9/11 Remembrance At The U.S. Embassy In Cairo
There was some sort of 9/11 remembrance at the U.S. embassy in Cairo today.
As the U.S. in its war against Libya and Syria is again allied with those folks who rally under this flag, rising it in front of the embassy can even be seen as appropriate.
Reuters: Egyptians angry at film scale U.S. embassy wallsEgyptian protesters scaled the walls of the U.S. embassy in Cairo on Tuesday and some pulled down the American flag during a protest over what they said was a film being produced in the United States that was insulting to the Prophet Mohammad, witnesses said.In place of the U.S. flag, the protesters tried to raise a black flag with the words "There is no god but Allah and Mohammad is his messenger", a Reuters reporter said.
About 20 people stood on top of the outer wall of the embassy in central Cairo, where about 2,000 protesters had gathered.
I have no idea what that alleged film is to supposed to be about but it likely does not show what those demonstrators were told it shows. Someone planned this stunt to coincide with 9/11.
There is also a video of the ripping up of the stars and stripes that used to fly from that flagpole.
Many U.S. folks will likely be upset by this. What are they going to do?
Posted by b on September 11, 2012 at 17:15 UTC | Permalink
At this rate, the US will be out of the Middle East by 2020..It's also important for people to note that the US is supporting these same people in Syria..
People the region
Talk about schizophrenic foreign policy...
Posted by: Ali | Sep 11 2012 19:07 utc | 2
From Global Research:
President of Italy’s Supreme Court To Refer 9/11 Crimes To International Criminal Court
snippet:
"This week, Judge Imposimato stated publicly in writing that 9/11 was just like the “strategy of tension” carried out in Italy."
Nothing will happen. Innaresting nonetheless.
Posted by: Noirette | Sep 11 2012 19:41 utc | 4
Archives.
Some may like to read, from Slate:
The Pentagon's Strangely Festive Ceremony, by David Plotz, Sept 11, 2002.
opening:
“The Pentagon 9/11 ceremony this morning feels less like a memorial than a celebration. At the World Trade Center, they're reading out the names of all 2,800 dead. In Shanksville, Penn., they're tolling a bell for each Flight 93 victim. But here they run a slide show of workers rebuilding the Pentagon, capped by a triumphal shot of a hard hat snapping together an office cubicle. The crowd of 12,000 cheers.”
(Coverage of subsequent memorials at the Pentagon are by amateurs and family members only, afaik. Mostly asking for funds...)
Posted by: Noirette | Sep 11 2012 20:02 utc | 5
The u.s. has soldiers that think they are fighting a holy war. The u.s. Fights for "god & country", god bless America & other mumbo jumbo so I never get mad when others say "no god but ours", every religious person does that. A bigot pastor was having some anti Islam movie so this might be it, his name is Terry jones, he also thinks it's a holy war against Islam. They pulled a flag down so what?
Posted by: Jose Rios | Sep 11 2012 20:22 utc | 6
I can't express how much this angers n saddens me. Not because of the 'blasphemy' of Egyptians expressing their anger at amerika in the 11th of September. The amerikan celebration of the WTC action is just typical propagandising that amerikans must learn to get over. More peeps in amerika die of preventable mis-prescribed medication each month of every year than have died as a result of the WTC collapse. In fact this article alleges ""the incidence rate of medical harm occurring is estimated to be over 40,000 each and EVERY day"
If the annual "911" farce was truly about preventing the deaths of amerikans and oblamblam was truly committed to helping his 'fellow amerikans' he woulds put a very firm anti-monopolist leash on the amerikan health industry; he did the opposite. As we all know he is prepared to spend billions on slaughtering families on the other side of the planet, and millions prosecuting working people in his own country for refusing to sign up to the insurance industry monopoly, while he jokes drinks and plays golf with the fuckers who are really killing amerikans.
But no mind amerikans can sort out their problems with reality; I don't really give a toss if they wanna drink the cyanide laced kool aid, but I do care about the other bit where Oblammer n his lackeys kill innocents on the other side of the world to distract from what is really happening.
Unfortunately this action plays right into that. There is no point in getting upset or angry with oblamblam and his minions about it, that is what they do.
The peeps I'm really pissed off with are the opportunistic wanna-be Oblamblams who are close enough to their people to know exactly what the real issues are but instead of helping their people they take young mens energy and betray their communities.
Whoever organised this knew exactly how it would be perceived and probably took a fat cheque to ensure this happened on the correct date with image gathering equipment in attendance.
