What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

U.S. Ambassador to Libya Killed in Rocket Attack (1 Viewer)



US ambassador in Libya killed in rocket attack while fleeing protest over Mohamed film, claims official

Samia Nakhoul , Marie-Louise Gumuchian

Wednesday 12 September 2012

The US ambassador to Libya and three other embassy staff were killed in a rocket attack last night that targeted his car in the eastern Libyan city of Benghazi, a Libyan official said on today.

"The American ambassador and three staff members were killed when gunmen fired rockets at them," the official in Benghazi told Reuters. Asked about the deaths, a US Embassy employee in Tripoli said: "We have no information regarding this." The employee said the embassy could confirm the death of one person.

The Libyan official said the US ambassador had been on his way to a safer venue after protesters attacked the US Consulate in Benghazi and opened fire, killing a staff member, in protest at a US film that they deemed blasphemous to the Prophet Mohamed.

The official said the ambassador and three other staff were killed when gunmen fired rockets at his car. He said the US Embassy had sent a military plane to transport the bodies to Tripoli to fly them to the United States.

Gunmen assaulted the Benghazi compound yesterday evening, clashing with Libyan security forces, who withdrew under heavy fire. The attackers fired at the buildings while others threw handmade bombs into the compound, setting off small explosions. Small fires were burning around the compound.

The assault followed a protest in neighbouring Egypt where demonstrators scaled the walls of the US embassy, tore down the American flag and burned it during a protest over the same film which they said insulted the Prophet Mohamed.

Reuters



 
Anti-Islam filmmaker in hiding after protests

LOS ANGELES (AP) — An Israeli filmmaker based in California went into hiding Tuesday after his movie attacking Islam's prophet Muhammad sparked angry assaults by ultra-conservative Muslims on U.S. missions in Egypt and Libya, where one American was killed.

Speaking by phone from an undisclosed location, writer and director Sam Bacile remained defiant, saying Islam is a cancer and that the 56-year-old intended his film to be a provocative political statement condemning the religion.

...
 
Wonder what happened? Typically the embassy's are protected with a contingent of marines, no? Would have thought they would have kept the ambassador under wraps. Not knocking anyone just interested to hear what really happened.

edit to add - I feel for the families, gotta be tough. That religion of peace can be a ##### sometimes.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Wonder what happened? Typically the embassy's are protected with a contingent of marines, no? Would have thought they would have kept the ambassador under wraps. Not knocking anyone just interested to hear what really happened.
The embassy compound was stormed and their car was hit by what is believed to be a rocket propelled grenade as they attempted to escape.
 
From what I heard over the radio, this movie was financed by that same fun-loving dude who burned the Qu'run on television, Pastor Terry Jones. The film features Muhammad having lewd sex and behaving rather badly.

 
Wonder what happened? Typically the embassy's are protected with a contingent of marines, no? Would have thought they would have kept the ambassador under wraps. Not knocking anyone just interested to hear what really happened.
The embassy compound was stormed and their car was hit by what is believed to be a rocket propelled grenade as they attempted to escape.
But that's sort of the question. How does an embassy get overrun like this? The kind of people who do the storming are no match for US Marines.
 
A negative movie about my religion?? I'm going to go kill people!

Murder is despicable and there is no excuse for it.

 
From what I heard over the radio, this movie was financed by that same fun-loving dude who burned the Qu'run on television, Pastor Terry Jones. The film features Muhammad having lewd sex and behaving rather badly.
Definitely worth murdering someone who had nothing to do with it.
 
Wonder what happened? Typically the embassy's are protected with a contingent of marines, no? Would have thought they would have kept the ambassador under wraps. Not knocking anyone just interested to hear what really happened.
The embassy compound was stormed and their car was hit by what is believed to be a rocket propelled grenade as they attempted to escape.
But that's sort of the question. How does an embassy get overrun like this? The kind of people who do the storming are no match for US Marines.
There are only a handful of Marines for each embassy, about 1000 total worldwide. They are tough but there's not much they can do against a mass assault.A lot of people just do not understand how vulnerable we really are. I'm still amazed at those who expressed shock that we weren't able to shoot down the various highjacked aircraft on 9-11. We have no immediate response capability to any threat to the continguous United States other than a nuclear response. Most of our 'security' is established from the threat of retaliation, not any true on-spot defensive ability.
 
