Letters to the Editor

Your views in 200 words or less

ISLAM: There’s danger in hasty generalization

Letter by Deborah Kinerk, Tacoma on Sep. 17, 2012 at 4:23 pm with 102 Comments »
September 17, 2012 4:23 pm

Here in America, we read about a film produced in America that portrays Muhammad as a sexually sadistic torturer and conclude, “It was a 14-minute piece of trash put out by a pervert. Why does the Islamic world erupt with venomous hatred pouring forth against all of America?”

One of the fallacies embedded in that question is the assumption that all or most Muslims are represented by the protesters. That is no more the case than is their belief that the film produced by one man speaks for all Americans.

Many people on both sides fail to see that the actions of one or a small minority do not speak for the millions of other people on the sidelines. It is vitally important, if we want to live in peace, to keep that fact in the forefront of our minds.

Tags:
Leave a comment Comments → 102
  1. Excellent, thoughtful letter. NPR had a reporter at the demonstrations in Egypt, and asked the Egyptian bystanders what they thought of the demonstrators. The most common response was “the demonstrators are morons.”

  2. LeePHilI says:

    Deborah – thanks for a rational viewpoint.

  3. charliebucket says:

    Nicely said. Thank you.

  4. Difference is our leaders stick up for what is right. They tolerate what is legal but speak up for reason.

    We do not see that when it comes to extremist Islam.

    Also, with all the protest and violence across many countries, let’s stop lying and pretend its a tiny minority.

  5. charliebucket says:

    Can someone tech savvy find a clip or article of the Libyan leader (and other leaders) condemning the violence?

  6. Great letter. Thank you, Deborah, for reminding us that “some” doesn’t equal “all”.

  7. Pecksbadboy says:

    If Iran put a movie on YouTube portraying Jesus as Gay, the same results would happen here.

    Romney would call for air strikes and Cheney would loose the effectiveness of his new heart.

  8. LeePHilI says:

    Charlie – you could provide proof to Confused all day long and it won’t make a difference.

    Rational adults that want to know, have already seen and heard leaders and everyday people of the Muslim faith denounce the rioters.

    For those who wish to know, here is a sample:

    http://hereandnow.wbur.org/2012/09/14/libyan-american-protests

  9. Scottc51 says:

    Deborah points out the current fallacy that our politics seems to love: to wit – using behavior (or opinions) of an extreme of a group to defame the whole group.

    I fear, however, that the violence (including murder) employed to suppress freedom of speech, will create terrorism in the world of ideas.
    Theo Van Gogh, Muhammed cartoon, nutball video used as excuses for murder.
    Sorry, but our society is deeply committed to freedom of speech and this does produce very distasteful messages at time. But speech controlled by thought-terrorists is infinitely worse.
    We should be clear in support of freedom of speech and expression.

  10. CharlieB – ‘a Libyan leader condemning the violence’ – What about the local Benghazi who came to the defense and support of our Embassy?

    Scottc – we are also committed (at least some of us) to the separation of church and state, whereas in Islam they are held to be one and the same.

  11. LeePHilI says:

    “Sorry, but our society is deeply committed to freedom of speech”

    Unless…..it offends the noisy conservatives. Anyone who was around in the early 2000s will remember that speaking out against President Bush (during wartime, was the made up excuse) was a traitor.

    I agree with freedom of speech and note that it goes hand in hand with freedom to look and sound stupid.

  12. Good choice asking for a quote from the Libyan President.

    You know said these attacks had nothing to do with this video.

    And no, this country would not kill a foriegn ambassador. What a tasteless, childish comment. There are incredibly offense protests (the KKK comes to mind) that do not lead anywhere to the type of wide spread violence we see in the ME.

  13. took14theteam says:

    Anyone who was around in the second decade of this century will remember that speaking out against President Obama was called a racist……

  14. charliebucket says:

    I have spoken out about the President many times bc I am not that big a fan of some his policies, but I have never been called a racist.

  15. took14theteam says:

    That is because the _hills like you….

    ;-)

  16. The most common response was “the demonstrators are morons.”

    Love to see a link.

    Hey, did you hear the one about…

  17. LeePHilI says:

    “Anyone who was around in the second decade of this century will remember that speaking out against President Obama was called a racist……”

    Anyone who is a grown up knows the difference between disagreement and racism.