Just as the assholes who grab Yemeni kids or semi-literate Jordanians born in refugee camp hell and send em to Syria with a gun telling them that Aleppo is Jerusalem and that the Syrian Army is the IDF, know what they are doing.
The anger of the people that many dismiss as 'jihadists' is real, what the 'rebels' often don't know is that they are killing their comrades to further the interests of their enemies. That is what most angers and saddens me.
As oblamblam has assassinated the honest leaders, dishonest opportunists have taken their place. Amerikans patting themselves on the back over this need to consider that these types of scams always get found out and when it happens as it ultimately and inevitably will, there really will be a jihadi problem.
By then amerika will be even broker than it is now - money spinners for the 1% like the apple/samsung kangaroo court will also have been put to bed, so money for peeps will be even tighter than now, and amerikans will be sick of the bullshit themselves. They won't believe any more lies about 'terror chatter' or 'red alerts' and will get done like a dinner by people who will truly have lost their mercy.
Posted by: Debs is dead | Sep 11 2012 20:45 utc | 7
Remember this.
Obama, June 4, 2009, Cairo:
"I've come here to Cairo to seek a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world, one based on mutual interest and mutual respect, and one based upon the truth that America and Islam are not exclusive and need not be in competition. Instead, they overlap, and share common principles -- principles of justice and progress; tolerance and the dignity of all human beings."
US consulate in Benghazi is set ablaze..Just a few months ago, Obama was out there helping them with kinectic action...
This blowback didn't even take years..Just months...More to come.
Posted by: Zico | Sep 11 2012 21:06 utc | 9
how times cange and what a difference a change in regime can bring: 2001...US was at war with Terror..now Terror is its ally: US was at war with Alqaeda..now US works with alqaeda against its foreign enemies, who stand in the way of freedom and democracy!
whod a thunk it!
Posted by: brian | Sep 11 2012 21:32 utc | 10
a rare comment in the MSM:
http://www.canberratimes.com.au/opinion/alqaeda-now-a-us-ally-in-syria-20120910-25oby.html
i recall when any association with alqaeda resulted in invasion murder incarceration
Posted by: brian | Sep 11 2012 21:35 utc | 11
Osama bin Laden has to be the most successful terrorist since Gavrilo Princip, the man that started a war that destroyed three empires and bankrupted two others. But Osama could be closing in on the record. He provoked the giant which then threw common sense away and began thrashing blindly without any strategic vision. A decade latter the Islamic world remains inflamed against the US.
If the US succeeds in bankrupting itself as a result, bin Laden may take the top honor from Pricip.
Posted by: ToivoS | Sep 11 2012 21:42 utc | 13
@ToivoS
I wouldn't give OBL all the credit, myself, reserving some credit for the people that dreamed him up and popularized him. Alas, he had to exit stage right, written out of the script for a presidential re-election, to be replaced by Assad, for now, with others to come no doubt.
What else could be expected?
http://upyachka.ru/images/11/v2_copy_20120907221341.png
Posted by: Sergey | Sep 11 2012 23:45 utc | 15
An American staff member of the US consulate in the eastern Libyan city of Benghazi has died following fierce clashes at the compound,the gunmen formed part of a group protesting against a US film they say is blasphemous.
Source: The Guardian
This protest seems to have spread to Libya. Anyone got anything on this movie that is causing so much trouble?
Posted by: Colm O' Toole | Sep 12 2012 0:40 utc | 16
Black Agenda Report is always worth bookmarking. Currently there is a marvellous expose (Part 1) of US policy in Africa.
blackagendareport.com/keith-harmon-snow_
Colm @16
This seems to be classic "blowback." It can be fairly embittering for a young Arab to discover that he wasn't fighting against but for the enemies of his people and 99% of people everywhere. The Benghazi Consulate would seem to be a very obvious target.
Posted by: bevin | Sep 12 2012 1:21 utc | 17
from Bradenton.com
The violence appeared to fit a pattern of growing fundamentalist ferment that has touched all of the countries where governments have fallen in the past 18 months. That trend has been especially pronounced in Libya, where in recent weeks conservative Islamists have leveled mosques and cemeteries associated with the moderate Sufi strain of Islam.
Organizers of the Cairo embassy protest said they’d begun planning the event last week when a controversial Egyptian Christian activist who lives in the United States, Morris Sadek, released a trailer for a movie called “Muhammad,” which repeatedly mocks the prophet and the religion. The 14-minute clip, which Sadek first posted on his Facebook page Sept 5, attacked basic tenets of Islam and suggested that the religion had spread only because the prophet told those he encountered to “pay extortion or die” if they didn’t convert.
