not killing more of them…they certainly could have killed them all sent their fleet to the bottom of the sea quite easily.
Tell me Chris, do you hate the Jews? Do you want to see them driven into the sea by Arabs? Who’s side are you on? Just want to know, because you seem so angry towards them.
Jack: “Chris, you’re right, because we don’t consider Palestinian’s our close friends and constant supporters, unlike the Israelis.”
So it’s OK for our close friends and constant supporters to kill our citizens? Wow.
“As for the young US citizen on board the flotilla attempting to run the blockade, given the circumstances, stuff happens, too bad, but the Israelis were being attacked at that time, they didn’t just shoot him for the fun of it.”
The Israelis were being attacked? How? Are you talking about before or after they began boarding a peaceful humanitarian aid ship?
We may never know who attacked first in this incident. The surviving activists claim that the soldiers began firing from their helicopters. We do know that the activists had no firearms. We know that Furkan Dogan was shot at close range five times, and many other victims were shot multiple times as well. How is that self-defense? How is that not excessive force?
“And further, re the blockade… It’s my humble opinion, that it was a completely justifiable act for their national defense. The crew on the ships caused the deaths, the Israelis on the other hand showed great restraint by not killing more of them…they certainly could have killed them all sent their fleet to the bottom of the sea quite easily.”
This is really sick, Jack. It was a peaceful protest. People have the right to a peaceful protest under international law. One might say it’s a God-given right. These people posed zero real threat to Israel! How on earth can you chalk this up to national defense? What the hell were they defending their country from? Political embarrassment?
“Tell me Chris, do you hate the Jews? Do you want to see them driven into the sea by Arabs? Who’s side are you on? Just want to know, because you seem so angry towards them.”
OK, now you’ve crossed the line. Are you really this crazy? I can’t tell, because half the time you seem reasonable, and the other half you’re totally off your rocker.
This is also extremely hypocritical of you. When you criticize Muslim countries, does that mean you hate Muslims? If not, then why do you assume I hate the Jews simply because I criticize the Israeli government? (Not to mention you’ve said far more negative things about Muslims than I have ever said about Jews…)
I have no anger toward the Jews. I do have anger toward the Israeli government for killing a young U.S. citizen for conducting a legal peaceful protest. I have anger toward them for instituting an oppressive police state against the Palestinian people. This anger is shared by the most of the world community. I also have anger toward Hamas and other terror organizations who exploit the fear and anger of the oppressed and teach them that violence and bigotry are the answer.
Both parties are acting in a manner that is totally counterproductive to peace. I do hold Israel to a higher standard, however, because they are the party with the greatest power. And they are using that power in a totally irresponsible way, a way that justifies the deaths of innocents in service of a larger goal; this way is never anything but self-defeating. I also hold them accountable because of their own history of oppression. They should know better.
Yes Jack you are right, the Liberal posters do not seem to want to respond about ‘what would you do’. I know what Obama did, not impressed at all. I didn’t ask for a confirmation of Obamas actions either, I asked what actions or any that you Libby or Jim might consider, much like you asked of Jack and got a straight answer. ‘Smoking Libby’ is probably the last person here who completely process’s thing clearly. Chris seems intent on carrying the day for his parties ideology, which is OK with me, as I do the same for my convictions. Jim’s silent treatment is deafening and telling. So,I will take Jack,s advise on this matter and appreciate our opinions might be more important to you 3 then your own.
Harold, I thought my answer was clear. I would have done exactly what Obama did in this situation.
Chris, it is discomforting to hear you state that, and if I may, I feel Obama’s actions (actually lack of any) really sends the wrong message. I felt the threat of such attacks deserves a more stern response from a US President, combined with leadership and less blaming something else. However given that he had a campaign trip to Las Vegas foremost on his mind, that might have been the best response he could muster, considering apparently the more important issue of campaigning. That Vegas trip really took up his time, you know he didn’t even have time to review Intel briefing’s,that might have saved four American Lives! However the rapid retort and blame aimed toward Romney’s criticism of Obamas lack of any real action was not out of the ordinary. Also I would to share a comment made by another; ‘Our leaders SHOULDN’T let our enemies know that when they kill our people and attack our embassies that the U.S. government will act like a battered wife making excuses for her psychotic husband’. When America lives are lost in a situation like this, nothing else matters until positive action is taken.
Danny Danon, Isreal Kissnet speakers interview on Fox News.
