RUTHFULLY YOURS

http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/detail/apologizing-to-our-enemies

All Presidents are hostages to events. It is, however, the manner in which they respond that shapes their outcome.
By the afternoon of September 11, the Obama administration scrambled to disavow a statement to the assault on the U.S. embassy in Cairo that had been issued by the embassy.

The statement said, “The Embassy of the United States in Cairo condemns the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims-as we condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions.”

“Misguided individuals”?

“The statement by Embassy Cairo was not cleared by Washington and does not reflect views of the United States government” an unnamed administration official told Politico.

But the statement did reflect the Obama administration’s views as expressed repeatedly over the years. Indeed, in condemning the killing of the U.S. Ambassador to Libya and his staff, issued on September 12, was repeated in President Obama’s statement. “While the United States rejects efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others, we must all unequivocally oppose the senseless violence that took the lives of these public services.”

The attacks, deliberately timed to coincide with the eleventh anniversary of the worst attack on the U.S. homeland since Pearl Harbor on 9/11, the administration made no effort to connect them. It made no effort to explain to Americans that this nation is at war with Islam, a war made manifest in Afghanistan following 9/11, pursued against the dictator Saddam Hussein, and which the President himself has been personally carrying out with drone attacks on al Qaeda leaders in Yemen and in Pakistan; a war personified in the ten-year effort to find and kill Osama bin Laden.

It was a war declared by Iran when, in 1979, Islamist revolutionaries scaled the walls of the American embassy in Tehran and took our diplomats hostage for 444 days until releasing them the same day Ronald Reagan took the oath of office for his first term in office. He would later order an attack on Moammar Gaddafi, the dictator of Libya after he sponsored terrorist attacks carried out against American targets in Germany and the bombing of an airliner over Great Britain carrying Americans. Gaddafi sued for peace.

If Obama had announced that the proposed funding to Egypt would not be sent, nor similar support for the nascent Libyan government that replaced Gaddafi then, at the very least, a message would have been sent that we will not support governments that stand aside when such attacks occur.

http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/09/12/americas-top-soldier-calls-on-pastor-to-stop-supporting-badly-produced-movie/
America’s Top Soldier Calls on Obscure Pastor to Stop Supporting Badly Produced Movie

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Gen. Martin Dempsey today called Florida Pastor Terry Jones and urged him to withdraw his support for a film that allegedly insults Islam.

“In the brief call, Gen. Dempsey expressed his concerns over the nature of the film, the tensions it will inflame and the violence it will cause,” Dempsey’s spokesman, Colonel Dave Lapan, told Reuters.

“He asked Mr. Jones to consider withdrawing his support for the film.”

The film has been blamed for attacks on US interests in Egypt and Libya, but in fact had nothing to do with either attack, as the top soldier in the US armed forces surely knows by now.

Gen. Dempsey’s call was a PR stunt designed to show the Islamic world that the US government takes jihadist threats more seriously than it takes American citizens’ rights to free speech.

The top soldier in America’s armed forces has deliberately chilled free speech and has violated the oath he took when he entered the armed forces, to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. He has also elevated an obscure, fringe preacher to a powerful position impacting US foreign policy.

The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs is, in other words, an idiot.

http://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2012/09/13/death-of-ambassador-stevens/?singlepage=true

While the mainstream media was occupying itself Wednesday decrying Mitt Romney’s forthright reaction to the carnage in Cairo and Benghazi, their putative bellwether, the New York Times, ironically was busy exposing the real story [1]. It’s clear now that if there is a disgrace in what happened at the Benghazi consulate, it has nothing at all to do with Romney and everything to do with our State Department, its chief Hilary Clinton, and her boss Barack Obama.

Here’s the NYT:

The wave of unrest set off by the video, posted online in the United States two months ago and dubbed into Arabic for the first time eight days ago, has further underscored the instability of the countries that cast off their longtime dictators in the Arab Spring revolts. It also cast doubt on the adequacy of security preparations at American diplomatic outposts in the volatile region.