The film controversy came as a controversial Florida pastor, Terry Jones, whose burning of a Quran in 2011 set off days of rioting in Afghanistan, announced that he planned to put the prophet on trial Tuesday in what he called International Judge Muhammad Day.
The embassy had tried to pre-empt the attack, issuing a statement hours earlier that condemned “the actions by those who abuse the universal right of free speech to hurt the religious beliefs of others.” Embassy officials also called Nader Bakkar, a spokesman for the conservative Islamist Nour party, in which they apologized for the film and Jones’ call, but Bakkar said he was unwilling to call off the protest.
http://www.bradenton.com/2012/09/11/4195842/in-anti-us-protests-egyptians.html
So that last paragraph explains the above comment in my #1 above.
from The Lede
A a 14-minute trailer for the English-language film, which was posted on YouTube in July, attracted little attention until last week, when a version dubbed into Arabic was posted on the same YouTube channel and then copied and viewed tens of thousands of times more.
Demonstrators attacked a U.S. consulate in Libya, killing one American, and breached the walls of the U.S. Embassy in Cairo, mounting angry protests over a film by a U.S. producer that portrays the Prophet Muhammad as a womanizer, pedophile and fraud.
The movie, "Innocence of Muslims," was directed and produced by an Israeli-American real-estate developer who characterized it as a political effort to call attention to the hypocrisies of Islam. It has been promoted by Terry Jones, the Florida pastor whose burning of Qurans previously sparked deadly riots around the world.
Terry Jones for President 2012 - International Judge Muhammad Day 9/11/2012
U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton confirmed that one State Department officer had been killed in the protest at the U.S. consulate in Benghazi. She strongly condemned the attack and said she had called Libyan President Mohammed el-Megarif "to coordinate additional support to protect Americans in Libya."
Clinton expressed concern that the protests might spread to other countries. She said the U.S. is working with "partner countries around the world to protect our personnel, our missions, and American citizens worldwide."
"Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet," Clinton said in a statement released by the State Department. "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. "
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/09/11/egyptian-protesters-scale-us-embassy-wall-in-cairo/
news report:
Romney released a statement on the violence. "I'm outraged by the attacks on American diplomatic missions in Libya and Egypt and by the death of an American consulate worker in Benghazi," Romney said. "It's disgraceful that the Obama administration's first response was not to condemn attacks on our diplomatic missions, but to sympathize with those who waged the attacks."
Romney emits vibes that scare the shit out of me. There's an insincerity, a falseness that I believe hides true evil. This man is capable of opening the gates of hell upon mankind.
Posted by: PissedOffAmerican | Sep 12 2012 3:56 utc | 24
from Wall Street Journal:
The film's 52-year-old writer, director and producer, Sam Bacile, said that he wanted to showcase his view of Islam as a hateful religion. "Islam is a cancer," he said in a telephone interview from his home. "The movie is a political movie. It's not a religious movie."
Mr. Bacile said he raised $5 million from about 100 Jewish donors, whom he declined to identify. Working with about 60 actors and 45 crew members, he said he made the two-hour movie in three months last year in California. The film has been promoted by Dr. Jones, who said Tuesday that he planned to show a 13-minute trailer that night at his church in Gainesville, Fla.
Soon Americans will realize their alliance with Israel is not only detrimental to the development to America's fair society, but dangerous as well..
This movie was made by an American-Israel and Americans get the blame for it..American-Israelis only use the American side when it suits them but they're very much closer to Israel than America..They see America as just a means to their Eretz Yisrael dreams.
In other development, Obama's not meething Netanyahoo on his trip to DC..Poeple think this is Obama's way of showing Bibi who's boss..But I think Obama's scared of that bastard..He doesn't want any embarrassment, which Bibi's very good at, before the elections..
Isn't it amazing that when an Israeli leader screams, most western leaders scramble for cover.lol
Posted by: Zico | Sep 12 2012 6:09 utc | 26
well sure they are spontaneous protests by people having seen the film and being utterly disgusted and shocked. sure the film just had been released in Libya and Egypt
In other news the US administration seems to have fallen out with Netanyahu and maybe with KSA.
