Beyond Ineptitude


******************* UPDATE ******************

“U.S. ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens killed in consulate attack in Benghazi

The death of Christopher Stevens, 52, on Tuesday came as two American State Department employees were also killed in Benghazi as an 20 gun-wielding attackers stormed the U.S. consulate, angry about an American made film.”

What happened yesterday on several foreign policy fronts is not fully known yet. But with what we do know we have an administration in way over it’s head and now an Ambassador may be dead. This is beyond ineptitude and approaching incompetence.

Here is the statement released by our own State Department in response to Americans exercising their freedom of speech. (the date on this is beyond incredulous):(edited per Comment #4 below)

“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.”

Can anyone believe this? It’s America’s fault because we have free speech that an Ambassador may be dead and sovereign American soil in Libya and Egypt was attacked on 9/11’s anniversary. This is the administration’s statement in response to Americans practicing free speech.(edit) Actually it’s not a statement, it’s another apology from this President’s administration (the second in Cairo) for our way of life. I cannot believe there are people who want to re-elect this self-described “incomplete” President.

I agee with Charles Krauthammer’s suggestion as to what the US response should have been — Go to hell


  1. First off, that statement was released by the embassy BEFORE the attack, and further, notice the words “by the embassy:” the administration wasn’t happy: “no one in Washington approved that statement before it was released and it doesn’t reflect the views of the U.S. government.”

  2. Randy in Richmond says:

    Oh, the administration wasn’t happy with an official report released by the…administration. Who cares when the statement was released, it reads no different if a week old or 6 months old.

    The ineptness is that this happened at all. Does anyone think it matters to our allies or others that read or hear of this release what section of the administration released it? This is sorta like God is in, God is out, God is back in. Jerusalem is in. Jerusalem is out. Jerusalem is back in.

    Wouldn’t at least one person in this administration think, 9/11… maybe we should be extra secure in certain countries today.

    This was an official press release from a US Embassy. Does no higher authority have to approve such releases?

    And later we can get into the Israel boondoggle involving the President himself.

  3. “Here is the statement released by our own State Department in response to what happened in Egypt…”

    Shouldn’t you retract the part about, “in response”? I’m sure you wouldn’t want to look like you were jumping to conclusions.

  4. Randy in Richmond says:

    In real time when I wrote “in response” that was how it was being reported in what I read. I have no trouble retracting the original wording, which has been changed.

    This timing actually makes it worse. This means the statement was planned as a press release to try and appease whomever by apologizing beforehand for our way of life. Had I known this at 5 am this morning here’s what I would have said:

    Here is the statement released by our own State Department in response to Americans exercising their freedom of speech. (the date on this is beyond incredulous):

    Regardless of the timing it sadly was ineffective as to it’s purpose.

  5. Either way, J. Strupp, it sounds like the State Department (and something like that HAD to have been read and approved by someone high up the food chain) is apologizing for our religious freedom. If I want to call someone an idiot for being a Christian or a member of any other religion, I can do that in this country. That’s my right. We shouldn’t be apologizing for it. For some reason, the Left is highly tolerant of the intolerance of certain people of a certain predominant religion in Egypt.

  6. “…the Left is highly tolerant of the intolerance of certain people of a certain predominant religion in Egypt.”

    Of course I can only speak for myself, but I have an inkling most liberals would agree with me, we hold everyone to the same standards: we dislike Muslim nutjobs to the exact same extent that we dislike Christian nutjobs, and defend the rights of both to be nutjobs. It’s just that you notice our defense of the former because we have more frequent occasion to express it since we are more often than not talking to the latter.

  7. @jimspice, in general “liberals” are more likely to call Christian nut jobs for what they are. They demure when it comes to Muslim nutjobs. After a terrorist attack, they are more likely to say “let’s not take this out on all Muslims,” while when a gun wacko shoots up something they are quick to look for or point out a Tea Party or Christian element.

    In any case, we shouldn’t be apologizing for free speech rights. I didn’t see Catholics storming embassies and shooting people when the Last Temptation of Christ came out.

  8. “But with what we do know we have an administration in way over it’s head and now an Ambassador may be dead. This is beyond ineptitude and approaching incompetence.”


  9. This was an attack on our Ambassador and our Embassy and all you can do is rush to blame the president.

    They are obviously trying not to escalate the situation which is why they aren’t rolling tanks into Benghazi.

