Even as President Barack Obama strongly condemned the “outrageous attack” on the U.S. embassy in Benghazi, Libya, in which Washington’s Ambassador to the country, Chris Stevens, was killed, a row erupted here over leading conservatives’ remarks criticising the government for its initial response to the incident.
Delivering a statement at the White House alongside Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Mr. Obama said Ambassador Stevens and the three other U.S. citizens killed should give every American great pride. “At the height of the Libyan revolution, Chris led our diplomatic post in Benghazi,” he added.
Speaking at the State Department earlier Ms. Clinton sharply hit back at comments from conservative leaders including Republican presidential hopeful, Mitt Romney, who said that it was “disgraceful that the Obama administration's first response was not to condemn attacks on our diplomatic missions, but to sympathise with those who waged the attacks.”
Touching upon the violence being linked to a controversial film made in the U.S. by Sam Bacile, described alternatively as a Jewish-Israeli individual and a member of the Egyptian Coptic diaspora, the Secretary clarified: “Some have sought to justify this vicious behaviour as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet... But let me be clear: There is never any justification for violent acts of this kind.”
Her remarks came after Mr. Romney and other Republicans such as former House of Representatives Speaker Newt Gingrich and former Governor of Alaska Sarah Palin issued statements criticising the U.S. embassy in Cairo for condemning the “continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims – as we condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions.”
Ms. Clinton too noted that the U.S. deplored any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of others, adding that the government was working to protect “our personnel, our missions, and American citizens worldwide.” According to anonymous officials speaking to Reuters news agency an anti-terrorist security team of Marines were said to be en route to Libya to offer further protection to U.S. personnel.
The Secretary also said that in the assault on the compound by “heavily armed militants” Sean Smith, a Foreign Service information management officer, was killed. It was an attack that “should shock the conscience of people of all faiths around the world,” she urged.
Keywords: Libyan unrest, Benghazi attack, U.S. Ambassador killing, U.S. Consulate attack, Libya political crisis, US politics
The first question that needs to be answered is, why allow the production of such blasphemous film, that would hurt the religious sentiments of people across the globe? Precaution is always better than cure, US should have banned the production, and we wouldn't have to see peoples emotions erupt. This was all preplanned, the US knows that Prophet Mohammed is the most respected, revered and loved religious personality in the world, yet they allowed this to happen, they already knew the repercussions. Now they are sending their marines to Libya, to set their disgraceful feet in the war torn country like Libya as though the blood of the innocent civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan didn't quench their thirst.
Why should it come to the notice of US now. It did not bother them much when they hastily pushed for armed anarchy in the country, just to gain some goody points with the new regime or the hardliners. Now its interesting to see whether they would go the same way in Syria.
Every attack should shock all faiths of people.
This attack once again proves the futility of nation building & implanting democracy, freedom from outside in muslim majority countries. It is like trying to grow watermelons in desert. Rather the US should have tried to depopulate these countries & cleared out all muslims before bringing in fresh migrants from free world. Especially the area of Af-Pak has become uncivilzed beyond repair & urgently requires application of nukes to depopulate before any civilization effort can begin.
While any unfortunate death through terror is to be condemnable,the terror to effect regime change in Libya by USA through direct attackis also responsible for such matter!
Why does it say"US President Barack Obama said Ambassador Stevens and the three other U.S. citizens killed should give every American great pride."...please rephrase what you want to say!!!
Can someone please explain to me what the U.S. is doing in Afghanistan? And why people are surprised that the Afghan people don't want them there?
Why is the US led by President Obama bothered more by this "outrageous
attack" by Muslims that resulted in death of Americans ? Why is there
nothing to bother about who and why anyone would want to make an anti-
Islam film in the first place ? This is not about freedom of expression
or religion, it is about incitement of hate, provocation of violence and
ultimately as steered by the US-influenced media, about Islamophobia.
It was an attack that “should shock the conscience of people of all
faiths around the world,” she urged (Ms.Clinton). When attacks like this
are masterminded by Americans on hapless citizens in Iraq, Afghanistan
and countless other countries in the past, I am guessing, it should not
be shocking anyone's conscience :)
Please Email the Editor