From what I heard over the radio, this movie was financed by that same fun-loving dude who burned the Qu'run on television, Pastor Terry Jones. The film features Muhammad having lewd sex and behaving rather badly.
He for sure deserved to die then. Next up for execution; Bill Maher, David Letterman, and Rush Limbaugh.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
There are only a handful of Marines for each embassy, about 1000 total worldwide. They are tough but there's not much they can do against a mass assault.A lot of people just do not understand how vulnerable we really are. I'm still amazed at those who expressed shock that we weren't able to shoot down the various highjacked aircraft on 9-11. We have no immediate response capability to any threat to the continguous United States other than a nuclear response. Most of our 'security' is established from the threat of retaliation, not any true on-spot defensive ability.
Whoah. Slow down. Let's get confirmation first that the ambassador really was killed and how the whole thing went down before we start making assumptions. Right now, according to that story, all we have is the word of a Libyan official. Not saying it didn't happen, but I'd like to get more details. In Cairo, a crowd gathered in front of the Embassy, the Marines pointed their guns, and the crowd dispersed.
 
Wonder what happened? Typically the embassy's are protected with a contingent of marines, no? Would have thought they would have kept the ambassador under wraps. Not knocking anyone just interested to hear what really happened.
The embassy compound was stormed and their car was hit by what is believed to be a rocket propelled grenade as they attempted to escape.
But that's sort of the question. How does an embassy get overrun like this? The kind of people who do the storming are no match for US Marines.
There are only a handful of Marines for each embassy, about 1000 total worldwide. They are tough but there's not much they can do against a mass assault.A lot of people just do not understand how vulnerable we really are. I'm still amazed at those who expressed shock that we weren't able to shoot down the various highjacked aircraft on 9-11. We have no immediate response capability to any threat to the continguous United States other than a nuclear response. Most of our 'security' is established from the threat of retaliation, not any true on-spot defensive ability.
Wut?
 
This is a pretty big deal.
It wasn't the action of a government, or by anyone sponsored by a government, so far as we know. It was apparently the action of some very religious fanatics who take insults to Islam far too seriously. Obviously we've always known these people are out there and prevalent in Islamic countries. Not sure what if anything we can do about it.
 
The only thing that was pathetic was the actual statement that was released:
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
Now the White House and the Stare Department is walking this back saying they had nothing to do with this; just curious, who in charge in this administration.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
This is a pretty big deal.
It wasn't the action of a government, or by anyone sponsored by a government, so far as we know. It was apparently the action of some very religious fanatics who take insults to Islam far too seriously. Obviously we've always known these people are out there and prevalent in Islamic countries. Not sure what if anything we can do about it.
True ... but I doubt the governments will do anything about it. They will just look the other way.
 
I'd think a better retaliation would be to make bad movies featuring Jesus going door to door, buggering whoever answers, leaving Mary Kay samples for those who don't.

Take it to Youtube. Not to the streets. Blaspheme on.

 
This is a pretty big deal.
It wasn't the action of a government, or by anyone sponsored by a government, so far as we know. It was apparently the action of some very religious fanatics who take insults to Islam far too seriously. Obviously we've always known these people are out there and prevalent in Islamic countries. Not sure what if anything we can do about it.
Bomb Mecca
 
The only thing that was pathetic was the actual statement that was released:[q]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[/q]

Now the White House and the Stare Department is walking this back saying they had nothing to do with this; just curious, who in charge in this administration.
You might not like that statement, and the State Department can deny issuing it or try to walk it back, but it was absolutely necessary. The first priority in these situations is to calm people down. These fanatics are associating this idiotic film with the United States as a whole, and it's imperative, for the sake of saving further American lives in the Middle East, to create a distance between the two.
 
This is a pretty big deal.
It wasn't the action of a government, or by anyone sponsored by a government, so far as we know. It was apparently the action of some very religious fanatics who take insults to Islam far too seriously. Obviously we've always known these people are out there and prevalent in Islamic countries. Not sure what if anything we can do about it.
But the Libyan government has the obligation to protect the US Embassy. They failed in this and it resulted in the death of the US Ambassador.Its a big deal.
 
This is a pretty big deal.
It wasn't the action of a government, or by anyone sponsored by a government, so far as we know. It was apparently the action of some very religious fanatics who take insults to Islam far too seriously. Obviously we've always known these people are out there and prevalent in Islamic countries. Not sure what if anything we can do about it.
True ... but I doubt the governments will do anything about it. They will just look the other way.
What should they do?
 
