- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
September 14, 2012 at 12:39 am #604861
DBPMember1) When the thing you’re apologizing for is not your doing
2) When those to whom you’re apologizing are guilty of criminal acts of violence
3) When your apology could be taken as an admission of guilt that will be used against you later
****************************************************************************************
The United States has just been attacked on its own territory.* American citizens have been killed and injured. Property has been destroyed.
There is no excuse for these criminal actions. Ever. Therefore, there is no reason for any official of the US government to apologize for (or “denounce”) anything in regard to these attacks.
And yet, what do I see when I open up the Times but this:
Angry demonstrations over an anti-Islam video already have occurred in Egypt and Yemen, and officials theorize that well-armed Libyan extremists hijacked a similar protest in Benghazi, where several Libyan security guards also were killed. The U.S. put all of its diplomatic missions overseas on high alert, and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton delivered an explicit denunciation of the video as the administration sought to pre-empt further turmoil at its embassies and consulates.
“The United States government had absolutely nothing to do with this video,” she said before a meeting with the foreign minister of Morocco at the State Department. “We absolutely reject its content and message.”
“To us, to me personally, this video is disgusting and reprehensible,” Clinton said. “It appears to have a deeply cynical purpose: to denigrate a great religion and to provoke rage.”
This posture of guilt is a serious mistake. It makes the US look morally weak and will only sow [edit: thx dobro] confusion about who is to blame in these attacks. To wit: Muslim fundamentalists, and only Muslim fundamentalists.
This is almost certainly going to cost American lives. It may even cost Barack Obama the election. He is already widely seen as being soft on radical Islam.
And now this . . .
**************************************************************************************
*American embassies and consulates are US territory.
September 14, 2012 at 12:59 am #771136
dobroParticipantWhat nonsense. You’re supposedly a smart guy. Look at the 4 sentences you cite by H Clinton. Every one of them is a true and appropriate statement. There is nothing in there that apologizes for anything.
Your “analysis” is based on misunderstanding and misusing plain English. Your “posture of guilt” meme is a figment of your imagination with no basis in reality. As is your unfounded assertion that Obama is “widely seen as soft on radical Islam”. Tell that to Osama Bin Laden.
BTW, Mr Editor, it’s “sow” confusion.
September 14, 2012 at 1:16 am #771137
sbreParticipantAll the U.S. Embassies and Consulates are guarded by U.S. Marines (interiors only, exterior security is handled by local law enforcement). I spent a majority of my enlisted time as part of these security forces in various countries around the world.
Having been stationed in Beirut, Lebanon in the 80’s I know first hand what all those young men are going through right now, and I ask you to join me in sending your positive thoughts and prayers (if you do so) to them and their leaders. It is a scary thing to see hundreds of armed and angry people surrounding the building you are in.
These men are well trained, well armed and have the greatest nation on Earth backing them up, however things can still get real bad, real quick.
This is a sector of American servicemen who are not often mentioned in the press, however are every bit as much at risk (and at times more so) then the troops we read about almost daily.
May God bless us all.
September 14, 2012 at 1:29 am #771138
kootchmanMemberCol Mark Goodman .. I believe he was the CO of the Marine Security Guard Detachments…probably in the late 90’s he got his bird to stay on and take the command.. held the billet for three or four years… toughest SOB on the planet… funny… I was his Plt Sgt in Egypt during Op Nimbus Star/Moon when tricky Dick came a calling on Anwar Sadat. when we evacuated the civilians from Cyprus… during the Greek and Turk dust up… we dropped them off in Beirut…. and went back 6 months later to evacuate US Embassy staff… it’s a circus out there… and the score card is ever changing. .referring two NATO allies in a real estate shoot em’ up… Semper Fidelis..
September 14, 2012 at 1:51 am #771139
DBPMember>>What nonsense. You’re supposedly a smart guy. BTW, Mr Editor, it’s “sow” confusion.
Yeah, thanks for the correction, Mr . . . Mr . . .
