Pages Menu
Categories Menu

Posted by on Sep 12, 2012 in International | 31 comments

US Ambassador Killed as Libya Mob Storms Embassy

US envoy killed as Libya mob storms embassy (via AFP)

Washington’s envoy to Libya and three other Americans were killed when a mob outraged over a movie mocking Islam stormed the US consulate in Benghazi, Libyan and US officials said on Wednesday. President Barack Obama quickly ordered increased security at US diplomatic posts around the world, while…

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2012 The Moderate Voice
  • slamfu

    BECAUSE OF A MOVIE?!!!? I am just speechless.

  • An over-reaction? Absolutely, slamfu, but given the reaction to the drawing of Mohammed a few years back with the turban as a bomb, I can’t see how this Bacile character expected anything better. I am frankly not surprised at all. But I won’t say simply that Islam is the problem. It’s the radical Muslims themselves that are the problems as well as the governments that don’t seek to quell their anger.

  • dduck

    I don’t think the fact that these attacks took place on 9/11/12, is a coincidence.
    AQ, would be my guess as the instigator/coordinator.
    Slam, you have to accept the fact that some people, especially immature younger ones, have very strong feelings about the prophet and Islam, and can either be spontaneously violent against the Great Satan (the west, Israel, and the U.S.)or be inflamed by others to commit this kind of violence.

  • slamfu

    Yes, I understand that, and I think it says a lot about them. People want to act like this is a limited event but its not. You ever see the South Park episodes that covered Mohammed? They really hit the nail on the head. They were going to show him at the end of an episode not long after the Danish cartoons. Instead, they showed Jesus, who had explosive diarrhea on the American flag and then set it on fire. They explained that was because if they showed Mohammed people were just frankly going to die somewhere. But that they could show.

    This is an absolute outrage and should not go unpunished. There is an institutional problem in Islam today, just as there was an institutional problem with the Catholic Church in the middle ages. And also today if you are a young boy in all too many cases. To pretend that this is just some minor blowing off of steam by a few obscure cases fails to take in the mountain of violent evidence and outrageous behavior done in the name of Islam and either explicitly or tacitly condoned by the “church” of Islam in the middle east.

    My favorite example so far today, Karzai coming out to condemn the “outrage”. He was speaking of the movie of course, not the storming of embassies.

  • dduck

    Slam, being a suspicious type, I can’t believe that a film with trailers going back to July (if I am correct), suddenly sparked these incidents. I am hoping that this is AQ or other fringe terrorist group and not a “institutional problem”.

    Meantime, I wish the internet would be more careful with explosive propaganda like this film and TJ would shut up, because there are zealots and easily incitable people out there. Religious tolerance would also be nice.

  • It wasn’t just “the internet”, it was this asshat:

    — Burning Korans
    — Hanging out with fascists
    — Anti-sharia law soapboxer
    — Intolerant miscreant

    Blood is on this guy’s hands, too. We should ship his butt to Libya and let them deal with him.

  • Willwright

    I doubt it but wonder if the people who put this video out could be sued by the families of the dead. When they put this trash out didn’t they think it could incite a violent reaction? You could argue they well knew what would happen and were deliberately inciting violence.
    If you agree with the logic then these people are partly responsible and libel for what happened.

    I think in this country it’s just a matter time before some awful attack takes place by people acting on what they read on the Internet or heard on talk radio. My guess if it can shown that they resorted to violence based on this then the people who put out what was read or heard will be held at least partly liable for the carnage. The only positive out of this is that there would be a lot less of type of programming and material around. That which remained would have to be toned down to avoid more suits.

  • CStanley

    Yeah, when a murder occurs, clearly the murderers shouldn’t be held solely responsible. How could they possibly help themselves?

  • I agree CStanley. Murderers don’t need Internet or talk radio motivation. They can use it as an excuse to murder. But once their mind is made up, they going to do it unless stopped.

  • Willwright

    I’m not saying the people who did the deed aren’t responsible as well, just in cases where the violence was incited the people doing the inciting certainly share in the blame. There are many examples where radio, the written word have been used to incite violence. If one of these right wing talkers mentioned Obama is coming to town next week to campaign and then said the station is having a special promotion giving away free ammo would that possibly be inciting violence? Probably not unless something bad happened. Unfortunately I think something bad is going to have to happen before things change.

  • dduck

    You are correct, WW.

  • CStanley

    @ TSteel: yes, a murderous person or group doesn’t require incitement, but I think even more to the point is the converse: a peaceful and moral person or group will not respond to verbal insults or incitement by becoming violent.

