BENGHAZI attack: all you can do is Scream

-->
On the Benghazi attack in September. This nasty episode didn't die away quickly and ultimately affected Susan Rice's career. It was a damn confusing event -- as is much that happens in this region -- but the desire for a neutral investigation that might have illuminated this disaster got obscured in political acrimony. The most disturbing ripple from the murderous riot is that weapons handed out by the US thru Qatar might have been used by the Islamist terrorists involved. Still puzzling--what was the connection between the "Muslim's Innocence" riots and this obviously 9/11 themed & planned attack?

The spectacle of enraged Muslims demonstrating? Protesting? Rioting? about another supposed offence against Islam, this time in response to a shoddy video produced in the US (but not in any way representative of any official point of view) in dozens of nations in this region, punctures the theory that Islamist extremism is a response to exploitative or misguided American foreign policy. The movie has nothing to do with the US government (even less so in the case of Germany!) yet the riots go on; it was not released by a major studio nor even seen by anyone publicly for heavens's sakes. The murder of a respected American diplomat Christopher Stevens--who supported the overthrow of Gaddafi--is particularly inexplicable and reprehensible in this perspective. Nor should Hillary have pandered to the rioters by claiming to have been “disgusted” by the video --but stated simply & firmly that street violence in Tunis, Cairo etc can never determine individual freedoms in the US. The fact is we have separation of church and state in the US – and this is a point no American official made. The only logical conclusion to draw from the behavior of irate Muslims in full cry is that we (Westerners and other free spirits) must submit to the totalitarian (extremist) Islamic demand--in short become Muslims. This group in effect rejects a pluralistic world, and it is that world that Hillary & Barack should defend publicly. Neither Hillary nor Barach nor Jay Carney made the slightest effort to explain the nature of the relations of a constitutional government with a democratic society. By failing to do this forthrightly and clearly, they appeared weak ideologically & opened themselves up to a Romney attack, but the latter’s blast was nothing but hasty opportunism. Rather than waste time trying to calm the irrational hysteria of these so easily provoked (and manipulated) mobs, we might do better to rescue one of the few truely secular Arab states in the region, Syria (the Syrians’ modernity is seen in their unconditional rejection of Basher). What we see here once again is the pathological displacement in much anti-US hysteria – that is, the use of the US as a handy whipping boy—that we see in many authoritarian societies (such as most of these are) where people cannot really dissent or protest unless they displace their anger onto the convenient US target. Anyone who has lived more than a few months in the region quickly catches on to the maneuver. Finally, why did no responsible person in one of these nominally democratic societies try at least via the media to speak reason to the rioters and educate them to the norms of the open democratic society they (hopefully) desire -- in which the claims of one religion cannot preempt civil law and civility.