(What is it you do for a living again?)
Say, you’re not getting stressed out over this election or anything, are you, dobro? I can relate. Maybe you should take some time off.
Anyway, here’s how the embassy attack thing played out:
● Radical Islamists attack American embassies, killing Americans. Their reason? –Someone, somewhere made an anti-Islam film, which nobody’s even seen. (How typical of these cretins.)
● Next thing you know, the American Secretary of State is denouncing this film that nobody’s seen.
– And the reason she did that, again?
– And the reason she chose this particular time to do it?
OK. Don’t see that as an apology if you don’t want to. It was still dumb and counterproductive. When thugs are ransacking your house because of something they think your cousin did, that is NOT the time to stand out in your yard denouncing the cousin. In fact, that is the WORST possible thing to do.
That is like telling the thugs: Yeah. You’re totally justified in ransacking my house over this.
September 14, 2012 at 2:02 am #771140
JanSParticipanthave you seen the film, DBP? Just because it can be done, doesn’t mean it should. No, haven’t seen it, never will. But…from what I have heard from various sources, it’s pretty reprehensible. So…did the guy who made it under a pseudonym mean for this violence and murder to happen? Was that his intent? If they actually find the guy, who is in hiding, I suppose they’ll have to ask him. Or …was the film an excuse for terrorists to do their thing on 9/11. Terrorists will use any excuse, now, won’t they?
I don’t see an apology there…it’s a condemnation, as well it should be. Just an opinion…like yours (quit listening to the media spin out there).
(Actually, I’d like to know why he’s in hiding. He had enough conviction to make the movie, he should have enough conviction to stand up for it. What’s he so afraid of?)
September 14, 2012 at 2:13 am #771141
DBPMemberThe same thing happened to the Danes a few years ago. Remember? Some fool of a newspaper there decided to host a “Draw Mohammed” contest, with predictable results. Muslims all over the world rioted, targeting Danish embassies and nationals for violence and demanding an apology from the Danish government.
So what did hapless little Denmark do? Did they cave in and apologize? Did they throw the newspaper publisher to the wolves?
Oh, hell no! The Danish government told the Muslim world, very clearly, that they were a democratic country and that they didn’t believe in censorship. While they understood that the Mohammed images were offensive to Muslims (and felt bad about that), they were not about to denounce the publisher or otherwise curb their freedoms just to avoid hurting anyone else’s feelings. End of discussion.
Danmark, Jeg hylder dig!
Have you seen any radicals storming Danish embassies since then? No.
But are we likely to see radicals storming American embassies again over stupidities such as this? Probably.
And that denunciation by Hillary’s going to have a lot do with that, I’m afraid.
Romney’s gonna play this one to the hilt, and I can’t say as I blame him: it’s the politic thing to do. And maybe that’s really what dobro’s is all steamed up at me about — ‘cuz I said this was gonna hurt his team.
September 14, 2012 at 2:14 am #771142
brewParticipantAnd where is our president? Oh that’s right; he’s in Las Vegas CAMPAINING!
Wednesday, September 12 2012
6:50 pm The President arrives Las Vegas, Nevada
9:10 pm The President delivers remarks at a campaign event
10:25 pm The President departs Las Vegas, Nevada en route Aurora, Colorado
11:55 pm The President arrives Aurora, Colorado
Thursday, September 13 2012
1:10 pm The President delivers remarks at a campaign event
Its all that he has been doing the last 2 years.
Letterman is more important to him than anything else.
Ofcoarse, this is all Bush’s fault, not his.
September 14, 2012 at 2:22 am #771143
dobroParticipant“Say, you’re not getting stressed out over this election or anything, are you…”
Not a bit, but thanks for your concern. I find it interesting but I don’t feel stress about it. My life will continue no matter who wins.
“Anyway, here’s how the embassy attack thing played out”
This would be more plausible if you said “this is what I think happened” because your impressions and conclusions don’t line up very well with reported facts. You apparently don’t know much about this film but there are plenty of people that do. Use your google machine.