This is a pretty big deal.
It wasn't the action of a government, or by anyone sponsored by a government, so far as we know. It was apparently the action of some very religious fanatics who take insults to Islam far too seriously. Obviously we've always known these people are out there and prevalent in Islamic countries. Not sure what if anything we can do about it.
But the Libyan government has the obligation to protect the US Embassy. They failed in this and it resulted in the death of the US Ambassador.Its a big deal.
What would you have us do about it? Shall we invade Libya? Replace the government there? Cut off all aid and allow a rabid Islamist regime to take over?
 
There are only a handful of Marines for each embassy, about 1000 total worldwide. They are tough but there's not much they can do against a mass assault.A lot of people just do not understand how vulnerable we really are. I'm still amazed at those who expressed shock that we weren't able to shoot down the various highjacked aircraft on 9-11. We have no immediate response capability to any threat to the continguous United States other than a nuclear response. Most of our 'security' is established from the threat of retaliation, not any true on-spot defensive ability.
Whoah. Slow down. Let's get confirmation first that the ambassador really was killed and how the whole thing went down before we start making assumptions. Right now, according to that story, all we have is the word of a Libyan official. Not saying it didn't happen, but I'd like to get more details. In Cairo, a crowd gathered in front of the Embassy, the Marines pointed their guns, and the crowd dispersed.
Did you get your confirmation yet?
 
There are only a handful of Marines for each embassy, about 1000 total worldwide. They are tough but there's not much they can do against a mass assault.A lot of people just do not understand how vulnerable we really are. I'm still amazed at those who expressed shock that we weren't able to shoot down the various highjacked aircraft on 9-11. We have no immediate response capability to any threat to the continguous United States other than a nuclear response. Most of our 'security' is established from the threat of retaliation, not any true on-spot defensive ability.
Whoah. Slow down. Let's get confirmation first that the ambassador really was killed and how the whole thing went down before we start making assumptions. Right now, according to that story, all we have is the word of a Libyan official. Not saying it didn't happen, but I'd like to get more details. In Cairo, a crowd gathered in front of the Embassy, the Marines pointed their guns, and the crowd dispersed.
Did you get your confirmation yet?
Yes. Thanks.
 
This is a pretty big deal.
It wasn't the action of a government, or by anyone sponsored by a government, so far as we know. It was apparently the action of some very religious fanatics who take insults to Islam far too seriously. Obviously we've always known these people are out there and prevalent in Islamic countries. Not sure what if anything we can do about it.
But the Libyan government has the obligation to protect the US Embassy. They failed in this and it resulted in the death of the US Ambassador.Its a big deal.
What would you have us do about it? Shall we invade Libya? Replace the government there? Cut off all aid and allow a rabid Islamist regime to take over?
:confused:The current government in Libya is the one that just took over in a revolution that we supported, right?
 
The only thing that was pathetic was the actual statement that was released:
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
Now the White House and the Stare Department is walking this back saying they had nothing to do with this; just curious, who in charge in this administration.
The reports indicate that Egypt embassy statement was released before the protests at that embassy (and before the protests at the Libyan embassy that resulted in the death of the ambassador).
 
This is a pretty big deal.
It wasn't the action of a government, or by anyone sponsored by a government, so far as we know. It was apparently the action of some very religious fanatics who take insults to Islam far too seriously. Obviously we've always known these people are out there and prevalent in Islamic countries. Not sure what if anything we can do about it.
But the Libyan government has the obligation to protect the US Embassy. They failed in this and it resulted in the death of the US Ambassador.Its a big deal.
What would you have us do about it? Shall we invade Libya? Replace the government there? Cut off all aid and allow a rabid Islamist regime to take over?
:confused:The current government in Libya is the one that just took over in a revolution that we supported, right?
Yes. That's my point. It seems to me some posters are implying that, by "allowing" this to happen, the Libyans have declared war on us.And Romney has already stated openly that the Obama response is weak. So I'm asking: what should our response be?
 