    Randy in Richmond: Political Hack. Your foreign policy chops leave much to be desired, and so does your sense of patriotism. Your only tactic here is heated rhetoric. “Incompetence” really? Which happens to be a really great word for your analysis.

    This is a moment of tragedy for our nation – one that should show our unity in the face of these senseless attacks. I guess you’ve already forgotten about the lessons we were reminded of yesterday on the anniversary of 9/11. Instead, you’ve jumped on the chance to take a cheap shot.

  10. @KPOM Yeah Christians aren’t responsible for the Crusades, or the Inquisition, the Reformation and religious wars. Or how about the doctrine of Martin Luther that flamed the fires of antisemitism in the run-up to World War II?

    This group absolutely is disgusting and their acts of terror will be avenged. And they should be. But to pretend like Christians never did anything wrong is so silly when Christians are perhaps responsible for more conflict and loss of life than any religion in world history. There is plenty of guilt to go around!

  11. Patience is a virtue. 1. all reports are not yet in. 2. no one person has been ID’d as the evil leader. 3. Pres. Bush appointed the Ambassador and set the embassy policy. 4. Syria is a mixed bag of people with different ideas. 5. Gov. Romney went on TV without any official information and ranted about the President not doing whatever he is not doing. (again, Romney will win).

    Teddy Roosevelt said, speak softly but carry a big stick. we have the big sticks.

    Ryan, if you please, give us a list of evil does we should engage in a military battle. as a military veteran i share the sentiment of other vets that we must not provoke a war.

  12. Randy in Richmond says:

    Yes, I blame the President’s Administration for the apology press release and it’s failure. I blame the President for condemning his opponent for criticizing the apology release, before condemning those who attacked our embassy. Later the White House itself disavowed the same release Romney had previously criticized–another example of follow the real leader by this President. No where do I directly blame the President for the death of the Ambassador and other Americans.

    Lorax, your personal, immature attacks on me have become tiring and boorish. Every cable news channel, radio talk show, and this very medium are discussing these very issues as presented here. Because you do not like me does not change what is being discussed. Your puerile personal attacks will have no affect on what I say here–bring them on.

  13. Yes the news is discussing this issue – but not launching a personal attack on the president. Just like Romney, you jumped the gun and that was a hack move–personal feelings aside.

  14. Randy in Richmond says:

    That probably has to do with the particular news we each are watching or reading. 🙂

  15. just what we need. “go to hell”. that type of immature thinking will surely get us into a war we do not need. those who support the ‘get tough’ talk should sign up for the military and serve your country like others have. why? we do not have enough ground troops to cover the world of chaos. did we not learn a lesson when Vietnam took 2 Presidents out of office (Johnson and Nixon from each political party). Join up now. Uncle Sam needs you.

  16. Randy in Richmond says:

    I remember you were persistant and right with your prediction for the Republican Senate Primary in your state, and I hope your prediction for the Presidential race will be correct also.

  17. Lorax is right, though. Obama is a political genius. He managed to turn a foreign policy disaster into a net benefit for him by being righteously indignant. Now with the Marines coming into play, the first death of a US ambassador in 20 years may be the best thing that happened to his campaign. The GOP needs to learn how to campaign.

  18. ????

    Obama didn’t have to do anything. He just had to sit back and watch his opponent shoot himself in the foot all day long.

  19. PS I have run away and am happily playing in Michigan. Carry on. 😉

  20. Two marines are among the dead as well – you know, members of the military that Romney didn’t have time to add to his laundry list at the RNC or mention even once.

  21. Which is to say, what exactly is wrong with the Cairo Embassy statement?

    KPOM: I think you’re right that liberals often demure when condemning muslims, and I had a discussion about this with a friend today. I think that because we (as Americans), in general, have less of a complex understanding of the various factions within islam and how it intersects with politics (rhetoric about shari’ah law aside), that liberals tend to be more hesitant to make statements about muslims in general because it’s hard to identify the wrongdoers and because “muslim fundamentalists” has been co-opted by the right as a blanket term for all Islamic people. What do you think?

  22. Randy in Richmond says:

    “Which is to say, what exactly is wrong with the Cairo Embassy statement?”

    I ask the same question, Lorax. Why would the Obama administration disavow the Cairo statement with this release as published in Politico:

    The statement by Embassy Cairo was not cleared by Washington and does not reflect the views of the United States government”.

