All This America Hate Over A Movie?!

Whiskey? Tango? Foxtrot?
Does anyone really think that the spasm of anti-American protests raging in the Middle East is over an unknown movie, The Innocence of Muslims?
Well, damn, I guess we are all wrong since the Minister of Propaganda White House Press Secretary, Art Carney, er, JAY Carney says sure, it is all over a movie.
No, no, not at all according to the propagandist press drone. It is not about United States policy in the Middle East whatsoever. No, no, no. It is just over a movie that no one knew about until it went on an anti-Islamic website. Nothing more to see here.
So here at Mediate, we get the word from Mr. Carney and I suppose we should all just chill out about it right? Here is the money quote from Mr. Carney:

This is a fairly volatile situation, and it is in response not to U.S. policy, not to, obviously, the administration, not to the American people. It is in response to a video – a film – that we have judged to be reprehensive and disgusting. That in no way justifies any violent reaction to it. But this is not a case of protests directed at the United States, writ large, or at U.S. policy. This is in response to a video that is offensive and – to Muslims.

Ok Art, er I mean JAY! Explain why the German embassy in Karthoum, the Sudan, was torched this past Friday in another Islamic Day of Rage, also known as the Friday prayers? Was it because some German may have produced the movie? Support the movie? I do not know. Guess I ain't one of them there edumacated folks like you all are in the White House.
Lets try this one.
How can it not be against American foreign policy in the Middle East when Islamothugs shouted this in Tunis, Tunisia:

Obama! Obama! We are all Osamas!

So what does that mean? That the Worthless Leader, President Obama, is responsible for this movie? Did he produce it? Financially back it?
In other words don't believe any other reason than the official government line courtesy of Mr. Carney.
Oh, and if you don't believe it, better believe it when the United States ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice, says so. Mrs. Rice took to the Sunday news talk-show circuit to continue the administration line that it is all about the movie and nothing more.
Now let me be clear.
This movie had a minimal at best stoking of the fires in the Middle East especially. Because the reality is that there is a lot more out there on the internet and all over the place decidedly anti-Islamic. No it is not just the movie but how it is played up to stoke up the Islamonazis and their attempt to further gain influence in such nations as Egypt and Libya. The movie has a role of catalyst, but if it was not this particular movie, it would be something else.
And while the facts regarding Libya and the reality that the raid on the Benghazi counselor compound was planned keep slapping the administration in the face, they still are going with the theory that it was just part of the hate against this movie. Mrs. Rice did that too this morning according to Ed Morrissey over at Hotair.com. Here is what she said on This Week:

“We believe that folks in Benghazi, a small number of people came to the embassy to – or to the consulate, rather, to replicate the sort of challenge that was posed in Cairo,” Rice said. “And then as that unfolded, it seems to have been hijacked, let us say, by some individual clusters of extremists who came with heavier weapons… And it then evolved from there.”

Even the way that they are trying to explain things just sounds on the fly. It is that they have absolutely no clue as to how this Islamonazis work.
You do know what al-Queda means in English? It means "The Base" for it is the umbrella of most if not all of the anti-Western world, Islamonazi terrorists. It is a decentralized group. Thus, they can stir up trouble, get their allies worked up and we have the attack on the counselor compound and the murder of four Americans including the United States ambassador to Libya, Chris Stevens. And who is to say that the storming of the embassy in Cairo was not a diversion so the Libya attack could take place? Again it is decentralized. They do not have a traditional chain of command. But what they do, or did have, is the ability to coordinate. And lets face it, there are enough people in any given Islamic-majority nation that does hate the United States and all that it stands for including who ever the sitting president is at any given time.
Like conspiracy theorists, these people think that it does not matter who the president is and what party controls congress. All one and the same to them. They represent the eeeeevvvvviiiiilllll that is the United States.
No they are not impressed that there is a more sympathetic leader in the White House in the Worthless Leader, President Obama. They can care less that his daddy was Islamic. They can care less that the current occupant in the White House has an Islamic-sounding middle name. In fact, the reality is that to the fanatics, Barack Hussein Obama is probably a heretic for he is a Christian.
And that is the problem.
The current political leadership thinks that this faux-outrage is not against our nation or leadership.
But it is.
And until they get their blinders off and realize that these people have to be defeated, not dealt with like some college seminar class, then we will continue to see this kind of violence escalate, not subside. In fact, in the Islamic world our president and the United States government is more hated now than when George W. Bush was the president.
No, this is not all over a movie. It is about bringing the United States down by any means necessary. Period.

