US envoy dies in Benghazi consulate attack

[Kuya]

They don't have anything to disprove. People who don't have an axe to grind with muslims know thr difference between an ultra conservative and a moderate-liberal. Reasonable people also understand that in more modern countries there are more center left people. Muslims shouldn't be expected to decry every act of violence that some muslim somewhere did. You wouldn't think it reasonable that a violent act from some americans should be held against all americans, so Muslims shouldn't have unreasonable expectations imposed upon them that other people don't have to endure.

[Kuya]

What we should be asking ourselves is why people see thousands of muslims protesting, of a country composed of millions, and instantly assume they're all like that. It's not on them to prove that not all of them are salafists, just like it's not on you guys to prove to the rest of the world you're not all batshit insane conservatives whenever the tea party protests.

[Xno Kappa]

Except it was a U.S. Consulate with American citizens killed whose security were dependent on the hosting country's government.

[Kuya]

You're talking about the ineptitude of a government. I am talking about accusing an entire population of extremism.

[Xno Kappa]

I meant the Libyan government seemingly being the only country to have taken any action against the attacks, not the population.

[Kuya]

That's because the only country where there has been a terrorist attack on a US embassy recently is Libya. What are you talking about?

[ronin sparthos]

They don't have anything to disprove. People who don't have an axe to grind with muslims know thr difference between an ultra conservative and a moderate-liberal. Reasonable people also understand that in more modern countries there are more center left people. Muslims shouldn't be expected to decry every act of violence that some muslim somewhere did. You wouldn't think it reasonable that a violent act from some americans should be held against all americans, so Muslims shouldn't have unreasonable expectations imposed upon them that other people don't have to endure.

If the Muslim community refuses to address the very real issue of extremists hijacking their religious beliefs and culture then the line between the moderate and extremist will be conflated and outsiders will begin to treat the two as equal. Is it fair? No and it cuts to human irrationality but is it the ultimate result of a handful of religious extremists claiming to be Islam while the majority sits on the sidelines muttering "that isn't Islam"? Yes.

You either get ahead of the problem or let the problem consume you.

In the ME there are many reasons for not wanting to get involved in counter-protests (being killed comes to mind) but in the West? Where are the protests and where is the rage that violence needs to stop? Religious groups love to throw the huge numbers of followers across the globe but when a situation like this presents itself where a minority group engages in violent actions the huge swaths of followers suddenly becomes silent. You'd think for a religious faith that claims to be the center of so many lives that people would be a bit more motivated to protect it from a handful of people who are obsessed with corrupting the system.

I'm aware that Muslims aren't the only group dealing with such a problem but they get the most play precisely because their extremists are so violent and so eager to spill blood in the name of Islam.

Kudos to the Libyans for protesting against their extremist elements and mustering the bravery needed to stand up and defend your beliefs.

[Kuya]

It's up to them to deal with their own cultural problems however they see fit. Do they want to prove they're not all terrorists or do they give no shits? It's their choice.

We however, have no right to demand them to prove it to us, much Like we would be outraged if the same demands were asked of us.

[Xno Kappa]

That's because the only country where there has been a terrorist attack on a US embassy recently is Libya.

You're right. Embassies/Consulates in other Middle Eastern nations have been completely peaceful as of late. No riots/protests whatsoever leaving a few dead here or there over a certain film.

[Kuya]

You're right. Embassies/Consulates in other Middle Eastern nations have been completely peaceful as of late. No riots/protests whatsoever leaving a few dead here or there over a certain film.

Post the article that proves there's been a terrorist attack against a US embassy and the local government didn't do anything about it.

What's been happening is lots of violent and peaceful protesting, and the people dying have been the protesters themselves or the police forces trying to quell them.

[ronin sparthos]

What we should be asking ourselves is why people see thousands of muslims protesting, of a country composed of millions, and instantly assume they're all like that. It's not on them to prove that not all of them are salafists, just like it's not on you guys to prove to the rest of the world you're not all batshit insane conservatives whenever the tea party protests.

If a conservative makes a stupid statement on behalf of America you can be sure as the sun rises each day that someone will counter that with "this is bullshit and does not represent me and active response by some in the form of protests and organizational action against such statements.

When those Qurans got burned by soldiers what was the response on behalf of America? Everything from outright condemnation of the fact from the top to personal apologies on behalf of individuals on the bottom. You also had individuals who praised the destruction of the texts but the point is that people weren't silent, people didn't sit back and let the soldiers actions define their beliefs and that is something I'd expect more from the Muslims in the West.

[ronin sparthos]

It's up to them to deal with their own cultural problems however they see fit. Do they want to prove they're not all terrorists or do they give no shits? It's their choice.