Posted by: somebody | Sep 12 2012 6:26 utc | 27
somebody @ 27
I don't think it's US administration falling out with Netanyahoo per sey..It's more of Obama scared that Netanyahoo will use the opportunity to bash him during his re-election campaign..I mean, see the number of standing ovation the bastard got from US congressmen/women..
Bibi has more sway in US congress than Obama himself..
Posted by: Zico | Sep 12 2012 6:39 utc | 28
@Don Bacon #18
The embassy had tried to pre-empt the attack, issuing a statement hours earlier that condemned “the actions by those who abuse the universal right of free speech to hurt the religious beliefs of others.”anything to say about the Pussy Riot now? maybe the Christian Orthodox should become more violent, then the Us would apologize to them, too
Posted by: claudio | Sep 12 2012 6:45 utc | 29
Don Bacon, obviously my (rhetorical) question is directed at the Us embassy, not you :-)
Posted by: claudio | Sep 12 2012 6:53 utc | 30
The most telling thing about Netanyahu's visit is that he is able to announce his arrival and visit amerika despite the fact that the amerikan head of state claims he doesn't want him there.
Occasionally rival gang non-amerikan political leaders have been given limited diplomatic immunity so they can speak to the UN. Altho I seem to remember old Yasser Arafat had to fight hard and get a resolution put through the general assembly a coupla times that he wanted ty visit NY on UN bizness.
Netanyahu just turns up like a bad smell when ever he chooses, doesn't show his face round the UN and oblamblam and his offsiders don't say anything apart from a gentle inference that oblammer & bibi won't have a nite on the piss together.
That is far from 100% to not get sloppy with bibi. The oblammer left enuf wriggle room to cover the possibility amerzionists may demand he kiss bibi ass live on all networks.
Meanwhile back in the real world unwhite muslim kids are droppin off twigs left right and center, and anyone offended by this is told to shut or wear a drone up the old khyber pass.
Posted by: Debs is dead | Sep 12 2012 7:20 utc | 31
31, Debs is dead, I guess Netanyahu is a head of state and as such visits the UN ...
It is war again between US and Al Qeida, it is official now
What do you think, US options are now that
a) Iran is very obviously not isolated and not threatened by US/European sanctions
b) China has taken the side of Russia and Iran in the conflict between US/Israel Iran/Russia
c) Iran sanctions and Syrian war are hurting European economy and business relations
e) there obviously is no military option given Iran's ability to retaliate by threatening Israel and Gulf countries plus backlash from China/Russia which US/Europe need for different reasons for their economy
f) the plan to make Israel more secure and potentially threatening by regime change in Syria has failed
e) the plan to get US friendly regimes in Egypt and Libya has failed (there is no regime in Libya and Morsi tries to balance everybody's interest who is prepared to invest in the Egyptian economy - he has to, this is his country's interest - and that is not just Saudi Arabia, not just the US)
and
do you think Israel is going to like the options the US has - and no, if Romney or Obama will make no difference
The US would have to take the presence of Al Qeida as pretext to intervene - like in Afghanistan - at the very moment they are trying to get out of this quagmire. They need Iran, Pakistan, Russia and China to get out of Afghanistan without fleeing by helicopter.
Posted by: somebody | Sep 12 2012 8:36 utc | 32
US ambassador 'killed in Libya'
The US ambassador to Libya has died after being attacked by militiamen storming the US consulate in the eastern city of Benghazi, reports say.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-19570254
Slight irony there.
Who are we going to bomb?
And will be re-allying ourselves with Ghaddaffi?
Posted by: johnf | Sep 12 2012 10:00 utc | 33
@somebody I left my the tarots in the back of the truck, but I'll try n judge what could happen next.
Heads of State visits between democracies are meant to have a protocol attached to them, particularly in the lead up to an election. If the election is more than three months away it is considered OK for the leader of a nation about to have an election to visit an ally on bizness, but normally an ally isn't meant to have a visit with the leader of a democracy about to have an election. The reasons are self evident. A state visit can give an incumbent a boost in the polls but not a big enough boost to win. So the Prime Minister of X visits the prez of Y, Y plays the hell outta it, milking it for all its worth and picks up a few % points, tho on polling day he hasn't made up enough ground on his opponent and loses. Next thing the Prime Minister of X can't get the new prez of Y to return his phone calls because new prez has decided p.m. of X took sides and needs some payback.
So professional diplomats normally frown upon stunts like the one bibi is tryin to pull.
