Anti-Islam film incites violence

[The Troll]

I was going to go into my UAW rant, on how they screwed things up, but I decided not to do that.  That would be "trollish"...

  Thanks Hawk for not being more SCABIST than you are!   

[Henry Hawk]

  Thanks Hawk for not being more SCABIST than you are!   

YOU are welcome...

[Locutus]

I don't often bump old threads, but this one is particularly interesting in light of this past week's events. 

I'm bumping it so if any of you, in your weekend spare time, care to read this thread from the start.  It is clear from very early on that we had all come to the conclusion that the events at the embassy in Benghazi were separate from the violence associated with the "Innocence of Muslims" film. 

This thread was started shortly after news of the Benghazi attacks broke, and by page 3, we were already segregating talking about the violence associated with the film, and the attacks on the facility in Benghazi.  The thread was started on September 12, 2012, at 07:44:51 AM, and by page 3, I made this post about separating the issues at hand:

CNN is reporting that the Libyan attack came in two waves and was planned in advance.  So we may be talking about two topics here.   The movie that incited the protests and a well planned attack by a pro-al Qaeda group. 

I just thought some of you may enjoy reading back how we discussed the events as they unfolded over that time, especially in light of this past week's hearing. 

[Locutus]

And if Henry Hawk has ever been wrong about anything he's said herein, it was this statement here:

Of course nothing further will come of this....the MSM will let this one die....if they can. 

The Republicans have been chanting, "Benghazi! Benghazi! Benghazi! Benghazi! Benghazi! Benghazi!" ever since. 

[AbbyTC]

Thanks for bumping this up, Locutus. It was interesting to read all the comments. 

[Locutus]

It will also be interesting to read any new commentary once the usual suspects show up.   

[Palehorse]

It will also be interesting to read any new commentary once the usual suspects show up.   

Except for being led off into the deep weeds about unemployment, I stayed out of this witch hunt in the early days. . .

[Locutus]

A smart move. 

[libby]

I just read the whole thing. Thanks, Locutus. 

[Exterminator]

The Republicans have been chanting, "Benghazi! Benghazi! Benghazi! Benghazi! Benghazi! Benghazi!" ever since. 

I think it's interesting to compare and contrast the differences between the Republicans' reaction to the death of these four Americans to the reaction of the Democratic House under Reagan in the aftermath of the bombing of a U.S. marine compound in Beirut in 1983 that killed 241...that's right...241 U.S. servicemen.  It wasn't as though no one could have seen it coming; the U.S. embassy there had been bombed six months earlier, killing 63 people, seventeen of whom were Americans.  Among those, seven were CIA officers, including the agency's top analyst in the Middle East.

There was one, only one, investigation into this attack resulting in a bipartisan report containing recommendations on how to improve security measures in government installations throughout the world.  Those recommendations were slow to be implemented and in March of 1984, another militant attack resulted in the kidnapping, torture and eventual murder of the CIA's Beirut station chief, Bill Buckley.  By September of 1984, with the new security precautions still not implemented, the third attack in eighteen months occurred with a bombing of the U.S. embassy annex, again in Beirut.

Where was the outrage?

"If you compare the costs of the Reagan Administration's serial security lapses in Beirut to the costs of Benghazi, it's clear what has really deteriorated in the intervening three decades. It's not the security of American government personnel working abroad. It's the behavior of American congressmen at home."

Unlike today's political witch hunt, there were not eighteen investigations costing the taxpayers millions of dollars while producing nothing of any value.  Our entire system of government has become dysfunctional (and I can't wait to see how Henry and me spin this to be the fault of liberals).

[Anne]

The glaring difference between this attack and the others, imo, is the length of the attack. A bomb is different than a sustained attack of several hours.

[Exterminator]

The glaring difference between this attack and the others, imo, is the length of the attack. A bomb is different than a sustained attack of several hours.

Seriously?   

[Anne]

Yes, the other attacks were more of a single brief incident, regardless of how many people were killed or injured. There was no opportunity to react to the attack. This one lasted several hours and there was time to help. No one has ever explained why no help was sent.

[Exterminator]

Yes, the other attacks were more of a single brief incident, regardless of how many people were killed or injured. There was no opportunity to react to the attack. This one lasted several hours and there was time to help. No one has ever explained why no help was sent.

First of all, help was sent but coordination and transportation takes time.  Just so that you know, the transporters on Star Trek aren't real.  Secondly, the attacks in Beirut happened over the course of eighteen months with no substantial changes to security protocols implemented during that time.  That's a long time to react.

[Exterminator]

I also think you're missing the original intent of my post and the bigger picture.