Benghazi, awash in guns, has recently witnessed a string of assassinations as well as attacks on international missions, including a bomb said to be planted by another Islamist group that exploded near the United States Consulate there as recently as June. But a Libyan politician who had breakfast with Mr. Stevens at the mission the morning before he was killed described security as sorely inadequate for an American ambassador in such a tumultuous environment, consisting primarily of four video cameras and as few as four Libyan guards.

“This country is still in transition, and everybody knows the extremists are out there,” said Fathi Baja, the Libyan politician.

http://pjmedia.com/spengler/2012/09/12/when-do-we-get-to-attack-obamas-character/?print=1

Barack Obama is not a bad man, just a bad president, Mitt Romney said in his acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention, echoing the self-characterization of the Wizard of Oz. The political pros advise against it, and with well-studied reasons. Responding to a question of this genre at a political conference some months ago, Karl Rove explained that if you attack Obama personally, you make all the people who voted for him feel badly. The way to get people to do what you want, by contrast, is to make people feel good about themselves. Politics is the art of flattering the voters, and that is just what Romney did: he told the voters that they had every right in the world to feel good when they voted for Obama, and they should vote against him now because the best feeling they had about Obama was then they voted for him.

I am not a candidate’s handler, though, and have no aspirations to be one. I don’t dispute Karl Rove’s competence or second-guess Romney’s speech writers. Like most conservatives, I was disgusted by the Obama administration’s apology for a hitherto unnoticed YouTube video. Obama is the first American president who truly dislikes the United States and blames its hegemonic position for most of the world’s troubles.

Almost a year before the 2008 election I characterized then-candidate Obama as a third-world anthropologist profiling us. There’s nothing in American culture with which to compare him, which is what makes him dangerous: he is an invasive pest with no natural enemies. He bears comparison to the carnival mentalist played by Tyrone Power, Jr. in Nightmare Alley, but his motivations are ideological rather than pecuniary.

How is it possible that we elected a president who embraces the Muslim Brotherhood, and who has thrown under the bus not just Israel, but all of America’s Middle Eastern allies? I addressed the issue in an essay published in Asia Times Online on Feb. 26, 2008, reposted below. Its major omission is the role of Valerie Jarrett, Obama’s Senior Counselor and general factotum. Otherwise I stand by the thesis.

* * * * *Obama’s Women Reveal His Secret

“Cherchez la femme,” advised Alexander Dumas in: “When you want to uncover an unspecified secret, look for the woman.” In the case of Barack Obama, we have two: his late mother, the went-native anthropologist Ann Dunham, and his rancorous wife Michelle. Obama’s women reveal his secret: he hates America.

We know less about Senator Obama than about any prospective president in American history. His uplifting rhetoric is empty, as Hillary Clinton helplessly protests. His career bears no trace of his own character, not an article for the Harvard Law Review he edited, or a single piece of legislation. He appears to be an empty vessel filled with the wishful thinking of those around him. But there is a real Barack Obama. No man — least of all one abandoned in infancy by his father — can conceal the imprint of an impassioned mother, or the influence of a brilliant wife.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444017504577647282515841336.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEFTSecond

“But as events keep reminding us, there is the world outside Mr. Romney’s comfort zone—outside of the subject of the economy and the failures of the Obama administration to alleviate unemployment. In the debates ahead, and what’s left of the campaign, he’ll have to address matters like national security and foreign policy in depth, and do so with a conviction that shows a willingness to take a stand whatever the cost in votes from this group or that. That cost will be all the greater if he does not.”

Four American diplomats, including U.S. Ambassador to Libya, Christopher Stevens, were killed Tuesday (and several others were wounded) in the attacks on U.S. consular offices in Libya and Egypt, all at the hands of the devout mobs wreaking their vengeance over a U.S.- made film that they declared insulting to Mohammed.