In this case blind Freddie can see bibi is tryin to embarass oblam in the hope oblam will either acquiese or if he doesn't 'go along to get along', he suffers a zionist backlash sufficient to lose.
That is some gamble for bibi to be making, cos if oblamblam doesn't go along but still wins israel will have some major problems with amerika for a while. After this e;lection oblammer doesn't ever need to run again and he would want some serious payback for bibi's stunt. Sure the whore on the hill will be all over it tryin to pressure the oblammer, but the same applies to them as well. A second term prez can do a lot more damage to a congress person or senator that he/she could do to the prez.
So on the surface of it seems as though notinyerhouse is taling a huge risk.
Some of that could be put down to bibi having the same sorta crazy brave meglomania as saddam hussein or milosivic. he has won by gerrymandering rather than actually havin to convince everyone to vote fer him, some of the nuances of electioneering and that 'democracy stuff' are alien to netanyahu's thinking.
Even so he cannot be so foolish as to imagine oblammer doesn't have a chance in November.
He must also know that oblammers call not to attack Iran doesn't come from a political call, one that holds the masses won't tolerate another big blue.
As we have all seen it is possible to sell any war to most amerikans as long as you wave the flag and tell the poor fucks they're the best in the world. Neither is oblam opting out cause he has some sort of ideological bent against invading a sovereign nation. His actions in Pakistan, Libya, Iraq and Syria show that ain't so.
So the reason oblamblam doesn't want to invade iran is because his bosses the old 1% or whatever don't want it.
The ware may cost them a great deal or rather will cost them a great deal of money and even if they win there isn't much upside.
The sanctions are in place - Iran is still gonna have the vast bulk of those hydrocarbons in a few years when an invasion is likely to be more doable, and a lot less costly.
If netanyahu does go it will be without the support of the elite unless. . .
The only unless I can think of is bibi doin something really crazy in the next few weeks. He could try and manipulate something so crazy that Oblammer has to go along with an attack on Iran or come across as too wimpy to be prez.
If that happened all bets would be off, the oblammer has happily sold his soul for votes before; it is tough to see him standing on principle this late in the game. I reckon oblam would even do down the 1% if it was between satisfying them or winning.
But notonyernellie could have something very persuasive cooked up. Something that gets the amerikan media bayin for Iranian blood, then if it were a choice between oblam losing with no bloodshed, or barak winnin after a couple million muslims get blown into paradise, teh oblammer is gonna pick the red box, and bugger the innocents.
In the latter case the whole white house adminsitration would batten down the hatches refusing to engage with any criticism or allow any chinks of reality sneak through the curtains.
That's the truly scary thing, given the correct political situation (ie certain defeat if the prez don't help the israelis attack Iran), the whitehouse will choose war - no matter what the projected cost to anyone, including amerikans, may be.
The other point to ponder is, if it does go down that way, why is notonmyass so desperate? What has him scared? Why the hurry? Is it cause that is the only time amerikan pols can be pressured sufficiently or is it just the zionists believe their own bullshit and are convinced Iran is about to go nuclear. Must be something cause doing that is one big gamble.
As for egypt, libya and syria, I don't believe the plan was ever to replace the existing leaders with a stable administration amenable to amerika. That would always end up with a stable administration sworn to chase the zionists away.
If yer an asshole sociopath as most pols are, having these nations at civil war seems about the best outcome amerikan thugs could hope for.
Posted by: Debs is dead | Sep 12 2012 10:34 utc | 34
Wow US Ambassador was killed along with 3 others (believed to be his bodyguards). /Agree with JohnF the irony is pretty heavy here. Maybe the US will bomb Benghazi a year after condemning Gaddaffi for threatening to bomb Benghazi.
Posted by: Colm O' Toole | Sep 12 2012 10:35 utc | 35
Obama meets his Carter moment and Israel hasn't even bombed Iran.
Libya isn't an 'enemy' country after the 'rebellion' so I don't see what they can do. Any kind of US intervention (drones or whatever) will convert a 'cold' uncontrollable Libya into a hot militia war.
Posted by: ThePaper | Sep 12 2012 10:46 utc | 36
e) there obviously is no military option given Iran's ability to retaliate by threatening Israel and Gulf countries
The Center For Strategic & International Studies came up with a 98 page what-if scenario. Interesting read. They also come to the conclusion that
"[...] a military strike by the Israeli Air Force against Iranian Nuclear Facilities is possible, however, it would be complex and high risk in the operational level and would lack any assurances of a high mission success rate.