  • Yeah, when a murder occurs, clearly the murderers shouldn’t be held solely responsible. How could they possibly help themselves?

    What Will says. It is especially true when people intentionally incite others to violence.

    Actually, let me be truthful. I hate Terry Jones and everything he stands for. If I can pin this on his sorry excuse for a soul, then I don’t care what truth needs to be stretched. He is a complete and total scumbag and intentionally so and needs to meet his Maker so he can explain himself. >:(o)

  • Willwright

    I lived Peru for a while and remember an incident where a local radio broadcast that local children were being murdered and placed in local mine to increase it’s yield. Enraged villagers attacked the mine causing a lot of damage. The problem finally resolved itself when all children were accounted and none were missing. Obviously there something wrong when people believe such nonsense. In this case most of the villagers were illiterate. Don’t know if this is the case in Libya but suspect it is. Does this relieve them of responsibility? No, but it may help explain this kind of violence over something as trivial as a badly made video.

  • dduck

    How many people have swung from trees in our country because of false accusations.
    How many mobs have beaten and killed people after being incited.
    How many witches were burned at Salem.
    How many crusades were launched to protect the “true faith”.
    How many Jews were killed because they killed Jesus or started a plague.

  • CStanley

    Sorry but i think you guys are conflating a whole lot of unrelated things. Whatever one’s opinion about incitement by spreading false information, that is a different thing than incitement by insulting someone. Think about it….an analogy that seems implied by your comments might be the murder of Dr. Tiller. The implication is that groups that use incendiary language about abortion contributed by inciting someone to think that Dr. Tiller deserved to be killed.

    But to make that situation more analogous it would have been like Dr. Tiller getting offended that he was called a baby killer, so he goes and blows up an office of Operation Rescue. Do you see my point, and would tou still in such an instance say that the speech that incited violence should be blamed for the murders?

  • Willwright

    CStanley, good points and shows how difficult it to draw the line between free speech and irresponsible incitement. My guess the people who put out the video had a pretty good idea what could happen. Do they have the right to put out this garbage? They probably do in most circumstances regardless of the consequences. My guess is that if the violence had occurred on U.S. soil and the inciters were in Libya we might be discussing the need to extradite those responsible for trial in the U.S. I wonder if anybody overthere is thinking of asking for video makers to stand trial there. If this ever happened these folks would think long and hard before ever making another video. I think these people feel they can do this today with inpunity. We’ll never be completely rid of morons like these. It’s part of the cost of living in a free society.

  • CStanley

    I am flabbergasted at the degree to which you are focusing on the need to tamp down on provocative speech rather than the need to hold people responsible for violent axions including murder

  • The_Ohioan

    I don’t think we should proceed to turn a situation on it’s head in order to produce a spurious analogy. The facts here are still murky and anyone who is confused about how free speech can be used to irresponsibly incite anger, and possibly eventual violent action, has only to listen to FOX news today (it’s still continuing as of this hour). Where money or power is involved, there seem to be no ethical bounds that cannot be crossed.

    I have no doubt that Sept. 11 demonstrations were planned, they have been executed for several years now, and if this video hadn’t been used, another would have. They are all over the internet as anyone who is interested could find. The fact that there were several rioters with RPG’s available leaves no doubt that this was planned to discredit the current Lybian authorities, but perhaps the consequences were more dire than expected – or not.

    What puzzles me is that, as in the Iran situation, they could capture and hold hostages for a much greater influence on our political process – what is stopping them?

  • CStanley

    At any rate, it appears that the deadly Libyan attack had little or nothing to do with the movie anyway:

    It was apparently planned as revenge for US killing an al Qaeda leader

  • Willwright

    September 12, 2012

    I am flabbergasted at the degree to which you are focusing on the need to tamp down on provocative speech rather than the need to hold people responsible for violent axions including murder

    Sorry, I’m not trying to let the murderers off the hook. My only point is that if it was in fact the video that caused the violence then the makers share responsibility. From you last comment this may not be the case. As its been said the details are still murky.

  • CStanley

    Well we just fundamentally disagree, WW. Even if the killers were unequivocally saying that they did this because of an offensive movie, I feel it would be extremely important to call them out on the bullsh!t and say on no uncertain terms that they are 100% responsible for their actions.