From Wikipedia: Danny Danon (Hebrew: , born 8 May 1971) is an Israeli politician who serves as a member of the Knesset for Likud. He is chairman of World Likud and Chair of the Knesset Committee for Aliya (immigration), Absorption and Diaspora Affairs.
http://video.foxnews.com/v/1842753537001/
The so-called peaceful flotilla protests were executed and backed by professional, aggressive, activists and their actions did pose a threat to the Israeli people.
The purpose for the Embargo at Gaza is to protect the Israeli people from hidden shipments of materials used for bomb making and explosive devises. It is not to prohibit shipments of food or medicine.
The protesters knew they were entering waters where they would be stopped and they chose to breach the embargo anyway. They weren’t bravely attempting to get supplies to the Palestinians; they were making a political statement! They went there looking for trouble, and hoping for violence, and they made sure they got it.
Israel has provided for and supplied the Palestinian people with food and medicines while guarding against materials that can be smuggled in to be used to make bombs to kill Jews. The jews have cared for Palestinians at their medical facilities.
What have the Palestinians done to demonstrate that they want peace…what small thing even have they done as an act of good faith? Nothing. they teach hatred of Jews to their children. They strap bombs to their own children and praise them for blowing themselves up. This is what your precious protesters defend whether their pea brains can figure it out or not!
Palestinian leadership makes a great show of peacemaking; they play the part of innocent victim like the best Hollywood B movie actor…but they are two-faced! They continue to foment hatred of Jews and the elimination of the Jewish state…it is impossible to create a peaceful solution with such people.
Read some history…read some news that isn’t run through the leftist media. Those activists organizers were ultimately responsible for the deaths that occurred on the flotilla. Their acts are unreasoned and foolish and accomplish absolutely nothing…and oh how they puff themselves up as if they were “making a difference”. Disgusting!
Tina: “What have the Palestinians done to demonstrate that they want peace…what small thing even have they done as an act of good faith? Nothing. they teach hatred of Jews to their children. They strap bombs to their own children and praise them for blowing themselves up. This is what your precious protesters defend whether their pea brains can figure it out or not!”
Tina, when you say “the Palestinians” and “they,” who exactly do you mean? These terms are unclear, because it makes it sound like you are generalizing. Writing tip: when you don’t add a qualifier, the word “all” will always be inferred.
There are many Palestinians who are working for peace. Many of them work with Israelis to urge an end to the violence. You should do some research on some of these groups.
Chris statement in his reply to Jack about the death of a American citizen ‘So it’s OK for our close friends and constant supporters to kill our citizens?’ Dogan may have been born on American soil to ethnic Turkey parents, however since the age of 2 he has been a permanently resided in Turkey and his participation in the Gaza Freedom Flotilla, was volunteered by himself. He was killed in the Gaza flotilla raid, Doan’s father said that “Furkan was a US citizen only, (which turns out to be a incomplete statement, much like Chris would have us believe)and he never thought that he would be killed since he was an American citizen.”, Just because he was born on US soil in New York, does not give him the justification of US protection while he participates in acts that threaten our allies. And remember, since the age of 2 Doan was was residing in Turkey permanently!
In Dogan,s final diary entry written on the ship, he wrote about the beauty of martyrdom:
“It is the last hours to martyrdom, insha’Allah. I am wondering if there is a more beautiful thing. The more beautiful thing is only my mother, but I’m not sure. The comparison is very difficult. Martyrdom or my mother? Now, the hall has been evacuated. So far people were not serious, but they have become serious recently.
An autopsy revealed he had suffered five gunshot wounds, to the nose, back, back of the head, left leg, and left ankle, at a distance of 45 centimeters. He was shot when he was filming the events in the ship. The autopsy report was never handed over to US authorities despite repeated requests to that effect.
Chris the qualifier for my comments can be found in this statement:
I think a fool, or someone with an agenda, makes the assumption that a non qualifying statement suggest “all” when the subject in question (for several years) has centered around terrorist acts and thought. It is particularly foolish when the writers, with whom you should be familiar, have made it plain they are not talking about “ALL” but instead, specifically those who wage jihad or make pronouncements about wanting to kill Jews and Americans.
The fact that there are or may be Palestinians working for peace doesn’t change the fact that their leaders, their teachers, their religious leaders are, almost to a man, dedicated to the elimination of the Jews. It doesn’t change the fact that their schools teach children that Jews are dogs and pigs and that Israel doesn’t exist…or that mothers strap bombs to their children and celebrate it! Talk about hate! And it does not change the fact that Jews must find ways to defend and protect themselves.
