Secretary Clinton Calls Attack “Savage,” with Film Uproar Leaving Foreign Service Heroes Dead in Benghazi
AS AMERICA commemorated 9/11, all hell broke loose in Egypt and Libya with protests and militants attacking, leaving one American diplomat confirmed dead, over a film that is directly targeting the Muslim faith, which is directed and produced by Sam Bacile, who calls Islam “a cancer,” saying “The movie is a political movie. It’s not a religious movie.”
Today, Secretary Clinton called the attacks “savage.”
Mitt Romney, today, doubled down on his statement last night, attacking President Obama while making the case for his own candidacy.
Max Fisher of The Atlantic has confirmed through Kurt Wurthmuller, whom Fisher describes as a Coptic specialist at the Hudson Institute, that the clip above is authentic.
@max_fisher @tom_d_ 4 minutes in and I don’t think they’ve said the title yet, but the opening scene is a doozy.
— Liam Stack (@liamstack) September 11, 2012
The film is being promoted by the infamous Terry Jones, the man responsible for the Afghanistan uprising after he threatened to burn a Koran. Also involved are a few conservative Coptic Christians in the U.S., though the church itself condemned the film, with Morris Sadek, leader of one group of U.S. Coptics, telling the Wall Street Journal, “The violence that it caused in Egypt is further evidence of how violent the religion and people are and it is evidence that everything in the film is factual.”
Coptic Christians are a minority in Egypt and subject to violence and persecution.
From the Wall Street Journal, which is a must read report:
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.
[...] Hours after nightfall, dozens of young men remained standing on top of the embassy walls, shouting into megaphones. One of the youths climbed up the flagpole to hoist a black banner emblazoned with the Muslim profession of faith in white letters—”There is no God but God and Muhammad is His Messenger”—a standard used by hardline Islamist groups throughout the world.
[...] The flashpoint appeared to be the film about the Prophet Muhammad, portions of which in recent days have been circulating on the Internet. Contravening the Islamic prohibition of portraying the prophet, clips from the film show him not only as flesh and blood—but as a homosexual son of undetermined patrimony, who rises to advocate child slavery and extramarital sex, for himself, in the name of religion.
The U.S. Embassy in Cairo released an apology, as did the Coptic Church, citing “efforts by misguided individuals to try to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims,” which the White House disavowed to Politico, reported by Byron Tau.
“The statement by Embassy Cairo was not cleared by Washington and does not reflect the views of the United States government,” a senior administration official told POLITICO.
The U.S. Embassy has now deleted multiple tweets, including the one stating they stood by their statement.
The Embassy statement quickly (and predictably) caused a firestorm on the right, with Charles Krauthammer going off on FNC, saying he’d issue “a statement saying to the mob ‘Go to hell!’”
Twitter exploded in insults directed at President Obama, invoking former President Jimmy Carter, which Krauthammer set up by stating the Embassy has released “a hostage statement.”
Coming from a contagion of reporting, the Egyptians yelled “There is no god but Allah and Mohammed is his messenger,” while storming the embassy wall in fury, which is a known militant cry from true believers.
Meanwhile in Libya, from New York Times stringer on the ground, Liam Stack, re-tweeted “the US consulate in #Benghazi being looted,” reported late last night.
This came after the American Ambassador Chris Stevens was shot and killed in the consulate, as was ten-year veteran Sean Smith, and two others, as looting and burning of the building began.
The film’s creator Mr. Bacile posted a trailer of the film in July, but it wasn’t until recently when clerics started condemning it that the furor spread.
“Obama! Obama! We are all Osama!” was heard being chanted, according to the Wall Street Journal.
The harrowing drama all unfolded on 9/11, as Americans were commemorating the attacks eleven years ago to the day.
Taylor Marsh, a veteran political analyst and former Huffington Post contributor, is the author of The Hillary Effect, available at Barnes and Noble and on Amazon. Her new-media blog www.taylormarsh.com covers national politics, women and power.
Share This
Related Posts
-
‘Having Sown the Wind … America Reaps the Whirlwind’ – Iraqi and Jordanian Reactions to Boston
Posted on Apr 18, 2013
-
NRA Liars and Congressional Cowards
Posted on Apr 18, 2013
-
After Boston, Washington’s Next Moves will be Telling (La Jornada, Mexico)
Posted on Apr 17, 2013
-
Will Americans Learn the Right Lesson from Boston Bombings? (Sotal Iraq, Iraq)
Posted on Apr 16, 2013
Honestly, the film could very well be taken – even by moderate Muslims – to be offensive. RADICAL POLITICIZED Islam is a cancer. Islam, the religion itself, is not the problem. And anyone who suggests as much by painting with as broad a brush as Hitler once did to the Jews is just asking for trouble. This Bacile character put our people at risk and should at least be called upon by Congress to explain himself.