Mitt Romney IS Right And The Dear Leader Is Now The Worthless Leader

That's right, I wrote it all in the headline! And I will proceed to explain that Republican presidential candidate, Mitt Romney, is spot on regarding American impotence in the Middle East and how the Dear Leader, President Obama, is now to going to be referred to here, correctly, as the Worthless Leader, President Obama.
Mr. Romney has been condemned by the usual suspects for actually speaking the truth to power when he made his remarks regarding, at the time, the pressing issue of the Islamist thugs  storming the United States embassy gates in Cairo, taking down the American flag and replacing it with a black, Islamic flag.
Oh, the usual suspects and in no particular order.
The Worthless Leader, President Obama, the sycophant Obamawhore propaganda news media, the Democrats, beltway Republicans, the foreign policy "establishment" and that is pretty much it.
But back to the comments.
What Mr. Romney was referring to is this statement put out by the United States embassy in Cairo:

The Embassy of the United States in Cairo condemns the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims – as we condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions. Today, the 11th anniversary of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States, Americans are honoring our patriots and those who serve our nation as the fitting response to the enemies of democracy. Respect for religious beliefs is a cornerstone of American democracy. We firmly reject the actions by those who abuse the universal right of free speech to hurt the religious beliefs of others.

Ok, maybe there is no direct apology in that statement, but it certainly shreds the First Amendment to the constitution.
Oh yeah, were are these people when Jesus Christ is defamed in so-called "art" as being on the crucifix and then in a jar of urine and the "art" work is named "Piss Christ"? Yup, the crickets have been chirping on that one for many a moon.
But it certainly is the tone of appeasement. That really, we are on your side.
And supposedly, this tirade by these radical Islamics is regarding a movie that I nor the overwhelming number of Americans had never heard of, The Innocence of Muslims. And this was actually shown in a movie house with less than 10 people, yes you read that right, 10 people in attendance. And yet in a world away, this D-movie riles the Islamonazis.
Allegedly.
This is the statement that Mr. Romney released this past Tuesday, when at that point, the situation in Egypt was on the front pages:

“I'm outraged by the attacks on American diplomatic missions in Libya and Egypt and by the death of an American consulate worker in Benghazi. It's disgraceful that the Obama Administration's first response was not to condemn attacks on our diplomatic missions, but to sympathize with those who waged the attacks.”

Spot on. Mr. Romney.
It took a long time for the Worthless Leader, President Obama's, administration to walk back from that disgusting statement from the embassy in Cairo. And when the statement was released, no one knew the full extent of the savagery that took place in Benghazi.

Now, this is what Mr. Romney said prior to taking questions from Obamawhore attack dogs reporters yesterday morning:

Good morning. Americans woke up this morning with tragic news and felt heavy hearts as they considered that individuals who have served in our diplomatic core were brutally murdered across the world.
This attack on American individuals and embassies is outrageous, it’s disgusting, it breaks the hearts of all of us who think of these people who have served during their lives for the cause of freedom, and justice and honor. We mourn their loss and join together in prayer that the spirit of the All Mighty might comfort the families of those who have been so brutally slain.
Four diplomats lost their life, including the U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens in the attack on our embassy at Benghazi, Libya – and of course with these words I extend my condolences to the grieving loved ones who have been left behind as a result of these who have lost their lives in the service of our Nation, and I know that the people across America are grateful for their service, and we mourn their sacrifice.
America will not tolerate attacks against our citizens and against our embassies. We’ll defend also our constitutional rights of speech, and assembly, and religion. We have confidence in our cause in America. We respect our Constitution. We stand for the principles our Constitution protects. We encourage other nations to understand and respect the principles of our Constitution, because we recognize that these principles are the ultimate source of freedom for individuals around the world.
Possibly the Administration was wrong to standby a statement sympathizing with those who had breached our embassy in Egypt instead of condemning their actions.
Its never too early for the United States Government to condemn attacks on Americans and to defend our values. The White House distanced itself last night from the statement saying it wasn’t cleared by Washington. That reflects the mixed signals they are sending to the world. The attacks in Libya and Egypt underscore that the world remains a dangerous place and that American leadership is still sorely needed.
In the face of this violence, America cannot shrink from the responsibility to lead. American leadership is necessary to insure that events in the region don’t spin out of control. We cannot hesitate to use our influence in the region to support those who share our values and our interests.
Over the last several years we’ve stood witness to an Arab Spring that presents an opportunity for a more peaceful and prosperous region, but also poses the potential for peril if the forces of extremism and violence are allowed to control the course of events.
We must strive to insure that the Arab Spring does not become an Arab Winter. With that I’m happy to take any questions you may have.