I suggest you do some reading…and try to understand that I am not a hater, I am not a bigot or racist…I am a strong defender of freedom. I would have the same reaction to a coordinated and committed assault on our freedoms from any other group. I know of NONE.
Islamic leaders, like Adolf Hitler before them, that want to wipe Israel off the face of the earth, kill Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, Christians, Atheists, and others or subjugate them are waging war both overt and covert.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/leveling-the-pyramids-experts-explain-what-could-be-in-store-now-that-the-muslim-brotherhood-runs-egypt/
http://counterjihadreport.com/tag/adolf-hitler/
http://americandefenseleague.wordpress.com/category/the-muslim-brotherhood-crimes/
Tina,
First you take umbrage at the implication that you are a hater or a bigot.
Then you link to the American Defense League, which is listed as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center.
*sigh*
If you don’t want to be seen as a hater or a bigot, stop associating with and getting your news from haters and bigots! It’s really that simple!
In case you don’t take the SPLC’s designation seriously, here is an excerpt from an article on the American Defense League:
“The ideology of Islam that promotes the killing of the infidel, the Christian or anyone else who lives outside of Islam and must be killed or made to submit, also serves the Lefts purpose of progressing towards a Godless society, because only in a Godless society, a society without Christianity that clearly says all men are created equal and that they have equal value regardless of usefulness, are you able to pursue their Fabian Socialist aims of molding the world into their garish nightmare where God would have no place in determining who lives and dies.
In a Fabian Socialist utopian world, the world of the American Left, where you would have to prove your usefulness to society, or be gotten rid of, theres no understanding of this concept of all men are created equal by their creator with the inalienable right of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness (property), or the innate value of life itself! As is true in Islam.”
This is mindless, hateful ranting. Is this really the kind of blog you respect enough to cite as a source in a discussion, Tina?
You cannot fight hate with more hate. Organizations like the ADL are not part of the solution to the problem of radical Islam. They are part of the problem.
The squall seems to have passed. And we, courageously, did nothing to make it worse.
Chris: “Then you link to the American Defense League, which is listed as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center. *sigh*”
And?
Lets look at the Southern Poverty law Center:
The SPLC’s op-ed writings have appeared in the Communist Party USA’s newspaper People’s World.
SPLC considers Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) a “hate group”, because it opposes illegal immigration, and uses demonstrations as a method, which the SPLC deems intimidation.
The SPLC runs tolerance.org, a website that advocates multiculturalism, the homosexual agenda and “social justice” with tips designed for teachers to be used in the classroom…I think this is called propaganda.
In the summer of 2003, the SPLC’s Intelligence Journal carried a feature article entitled “Into the Mainstream”, by Chip Berlet. The cover of the journal had an image of Adolf Hitler in front of the American flag and the caption, “Marching toward the Mainstream: the radical Right invades American culture”.
The SPLC has published criticisms of movies they deem to be not politically correct, often smearing the filmmakers in the process and portraying them to be part of a purported “radical right” conspiracy to influence the culture. Films the SPLC has criticized in this manner include Ronald Maxwell’s American Civil War epics Gettysburg (1993) and Gods and Generals (2003), and Mel Gibson’s 2004 film The Passion of the Christ.
You have your sources and I have mine.
Our readers are, as always, free to decide for themselves.
“This is mindless, hateful ranting.”
Is it? I find it filled with reasonable commentary based on decades of recorded history.
Your position, and be clear it is a position, is held by control freaks with an agenda to “transform” America…and you think I should fall in with that?
Sorry, no!
The Islamist threat is real and the goal is to oppress or kill anyone that will not bend to their will.
Leftist also seek to control and/or oppress anyone that does not share their point of view. The Southern Poverty Law Center now exists for this PC agenda.
“You cannot fight hate with more hate.”
You cannot pretend to be inclusive and then attempt to suppress others…you cannot pretend to be kind and thoughtful and then make ugly and false charges about others or their intentions just because they hold different views…but you do it all the time.
“In a Fabian Socialist utopian world, the world of the American Left, where you would have to prove your usefulness to society, or be gotten rid of, theres no understanding of this concept of all men are created equal by their creator with the inalienable right of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness (property), or the innate value of life itself! As is true in Islam.” Tina G.