    Administration supporters such as you approve of the statement but apparently the administration does not. Odd isn’t it.

  23. Randy in Richmond says:

    President Obama made this comment on the Cairo press release in an upcoming interview with 60 Minutes:

    “In an effort to cool the situation down, it didn’t come from me, it didn’t come from Secretary Clinton, it came from people on the ground who are potentially in danger,” Obama told CBS. “And my tendency is to cut folks a little bit of slack when they’re in that circumstance, rather than try to question their judgment from the comfort of a campaign office.”

    Wait a minute. We have been lead to believe the statement was released prior to, not in response to, the situation in Cairo. Included within this Post’s comments you can find me being asked, “Shouldn’t you retract the part about, “in response“–which I did. Now that the President of the United States has said the Cairo statement was “to cool the situation down” and “it came from people on the ground who are potentially in danger” validates the term “response” as being accurate.

    Thus, anyone referring to the Cairo press release in terms of a ‘response’ to the happenings there was/is in complete agreement with President Obama — who certainly should know.

    It’s good to be vindicated by the President himself.

  24. What are you talking about? The “protests” didn’t begin with Stevens and two marines being killed. Your blog post makes it sound like the Embassy statement was right given after they were killed which is wrong. The statement was issued before the incident, hence the President’s phrase, “potentially in danger”.

    You do realize that this story preys on people like youself, right? It’s in the 24 news media’s wheelhouse. Team politics is impulsive by nature and what better way to reinforce this then a story about Muslims killing Christians during an election year?

  25. Randy, I didn’t say I approve of the Cairo statements. I asked what is wrong with it. Read carefully.

    The administration disavowed the statements because, whether or not you or I agree or disagree, it is, in fact, not the official position of the State Department of the United States of America.

    Your argument has become completely circular. Strupp is right, you have been thrown into the rock tumbler!

  26. Randy in Richmond says:

    I understand 100% what I’ve said and according to the President it was in response to what was happening. By the President’s own words if there had been no activity at the embassy, there would have been no press release. And if nothing had happened what is the President referring to to cool down.

    You guys live in your MSM world and I’ll stand on the facts as given by our President.

  27. Maybe Romney should pull a McCain and suspend his campaign so that he can act like he has any clue what to do.

  28. Randy in Richmond says:

    Some things never change.

  29. Facts: USA has many under cover agents in the middle east. Propaganda rules briefly. Classified information is not public. the joint chiefs of staff have a lot to say about foreign policy. the press is always anxious to get the first story out. the press almost never retracts their first story. many stories are never published. there are no real regulations for film makers or for the U tube. Egypt does not care about the Green Bay Packers.

  30. @Lorax, I never said Christians never did anything wrong. I’m not a Christian, anyway. But if you have to go back to the Crusdades, that’s a stretch.

  31. @Dick Steinberg, are you saying Egyptians are Bears fans? Tough night. 🙁

  32. “But if you have to go back to the Crusades, that’s a stretch.”

    There’s a few religions that disagree with you there, KPOM.

  33. Randy in Richmond says:

    We now know that the author of the Cairo press release was Larry Schwartz, Public Affairs Officer. I have several questions for you, Mr. Schwartz.

    1) In your statement you refer to “continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims”.

    Could you please provide specific examples of what caused you to state this–and who are these misguided individuals? And when did you receive that information? If it was a video, did you view it? I’m certain you would not release such a statement without actually reading or viewing whatever it was that prompted you to make the statement.

    2) You also state “we firmly reject the actions by those who abuse the universal right of free speech to hurt the religious beliefs of others”.

    Mr. Schwartz, who are those that you refer to here? How did they abuse free speech? I assume you are issued a set of guidelines to define and delineate what is and what is not abuse of free speech. You certainly do not have the authority to make such a subjective decision on your own, do you?

    And lastly, President Obama has said you acted ‘to cool the situation down”. What situation were you trying to cool down?

  34. Randy, they were trying to diffuse the situation. They were afraid for their lives inside the embassy.

    Your snotty dismantling of the statement they released is a waste of time. You yourself know the answers to all these questions.

  35. Randy in Richmond says:

    I was going respond to your comment about this matter but your juvenile use of snotty overrules.

  36. Randy in Richmond says:

    Then candidate Barack Obama on National Public Radio.

  37. Randy in Richmond says:

    Remember the good ole days before YouTube when our embassies weren’t assulted and attacked or our flag wasn’t burned.