The only thing that was pathetic was the actual statement that was released:[q]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[/q]

Now the White House and the Stare Department is walking this back saying they had nothing to do with this; just curious, who in charge in this administration.
You might not like that statement, and the State Department can deny issuing it or try to walk it back, but it was absolutely necessary. The first priority in these situations is to calm people down. These fanatics are associating this idiotic film with the United States as a whole, and it's imperative, for the sake of saving further American lives in the Middle East, to create a distance between the two.
Tim, I can't believe that you actually typed this but I'll play along; do you think that this statement really calmed anyone down? Try to remember these people were crazed enough that they stormed an armed embassy; do you think they cared about a press release? They do not understand that the government of the U.S. has no association with the film makers; with all that in hand you do not release a statement basically justifying the anger of the people attacking our embassies.
 
This is a pretty big deal.
It wasn't the action of a government, or by anyone sponsored by a government, so far as we know. It was apparently the action of some very religious fanatics who take insults to Islam far too seriously. Obviously we've always known these people are out there and prevalent in Islamic countries. Not sure what if anything we can do about it.
But the Libyan government has the obligation to protect the US Embassy. They failed in this and it resulted in the death of the US Ambassador.Its a big deal.
What would you have us do about it? Shall we invade Libya? Replace the government there? Cut off all aid and allow a rabid Islamist regime to take over?
:confused:The current government in Libya is the one that just took over in a revolution that we supported, right?
Hello, exactly.The proper response from this admin will be to apologize for our sinfulness.
 
This is a pretty big deal.
It wasn't the action of a government, or by anyone sponsored by a government, so far as we know. It was apparently the action of some very religious fanatics who take insults to Islam far too seriously. Obviously we've always known these people are out there and prevalent in Islamic countries. Not sure what if anything we can do about it.
But the Libyan government has the obligation to protect the US Embassy. They failed in this and it resulted in the death of the US Ambassador.Its a big deal.
What would you have us do about it? Shall we invade Libya? Replace the government there? Cut off all aid and allow a rabid Islamist regime to take over?
No. There's nothing the US can do.
 
Here's the problem...

For normal people, Islam can be practiced very moderately. It says in the Koran than people can interpret it how they wish so many choose to ignore parts they don't agree with - just as Christians do. In fact, people don't have to pray, go to mosque, can eat pork and still be Muslim.

However, the huge failing with Islam is two-fold:

- At Islam's core (and what differentiates itself from Christianity) is that it expects submission to God and it taught to not just be a religion, but a way of life.

- many people are too ignorant to interpret themselves so they rely on imams ('experts') to tell them what to do.

So you take a religion that expects submission, combine it with stupid people whose identify is wrapped up in a religion and leaders who want to have power over people and what you have is a cluster####.

 
This is a pretty big deal.
It wasn't the action of a government, or by anyone sponsored by a government, so far as we know. It was apparently the action of some very religious fanatics who take insults to Islam far too seriously. Obviously we've always known these people are out there and prevalent in Islamic countries. Not sure what if anything we can do about it.
But the Libyan government has the obligation to protect the US Embassy. They failed in this and it resulted in the death of the US Ambassador.Its a big deal.
What would you have us do about it? Shall we invade Libya? Replace the government there? Cut off all aid and allow a rabid Islamist regime to take over?
:confused:The current government in Libya is the one that just took over in a revolution that we supported, right?
Yes. That's my point. It seems to me some posters are implying that, by "allowing" this to happen, the Libyans have declared war on us.And Romney has already stated openly that the Obama response is weak. So I'm asking: what should our response be?
You are reading too much into my post. I was simply responding to you saying that this was not the action of a government. The reality is - this is not only the responsibility of the idiots on the street - its also the responsibility of the Libyan government. They are responsible for the death of a US ambassador.What should the US do about it? Demand an apology. Beef up security. That's about it.But that doesn't mean its not a big deal. It is.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
This is a pretty big deal.
It wasn't the action of a government, or by anyone sponsored by a government, so far as we know. It was apparently the action of some very religious fanatics who take insults to Islam far too seriously. Obviously we've always known these people are out there and prevalent in Islamic countries. Not sure what if anything we can do about it.
But the Libyan government has the obligation to protect the US Embassy. They failed in this and it resulted in the death of the US Ambassador.Its a big deal.
What would you have us do about it? Shall we invade Libya? Replace the government there? Cut off all aid and allow a rabid Islamist regime to take over?
No. There's nothing the US can do.
Outside of beefing up security a little, which still won't be a guarantee of future safety, this seems about right to me.What do some of you want us to do?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top