Once again, spot on and no cowardice. Understand that Mr. Romney stood up for the constitution and what it means for us as Americans. It protects people that want to make a D-movie condemning Islam and Mohammad as well as "art" depicting a crucified Jesus in a jar of urine. And he did try to put something positive about the so-called "Arab Spring". However , he also stated what many of us believe is already there, an Arab Winter.
But to read the Obamawhore attack dogs media, why it was horrible that Mr. Romney would somehow play politics with this situation. Never mind that their Lord and Savior did exactly the same thing when he was running for president in 2008.
Note to the uninitiated.
It is perfectly OK for a Democrat to do what then Sen. Messiah Barack did in blasting then-President George W. Bush. If a Republican does anything like that, well he is a disaster. And un-patriotic. And blah, blah, blah.
And if any of these reports are accurate, that our brave embassy marine guards guns were unloaded window-dressing, that the State Department had credible evidence that something bad was going to happen, then Worthless Leader, President Obama, man up and take what comes your way. Because your sir are the commander-in-chief of the armed forces of the United States of America.
So, why is the former Dear Leader, now Worthless Leader, President Obama, deemed worthless by your humble blogger?
Because he chose to attend a fundraiser, what else is new, in Las Vegas, he dared to make this obscene comparison:

'The sacrifices that our troops and our diplomats make are obviously very different from the challenges that we face here domestically but, like them, you guys are Americans who sense that we can do better than we’re doing….I’m just really proud of you.'

Really? You are comparing coddled campaign workers to soldiers and diplomats who actually gave and will give their lives so said campaign workers can continued to be entranced by your "Hope"  and "Change" skulduggery?
No sir, I will write that I am not proud of my president making such a statement.
You know who got in trouble for making a similar comment?
Why it was Mitt Romney in 2008 when he made the grievous attempt to compare his son's serving his presidential campaign then as serving in the armed forces. He was wrong to make such a comparison and was rightly rebuked.
But the difference is that Mr. Romney was a candidate in the Republican primaries in 2008. The above comment came from the president of the United States.
I am sorry, but a president can not compare a political campaign to those serving in harms' way. Period.
Hence, he is now the Worthless Leader, President Obama.
This has been a bad week for our nation. We do need leadership. We need new leadership. One that is not afraid to speak for America and not passively. One that does not shirk from the responsibility of governing. One that will not send our best and brightest to be sitting ducks and get killed when they may not have had to.
Mitt Romney is right and the now Worthless Leader, President Obama, is wrong.

 

 

Is Libya Heading To A Sharia Law State?

WOW! Who would have thought it? That the new Libya would stride nicely into becoming an Islamist state complete with Sharia law?
Well, some of us armchair analysts, you know not the Ivy-League types, kind of thought this might be the outcome of the Libyan revolution against the late dictator, Moammar Khadafy.
And it appears that we were correct.
If this report is to be believed, and why not since it is out of the mouth of the head honcho, Mustafa Abdul-Jalil, that is exactly where Libya is headed.
In this post from March 23 of this year, your humble blogger asked an obvious question:

Wait, we do not even know anything about these rebels. We maybe backing forces worse, if you can believe that, than the dictator Qaddafi.

OK, lets see, they capture a wounded Khadafy then drag his possibly still alive body on the hood of a pickup truck through his hometown of Sirte.
While I do relish the end and death of Khadafy, it is not the way things are done in civilized societies.
Now there is the serious possibility that Libya will become another Islamic state. One that maybe a Sunni Islam version of Iran.
Is that what we wanted in the ouster of Khadady? Is it our national interest to oust a bad dude for a group of bad dudes?
It appears that maybe the case here.
And it is looking very likely that Tunisia will end up becoming an Islamic state if the election held today favors Islamic parties. The election is for the constitutional assembly and who will be on it. And if the majority turn out to be Islamsts, what good will have been gained?
This is the direct result of not leading but letting others do the dirty work. That is what the Dear Leader, President Obama, and the Democrats have done in this case. And in the long run, the detriment maybe a slew of Islamist regimes from Tunisia to Egypt. And all will, no doubt, be much more anti-American than the previous ones.
No question, the United States made some serious mistakes.
Like not getting some of the leaders, such as Hosni Mubarak in Egypt to transition. Same in Tunisia.
Part of the problem was that these were secular leaders. And they used the specter of their nations falling in the hands of Islamist fanatics. Yet their bid to hold onto power ended up doing just that.
Khadafy in Libya is a little different.
He was using some Islamic law with his own twisted socialist vision. Kind of like Saddam Hussein did to the end of his reign of terror. Thus he co opted Just enough of Islamic teaching to make him out to be a defender of the faith.
But when the opportunity arose, the true believers began a revolution. And the end result is probably going to be a hostile, anti-American Islamist state ruled by Sharia law.
Yeah, I don't have some Ivy-League advanced degree, but how could I see this coming and not the best and the alleged brightest in the highest places of American government?

