Obama’s response to our embassies being attacked?

Good day all. Yesterday, the 11^th anniversary of the attack by Al Qaeda backed Islamic terrorists that murdered 3000 people, the Muslims decided to celebrate by attacking our embassy’s in Libya and Egypt. The ambassador to Libya and 4 others were murdered by these scum. The Flag was burned and apparently the Al Qaeda flag was hoisted at our Egyptian embassy.

What was the response of the Obama Administration?

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.

Allow me to translate this crap. The Obama State Department APOLOGIZED for hurting the Muslims feelings! Once again, Obama’s “people” have disgraced the nation they purportedly represent. We should not be apologizing to these scum, we should be demanding an apology and restitution and the heads of every single person involved. Not the people, JUST their heads…on a platter.

Of course, once it got out what King Putt did, the Romney campaign opened fire. From the Washington Post:

In a statement Tuesday night, Mitt Romney accused the Obama administration of sympathizing with the Libyan protesters who attacked a consulate in Benghazi, killing the U.S. ambassador and three other American diplomats.

“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,” Romney said. “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.”

Disgraceful yes, but not at all surprising. Obama has been accused of being a “Secret Muslim” due to his upbringing in Indonesia and his trips to Pakistan and other Islamic countries as a youth. I have not commented on this, and frankly don’t think Der Fubar is a Muslim. I also don’t think he is a Christian either. I do think he does sympathize with our enemy and has actively worked to aid and abet the radical, (Which differ from the average Muslim in noise level only), Muslims in hurting Israel and the West.

The original response from Romney came out before we knew about the murder of the Ambassador and the 4 others in Libya. So what was the response from Obama on Romney’s comments? About what you would expect.

Obama spokesman Ben LaBolt responded a few hours later that it was Romney who was out of line. “We are shocked that, at a time when the United States of America is confronting the tragic death of one of our diplomatic officers in Libya, Governor Romney would choose to launch a political attack,” he said.

In other words, the SCoaMF is in full damage control mode. They have disavowed the earlier statement apologizing to the RIF’s ((Radical Islamic Fundamentalists)) and sent “Saint Hillary of the Clintons” out to try and walk back this disaster.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton condemned the attack “in the strongest terms,” adding that while the United States “deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of others … there is never any justification for violent acts of this kind.” Wednesday morning, Obama released his own statement condemning “the outrageous attack.”

Nice try thunder thighs, but we aren’t buying it. YOUR State Department, under YOUR leadership put out that statement. (Yes it was actually the embassy in Cairo, but they don’t do anything without checking with Washington) As soon as you heard what had happened, you should have made sure that ANY public statements were cleared through you, or the White House first. Nice going there Cankles. It shows just what a leader you are. *snort*

I’m sure a lot of you are wondering what happened to the Marine guards on duty in the embassies? Why didn’t they just open fire and mow down these slime when they came over the wall and invaded the grounds? Breitbart asks the same question.

Early reports of the militant attacks on the American consulate in Benghazi, Libya that killed our Ambassador, Chris Stevens, and three other Americans offer a confusing picture of the facts surrounding these murders.

CBS News is reporting that Ambassador Stevens suffocated to death while two Marines and an embassy staffer were shot to death. CBS also reported that more Marines were being sent to Libya. But these reports raise more questions than they answer:

Breitbart then quotes CBSNEWS:

Military officials told CBS News an anti-terrorism team of U.S. Marines was being deployed to Libya to help secure U.S. interests following the attack. The State Department said, however, that no Americans were remaining at the facility in Benghazi. State officials would not confirm how many Americans were evacuated, or to where….

Stevens died of suffocation, while two U.S. Marines sent to Benghazi when the clash erupted were shot and killed by well-armed protesters. It was not immediately clear whether the Marines were part of Stevens’ security detail. The American whose death was confirmed on Tuesday also died of a gunshot wound. He was identified by the State Department on Wednesday as Foreign Service Information Management Officer Sean Smith.

Breitbart continues:

Security at the consulate was apparently provided by Libyan nationals hired by the United States. While security for American embassies is typically provided by our own Marines, the two Marines reported killed in yesterday’s attacks appear not to have been stationed at the embassy, but were sent there from another unknown location as the violence erupted. There is also no indication if these two Marines were the only American military personnel on site at the time of Ambassador Stevens’s death.