We however, have no right to demand them to prove it to us, much Like we would be outraged if the same demands were asked of us.

You're right, they don't have to do anything but know that inaction is a choice and comes with consequences.

We have no right to make demands but when you've got hundreds of protestors causing all sorts of damage to the West while flying flags with declarations of violence you'd think the peace loving Muslims would be inspired to counter this action - especially the ones here in the West who are thousands of miles away from the mischief makers.

[Kuya]

It's their businesses whether they make a statement or not. What is truly vile isn't their inaction, but those who imply that inaction is the same as support.

[tyven]

Kuya pls. we have all learned of the innocence of muslims.

[Cantih]

Hoooooboy
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinio...y.html?hpid=z7

Important bit in bold for the tl;dr people.

When House Republicans called a hearing in the middle of their long recess, you knew it would be something big, and indeed it was: They accidentally blew the CIA’s cover.

The purpose of Wednesday’s hearing of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee was to examine security lapses that led to the killing in Benghazi last month of the U.S. ambassador to Libya and three others. But in doing so, the lawmakers reminded us why “congressional intelligence” is an oxymoron.

Through their outbursts, cryptic language and boneheaded questioning of State Department officials, the committee members left little doubt that one of the two compounds at which the Americans were killed, described by the administration as a “consulate” and a nearby “annex,” was a CIA base. They did this, helpfully, in a televised public hearing.

Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) was the first to unmask the spooks. “Point of order! Point of order!” he called out as a State Department security official, seated in front of an aerial photo of the U.S. facilities in Benghazi, described the chaotic night of the attack. “We’re getting into classified issues that deal with sources and methods that would be totally inappropriate in an open forum such as this.”

A State Department official assured him that the material was “entirely unclassified” and that the photo was from a commercial satellite. “I totally object to the use of that photo,” Chaffetz continued. He went on to say that “I was told specifically while I was in Libya I could not and should not ever talk about what you’re showing here today.”

Now that Chaffetz had alerted potential bad guys that something valuable was in the photo, the chairman, Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), attempted to lock the barn door through which the horse had just bolted. “I would direct that that chart be taken down,” he said, although it already had been on C-SPAN. “In this hearing room, we’re not going to point out details of what may still in fact be a facility of the United States government or more facilities.”

May still be a facility? The plot thickened — and Chaffetz gave more hints. “I believe that the markings on that map were terribly inappropriate,” he said, adding that “the activities there could cost lives.”

In their questioning and in the public testimony they invited, the lawmakers managed to disclose, without ever mentioning Langley directly, that there was a seven-member “rapid response force” in the compound the State Department was calling an annex. One of the State Department security officials was forced to acknowledge that “not necessarily all of the security people” at the Benghazi compounds “fell under my direct operational control.”

And whose control might they have fallen under? Well, presumably it’s the “other government agency” or “other government entity” the lawmakers and witnesses referred to; Issa informed the public that this agency was not the FBI.

“Other government agency,” or “OGA,” is a common euphemism in Washington for the CIA. This “other government agency,” the lawmakers’ questioning further revealed, was in possession of a video of the attack but wasn’t releasing it because it was undergoing “an investigative process.”

Or maybe they were referring to the Department of Agriculture.

That the Benghazi compound had included a large CIA presence had been reported but not confirmed. The New York Times, for example, had reported that among those evacuated were “about a dozen CIA operatives and contractors.” The paper, like The Washington Post, withheld locations and details of the facilities at the administration’s request.

But on Wednesday, the withholding was on hold.

The Republican lawmakers, in their outbursts, alternated between scolding the State Department officials for hiding behind classified material and blaming them for disclosing information that should have been classified. But the lawmakers created the situation by ordering a public hearing on a matter that belonged behind closed doors.

Republicans were aiming to embarrass the Obama administration over State Department security lapses. But they inadvertently caused a different picture to emerge than the one that has been publicly known: that the victims may have been let down not by the State Department but by the CIA. If the CIA was playing such a major role in these events, which was the unmistakable impression left by Wednesday’s hearing, having a televised probe of the matter was absurd.

The chairman, attempting to close his can of worms, finally suggested that “the entire committee have a classified briefing as to any and all other assets that were not drawn upon but could have been drawn upon” in Benghazi.

Good idea. Too bad he didn’t think of that before putting the CIA on C-SPAN.

[Dimmauk]

Hoooooboy
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinio...y.html?hpid=z7

Important bit in bold for the tl;dr people.

I was wondering if Paul Ryan would bring up the attack tonight. Now I hope he does.

[Salodin]

I was wondering if Paul Ryan would bring up the attack tonight. Now I hope he does.

Assuming biden doesn't pull a brobama and actually attacks and refutes him on the issue, and doesn't let him slide.