  18. took14theteam says:

    I guess there aren’t many “Grown Ups” that comment here.

    Maybe a gaggle of OLD people, but no “Grown Ups”……

  19. Thank you, Deborah, for reminding us that “some” doesn’t equal “all”.

    Unless, of course, it’s the Tea Party.

  20. truthbusterguy says:

    This is NOT about a movie trailer. Muslims around the world are mad that obama spiked the football 30 times at the DNC about killing bin laden.

    The arab winter is all on obama and no amount of media bias can cover his butt on this one.

    Now we know why he hired Hillary, just for times like this. He has her take the 3 AM phone calls.

    obama is such a man child lightweight.

  21. Good link, Larry. Here’s another one for ya’ charlie, compliments of FOX News (just kidding):

    One day after the attacks that killed 4 Americans including the U.S. Ambassador to Libya, there is a new prime minister.

    Mustafa Abushagur was elected on Wednesday…

    He becomes the nation’s first elected official since the killing of Gadhafi last year.

    On what appears to be his twitter account, he wrote that he was friends with U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and condemned the “barbaric acts.”

    He wrote, “This is an attack on America, Libya, and free people everywhere.”

    http://rochesterhomepage.net/fulltext?nxd_id=341652

    Little doubt the new Libyan Prime Minister and government – many of whom have very strong connections to the US – understand the importance of relations with the USA, and the gravity of the murderous sacking of our embassy there. Other islamic countries, such as Egypt… not so much.

  22. Then there’s this from Libyan President Mohammed el-Megarif:

    “The idea that this criminal and cowardly act was a spontaneous
    protest that just spun out of control is completely unfounded and
    preposterous,” Megarif told NPR.

    http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=a1b_1347888476

  23. And no, this country would not kill a foriegn ambassador.

    but….we have all that fancy, expensive drone hardware especially designed for carrying out assassinations via joystick! I guess that isn’t equivalent because the killings are done on their soil.

    http://blog.alexanderhiggins.com/2012/09/17/assassination-drone-strike-kills-women-girls-gathering-firewood-185721/

    http://rt.com/usa/news/drone-strike-obama-casualties-604/

    http://www.disinfo.com/2012/04/u-s-drones-killed-2800-civilians-in-pakistan-in-7-years/

    btw – since Stevens died of smoke inhalation it is not clear that the militants (not protestors) who attacked the consulate were planning to kill him (its not even clear that they knew that he was visiting the consulate at the time). Not a diminishing of the act of arson that they clearly planned nor the death that resulted from their violence.

  24. AND, Libya didn’t kill Stevens – a rebel faction did. Claiming moral superiority because “this country” wouldn’t kill a foriegn(sic) ambassador is absurd because there are always the nutjobs that you can’t totally control.

  25. you did diminsh the act, and you are making excuses for the murder of a US citizen. It was a complex attack, not a ‘random mob’.

    And what you described with your links is collateral damage. You ignore the fact that we are war with these terrorists. You feel safe while typing such nonesense because of those drones.

  26. BillBrewster says:

    And so today we read, “Afghan militants claimed responsibility on Tuesday for a suicide bomb attack on a minivan carrying foreign workers that killed 12 people saying it was retaliation for a film mocking the Prophet Mohammad.” Deborah, I don’t think what we are seeing in the news as signs of a world who desires peace. Now there are reports of murdering every person that was involved in the making of the “film.” I do believe in fighting for peace but my weapon for war is not a gun.

  27. And this from Libyan videographer, Mr. Al-Bakoush, who shot the footage of Stevens being found and removed from the safe house and compound:

    Al-Bakoush and his colleagues said that once they learned his identity, they were stunned Stevens had been alone.

    “I’ve never seen incompetence and negligence like this, from the two sides, the Americans and the Libyans,” he said. “You can sacrifice everyone but rescue the ambassador. He is the ambassador for God’s sake.”…

    Even before the assault, many Libyans had complained about deteriorating security in Benghazi, where the uprising against Gadhafi first erupted. Scores of rogue militias have been drafted by the government to provide security in the absence of a regular force, and the role of extremists, including members of Ansar al Shariah, has been controversial.

