Pepper sprayed for public safety.

[Hank Chinaski]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/...4e1_story.html

what is the book that caused this and why would my government apologize for a book being published? finally, why aren't our embassy guards shooting these people that scale the walls?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/...4e1_story.html

what is the book that caused this and why would my government apologize for a book being published? finally, why aren't our embassy guards shooting these people that scale the walls?

Your article says it's a film, not a book, and what is this apology bullshit?

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/...4e1_story.html

what is the book that caused this and why would my government apologize for a book being published? finally, why aren't our embassy guards shooting these people that scale the walls?

Why would Romney criticize statements made by US embassy personnel at a time when those very people are in harm's way? Why would he speak before he has the facts, and get basic facts wrong in a sensitive and explosive situation?

One hell of a SMH moment here. This guy has zero foreign policy and diplomacy skills. But today really isn't about his pitiful ass.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

Why would Romney criticize statements made by US embassy personnel at a time when those very people are in harm's way? Why would he speak before he has the facts, and get basic facts wrong in a sensitive and explosive situation?

One hell of a SMH moment here. This guy has zero foreign policy and diplomacy skills. But today really isn't about his pitiful ass.

2. But I'm seriously bothered by the governments of both those countries.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

2. But I'm seriously bothered by the governments of both those countries.

That's a bold, bold statement Hank. How does that have anything to do with Romney's attack on Obama over this?

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

2. But I'm seriously bothered by the governments of both those countries.

Welcome to the neocon's brave new world.

It's going to be a very long process to get those two countries to a place where we're happy with their governments, if it ever happens at all.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch

That's a bold, bold statement Hank. How does that have anything to do with Romney's attack on Obama over this?

Can you imagine what he would have said if 9/11 was during an election?

The man seems to be quickly turning himself into Sarah Palin with his tin ear.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch

That's a bold, bold statement Hank. How does that have anything to do with Romney's attack on Obama over this?

Do you understand that the "2" means that I agree with GGG on Romney?

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

Do you understand that the "2" means that I agree with GGG on Romney?

It's not fair to express two thoughts in one post.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

Do you understand that the "2" means that I agree with GGG on Romney?

Yes, noted, and let's drop Romney. Not worth talking about today.

I'm particularly worried about Egypt, even though it was Libya where Chris Stevens and his staff were murdered. Lot's of folks from Libya talking out today against the attack; people on twitter from Egypt seem much more careful in what they say (except for dear Mona telling all the idiots to fuck off in exactly those terms). I think that says something about where each country is right now.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

Do you understand that the "2" means that I agree with GGG on Romney?

Yes, but it's an awfully weak form of agreement when you started with claiming that the US was apologizing and you ended with noting your "worries".

But, on a serious note -- were these attacks encouraged or directed by or connected with the governments? I don't know, haven't read much yet, am wondering.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch

Yes, but it's an awfully weak form of agreement when you started with claiming that the US was apologizing and you ended with noting your "worries".

But, on a serious note -- were these attacks encouraged or directed by or connected with the governments? I don't know, haven't read much yet, am wondering.

CNN is reporting that the Libya attack was planned in advance; perhaps as revenge for some of our actions against aQ or Qad. or perhaps to try to spark a broader revolt in Libya against a government we are supporting.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch

Yes, but it's an awfully weak form of agreement when you started with claiming that the US was apologizing and you ended with noting your "worries".

I beleive I posted before realizing the extent of the attacks. I do feel we should not condemn any particular speech, I can accept a general statement against hate sppech, but when we condemn a particular thing, I feel we cross a line. But I'm not in the State Department. I'm not sure there is any clear answer.

otoh Going by what a Hank admin would do, however, takes a recognition that I'm a hot head, and would have nuked several countries in the last few years.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

I beleive I posted before realizing the extent of the attacks. I do feel we should not condemn any particular speech, I can accept a general statement against hate sppech, but when we condemn a particular thing, I feel we cross a line. But I'm not in the State Department. I'm not sure there is any clear answer.

The article you linked doesn't suggest that anyone in the US gov't "condemned" any particular speech. Instead, Clinton "condemned" the attacks and Obama said "We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others, but there is absolutely no justification to this type of senseless violence. None. The world must stand together to unequivocally reject these brutal acts.”

So what line did we cross?

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch

The article you linked doesn't suggest that anyone in the US gov't "condemned" any particular speech. Instead, Clinton "condemned" the attacks and Obama said "We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others, but there is absolutely no justification to this type of senseless violence. None. The world must stand together to unequivocally reject these brutal acts.”

So what line did we cross?

Translation: I don't follow PB socks on twitter.