At the U.S. embassy in Cairo, where the attackers scaled the walls unimpeded—while Egyptian police stood peacefully by doing nothing—the crowds tore down the American flag and chanted ominous warnings to “Worshippers of the Cross.” In a statement dazzling for its cravenness, the embassy denounced “the continuing effort by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims” and declared that the U.S. rejected “those who abuse the universal right of free speech to hurt the religious beliefs of others.”

With news of the attacks spreading last night, Mitt Romney issued a statement blasting the obsequious embassy response—no small relief to those supporters of his candidacy who have nearly given up all hope that they could hear a few words from Mr. Romney on national security and foreign policy. Words that would speak for his willingness to take a stand on issues that might cost him with those undecided voters he yearns to win. Issues, that is, other than the ones in the steel-rimmed comfort zone where he and his chief advisers have apparently decided he should remain for the duration. Thanks to such decisions, the Republican presidential candidate managed to avoid all mention of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and the achievements of the U.S. military in the course of the convention in Tampa. As did the vice presidential candidate and virtually every speaker.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443884104577647282429229736.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop

“Mr. Obama also came to office saying, and apparently believing, that a more deferential America would be better respected around the world. He will finish his term having disproved his own argument. The real lesson of the last four years—a lesson as much for Republican isolationists as for Democrats who want to lead from behind—is the ancient one that weakness is provocative.”
The New World Disorder As the U.S. retreats, bad actors begin to fill the vacuum.

By their nature, foreign policy problems often have a long fuse. The successes of one Administration (Truman, Reagan) sometimes don’t pay off for years (Bush 41), while dangers can simmer until they suddenly explode (al Qaeda). The Obama Presidency has been an era of slowly building tension and disorder that seems likely to flare into larger troubles and perhaps even military conflict no matter who wins in November.

This is the bigger picture behind this week’s public fight between the U.S. and Israel, as well as the anti-American violence in Cairo and Benghazi. In the Persian Gulf, across the Arab Spring and into the Western Pacific, the U.S. is perceived as a declining power. As that perception spreads, the world’s bad actors are asserting themselves to fill the vacuum, and American interests and assets will increasingly become targets unless the trend is reversed.

The Administration can’t be blamed for the 9/11 anniversary attack in Benghazi, which was an act of terrorism by anti-American Islamists that wasn’t stopped by a weak new government. Chris Stevens, the first U.S. Ambassador killed abroad in 33 years, was one of America’s most capable diplomats who was deeply engaged in the post-Gadhafi transition. Libya’s government has condemned the attack, and one test of its desire for close U.S. ties will be whether it punishes the perpetrators.

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/09/911_-_the_international_day_of_jihad.html On 9/11/12, somehow the existence of an unknown movie provoked the worst sort of protests and the U.S. Ambassador to Libya was pulled out of his car, dragged through the streets, and brutally murdered. The video has gone viral throughout the Middle East and the same people who cheered the 9/11 bombings rejoiced once […]

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/09/jihad_denial.html

The events of 9/11/12 should make obvious to even more Americans that Islamists dedicated to jihad by any and all means, not only control many Middle Eastern countries, they also enjoy wide popular support. But there are certain species of Americans who cannot let themselves believe that there actually is a sizable group of people in the world who want to conquer us and subject us to life under Sharia Law.

Many of these jihad denialists are liberals, but far from all of them are. Diana West makes savage fun of Senators McCain, Graham, and Leiberman, whom she terms Tweedles Dum, Dum, and Dee, for their almost painful reiteration of the blind faith that a majority of Middle Eastern Muslims sincerely want democracy, and if only they get it, they will forget what the Quran and the clergy tell them is their duty as Muslims. On her eponymous blog, blog she quotes and comments on their joint statement on events ion Libya and Egypt:

“Despite this horrific attack, we cannot give in to the temptation to believe that our support for the democratic aspirations of people in Libya, Egypt, and elsewhere in the broader Middle East is naive or mistaken.

We cannot resign ourselves to the false belief that the Arab Spring is doomed to be defined not by the desire for democracy and freedom that has inspired millions of people to peaceful action, but by the dark fanaticism of terrorists.”