    The city is divided block by block among the groups, which have kept the weapons they procured during the uprising. Many of the militias occupy bases lined with tanks and machine-gun mounted trucks and are led by self-styled colonels.

    http://seattletimes.com/html/nationworld/2019186089_libya18.html

    Sounds like yet another enormous intelligence gaffe by our naive and bungling foreign policy rookies and their fearless leader, the campaigner-in-cheif. This time you can throw in botched security protocol that leaves an ambassador behind. What do you want to bet Valerie Jarrett’s fingers are all over this one too?

    Clearly, with all of the conspicuous security concerns endemic in Benghazi, this naive administration dropped the ball.

    But it’s also clear that, at least in the case of the long-repressed Libyans, there are many who are not “represented by the (muslim) protesters”. Or, at least, were not sympathetic to the loss of life at the US embassy in Benghazi.

  28. end italics

  29. you are making excuses for the murder of a US citizen

    How?

    I have noted the difference between 1st degree and 2nd degree murder by describing the intent – that is, in no way, providing an excuse for the murder.

  30. And what you described with your links is collateral damage.

    And you are diminishing the intentional taking of civilian lives by the phrase “collateral damage”.

    Since Stevens was killed by smoke inhalation I imagine that there are more than a few apologists for the rebels who consider his death as “collateral damage” rather than a murder. Your moral outrage is rather selective.

  31. averageJose says:

    What’s the “danger”?
    Should seem obvious that any element of “danger” resides in underestimating their ability and desire to kill the “infidel”.

  32. averageJose says:

    I wonder if he died from smoke inhalation before he was sodomized…

  33. deliberate attack with heavy weapons and explosives against a diplomat. We were/are targeting terrorists. They are targeting civilians. Your comparison is not even close.

    Once again you are trying to diminish this act of murder.

    Selective? By ‘selecting’ acts intentionally killing US citizens that were there to assist that nation.

    Why do you stay in America?

  34. “speaking out against President Bush (during wartime, was the made up excuse) was a traitor.”

    But that’s not the point is it? Did those offended by the President being called everything from a moron to a monkey storm the premises, slay the occupants and set off a multi-national mob of angry protesters. No.

    And Deborah, you write in your letter, which I know was an attempt at reason and sanity….”the actions of one or a small minority do not speak for the millions of other people on the sidelines….”

    Just what constitutes a small minority? Look, I’m sorry for the sane, decent Muslims in this world who find themselves in this situation, but please, let’s stop acting like this is somehow equivalent to say last year’s OWLs or even the skinhead whack jobs who crawl around together here and there in America.

    And let’s get realistic about the fact that what was celebrated as Arab Spring (appropriately named as its clearly a fair-weather situation) resulted in muslim extremists taking the helm in Egypt; people who want to see Sharia law applied to the makers of the dumb little video that is being scapegoated as the cause for this. What you are so ready to label a small minority is not small, and it’s growing.

    For all of you who are eager to keep Pres. Obama in office, can you not see that these nations are thumbing their noses at his grand efforts towards reconciliation?

  35. Permit me to share a few words from Wretchard re the outcome of worshiping at the altar of political correctness.

    “The West has lost its mind. It has gotten dementia… if it doesn’t recover its senses, nothing can save it.’

  36. MyBandito says:

    Sozo- If you consider what is presently going on in the Middle East, “thumbing their noses at his (Obama’s) grand efforts towards reconciliation,” what do you call 9/11/01, during Bush’s presidency?

  37. sozo, thanks for the Wretchard quote. I haven’t read the Belmont Club since he revealed himself and moved – have to track him down.

    Is their any better outside purveyor of political common sense and exposer of the obvious than he?

  38. This whole situation is sickening. Not only is the ME a bigger mess then it was three years, but the left is have moved from spinning/rewriting history to lying about current events.

    There is no sense of responsibity. No sense of national pride. No respect for our citizens or their rights. Shameful does not even begin to describe it.

    Look at this thread. We have a college professor, someone who it is assumed to be educated, falling for the garbage coming from career pols. Altering reality to fit their political lens.

    Sorry state of the Nation.

  39. what do you call 9/11/01, during Bush’s presidency?

    The unfortunate result of Clinton-era (lack of) policy toward overt terrorist threats. Either that or retaliation for blowing up an aspirin factory or two.