Iranian retaliation will have devastating regional consequences. The US expects Israel to be responsible and not to carry out such a strike. [...]"
By the way, congrats B to reaching the 3 million visitor mark. Drinks are on the house I guess? :D
Posted by: Juan Moment | Sep 12 2012 10:54 utc | 37
Debs is dead, do you think Israelis would vote for or Knesset parties would continue to support an Israeli prime minister who has been demonstrated to have no influence in the US?
Posted by: somebody | Sep 12 2012 12:26 utc | 38
A little off topic but still about the yearly 911 fantasy land commemorations. Here in Christchurch N.Z. on the 11th of Sept. (admittedly, only the 10th in the usa and I didn't check todays paper), our daily paper, the ChCh Press, covered the anniversary of 911 with exactly ZERO articles !! I was stunned . . . the ONLY mention was a couple of lines in the "On This Day"in history side bar along with mentions of 1297 - William Wallace and the battle of Stirling Bridge, 1830 - Ecuador becomes a republic, 1928 - first flight across the Tasman Sea. 1998 - Ken Starr tells congress(critters)there are 11 impeachable charges against W.J.C. This is a first . . I'd like to think that just maybe (though unlikely) someone with editorial clout has been woken up to utter impossibility of the official conspiracy theory and has been able to get away with not perpetuating it. One can only live in hope and I'm off to congratulate them on their non brainwashing !!
Posted by: DontNeedNo... | Sep 12 2012 13:05 utc | 40
there is of course also this 9/11
9/11 has been very muted in this country also - and I guess in the US
one reason probably because the policy is dead - Afghanistan and Iraq and Libya and Syria were a failure
another reason officials begin to be in retirement - and free to speak - so more people will talk what they think of it
Posted by: somebody | Sep 12 2012 13:56 utc | 41
@DontNeedNoStinkinUserName
please use another, shorter username. I have to "censure" your long one as it breaks the blogs outline.
Could the film have been released in collusion with the fuckin' garbage that is pushing Romney into the White House? Interesting Romney's premature criticism of the White House's reaction. Whoever released the film, on the anniversary of 9/11, surely did it to incite violence. It plays into the handas of these racist murderous sacks of shit that would love nothing more than to see Romney licking Israeli ass and murdering Muslims while soiling the rugs in the Oval Office. The RW scum have certainly wasted no time drooling over the political hay they can make from these diplomat's deaths. The scum in DC are acting in character, capitalizing despicably during a senseless tragedy. Hang the fucker that produced this film. He is as responsible for this Ambassador's death as the radical Islamist that pulled the rocket launcher's trigger. Does ANYTHING good come out of Washington DC these days? Are these lying corrupt sacks of SHIT the best we can come up with?
Posted by: PissedOffAmerican | Sep 12 2012 16:42 utc | 43
"Bacile posted a 13-minute English-language trailer on YouTube in early July but it was only in the past week that it appears to have caught the attention of combatants in the online culture wars."
Posted by: somebody | Sep 12 2012 16:56 utc | 44
Sorry b didn't realise it was causing a problem - replaced with DontNnSUName . . .how's that
Posted by: DontNnSUName | Sep 12 2012 21:18 utc | 45
Possibly Romney initially made the same mistake I did in my #1 above, not recognizing that the Cairo embassy sympathy message came out before the attacks and not afterward. The message didn't mention any movie; it was generic in nature. But that leads to other questions, like: What precipitated the message? Was there a State Dept. alert? Specifically to Cairo?
The comments to this entry are closed.
The U.S. War on Terror has overwhelmingly targeted Muslims and created Islamophobia, with the term "radical Muslims" regularly used, since the terrorist attacks of September 11 2001.
This has contributed to a poor, and worsening, view of the US by Muslims worldwide. In Egypt currently the US favorability rating is at 19%, down from 22% under Bush. Turkey, Jordan and Pakistan are even worse.
http://www.pewglobal.org/2012/06/13/global-opinion-of-obama-slips-international-policies-faulted/
In Cairo, dozens of protesters climbed the embassy wall and tried to tear the American flag apart after failing to burn it. But the U.S. doesn't get it. This recent flag incident -- was an attack on Muslims!
"The Embassy of the United States in Cairo condemns the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims. . .. We firmly reject the actions by those who abuse the universal right of free speech to hurt the religious beliefs of others"
http://egypt.usembassy.gov/pr091112.html
Posted by: Don Bacon | Sep 11 2012 18:15 utc | 1