Then the Romney campaign has the audacity to call out Obama as if somehow he was involved on all levels of responses that occurred… this stinks of desperation. More and more, the Romney campaign solidifies my vote for Obama. And then further calls upon me to make sure I tell as many people as possible to vote for Obama. And I’m not a HUGE Obama fan by any measure.
Bacile should have to explain himself to Congress? Seriously, think about what you just said. While that movie is pure crap and likely intended to inflame muslims, he’s well within his 1st amendment rights to make it and put it out there. You want an American to be held responsible because those in other nations can’t be expected to control their emotions whenever they get offended? Give me a break. We in the modern world understand about freedom of speech. It is the Muslim world that seems to have a problem with the modern age and I think it is absurd that we have to pussyfoot around their backwards responses to anything they have a problem with.
Hear, hear, slamfu.
Look, there are plenty of good Catholics out there, but do we need to have a film on You Tube produced by a Muslim, describing and illustrating the activities the old popes like Alexander Borgia, the inquisition, the ignoring of the Jewish plight in general AND then saying that the church is an evil cesspool and other slanderous remarks on the order of this guy’s film.
If we had the equivalent of an AQ, that was comprised of Catholics, would they not start attacking the filmmaker and his supporters. Maybe not as violent as these attacks, but could be nasty.
But there isn’t a Catholic equivalent of AQ, dduck. I’m not saying that i like anti-Catholic screeds anymore than I like the anti-Islamic stuff that is being condemned here. The problem though is that we have to defend freedom of speech for all of it because once that principle is compromised there is no getting it back.
I mean there is a lot of venom spewed at the Catholic Church as it is, and as a Catholic living in a pluralistic society I wouldn’t have it any other way. Shudder the thought of having Bill Donahue the right to decide what can or can’t be published on the topic. He has a right to his own rebuttals but he can’t be given the right to invoke censorship. And here we’re only talking about someone who bloviates, while in the Islamist situation we’re dealing with murder in an attempt to extort censorship. Ridiculous to even consider that as far as I’m concerned.
Of course Bacile has the RIGHT to make the film, but was it intelligent to purposefully inflame an already angry group of radical Islamists??
There is a difference between having the right to do something and using good judgement. While nothing was done illegally, imo Bacile exercised poor judgement. Apparently now, he has gone into hiding due to numerous death threats.
I agree, bluebelle.
BB, There is poor judgement and then there is overt, premeditated judgement to incite violence or harm. Again, think of yelling fire in a crowded theater.
CS, The fact that there is no equivalent of a Catholic AQ, currently, means that making a film as inflammatory as this one would not do as much potential harm.
However, we know from the reaction to the Danish cartoons, that the Muslims are not as tolerant as we are in the West and that they would be violent.
I know it is impractical for You Tube to screen every submission, but I’m sure they do it for child pornography. Are they censoring with that. You bet.
more poignantly, to potentially start another war in our times between two faiths, such a film would not be about the inquisition etc, it would be about the slaughter-crusades against muslims and visa versa. A sad and horrible history when popes were driven by their own ugly ambitions to be kings and live in splendor, and various muslim leaders were invaders to take the lands of now eastern europe and elsewhere. ALL were war mongers. It had NOTHING to do with ‘the one true faith.’ That was pope’s central propaganda slogan to incite the poor and the ignorant, to rouse mercenary armies to go kill and die ‘for the faith.’ Makes any reasoned person want to throw up to read the ease with which peaceful people were mowed down by both sides and for years on end. Pogroms were not just against the jewish believers.
The douche has every right to make a terrible film. Did he want to insight rage and anger? Probably, but I assume that he thought they would just kill each other, not go after an ambassador. I am sure he is thinking twice about his career in film. As for censoring ourselves out of fear…no thanks.
We all pay the consequences of our actions– is that the same thing as censoring ourselves out of fear?? Maybe. There are some things worth being afraid of that should be considered when exercising our priceless right of free speech. Romney exercised his right to free speech last night without knowing all the facts, inflaming an already delicate situation. I’ll defend his right to do it but condemn the fact that he was either unaware or unconcerned about how it would look to the Libyans or the rest of the ME where such rights are unheard of.
There are many instances in our country when free speech is exercised with a harmful effect– at a KKK rally for instance.
Both the filmmaker and the candidate were irresponsible and should accept the consequences.
his film career is over shannon-lee. If ever he had one. His material will go into the archive kept for “father” coughlin (sp?), mcCarthy hearings, rants by various dictators against various religious groups.
Most of us, even those we don’t like or agree with, self censor not out of fear but out of common decency, self-respect, honor and what we each hold to be the ‘right’ thing to do.