  40. MyBandito says:

    Clamato- That response was expected. Yet, none of what is happening now is “The unfortunate result of “Bush-era policy?

  41. LeePHilI says:

    Oh yes….dare we forget that Bush blamed Clinton for 9/11.

    As we know, Obama is not allowed to blame Bush for an economic disaster, but Bush is able to blame Clinton for a one day attack that happened 9 months into his administration…and then there were those nasty memos…..

  42. LeePHilI says:

    “Just what constitutes a small minority? Look, I’m sorry for the sane, decent Muslims in this world who find themselves in this situation, but please, let’s stop acting like this is somehow equivalent to say last year’s OWLs or even the skinhead whack jobs who crawl around together here and there in America.”

    A small minority might be defined as the Ku Klux Klan, who paraded around as mainstream Christianity, knowing that God’s will for black people was to be killed for their offense of being black.

    But then again….if the Muslim terrorists are what all Islam is….why can’t the KKK be what all Christianity is?

    I’m wondering if all this churning of the issue is helping Mitt’s latest announcement that he is not the leader of those in need for government services, most of which have already paid their dues long ago. The Islamic riots make for good cover for a failing campaign that just nailed its own coffin.

  43. and 3+ years later we are still hearing ‘blame Bush’ from the left.

    NewsFlash: Obama running for reelection, Bush is retired and building schools in Africa

  44. LeePHilI says:

    Since we can’t find anything in the mainstream media about the ambassador being sodomized, I’ll contribute one fine source, from Christianity:

    http://www.nowtheendbegins.com/blog/?p=11209

    Bush is clearing brush to build schools in Africa? Probably why they didn’t have him at the GOP Convention.

    Convulsive8 is the perfect rube who would blame shift 9/11 to Clinton, but deny that Bush has anything to do with the economic state of the United States.

  45. LeePHilI says:

    Let’s not let truth get in our way:

    Greetings,

    Concerning your query on the report published by a Lebanese website
    according to which ambassador Stevens was sodomized. That report falsely quoted our news agency and has no truth whatsover to it. AFP promptly sent a strongly worded complaint to that website and they removed the report and published a denial, saying that AFP did not report such a thing.

    Thank you
    Ezzedine Said

    Agence France-Presse (AFP)
    Chief Editor for the Middle East and North Africa

  46. http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Pages/TheList.htm

    KKK was motivated by religion. Nice try.

    Incredible to see all the excuses for terrrorism

  47. LeePHilI says:

    CT8 says:
    Sep. 18, 2012 at 11:35 am KKK was motivated by religion. Nice try

    Someone skipped school the day they taught US History

    “The Ku Klux Klan was reformed in 1915 by William J. Simmons, a preacher influenced by Thomas Dixon’s book, The Ku Klux Klan (1905) and the film of the book, Birth of a Nation, directed by D.W. Griffith.

    Technically speaking their beliefs are not based on the Bible.

    The KKK is part of a much broader problem called the “Christian Identity” Movement. This welds together all the best bits of anti-semitism, racism, homophobia and rampant fundamentalist Christianity.”

  48. LeePHilI says:

    Oh and before you jump on “their beliefs ae not based on the Bible”, you’d better take a look at the majority of religions calling themselves “Christian”. Their dogma is nowhere in the Bible.

  49. Nice deflection from BHOs failures and ‘blame Bush’ policies.

    Keep your anti-Church hate to yourself. Incredible that someone can make so many excuses for a failed admin and terrorist atacks

  50. Yet, none of what is happening now is “The unfortunate result of “Bush-era policy?

    Have you been sleeping for he last 3 2/3 years?

    When you see signs that read “Obama, Obama, We Love Osama” it’s a safe bet the rioters weren’t.

    Bin Laden is dead, the football’s been spiked, GM is dying, and the muslim world is on fire.

  51. Oh yes….dare we forget that Bush blamed Clinton for 9/11.

    Not wishing to stoop to _hill levels, I’ll be generous and term that statement a complete… fabrication.

    Bush never blamed Clinton for 9/11. Unlike the impostor currently occupying the White House golf cart, the Bush family have possess an attribute commonly known as class.