Chris, you call the above quote hate. Where’s the hate? It’s true! In far too many case within the Islamic religion we have seen where a person’s very life is in jeopardy if they are outside this religion. If someone draws the wrong cartoon, if they’re homosexual, if they say something offending Islam, if they dishonor their family, if a wife cheats on her husband, etc. they are often subject to death! Yes, the Muslim response is too often to murder and that has civilized people rightly concerned. Murder for Islamic religious reasons happens in substantial enough numbers that a rational, caring, decent human being can’t just let slide and chalk it up to one’s culture! To condemn barbaric practices is NEVER hateful, in fact it’s just the opposite. It is an act of concern and love for the safety and well being of others. This is not fighting “hate with hate” Chris, it’s apply peer pressure where it belongs. It’s opposing an insane act with a statement of sanity and reason. I can’t believe I have to explain this you, this should be so obvious!
Try this silly experiment Chris just for grins, okay and see if it doesn’t make you feel better about yourself. Repeat after me (in the privacy of your domicile), ALL Muslims who believe in killing others who are outside their religious beliefs are absolutely wrong, wrong, wrong! Repeat it 10 times, increasing in intensity and afterwards take note of how good you will feel for having said it. This is your conscience Chris, it’s rewarding you for having a good thought!
Then while you are still in the mood, go apologize to Tina and I bet you will get the same result, you will feel even better. Because deep down in your heart you know Tina is right, you know she is not a hater, and you been critical of a very good, very intelligent woman who has been very, very patient with you…and you’ve been hateful towards her for far too long. -Jack
No the squall has not passed Libby, have you not noticed the news? The violence continues, four more innocent people were just murdered in the name of that video, but in reality in the name of Islam against infidels. -Jack
Tina: “The SPLC’s op-ed writings have appeared in the Communist Party USA’s newspaper People’s World.”
Are you sure the SPLC gave this newspaper permission to use its op-ed?
“SPLC considers Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) a “hate group”, because it opposes illegal immigration, and uses demonstrations as a method, which the SPLC deems intimidation.”
This is a lie, Tina.
In reality, the SPLC is very clear about why it considers FAIR a hate group:
“The Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) is a group with one mission: to severely limit immigration into the United States. Although FAIR maintains a veneer of legitimacy that has allowed its principals to testify in Congress and lobby the federal government, this veneer hides much ugliness. FAIR leaders have ties to white supremacist groups and eugenicists and have made many racist statements. Its advertisements have been rejected because of racist content. FAIRs founder, John Tanton, has expressed his wish that America remain a majority-white population: a goal to be achieved, presumably, by limiting the number of nonwhites who enter the country. One of the groups main goals is upending the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, which ended a decades-long, racist quota system that limited immigration mostly to northern Europeans. FAIR President Dan Stein has called the Act a “mistake.”
In Its Own Words
“As Whites see their power and control over their lives declining, will they simply go quietly into the night? Or will there be an explosion?”
FAIR founder and board member John Tanton, Oct. 10, 1986
“I’ve come to the point of view that for European-American society and culture to persist requires a European-American majority, and a clear one at that.”
John Tanton, letter to eugenicist and ecology professor Garrett Hardin (now deceased), Dec. 10, 1993
“I blame ninety-eight percent of responsibility for this country’s immigration crisis on Ted Kennedy and his political allies, who decided some time back in 1958, earlier perhaps, that immigration was a great way to retaliate against Anglo-Saxon dominance and hubris, and the immigration laws from the 1920s were just this symbol of that, and it’s a form of revengism, or revenge, that these forces continue to push the immigration policy that they know full well are [sic] creating chaos and will continue to create chaos down the line.”
FAIR President Dan Stein, “Oral History of the Federation for American Immigration Reform,” interview of Dan Stein by John Tanton, August 1994.
“Do we leave it to individuals to decide that they are the intelligent ones who should have more kids? And more troublesome, what about the less intelligent, who logically should have less? Who is going to break the bad news [to less intelligent individuals], and how will it be implemented?”
John Tanton, letter to eugenicist Robert K. Graham (now deceased), Sept. 18, 1996
“Immigrants don’t come all church-loving, freedom-loving, God-fearing Many of them hate America, hate everything that the United States stands for. Talk to some of these Central Americans.”