Ding Dong! Khadafy's Dead! Ding Dong! Khadafy's Dead!

This news should have happened in 1986 when the United States bombed the compound of the now deceased dictator, Moammar Khadafy. But I will take the fact he met his fate and is probably burning in Hell as I write this.
The dictator who's claim to fame is the infamous "Green Book", met a horrific end as his corpse was dragged in the streets of his hometown of Sirte. Some would say that it was too good for him. I will leave that to the Good Lord to judge.
But a look at Khadafy and his reign of terror makes me more than sympathize with those that did him in.
As he consolidated power after his 1969 coup, he was certainly no democrat.
And as he retained power, it only corrupted him further.
Libya maybe a big desert, but it is rich in natural resources. Yet Khadafi kept it mostly for himself and his minions. Not unlike many other dictatorships, he tried to justify it by "spreading the wealth" and concocted the Great Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya. It was the basis for his view of socialism and wrought disaster for his land and people.
And as time went on, Khadafy tried to curry favor with Islamists within the nation. The nation became a mix of the Jamahiriya and Islam. Much of Islamic law was incorporated in the nation.
Of course Khadafy will always be remembered for his and nation's role in the bombing of Pan Am airlines flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland in 1988. That bombing while the plane was in flight killed 270 people in all. And the only terrorist convicted of the dastardly crime, Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, ended up being released by Scottish authorities on "humanitarian" grounds and is still alive. And somewhere in Libya.
And Khadafy was always trying to push his twisted ideology all over the place.
But no more.
One can only hope that the Libyan National Transitional Council can consolidate and bring true reform to this battered land. And yes, some form of democracy.
Most important is that the leaders of this effort were the British and French governments. Yes, the United States has engaged and should have gotten congressional approval for this engagement. But it is done. And in reality, as has been noted, the United States did not lead this effort but came up the rear.
We should be glad that a man that created so much pain and terror in his life ended up seeing it end in much the same way. Eternal justice was meted out.
So, ding dong! Khadafy's gone!

If Khadafi Falls, What Kind Of Libya Will The West Get?

It does appear that the Libyan civil war is about to end, sort of, with the rebel forces entering the capital, Tripoli. And they have met little if any resistance.
If this does indeed wind down the civil war, what will Libya look like a year from now. Six months from now. And most important, what will the new Libya be to the West and the United States. Will it be a friend or foe?
Part of the problem has been trying to figure out the rebels in the first place.
This recent article in The Christian Science Monitor sure does nothing to help. I would argue that because so many of the rebel leader are formerly of the Moammar Khadafi regime, it is hard to say what they will do once Khadafi falls. If he is still in the nation, will they find and kill him? Will they help Shepperd him off to another third-world dictatorship so he does not have to face the fury of his people? And what if they turn out to support an Islamist government in Tripoli?
Again, we do not know.
The linked article concludes thus:

Who are Libya's rebels? They're, well, Libya. Nationalistic, flawed, proud, inexperienced in government.
On balance, they're the best hope for a better Libya than what Qaddafi offered.

Hmm, I will question that balance. Not because I do not believe that the Libyan people want freedom. But many Iranians wanted that too and look what ousting the Shah of Iran did for them?
And what to make of the assassination of the rebel military commander,
General Abdul Fattah Younes? It appears that because the West and the United States support the Transitional Nation Council, as the rebels are now known, they are in line to get $30,000,000,000 of frozen Khadafi money. And if this report in Front Page magazine is correct, the money is just factionalizing the TNC more than it may have been. And it is a fact that there are al-Qaeda forces in the rebel coalition. And it is a fact that a faction if not al-Qaeda sympathetic are Islamist at heart.

Again, a fundamental problem is exactly what hurt us in the Iranian revolution of 1978-79. We supported the wrong side.
Sure, the Shah was not a democrat. Yeah, he was not a paragon of freedom. Part of that was a paranoia that turned out to be correct. A paranoia about being ousted by backward-forces. And he was. Had he instituted true democratic reform, there may still be an Iranian monarchy. But, just supporting people that may be better than the devil we know did us no good. And thus the brutal dictatorial Islamic republic is now in control in Iran.

If the Untied States does not figure out these rebels and how they will govern, it will be Iran all over again.

As the article in The Christian Science Monitor noted, because of Khadafi's form of rule, there really are no reliable institutions that the people will respect.

And that is a real and present danger.

I am glad that Khadafi is on his way out. But what will take over could be worse for the West and the United States. And having a hands-off attitude will not help matters either.