  52. averageJose says:

    Now why on earth would the leftist muslim loving pc msm repost anything that makes their messiah or muslims look even worse?

  53. averageJose says:

    btw Larry, you made a prediction over the weekend about a number of commentors needing to change their monikers after the mods return from the weekend.
    Fail, as usual.

  54. Anyone who was around in the first decade of this century will remember when speaking out against President W. Bush was called UNPATORTIC.

    TBG – I bet you thank flyweight Romney deserves more credit than the President for getting Osama?

    Clamat0 – good points; and let us not forget that the locals came to the aid of the Embassy and tried to get the Ambassador to the local hospital.

    I call 9/11 the basic failure of the Bush Regime from which all other’s blunder followed.

  55. CT8 – what you forget is that those terrorists are at war with us which makes all U.S. property and personnel targets, along with those locals who work or even cooperate with us.

    What is truly sorry is the state of the right wing beliefs that Romney would be an improvement for anything other than replacing Bush as the Worst President Ever.

    Bush is gone, but is police mistakes live on.

    ‘building schools in Africa’ – odd that I could find nothing on the WEB about this.

    If the KKK were not motivated by religion how do you explain the following excerpt from the Klansman’s Manual (1945 ed):
    “The supreme pattern for all true Klansmen is their Criterion of Character, Jesus Christ, “who went about doing good.” The movement accepts the full Christian program of unselfish helpfulness, and will seek to carry it on in the manner commanded by the one Master of Men, Christ Jesus.”

  56. BillBrewster – IMO Bush blundered in Afghanistan when he:
    1. Occupied the country.
    2.Imposed Hamid Karzai as ruler.
    3. Tried to rebuild the country as a ‘western democracy’.
    4. Thought the Afghans needed to be taught how to fight

  57. So you believe OUR AMERICAN representatives were acceptable, legal, military targets? What is wrong with you? How low will the left go to remove BHO from this mess he is knee deep in?

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0712/78094.html

    Bush building a clinic.

  58. Sonofwashington says:

    “The Bush family possesses an attribute called class”???
    I’ll give a modicum of credit to the elder Bush and even Jeb Bush, but G.W. was absolutely classless besides being clueless. He was puppet to Dick Cheney and the cabal of neocons who ran his foreign affairs, as he was to Rove who ran his domestic affairs.

    Nevertherless, when it comes to just plain class and intellect, the Bush’s can’t hold a candle to President Obama and the right wing goes bonkers over the stark contrast between the current president and the one that was NOT even invited to the Republican National Convention.

  59. MyBandito says:

    Clamato- Only a hypocrite would chastise someone for pointing out that it was the failed policies of the Bush administration that got us here, and in the same breath blame Clinton for 911 which happened on Bush’s watch. Which is it? Is the sitting President responsible for everything that happens as soon as he’s sworn in, or the previous administration?

    You cannot have both, unless you’re on the Right, which can do no wrong.

  60. Scottc51 says:

    When I criticize a president and am called a name, like traitor or racist that is freedom of speech too.

    Getting a death threat or actually murdered for making a statement is not morally equivalent to being labelled (rightly or wrongly).

  61. This class conversation is too funny.

    Let’s talk about the gift he gave the Queen…

  62. menopaws says:

    Deborah–Wonderful letter….sorry once again the responses moved away from your logic and sensible observations to the land of political bashing………I keep thinking that all the energy wasted on arguing the same issues, day in, day out could be put to work helping in our community……..Thanks for proving that there are still grounded, smart people out in the real world……

  63. Of course not all Muslims are involved in terrorism and riots against the West, but a significant enough number of them are…and a significant “branch” of the radical segment of said religion is gaining power and strength that at the very least people should be more realistic about the fine line that separates mainstream Islam from radical Islam. No comparison to KKK, none.

    As for suggesting that 9/11 was somehow a reflection on President Bush’s policies, really? Too ridiculous for further comment. How unpatortic of you to suggest such a thing.

  64. MyBandito says:

    At least as unpatriotic as it would be to suggest that 9/11 was somehow a reflection on President Clinton’s policies.

    Which is it? Is the sitting President responsible for everything that happens as soon as he’s sworn in, or the previous administration? Or does it depend on the political party of the sitting President?