Notice it’s all about them. Evidence of their error in supporting al Qaeda-Muslim-Brother-generic-jihad revolutions across the Arab world is penetrating the collective dome, but they are trying to resist with all of their might. What we are looking at is textbook, Psych 101 denial.

There’s more. Read it all.

http://www.americanthinker.com/printpage/?url=http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/../2012/09/mrs_clinton_and_american_sensibilities.html

In an effort to protect the delicate sensibilities of Egyptian rioters who invaded the American Embassy and tore down the American flag, Secretary of State Clinton accepted at face value the claim that the rioters were just so outraged and horrified by an anti-Muslim movie that they couldn’t control themselves. While rejecting violence in a pro forma way (“There is never any justification…”), she went on to apologize for her nasty countrymen and to deplore them. “We condemn the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims.” Later, on the State Department Twitter feed, “The U.S. deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of others.” And, “Our commitment to religious tolerance goes back to the very beginning of our nation.”

As does our Constitutional commitment to free speech, including and especially speech that offends someone. Americans should have two words for Secretary Clinton: “Piss Christ.” If you can’t make yourself say them, try “Skokie.”

In 1987, American Andres Serranno produced a photograph of a plastic crucifix in a glass of his own urine. His work was funded in part by the U.S. Government’s National Endowment for the Arts.

A decade earlier, members of the National Socialist Party wanted to march in full Nazi regalia in Skokie, IL — home to a large number of Holocaust survivors. In a series of court actions, Skokie lawyers argued that, for Holocaust survivors, seeing a swastika was the equivalent of a physical attack. The Illinois Supreme Court disagreed, calling the swastika a symbolic form of free speech entitled to the protection of the First Amendment.

“Piss Christ” and Skokie are metaphors for the First Amendment right to hurt people’s feelings. Americans are told to suck it up and shut up. “Sticks and stones,” “If you don’t like it, lump it,” and all that.

As a practical matter, Secretary Clinton’s acceptance of the movie as instigator of the riots reeks of naiveté. Did it not occur to her that a purported offense against Islam might be a smoke screen for well-planned violence? Later press reports suggest that to be the case. Did she think radical Muslims don’t know that Americans generally hasten to be seen as sensitive to the feelings of others? The best defense is a good offense — “You Americans insulted us.” They read her like a book.

Did it not occur to her that the anniversary of 9-11 would be a great time for Islamic enemies of the United States to launch another attack on a symbolic American target? They can’t reach New York perhaps (thank you, NYPD and the Patriot Act), but an American Embassy is sovereign American soil.

Of the killing of the U.S. Ambassador to Libya, Chris Stevens, and three other Americans, she said, “This is an attack that should shock the conscience of people of all faiths around the world.” Muslims included, no doubt, but why only “people of faith?” Can’t an ethical atheist be horrified?

http://news.yahoo.com/actress-says-duped-anti-islam-film-details-emerge-075312258.html

OH PULEEZ! IT WAS NOT THE STUPID FILM….THIS WAS SO DELIBERATELY ORCHESTRATED AS AN EXCUSE TO VENT JIHADIST RAGE IN ALL THE ARAB COUNTRIES…..RSK
Actress says was duped, as anti-Islam film details emergeBy Alex Dobuzinskis

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) – The origins of a crudely made anti-Muslim movie that sparked violent protests in Egypt and Libya began to slowly emerge on Wednesday, with an actress in the California production saying she was duped and was unaware it was about the Prophet Mohammad.

Cindy Lee Garcia of Bakersfield, California, who appears briefly in clips of the film posted online, said she answered a casting call last year to appear in a movie titled “Desert Warrior.”

“It looks so unreal to me, it’s like nothing that we even filmed was there. There was all this weird stuff there,” Garcia told Reuters in a phone interview.

Clips of the movie, posted on YouTube under several titles including “Innocence of Muslims,” portrayed the Muslim prophet engaged in crude and offensive behavior. Many Muslims consider any depiction of the prophet as blasphemous.