You also don’t seem to know much about the timeline of events and the fact that much investigation is ongoing.One thing I like about Obama is that he doesn’t seem to be big on jumping to conclusions before the facts are collected. A leadership quality that is prized in most circles.
“That is like telling the thugs: Yeah. You’re totally justified in ransacking my house over this.”
So that’s your conclusion. No relation to the facts, just your spin. Go stand over there next to Mitt Rmoney. Sounds like you two might get along.
September 14, 2012 at 2:25 am #771144
brewParticipantCurious as to why the Feds would find it necessary to hunt down the filmmaker.
http://mynorthwest.com/15/736363/US-identifies-antiMuslim-filmmaker
September 14, 2012 at 2:28 am #771145
dobroParticipantThe Feds might be wondering if foreign agents were involved in making a propaganda film with the express purpose of stirring up trouble during a major election in the US, possibly influencing it in their favor. Think about it.
September 14, 2012 at 2:42 am #771146
kootchmanMemberCause they have no respect for freedom of speech anymore?
September 14, 2012 at 2:43 am #771147
brewParticipantSeptember 14, 2012 at 2:44 am #771148
kootchmanMemberSeptember 14, 2012 at 2:49 am #771149
jamminjMember“The United States government had absolutely nothing to do with this video,” – TRUE
“We absolutely reject its content and message.” – TRUE
“It appears to have a deeply cynical purpose: to denigrate a great religion and to provoke rage.” – TRUE
so the US should hide and not make statements of fact? What is it with repugs and the truth?
And are you seriously trying to compare the Danish to the US? Do you seriously believe this is JUST about some movie no one has seen? The US for decades has tried to control, change, manipulate the middle east for its own interests. Maybe if we really followed the lead of the danish, you can make an argument, but to compare the two, ridiculous.
September 14, 2012 at 3:22 am #771150
DBPMemberIt’s a matter of timing, J.
In a struggle like this, timing makes all the difference between cravenly submitting to a bully and wisely avoiding future fights. (See my response to your last point below.)
Suppose there’s some drunken lout who comes over to your house every night, bangs on your door, and accuses of you of having carnal relations with his wife. Are you morally compelled to answer each of this dumbass’s accusations with patient assurances that you’ve never so much as winked at her?
–No. Of course you’re not!
And it’s just the same with these loutish mobs in Egypt or wherever. Their idiotic charges don’t even deserve an ANSWER, let alone a denunciation of whatever fool thing it was they were so steamed up about.
>>And are you seriously trying to compare the Danish to the US? Do you seriously believe this is JUST about some movie no one has seen? The US for decades has tried to control, change, manipulate the middle east for its own interests. Maybe if we really followed the lead of the danish, you can make an argument, but to compare the two, ridiculous.
Well, I agree with you there. Partly. There’s more to it than a simple (perceived) offense against Islam. The United States needs to be an honest player in the Middle East, and up until now, it really hasn’t been.
If you’ve followed my posts on this forum, you’d know that I’ve been VERY outspoken on issues of fairness and peace in the Middle East. But the structural problems there (Israel/Palestine, Iraq/Afghan wars, oil wealth, poverty) will not be resolved overnight, and they will certainly not be resolved through a policy of reiterating how much respect we have for Islam every time a mob of “Islamic” thugs throws a brick through our window.
P.S. Go easy with that “repug” stuff, please. Many of my friends are Republican, so I take offense at that.
September 14, 2012 at 3:30 am #771151
jamminjMemberthe statement by Clinton are not for the extremists. The middle east issue is more than just the recent attacks on our embassies.
and as far as ‘repug’ – thugs is how they have treated our political system the past 3+years, call em as I see them. and sorry about your friends.
September 14, 2012 at 5:05 am #771152
JanSParticipantso…the guy, supposedly, who made this moving is Egyptian, a Coptic Christian…that’s the latest word…
is this what he wanted to do? He has set off a firestorm…with American Embassy personnel in various cities in jeopardy.