  65. LeePHilI says:

    “sozo says:
    Sep. 18, 2012 at 5:02 pm Of course not all Muslims are involved in terrorism and riots against the West, but a significant enough number of them are…”

    While hundreds were protesting in the streets, how many thousands were at home minding their own business?

    “significant” Only in the mind of those trying to find fault.

  66. LeePHilI says:

    “Barack Obama met the Queen at Buckingham Palace today and gave her a gift of an iPod loaded with video footage and photographs of her 2007 United States visit to Richmond, Jamestown and Williamsburg in Virginia. In return, the Queen gave the President a silver framed signed photograph of herself and the Duke of Edinburgh – apparently a standard present for visiting dignitaries.”

    Not even good at recent History, I see…..

  67. averageJose says:

    So what about your prediction Larry P.Hill?

  68. Keep searching Hill. Find a link you like with the playlist. Then go away…

  69. Which is it?

    It’s the difference between 8 months and 45 months. It’s the difference between ignoring threats from and actions by Al Qaeda for 4 years…

    http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/military/july-dec96/fatwa_1996.html

    and being forced to act with vigor as a result of tragic consequences of previous ignorance.

    It’s the difference between a policy of zero tolerance of terrorist acts and the current politically correct policy of appeasement and apology.

    And it’s the difference between invective (“hypocrite”) and obvious humor (e.g my SEP. 18, 2012 AT 10:44 AM) sailing over a humorless air sack.

  70. MyBandito says:

    If you’re saying that your hypocrisy is the result of a failed attempt at humor, I see the humor.

    The real difference is that the President who you like can do no wrong, while the one that you dislike can do no good. History will be the judge.

  71. The unfortunate result of Clinton-era (lack of) policy toward overt terrorist threats.

    So now we are blaming Clinton for Ashcroft?

    http://archive.democrats.com/view.cfm?id=7789

  72. “and 3+ years later we are still hearing ‘blame Bush’ from the left.

    ROFL – that’s hysterical, coming just a few posts after someone tried to blame Clinton for 9/11. Thanks for yet another great laugh!

  73. “As for suggesting that 9/11 was somehow a reflection on President Bush’s policies, really? Too ridiculous for further comment. How unpatortic of you to suggest such a thing.”

    So was Clammie “unpatriotic” for repeatedly blaming 9/11 on Clinton? Were any of the whackadoodles who blamed the attacks in Libya and Egypt on Obama unpatriotic?

  74. So now we are blaming Clinton for Ashcroft?

    Oh please, bB. What exactly is democrats.com saying? That 9/11 would have been prevented if Ashcroft hadn’t had agents assigned “to eavesdrop on New Orleans hookers and their clients”?

    And isn’t the whole line about denying a 58 Million dollar request for more FBI counter-terrorism agents taken right out of the truther playbook, under the heading “Proof that 9/11 was an inside job intended to allow the Bush family access to Iraq’s oil”?

    This is proof of Bush’s 9/11 fault/ complicity?

    Here’s the real red meat:

    http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/weekly-updates/34-new-information-clinton-administration-osama-bin-laden/

    How conveniently they overlook…, er, forget.

    This has been fun, but the reality is that, in retrospect, the chances 9/11 would have been prevented by either administration are pretty slim. But one simply cannot dispute that Clinton had more time and actionable intel upon which to act than Bush – not the least of which included opportunities to kill or capture Bin Laden in the Sudan.

  75. The real difference is that the President who you like can do no wrong.

    Straw man 1-A

    If your saying you didn’t “get” the humor, I see the humor.

    So was Clammie “unpatriotic” for repeatedly blaming 9/11 on Clinton?

    Straw man x ∞

    If you’d bother to pay attention, you’d have noticed the “blame-game” began with ‘Dito’s comment @ 10:36.

    New York (0bama) Mimes weekend Op-Ed unsubstantiated speculation aside, there remains substantially more proof that the Clinton administration blew considerably more opportunities to act on Al-Queada intel than Bush could possibly have had in the less than 8 months he was in office prior to 9/11.

    BTW, got that link I asked for? You know, the one from your straw man 1 @ 4:29.

    Didn’t think so.