FAIR President Dan Stein, interviewed by Tucker Carlson, Oct. 2, 1997″
http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-files/groups/federation-for-american-immigration-reform-fair
Once again, Tina, you are trying to paint those who take a stand against hatred and bigotry as mean, intolerant bigots who simply can’t allow different points of view. You refuse to actually look at the real reasons why the SPLC uses the “hate group” label, and instead construct a strawman argument because you can’t win on the facts. Why do you do this? Why is a racist, eugenecist hate group worth that kind of protection, that you are willing to spread falsehoods and embarrass yourself in order to defend it? Are you that much of a partisan slave?
“The SPLC runs tolerance.org, a website that advocates multiculturalism, the homosexual agenda and “social justice” with tips designed for teachers to be used in the classroom…I think this is called propaganda.”
Are you insane?
“In the summer of 2003, the SPLC’s Intelligence Journal carried a feature article entitled “Into the Mainstream”, by Chip Berlet. The cover of the journal had an image of Adolf Hitler in front of the American flag and the caption, “Marching toward the Mainstream: the radical Right invades American culture”.”
I decided to go read it, and I don’t see what you’re offended about. Many of the organizations listed by Bertlet are white supremacist and neo-Nazi groups. Those groups are part of the radical right. Are you offended at Bertlet associating an image of Adolf Hitler with neo-Nazi and white supremacist groups? Why?
“The SPLC has published criticisms of movies they deem to be not politically correct, often smearing the filmmakers in the process and portraying them to be part of a purported “radical right” conspiracy to influence the culture. Films the SPLC has criticized in this manner include Ronald Maxwell’s American Civil War epics Gettysburg (1993) and Gods and Generals (2003), and Mel Gibson’s 2004 film The Passion of the Christ.”
So now you’re saying they are not to be listened to because they engaged in film criticism? Are you kidding me? This is some weak crap, Tina, even by your extremely low standards.
“Is it? I find it filled with reasonable commentary based on decades of recorded history.”
LOL! It’s hysterical, hyperbolic hyperventilating. You wouldn’t know reasonable commentary if it hit you in the a**.
And Jack, you are just as bad. You write, “To condemn barbaric practices is NEVER hateful, in fact it’s just the opposite.”
But the website does not condemn “barbaric practices.” IT CONDEMNS ISLAM! How can you say that you are not against all Muslims, or that you are not against Islam itself, and then look approvingly at sources which say just the opposite? You have always waffled on this issue, Jack. You talk out of both sides of your mouth, and then you leave enough words to talk out of your a** as well. It’s ridiculous.
You also write, “Repeat after me (in the privacy of your domicile), ALL Muslims who believe in killing others who are outside their religious beliefs are absolutely wrong, wrong, wrong!”
Do you think I don’t know this already? When have I ever defended Muslims who believe in killing? I have only defended moderate and peace-loving Muslims, who undoubtedly make up the majority. Muslims in America do not commit crimes in larger numbers then the general population. Islam is the third largest religion in the world. Do you really think it’s productive to hold the entire religion responsible for all terrorists attacks, or for the mobs in the Middle East? Do you really think it’s productive to call the whole religion evil? That’s what groups such as the American Defense League do. That is bigotry toward the majority of Muslims, who are normal people like you and I. To support them is to support hatred. Enough.
I’d also like to add, Tina, that if you really think teaching social justice and multiculturalism amounts to “propaganda,” there is something deeply wrong with you in the root of your soul, and you should probably leave this country, since those two principles are pretty much synonymous with “American.” Social justice is what freed the slaves and desegregated the water fountains; it was at core of Martin Luther King, Jr.’s legacy; it is the reason you are allowed to run a business today. Multiculturalism is another thing that makes this country great. If you have a problem with those two principles, I pretty much think you’re an awful, ungrateful, un-American human being. Sorry, I don’t feel much like mincing my words today. I get that way when people try to advertise hate groups to me.
Furthermore, what do you mean when you say tolerance.org teaches “the homosexual agenda?” If you mean that they teach that all human beings should have the same constitutional rights regardless of sexual orientation, then good for them, and to hell with you for suggesting that’s a bad thing. If you mean something more radical than that, then you need to provide examples of what it is you find so offensive about their message.
As I said, Chris, you have sources for information and I have mine. An organization that refuses to respect people with differing points of view (thought and speech) is not to be trusted, particularly when they think it necessary to label them as haters for religious views.
I’m frankly disgusted by the so-called social justice crap that passes for caring and thoughtful participation in our schools and workplace.
