Attacks on the American Embassy in Egypt - image CBS News
This morning fromReuters: The U.S. ambassador to Libya and three other embassy staff were killed in a rocket attack on Tuesday in the Libyan city of Benghazi, a Libyan official said.
It was not clear if the ambassador was in his car or the Libyan consulate when the attack occurred.
"The Libyan ambassador and three staff members were killed when gunmen fired rockets at them," the official in Benghazi told Reuters.
A film produced by the U.S. State Department introducing the U.S. Ambassador to Libya, Chris Stevens, is shown below. The naiveté with which the U.S. approaches the region is evidenced in the short film – with Stevens pointing out how our nation allows freedom of (and he should have noted “from”) religion. That is something foreign to the Middle East, where theocracy is the main form of government in Iran, as well as newly formed governments in Egypt and Libya where the Muslim Brotherhood has a strong hand in the governments, or even our allies such as Saudi Arabia where the law is based on the Koran, and women’s rights are non-existent. (Stoning is the preferred method of dealing with immodest women and the LBGT community in the Middle East.)
There was also violence in Egypt, coverage of the day’s events by CBS News – catch the U.S. Response at the end of the report.
Apparently, the excuse for the eruption of violence, was the release of an anti-Muslim film by a group in California, the film had been released to little or no commercial success. The premise of the movie: a ridiculous and badly hatched movie that depicts Mohammad as some sort of nut – violent and erotic – in other words a parody. Fine if one is in the U.S. and free speech, no matter how poorly grafted and/or distasteful, is tolerated – but in Libya and Egypt that is enough “proof” of “anti-Muslim rhetoric” to attack the entire U.S., take over their embassies and kill Americans!
Perhaps, just perhaps, if every time someone of little or no import, a cartoonist, or even journalist, that joked or lampooned, the Pope, was met by millions of angry Catholics storming into the streets, burning the nations flag, and murdering staffer, the cartoonist, or whoever they pleased, this would make sense somehow – but – the only way this does make sense is that once a Theocracy has a foothold in a nation, and their population is undereducated or radical enough to believe a shoddy film produced in the U.S. is representative of all of the U.S., it allows those few at the top of the food chain to gain a firm foothold in the nation – while laying the blame on the “Great Satan” (i.e. the U.S.A.) for the Muslim worlds short-comings. The aforementioned provides the protagonist (General, Ayatollah, et al) an an instant riot, or takeover of an embassy where those staffers are sadly attempting to help these people.
Shades of the Ayatollah and his return to Iran! (See Jimmy Carter, his naive support for the Ayatollah’s return to Iran, and the subsequent U.S. embassy takeover, deaths and hostage situation in Iran in that period.)
Viewing, with a bit of sanity, any organized religion, one finds that the founders made decisions based on attracting a wide range of followers, that there were military, political and, let’s face it, colonization goals involved, with a startling few of those who were basically against such a sham. The fact that most of the Popes were more interested at one point in history in consolidating The Italian State, rather than in promoting Catholicism and its core values is a well known fact. Martin Luther rebelled over what can only be called the “purgatory tax” or a way to fund a war by making up a place called Purgatory, and then charging individuals a sum of cash to insure that they or their relatives did not end up there after death. That worked in the middle ages. Also, it is not a stretch that a general, bent on taking power and controlling a large section of the Middle East, whose plans encompassed the entire world at the time, would band tribes of Bedouins together, write a book, suddenly get “religion” – which was built on the backs of two of the prominent religions of the day – all in order to give the peoples a common thread to bind them together and consulate his power. He accomplished that task – His name was Mohammed. Therefore, today one has Catholics that pray for the souls of the dead trapped in an imaginary purgatory, and Muslims who want to kill infidels to gain entrance into Paradise, and in the meantime, convert the entire planet to the true religion by war and conquest.
(All of the above available in library books, history books, and college course in upper level theocracy and history disciplines – or they were at one time.)
What is mind-boggling is the total lack of coverage of this event by local affiliates on the 11 o’clock news hour last evening. The story broke yesterday afternoon, and when one has an embassy takeover and murder of staff on the anniversary of 9/11, then that is of some interest one would think, to some of the individuals watching?
Perhaps those in control of the breaking news segment passed in this area due to the fact that the very murder of an American in any nation for any reason, might be justified if a flag were involved – No joke, take the City of Amherst, MA for example, where U.S. flags may be flown on 9/11 every 5 days, so that the community won’t be upset by the controversial symbol of the flag!!! - (See Coverage here from local NBC Affiliate: WWLP Springfield. Of course, this is the University of Massachusetts, where one can become a certified SEIU Organizer – the only University that has an advance degree program in - Labor Studies Graduates go on to make hefty salaries, on the backs of union workers, while organizing protests in placed like Wisconsin – Therefore, not reporting on a major event involving a U.S. Embassy, and the death of the Ambassador at the hands of Muslim protestors, might not be considered, normal! Or perhaps, just perhaps, those networks would prefer to keep this one shoved under a rug somewhere.
Consider there are obvious comparison that would and should be made regarding the poor foreign policy choices coming from the Administration and the screamingly similar policy during the Carter Administration. Whereby any honest Historian will admit that the two have too many distinct parallels. To discover: one might read articles from 1977 to 1980 and find more than a few decisions that are comparable.
This act of violence, murder and mayhem in the name of Allah, will of course, go unanswered, as it was in 1980. Or it may be “strongly condemned” by the U.S. Administration. It must be seriously tiring for Hillary Clinton, Secretary of State to tow the party line in these instances. One can hazard to guess, as the number of 3 am calls have piled up over the years and that those individuals claiming to be fighting for Democracy while installing a Theocracy in the Middle East would not have dared to do so under a Clinton administration. It sends a message to the millions of baby boomers who got out the vote for Reagan in 1979, and are "very enthusiastic" regarding this years election.
No comments:
Post a Comment