  • slamfu

    Wow, I’m with CStan on this one bigtime. Where to start. This type of thing has been used as an excuse for violence before. Muslims have on many, many occasions killed for an insult to their religion. I see people quoted examples of crusades, lynchings in America, witch trials without making the extremely obvious connection that those times are long gone, viewed with disgust by us now, and serve as an example of how NOT to behave. Meanwhile, the “tolerance” expected by us of current over the top violent behavior from muslims no matter what the provocation, seems a very one way street in terms of respect.

    My point is, we have freedom of speech in this country. It is legal to provoke, it is not legal to lash out in murderous violence for being exposed to someone’s opinion. This was a cheaply made movie by a two bit hack, and something just like it could appear on the scene at any moment. Are we to just sit back and absorb embassy attacks and the MURDER OF US AMBASSADOR as a result? Have we lowered the bar of expectation so much when it comes to muslims? “There they go again”? What if we swapped it out. What if Italy said they are going to exterminate Portugal? What if a French mob executed the British Ambassador for an insult? Insane right? No way we would universally condemn the insulter, not the mob. But move it over to the Middle East or North Africa and all of a sudden we are making excuses for how we could have tried harder to worry about their feelings. I thought the Danish Cartoon fiasco back in the day was insane enough, but this is showing me even more.

  • dduck

    Slam said: “I thought the Danish Cartoon fiasco back in the day was insane enough, but this is showing me even more.”
    Question, would anyone NOT interested in fomenting violence produce and promote that film on the internet or any other medium?

    Let’s wring some truth out of all the distortion. (1) My position is that if they can be found, the murderers should either receive harsh treatment (see SEAL Team 6) or tried on court; I am not defending them in the least. Please understand that.

    (2) I deplore the producer and TJ, and hope they can be accused of some crime, the more serious the better. These are evil trashy maggots.

    (3) Just because I and others say we somewhat understand the anger of Muslims and the extreme anger of a few, does NOT mean we sympathize with them. When at war you have to must understand your enemy as much as possible.

    (4) No one has explained how You Tube and others manage to block out child pornography. If this trailer has been around since July, surely they could have deleted it if they were at all sensitive (if not perhaps they should be). That isn’t censorship. (How many nasty remarks are deleted here on TMV.)

  • The_Ohioan

    This is getting even more murky. Chris Cilizza has just reported that the film, the maker, and the producer all seem to be phantom entities. The cast have deplored the version aired, apparently the worst parts were dubbed in; they disavow the final version. At this point no one knows where the film came from, who produced it, why it was on youtube, and, of course, the reason for it in the first place. Maybe al Quida have given up on planes and taken to youtube for future attacks.

  • Dabb

    Just because you have the right to say something doesn’t necessarily make it the right thing to say.

    I’ve always felt that with “rights” comes “responsibility.”

  • CStanley

    Dduck, I agree that understanding is important but that’s different than putting a primary focus on understanding vs. expecting accountability. I’m sorry, i don’t mean to direct this just at you or a few other commenters, it’s more like a reaction toward a LOT of media and blog commentry today…a meme if you will. And it strikes me that this would be like people talking in 1939 about the need to understand the rise of the Nazi party as a result of economic conditions in Germany.

  • dduck

    CS, I don’t know how to make it any clearer. They are fully accountable and should be shot or tried. That’s my understanding as far as the perpetrators are concerned. Same for the “producer”, same for AQ or whomever organized this 9/11 anniversary statement. And, yes YT also bears some criticism. No primary focus, screw them all.
    Primary rule of war know your enemy.

  • CStanley

    Love ya dduck but we’re going to have to agree to disagree. I get that you want the perps to be brought to justice and aren’t excusing them in the least, but the problem is, what about the rest of the angry mobs? By publicly expressing that we need to police what people say about Muslims, tacit approval to the idea these folks have that their outrage is justified, even if that isn’t ..intent.

  • dduck

    CS, back at you. I say the mob’s expression was understandable- a protest over an insulting film and probably with the accelerant of agitating extremists, even possibly AQ. Not excusable, this is a mob and it reduces to it’s lowest level as we know. Riots in all countries and America prove that mentality.

    I am trying to understand what happened and the above is a theory. I only hope that it is a core of perpetrators that did the actual killing using the mob as cover.

    What you call police is overstated, I say common sense.

  • SteveK

    Question, would anyone NOT interested in fomenting violence produce and promote that film on the internet or any other medium?

    Let’s wring some truth out of all the distortion.

    dduck I’m with you 100% on this one!

Twitter Auto Publish Powered By :