The people in the United States once stood as a united group for the dignity of all human beings simply because they are human beings.
As individuals we didn’t always behave as if we honored each other as human beings but we knew this was the principle on which we stood as Americans and generally speaking the majority made sure that this kind of justice prevailed.
Since the Marxist gained power we have replaced this solid basis for dealing with each other with division and rancor. We are now a country divided and every group has a gripe that screams for attention. they waste school time and money on what should be personal and individual “problems” that are handled at home.
I have told you before…marriage is not a right in my opinion. Homosexuals, blacks, browns, yellows, and reds…and anyone with a mixture…already have the same rights as everybody else. the bottom line is they already have the same right to be treated with dignity as everyone else. Problems should be addressed on this basis alone!
The PC activism on campus, in the courts, and in government is no accident. Activists in the Marxist tradition love to stir up divisiveness so they create a clear path to the “transformation” of America into their socialist utopian dream.
Chris as long as you remain in that PC box you will never understand how I can condemn activists that attempt to control the thoughts and actions of others. You don’t stand on the grounding principle of human dignity; you stand on the shifting sand of qualified speech and politically correct group think.
I don’t NEED to do anything, Chris, except what I choose to do.
“I have told you before…marriage is not a right in my opinion”
Happily, your opinion doesn’t matter in the eyes of the law. The Supreme Court has ruled numerous times that the right to marry the person of one’s choosing is a civil right that can only be infringed on given a compelling state interest. The most famous case in which marriage was ruled to be a civil right was Loving v. Virginia, in which the court upheld that anti-miscegenation laws were unconstitutional. If marriage were not a right, states would still be able to outlaw marriage between people of different races.
Do you believe the court was wrong in their ruling on Loving v. Virginia? Should states be able to outlaw interracial marriage? If you don’t think marriage is a right, I don’t see how you can argue that states should be forbidden from implementing discriminatory marriage laws.
What if the state of California decided that conservative bloggers/small business owners named Tina could not marry? I’m sure I’d here plenty about “rights violations” from you if that were the case.
I’d also like to point out that the same argument against gay marriage you’re making right now was used to argue against interracial marriage in the past. After all, they said, no one’s rights were being denied! Everyone had the right to marry someone of the same race, just as today, everyone has the right to marry someone of a different sex. Can’t you smell the equality?
Other court rulings have even upheld the right of convicted murderers on death row to marry.
Newt Gingrich and Rush Limbaugh have both exercised their right to marry, multiple times in fact!
Since the courts have long established that individuals have the right to marry the person of their choosing, you need to come up with a compelling state interest for why same-sex couples should be denied that right. I think you did that one time…
404 Not Found
…Oh wait, I guess that never happened.
Again, you may not believe marriage is a right, but legal precedent trumps your (uninformed and shallow) opinion.
As for your refusal to retract your false statements about the SPLC’s classification of FAIR as a hate group, or to explain what it is about tolerance.org you find so offensive…I’m dismayed, but not surprised, at your continued cowardice.
Still talking to me like I was born yesterday I see…you have a lot to learn, Chris.
I believe that rights are precious and deciding that everything under the sun is a right will eventually erode all of our basic rights.
There is a very big difference for me between denying a man and a woman marriage based on the race of one of them Since a man and a woman can produce children regardless their respective race and two men or two women cannot reproduce it seems like simple logic to me.
I think the basic family unit (father, mother, children) is vital to the continuation of civil society. (That doesn’t mean that living arrangements that vary from the basic family unit are bad or improper or undesirable) The family unit is a building block of civilization. Our marriage and divorce laws should be strengthened for the same reason. Children are the future. It’s important that children know and learn to respect children and family and the responsibility involved in both. It’s important that children have both a father and a mother, preferably their own. This basic family unit is the most desirable atmosphere for raising stable children and the3 state has an interest in promoting the basic family unit.
We have pushed the needs of children into the background and become very self-interested as a people and it shows in the number of dependent people, people in gangs, people living on the streets and in jails and children living on their own. We think that if we want something we should be able to have it no matter what it might mean to the children we produce. This change has made a big difference in our society It’s something you haven’t witnessed but I have. Marriage today is viewed much differently. Its a thing desired, like a new car or a house rather than a solemn contract.
We have lowered our expectations of each other in a lot of other areas as well and our society is decaying right before our eyes.