And Mr. Romney condemned before he had all the facts. I get the feeling that he won’t back down because it would make him look weaker. He said “This is politics, I’m not going to worry about the campaign”. What did he think politics is? It’s all about the campaign to him.
September 14, 2012 at 6:24 am #771153
NFiorentiniMemberA few years back, didn’t we all learn that criticizing the president in a time of war was unpatriotic? Insulting the Commander-In-Chief was tantamount to insulting those who served under his command?
So here we are in 2012, and the Faux News Followers are making stuff up. What I want to know is…
“Why does the Rape-lubican Party hate America?”
It must be a sad existence when people are so brainwashed that they perceive words to mean things that they don’t.
And DBP…
“Say, you’re not getting stressed out over this election or anything, are you, dobro? I can relate. Maybe you should take some time off.”
Dobro’s fine. He hasn’t lost touch with reality. Perhaps you should heed your own advice.
September 14, 2012 at 6:58 am #771154
kootchmanMemberAs I recall it a “few years ago” there was no restraint. This what we say to the middle east…. in clear terms. The current POTUS himself weighed in. welcome to the fray…. now…get back from Las Vegas and ACT the part of Commander in Chief not Campaigner in Chief … we know you can work a rope line and golf a lot… ummm things are kinda in flux.. a little leadership .. if it’s not too much trouble. This is such a Neville Chamberlain moment for the Prez. Bring out the inner RR, Churchill, FDR, Truman… at least fake it for a couple of days.
September 14, 2012 at 8:36 pm #771155
waterworldParticipantRe: Posts #10 and #11: One reason the feds might be interested in the filmmaker is that he may have violated the terms of his federal probation by making or distributing the film.
Mr. Nakoula, the person identified by the federal government as the producer of the film, was indicted in LA in 2009 for bank fraud, possessing unauthorized access devices (credit cards), possessing false identification documents (social security cards), and making false representations related to social security numbers. In June, 2010 Mr. Nakoula was sentenced to 21 months in prison followed by five years of “supervised release” (the federal term for probation), and ordered to pay nearly $730,000 in restitution to victims whose identities are under court-ordered seal. There are several conditions of Mr. Nakoula’s supervised release related to computers and the internet: He may use computers only in connection with his employment; he may not access the internet without his probation officer’s permission; computers, cell phones, and other similar devices he owns are subject to search and seizure at any time.
The feds have more than sufficient grounds for inspecting Mr. Nakoula’s computers and cell phones to determine if he is in compliance with his supervised release conditions. This isn’t to say that I think making an offensive film in itself warrants searching the computers of someone on federal probation. But if Mr. Nakoula was paid by someone to make the film, then he may be required to pay that money over to the victims of his financial fraud. Or, if he has violated the restrictions on his use of computers or access to the internet, then he might lose those privileges. Further, the Court can send someone back to prison for violating the conditions of supervised release.
September 14, 2012 at 10:23 pm #771156
BostonmanMemberAt least the crazy right wingers usually hold up in the woods with their guns. You crazy left wingers are out in the open. Reading some of these posts its embarrasing. “Rape-lubican” party. You guys have some serious issues.
September 14, 2012 at 10:27 pm #771157
NFiorentiniMemberDoes “Rape-lubican” offend you? Because if it does *legitimately* offend you, your eyes have ways of shutting that whole thing down.
:)
September 14, 2012 at 10:45 pm #771158
BostonmanMemberI am a republican and have never raped anyone and I think when you make a statement like that you are making a stereotype that is offensive. Why should I avoid the forums because the people on the left like to use a term that is a felony offense and associated with half of americans.
September 14, 2012 at 10:47 pm #771159
NFiorentiniMemberI don’t know if you’re being purposely obtuse or not, but it’s a reference to Republican candidate for Congress in Missouri Todd Akin.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.