  76. “…the reality is that, in retrospect, the chances 9/11 would have been prevented by either administration are pretty slim. But one simply cannot dispute that Clinton had more time and actionable intel upon which to act than Bush – not the least of which included opportunities to kill or capture Bin Laden in the Sudan.

    precisely

  77. HaleRevere says:

    While I agree with the message of this article, I feel it leaves out one crucial point.
    When we, as Americans, have issue with actions of a select group of Muslims (exremists or not) or a particular nation, we do NOT hit the American streets in a mob frenzy and storm their embassies or kill their Ambassadors. We blog, tweet, post comments, call into radio talk shows, and picket from time to time. So our responses in protest do NOT even compare to those we see in the Muslim world.

  78. “one simply cannot dispute that Clinton had more time and actionable intel upon which to act than Bush – not the least of which included opportunities to kill or capture Bin Laden in the Sudan.”

    The bipartisan 9/11 Commission investigated that crap about the Sudan, and guess what they concluded? They concluded: “The commission has found no credible evidence that this was so.”

    What I find interesting about the near constant repetitions of this falsehood is that the only two groups of people who’ve made it are (1) the government of the Sudan, a nation that our own State Department has accused of being a state sponsor of terrorism, and (2) the wrong wing in this country

    Clammie, why are you repeating the propaganda of a nation that our own State Dept has branded as a state sponsor of terrorism”?

  79. sozo,

    Still waiting for you to answer the question. You said “As for suggesting that 9/11 was somehow a reflection on President Bush’s policies, really? Too ridiculous for further comment. How unpatortic of you to suggest such a thing.”

    So was Clammie “unpatriotic” for repeatedly blaming 9/11 on Clinton? Were any of the whackadoodles who blamed the attacks in Libya and Egypt on Obama unpatriotic?

    Answer the question.

  80. First of all ehill, I was just having a little fun with the typo…”unpatortic?” But clearly you missed that. So, no I was not labeling anyone unpatriotic.

    That said, I will paste one more time what clamato said, with which I concur:

    ‘one simply cannot dispute that Clinton had more time and actionable intel upon which to act than Bush – not the least of which included opportunities to kill or capture Bin Laden in the Sudan.’

  81. HaleRevere, I’ve been trying to make this point for days but without much luck. Thanks for trying to make it one more time:

    “we do NOT hit the American streets in a mob frenzy and storm their embassies or kill their Ambassadors. We blog, tweet, post comments, call into radio talk shows, and picket from time to time. So our responses in protest do NOT even compare to those we see in the Muslim world.”

  82. HaleRevere – the political situations in Libya and Egypt are far, far, far different than what we have here in the US. Comparing the internet “activism” from the comfort of our own homes in a prosperous country with a constitutional democratic republic to the sometimes violent responses in countries that just recently ousted tyrants who had been in power for decades and only considering the “Muslim world” as the sole variable is bizarre. There is much more going on with those protests/revolts than religion.

  83. The bipartisan 9/11 Commission investigated that crap about the Sudan, and guess what they concluded? They concluded: “The commission has found no credible evidence that this was so.”

    Well mole, that’s probably because Clinton perjured himself before the 911 commish on the subject.

    Here’s Bill Clinton himself describing how he passed up on the opportunity to have Bin Laden extradited to the US from the Sudan:

    http://archive.newsmax.com/audio/BILLVH.mp3

    Love how hillary follows the clip with an incredibly lame-ass limbo move.

    From ABC’s movie “Path to 9/11″:

    During a February 2002 speech, President Clinton explained that he turned down an offer from Sudan for bin Laden’s extradition to the U.S., saying, “At the time, 1996, he had committed no crime against America, so I did not bring him here because we had no basis on which to hold him.”

    But that wasn’t exactly true. By 1996, the 9/11 mastermind had already been named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing by prosecutors in New York.

    9/11 Commissioner former Sen. Bob Kerrey said that President Clinton told the Commission during his private interview that reports of his comments to the LIA were based on “a misquote.”

    During his interview with the 9/11 Commission, President Clinton was accompanied by longtime aide and former White House counsel Bruce Lindsey, along with former national security advisor Sandy Berger, who insisted in sworn testimony before Congress in Sept. 2002 that there was never any offer from Sudanese officials to turn over bin Laden to the U.S.

