Casus belli 8

The attacks yesterday (9/11) on American diplomats and their diplomatic compounds in Egypt and Libya, the killing of members of their staff, and most imperatively the atrocious murder and savage treatment of the dead body of Ambassador Christopher Stevens ought to be treated as acts of war.

This text by John Hinderaker and the pictures come from PowerLine:

Official accounts say that those who were in the vehicle with Ambassador Christopher Stevens as they tried to escape from the violence at the American consulate in Benghazi were shot, but that Stevens died of “suffocation.” This may have an ominous significance. Further, news accounts indicate that the ambassador’s body was dragged or paraded through the streets. This photo is said to be of Ambassador Stevens, and it certainly appears to be him. I can’t tell from the photo whether he was dead at this time or not. I hope so:

This picture is also represented to be of Ambassador Stevens. It is hard to tell; about all one can say is that the shirt appears consistent with the first photograph:

The appropriate reaction to what happened last night in Cairo and, especially, Benghazi is fury. The question is, what are we going to do – not say, do – about it?

UPDATE: This photo, said to be of Ambassador Stevens, has surfaced. It does seem to be him. The caption suggests that the people in the photo are “helping” him; that could be true, I suppose. He is also described as “unconscious.” It is unclear when in the sequence of events these pictures were taken.

Yes, we should rain shock and awe down on Egypt and Libya.

But the answer to the question John Hinderaker asks: “What are we going to do about it?” – considering that Barack Obama, an Islam-loving anti-America pacifist, is in charge of US foreign affairs – is: “Probably nothing more than issue an apology for annoying the murderous Muslim mobs in both countries.”

Indeed, such an apology has already been issued, to the disgust of Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney.

From sea to shining sea Americans should sit down and weep.

Then rise, throw Obama out of the White House, put a fiery and decisive end to the jihad, and reclaim American greatness.

  • American soil is attacked, and we APOLOGIZE for hurting Muslim’s feelings! I’m voting for Romney, this shit is getting out of hand.

  • The two Navy destroyers taking position off the coast of Libya should be ordered to open fire in retaliation.

  • liz

    Yes, act of war, just as 9/11 was an act of war, and every atrocity committed by them since then has been. What better way to commemorate 9/11 than to finally wipe the bastards out.

    • Kill ’em all and let God sort ’em out?:-)

      • liz

        This is a good pretext. Ironic that they apparently attacked to get revenge on Obama for killing Osama. But Obama’s cowardly retreat and apology prove he had nothing to do with it.

        • They actually think it was revenge for us taking out Abu Yaya al-Libi, but yes Obama’s reaction shows him to be a paper tiger. It is apparently now believed by some that the film protest was used as a diversion, the main attack having been planned before the movie came out. Seems to have taken on a life of its own, with Yemen embassy now attacked.

  • JohnChristoph

    What an endless game of insanity. I heard a report that this “offending” film was made/liked/ supported by the Florida preacher who burned the Koran. If true, people will denounce the preacher for stirring the flames. Of course this is nonsense. The preacher should have the right to freedom of speech and expression regardless of the threats made against him/the troops/the U.S., anybody.What we have done is capitulate, giving the high ground to the shouters, who then dictate to us what is permissible, what is tolerable to be said. Thus, they say if you make a film that disturbs us, we will kill you, so don’t do it. They are using threats of intimidation and blackmail to stop and limit opposition. It’s like capitulating to another mafia. The even larger problem is that our squad of religious delusionals attempts to placate their squad of religious delusionals, with each squad attempting to delineate what is acceptable when talking about the other fellows’ delusional gods. This kind of numb-nuttiness will continue until we, sometime in the future, perhaps, mercifully, begin to come to terms with our own origins and our own inability to simply accept reality, even if it is a hard reality to accept. (And it is, I don’t really like it anymore than anybody else does).

    • John I can tell you on good authority one set of religious delusionals who would have absolutely no problem with cleaning house in the middle east, and that would be the Mormons. They believe it is inevitable, and are philosophically fine with it. Once again why is it the Liberals, who can’t accept social Darwinism, or even basic survival of the fittest? It fry’s my brain how counter intuitive it is to capitulate(as you say) to an obviously inferior and backward culture.