You and others might think that what I speak of is about some nostalgic desire to relive the past but you would be wrong; my concerns are for my grandchildren and their future. I watched our society fall apart in less than fifty years to the point that our streets are no longer safe. I hate to think what the future fifty might bring.
I understand that for you and for many in the gay community this is an emotional issue desired for reasons having to do with love and creating a sameness or likeness in their commitment to married couples. It’s emotionally charged for me too. I’m sick of lowered standards with respect to children.
The creation of a new human beings is a very big deal requiring a sense of responsibility we rarely see anymore. Too many children are as disposable as our garbage. Too many children are left to fend for themselves or are stuck in families where one parent doesn’t really care about them…sometimes neither parent does because they are too concerned with their own personal desires and gratifications. Our original blood ties are stronger than associations based on feelings and desire. Somehow we have lost respect for this important core foundational truth.
I speak out, even though people like you call me names or consider me “shallow” (or whatever) because I honor marriage as between one man and one woman…a foundational block and on a more personal level because God made us as He did for that purpose. Be fruitful and multiply. Bobby Darin circa 1960:
It doesn’t bother me that the Supreme Court has ruled as it did in Loving v. Virginia because the cases are not the same.
If the SC rules against my position in some future case I will not be silenced no matter how many names you call me and no matter what you think of me. I don’t care about what you think of me because I don’t need your approval. It would be refreshing to see you grow up to the point of being able to handle that not everyone agrees with you but that’s okay.
Some of our readers might find the following interesting:
http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/marriage-and-family/children/children.cfm
It is none of my business how others choose to arrange their lives. I don’t have any desire to make judgements.
I do wish the gay community would have respect for marriage and choose another word to describe and establish the tradition of gay coupling. Unless they have another agenda I don’t see why choosing another word (as they did when they coined the term civil union) is an unreasonable solution to a deeply divisive problem that has become unpleasant for everyone. Respect has to go both ways or there is no way to resolve this problem. I have seen very little respect shown to Christians and others who believe that marriage should remain between one man and one woman. Californians voted twice on this issue only to be disrespected. It makes me think there must be another agenda in play.
OK, so im not the most educated citizen. But we have a muslim president, who obviously refuses to take action for a terrorist attack. But what did we really expect? If your commander-in-chief will not issue orders to protect us, who will, when the attacks are truly in our back yard? I’ve come to a decision that I will not vote for either Obama or Romney, as they are both equally destructive to my family’s way of life. I feel if people in the middle east don’t want our help, fine, but acts of terror are only stopped by force.
jmd, I can appreciate your sentiments, but not your logic. Voting for neither assures the worst possible outcome. The worst is clearly and by miles Obama. Why help your enemy?
Tina: “There is a very big difference for me between denying a man and a woman marriage based on the race of one of them Since a man and a woman can produce children regardless their respective race and two men or two women cannot reproduce it seems like simple logic to me.”
For the millionth time: There is no reproduction requirement in marriage law. We do not prohibit infertile or elderly couples from marrying. Childless marriages are just as valid as marriages that produce children.
Therefore, restricting gay couples from marrying on the grounds that they cannot produce children makes no sense. The ability to produce children is not a requirement for any other couple. Restricting marriage from gay couples is arbitrary discrimination, and thus unconstitutional.
“Unless they have another agenda I don’t see why choosing another word (as they did when they coined the term civil union) is an unreasonable solution to a deeply divisive problem that has become unpleasant for everyone.”
Separate is not equal.
“I have seen very little respect shown to Christians and others who believe that marriage should remain between one man and one woman.”
This is like complaining that integrationists in the sixties didn’t show enough “respect” to segregationists who were deeply motivated by their interpretation of the Bible. Why should the oppressed show respect to those who are oppressing them? Why should they pretend that those who are violating their rights have an equally valid point of view?
The two sides are not morally equivalent. You may believe, based on your religion, that marriage should be between one man and one woman (even though you don’t believe in following most of the other marriage rules of the Bible–for instance, I doubt you plan on marrying your brother-in-law if your husband dies). You can believe whatever you want, but you don’t have the right to impose your religious beliefs on the rest of America. We allow plenty of things in this country that the Bible prohibits. That’s the great thing about America.
“Californians voted twice on this issue only to be disrespected.”
Yeah, some people tend to disrespect others who vote to forcibly annul their marriages against their wills. Those emotional, irrational gays!
“It makes me think there must be another agenda in play.”
Yes, it’s called equality. You wouldn’t get it.