    But other evidence suggests the Clinton administration did not take advantage of offers to get bin Laden…

    SANDY BERGULAR??? LMAO, gee, wonder what documents he was able to steal and destroy ahead of that testimony.

    And then there was this missed opportunity by Clinton in Afghanistan:

    http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2012/05/14/60-minutes-clinton-administration-passed-opportunity-kill-bin-laden-1

    Bad enough to be a tool, mole, but you should remember that dull tools are that way because they are the most frequently used and abused.

    So was Clammie “unpatriotic” for repeatedly blaming 9/11 on Clinton?

    More straw man crap. With your ever expanding collection of straw, I feel for the starving horses of the world.

    Keep trying.

  84. September 11, 2001 was EIGHT months into the Bush Administration.

    John Ashcroft, tired of all the emphasis upon fighting terrorism, instructed the DOJ to spend less time and resources on that area.

    Bush received PDAs that shared intel that bin Laden wanted to attack on American soil (again – remember he did attack the WTC during Clinton’s administration) AND that bin Laden was considering weaponizing airplanes by crashing them into tall buildings.

    Blaming Clinton for the Bush Administration failure to protect us is lame partisanship.

  85. took14theteam says:

    LMAO

  86. bB, go back and re-read my 8:53 AM – especially the last paragraph.

    Drama queen much?

  87. averageJose says:

    Citation bB… citation. Quit being such a hypocrite asking for citations if you’re not going to provide them for your post… truther.

  88. averageJose says:

    “There is much more going on with those protests/revolts…” Yep… it’s jihad and terrorism.

  89. The Rightists sure seem to be getting rather testy these days……perhaps that occurs because they smell defeat in the winds.

    Not sure how I’m supposed to cite that September is eight months after January…..

  90. took14theteam says:

    Cause you are a Muslim?

    One would think that based on your comments(not just here, but in every letter you comment on).

    But that is okay, you are probably waiting for those 72 virgins…..

  91. Clammie,

    Thanks for repeating the propaganda of the government of Sudan. You’re so patriotic.

  92. “That said, I will paste one more time what clamato said, with which I concur:

    ‘one simply cannot dispute that Clinton had more time and actionable intel upon which to act than Bush – not the least of which included opportunities to kill or capture Bin Laden in the Sudan.’”

    One simply CAN dispute it, because Clinton turned over everything to Bush. Richard Clarke told Condaleeza Rice that al Qaeda would be their biggest challenge. So Bush had access to everything Clinton had. And he had an additional eight months to act on it. Perhaps you can tell us all what Bush did do make us safer from al Qaeda in those eight months? Don’t bother. He did nothing.

    But aside from that, I find it fascinating that you repeat the propaganda of the government of Sudan as well. And you dare to accuse someone else of being unpatriotic or anti-American? Wow, talk about hypocrisy.

  93. took14theteam says:

    Took you awhile to come back _hill.

    Why no standard Clichés??????

  94. because you’re spewing so many.

  95. averageJose says:

    No citation for the rest of the post I see. Can’t back it up, I understand.

    “Allah is our objective; the Quran is our law, the Prophet is our leader; Jihad is our way; and death for the sake of Allah is the highest of our aspirations.”

    Who says that?

  96. “Who says that?

    You just did.

  97. Got any more golden insight for us, mole?

    Well than a few more hypocritical insults, invectives, taunts, mocking clichés, straw man fallacies, etc. etc, etc, etc, will do for another laugh.

    Never mind, “you just did”.

  98. Wow, what a well-spoken, factual, erudite response. You truly are a mental giant.

    /sarcasm

  99. “from the comfort of our own homes in a prosperous country with a constitutional democratic republic…”

    Conservatives would like to sustain the freedom and safety we experience in this country.

  100. .hill, you should try laughing at yourself once in a while – save us all a few more laugh lines.

  101. I’ll keep that in mind, but I’m usually too busy laughing at you.

  102. Yep, all the evil Muslims are alike.

    Libyans attack the building used by the militia suspected of the consulate attack and the death of 4 Americans. http://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/09/21/libyans-storm-ansar-al-sharia-compound-in-backlash-attack-on-us-consulate/

    Notice that the link is to Fox News. I knew you wrong-wingers wouldn’t believe anything else.

*
We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0