Tuesday, September 11, 2012

So How Do Islamic Radicals Celebrate 9-11?

They attack a few U.S. embassies, of course.

As I set forth below, Islamic radicals are today ascendant in the Middle East. The Arab Spring has been the victory of Salafists. And as I pointed out, Egypt has already taken the first big steps down the path followed by Iran in 1979 as it became a radical Islamic theocracy. So, shades of 1979, it is no surprise that our diplomatic posts in both Cairo and Libya were attacked on this 9-11. The ostensible reason for the attacks was that some private U.S. citizens, Egyptian ex-pats, made a video criticizing Islam. The film has been available to audiences in the Middle East since 1 July.

In Cairo:

Mainly ultraconservative protesters [read Salafi / Wahhabi Islamists and supporters of the Muslim Brotherhood] climbed the walls of the U.S. Embassy in Egypt's capital Tuesday and brought down the American flag, replacing it with a black Islamist flag to protest a U.S.-produced film attacking the Prophet Muhammad. . . .

The unrest in Cairo began when hundreds of protesters marched to the downtown embassy, gathering outside its walls and chanting against the movie and the U.S. "Say it, don't fear: Their ambassador must leave," the crowd chanted. Dozens of protesters then scaled the embassy walls, and several went into the courtyard and took down the flag from a pole. They brought it back to the crowd outside, which tried to burn it, but failing that tore it apart. The protesters on the wall then raised on the flagpole a black flag with a Muslim declaration of faith, "There is no god but God and Muhammad is his prophet." The flag, similar to the banner used by Al Qaeda, is commonly used by ultraconservatives around the region. The crowd grew throughout the evening with thousands standing outside the embassy, chanting "Islamic, Islamic. The right of our prophet will not die." A group of women in black veils and robes that left only their eyes exposed chanted, "Worshippers of the Cross, leave the Prophet Muhammad alone." Dozens of riot police lined up along the embassy walls but did not stop protesters from climbing the wall. . . .

Instead of responding with outrage, not merely at the protests, but the failure of the new Muslim Brotherhood government in Cairo to protect our embassy, the response from the Obama administration's State Department essentially 'apologized for blasphemy' by a person who has every right to free speech in the U.S.:

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,. . . 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

That is utterly disgusting in its apologetic tone and counterproductive for its failure to defend Americans' freedoms. Moreover, it completely fails to hold the Egyptian government to account for their failure to defend the Embassy.


Update: I couldn't agree more with this response from Charles Krauthammer:

And then there is this from Instapundit: "Advice to Obama: To stiffen your spine, imagine these were Tea Partiers instead of Islamic fundamentalists who hate America and all it stands for." Funny, but based all too much on reality.


The attack on our diplomatic in Libya was more severe, involving what amounted to a full scale attack:

Libya's deputy interior minister Wanis al-Sharef told AFP: "One American official was killed and another injured in the hand. The other staff members were evacuated and are safe and sound."

He could not say if the dead man was a diplomat.

Abdelmonoem al-Horr, spokesman for the Libyan interior ministry's security commission, said rocket-propelled grenades were fired at the consulate from a nearby farm. Security forces and the interior ministry were trying to contain the situation, he added. . . .

"Demonstrators attacked the US consulate in Benghazi. They fired shots in the air before entering the building," Libya's deputy interior minister, Wanis al-Sharif Sharif, who is in charge of the country's eastern region, told AFP.

"Dozens of demonstrators attacked the consulate and set fire to it," said a Benghazi resident, who only gave his name as Omar, adding that he had seen the flames and heard shots in the vicinity.

Another Libyan witness said armed men had closed the streets leading up to the consulate, among them ultra-conservative Salafists. . . .


UPDATE: The attack by Salafists on our Consulate in Benghazi, Libya is now confirmed to have taken the lives of Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three other Embassy staff members.


Consider these attacks the canary in the coal mine. We are, in many ways, in a much more precarious position vis-a-vis the Middle East than we were eleven years ago. The Salafists - those people whose ideology was shared by Osama bin Laden - now are in or close to control of most of the Arab nations of the Middle East. There will be blood.


Anonymous said...

"There will be blood"
Yes,there will. The Dog is wagging Obama


suek said...

I seem to recall that 9/11 - the date itself - has had some historical significance to muslims, and that was the reason for their choice of the day for the original attack on the Twin Towers and DC.

Well...now it's significant for both of us - but I would like to have more info on the original muslim event...if anyone knows what it was.

Heisenbug said...


The original 9/11, according to some sources, was the embarrassing defeat of the Muslim hordes at the second Siege of Vienna in 1683. On that day, King Jan Sobieski of Poland came to the aid of Vienna with his cavalry, the Hussars, and routed the Islamic armies and raising the siege.