You can hold those who did the actually killing 100% responsible but it appears (though not all facts are in) that the people that financed and produced this movie had only one thing in mind when they made it… To create more hatred and disruption in our already troubled world.
They accomplished their goal… May they all rot in hell.
npr reported on the steven jones pastor from florida used this film to flame muslims . he is in the middle of this.
kindle post
A couple of thoughts to add:
1) The attack (with rocket-propelled grenades) on the consulate in Benghazi virtually HAD to be a preplanned attack. Random citizens don’t go out into the streets to protest an obscure film thinking, “Hey, I should take my RPG with me, just in case.” Not even in Libya would that happen.
2) The crowds in Libya, Egypt, Yemen (and I heard that Tunisia may also be out there now) played right into Pastor Jones’ and Bacile’s hands. The film claimed that Muslims were violent. The film purposely incited said Muslims. Said Muslims reacted violently. Not a smart move on the part of the Muslim faithful. A very insidiously clever move on the part of Jones and Bacile.
3) As for movies (and incendiary speech) leveled at the Catholic Church: where have you people been? That stuff was virtually standard fare with the Loraine Bettner crowd. The Catholic Church has had persecutors since its inception. The early Church leaders told their parishioners to pray for their persecutors.
4) The same people who are protesting this film probably have kids watching the cartoons that depict a (hero) boy who becomes a suicide bomber killing random Israeli soldiers (‘cuz, you know, they are all guilty of all the crimes ever committed by any Jews anywhere).
5) My Catholic faith tells me that it is wrong to incite people to violence. It is wrong to purposely hurt their feelings via insults and such. The only place where chastisement is warranted it when one is trying to improve a friend’s behavior.
6) Romney’s response is beyond stupidity. He claimed that Obama did exactly the opposite of what Obama did. He then laid out a program of what Obama ‘should’ have done. Which is what Obama did, in fact, do. Does this mean that Romney is now an Obama supporter?
Ok, here’s the wannabe Tom Clancy in me speaking.
AQ can’t get into flight schools anymore (I hope) so they take a quickie “Filmaking For Dummies” book or course.
I always felt that Iran has among the best intelligence services in the world and did a lot of disinformation leading up to the Iraq invasion, so I’m going to suggest them or AQ as the people behind the film.
Next, cozy up to locos like TJ and haters of Islam like Steve Klein. Rope them into thinking they are making a anti-Islamic film, and presto chango you can get money, organization and promotion of the film. And you used Americans against Americans.
Next, get really inflammatory stuff dubbed into the mouths of the actors who also were conned into thinking this was a story of ancient desert life, or whatever.
Produce a version dubbed in Arabic, have your people push hard on the 9/11 anniversary, where there are protests, agitate the crowd, have a planned well armed assault, as in Libya and sit back and watch the results on CNN.
Cairo, was probably a spontaneous protest and thankfully didn’t, or couldn’t, turn into a bloodbath.
Tom, we miss you.
I’m sorry if you don’t like my suggestion of a Congressional hearing – just figured that if we can hold hearings about steroid use in baseball, that a hearing over such a thing as this film (if it was indeed the catalyst some claim it was) might fall into more appropriate actions for Congress. Sure, this guy has freedom-of-speech, but if the intent for this film was to rile up extremists, should he not be held somehow accountable for the actions that result? Much like the example of screaming “Fire!” in a crowded building.
And to be clear: any and every damn person who attacked our embassy deserves to be iced in a not-so-pleasant fashion.
I am not saying that they don’t deserve the blame for the actions committed. That said, whether it be a plot by AQ or by extremist Christians in our own country, such a film produced to elicit a certain response (as historically can be demonstrated would/could occur) – and if it is indeed deemed to have played a significant role in this event – should be investigated and perhaps categorized in such a way that might incentivize a site like YouTube to block access or delete it.
Okay, SState, if I am understanding you then:
You are suggesting that Congressional ‘investigation’ into whether or not the makers were attempting to cause international riots would be appropriate? I guess that would be a legitimate (if somewhat misguided) point of view. In that case, the FBI (or CIA if it was produced internationally, as does not seem to be the case) would be the correct agency to investigate any possible wrong-doing. When Congress investigated the use of steroids in MLB, they were investigating acts that were known to be illegal, trying to discern just how widespread they were.
If Congress believed that the makers of the film were part of a large organization that intended to get their members to continue making inflammatory films, that might be a legitimate use of Congressional time. They are not law enforcement (that is the Justice Department’s job, under the Presidential Administration). The inquiries that Congress makes are typically for purposes other than trying to act as the Grand Jury to produce charges.
Yes, let’s get some more information and facts before deciding on any course of action.