Why weren’t these Marines armed? If they were armed, why didn’t they fire? My guess is they weren’t armed and if they were, were ambushed and never had a chance to shoot. If they weren’t armed, this was probably on orders of the State Department, just like what happened in Tehran in 1979. The Marines had weapons but weren’t allowed to load them, never mind actually using them.

All reports indicate that the security forces at the consulate were overwhelmed by the size of the militant crowds and offered no resistance as they stormed the building, looted it, and killed the four Americans.

As the facts surrounding the destruction of the American consulate and death of Ambassador Stevens become known, investigators will focus on these questions: Did the State Department provide adequate security for our embassy staff there? If not, why not?

And finally, the most important question of all: Where were the Marines?

On another forum, this question was asked. The answer from someone who knows was, “The Marines on the embassy security details can’t answer that question. All aspects are classified Top Secret. However, the ones I talked to were frustrated even though they can’t speak about it.”

Now I can understand classifying the details of our security procedures at our embassies. However, what most people don’t know is that the Marine guards report to the Ambassador, not through the normal chain of command. If the Ambassador and the State Department say no weapons or resistance, then they Marines can do nothing.

This was exactly what happened in the ‘70’s and one reason our embassy in Iran was taken over. The Marines were not permitted to use deadly force to protect it. Most people probably thought that order had been changed after the Iranian hostage fiasco. It may very well have been under Reagan. However, since Reagan, we have had one squishy Republican after another as president and the Democrats? It goes without saying they would have issued orders to not defend our embassies.

Now there are a lot of details we don’t know as of this posting. However there is one thing we do know. Obama will do nothing to retaliate for these attacks. After all, he’s responsible for putting these regimes in place. ((Arab Spring fiascos)) Why would he want to do anything to people that he philosophically supports? Now if it were me that was in charge, well, this wouldn’t have happened in the first place of course. However, if it did, I would make my displeasure at these acts of war by these regimes known.

First, there are reports of huge rallies to take place in Libya and Egypt. When they occurred, the following would take place on my orders.

For Egypt, the demolition of the Aswan Dam. This would send a virtual tidal wave down the Nile river, destroying everything in its path including Cairo. I’ve been following discussions on another forum regarding how this could happen. There are two methods. One, use a small nuclear device dropped into the reservoir directly behind the dam. This would break the dam and send radioactive water down the Nile contaminating everything that was flooded.

Then there are those who think we should use conventional means to break the dam. This would be similar to the method used by the British Royal Air Force in World War Two ((Operation Chastise)). Of course, rather then sending in a squadron of Lancasters ((The Avro Lancaster)) at low altitude with a specially designed depth charge, the thinking is either multiple hits on the front face of the dam with cruise missiles ((Cruise Missiles)) or bunker buster ((Bunker Buster weapons)) bombs, or dropping large charges behind the dam as was done in the RAF raid.

Since modern guidance systems are far better than what the RAF had in WW2, we wouldn’t need to send strike aircraft over the reservoir at low altitude. It would take more munitions than a single nuclear weapon, but it would leave the region downstream free of radioactive contamination and suitable for colonization by others. Needless to say, Egypt would be destroyed as a nation with millions dead.

For Libya, since they don’t have a handy dandy dam to blow up, I would order the USAF ((United States Air Force)) or the Navy ((United States Navy)) to send in a few aircraft of a suitable type armed with suitable weapons, such as cluster bombs ((Cluster munitions)), and drop them on the crowds marching in their protest rally. Considering the size of these protest marches in these hellholes, that should cause several hundred thousand casualties.

Are either of these ideas a bit over the top? Oh Hell YES, they are! The object is retribution. Overwhelming, utterly disproportionate totally devastating retribution. It would be an object lesson to other nations, (Iran or Syria come to mind), that we have had enough of their antics and we will no longer play their game. You mess with the United States and we will annihilate you in the most extreme way we can come up with.

Like most Americans, I want the United States to be liked. If not liked, then respected. If not respected, then absolute terror over what we might do if you piss us off is acceptable.

I don’t know if Romney has the guts to do what I suggest. (Probably not), but at least he won’t actively aid our enemies the way King Putt has been doing since he played his first round of golf assumed the office of President of the United States in 2009.

Emperor Misha of the Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler is not amused by the latest exploits of King Putt. He described his feeling about this here. He also showed his utter contempt for the goat molesters in this post. Take a look at both please

Remember in November!

Thatisall

~The Angry Webmaster~

(4 votes, average: 0.00 out of 5)

Loading...