Letters: Support for Romney criticism of embassy

I must take issue with your Sept. 14 editorial, “Wrong tack by Romney,” in which you criticized Mitt Romney for making a statement that was critical of the American embassy in Cairo over its condemnation of a controversial film denigrating Mohammed and Islam in general. Romney was absolutely correct in his statement. The statement issued by the embassy, while it did not formally apologize for the film, was very apologetic in tone. The statement condemned the film but failed to condemn (or even mention) the attacks on the embassies in Egypt and Libya or the murder of four Americans. The issue of freedom of speech was given in a weak and backhanded matter and, in fact, suggests that freedom of speech is not extended to criticism of religion.

Now, let’s look at Romney’s statement, which consisted of two sentences. In the first sentence he expressed outrage on the attacks on the embassies and the murder of four Americans including the ambassador to Libya. In the second sentence he stated that it was disgraceful for the administration’s first response not to condemn the attacks, but sympathize with the attackers.

While the embassy statement cannot be directly attributed to the president, the embassy and its consulates are part of the executive branch and the president is ultimately responsible for what they say and do. Additionally, the statement (which is considered the official position of the American government) remained on the embassy’s website for several hours, and President Barack Obama never bothered to order it removed until the criticisms started pouring in.

What is surprising in all this is that the outrage by the media at Romney’s statement far surpasses its outrage at the attacks on our embassies and the deaths of four Americans. Even Kirstin Powers, a liberal Democratic strategist and journalist, has described the outrage over Romney’s statement as “insane” and completely overshadowing the outrage over the attacks and the deaths of the four Americans. Powers went on to state that if all this had occurred during the Bush administration, the response by the press would have been “completely, radically different” with questions as to how this happened and what could have been done to prevent it — questions that are not being asked today.

Kenneth McMillan

retired state employee/Department of Corrections

Baton Rouge

Comments

1) Comment by agagent - 22/09/2012

It is Obama who is President, and he is running for re-election. Most of the media will give him all their support even as their credibility sink to a new low. The Obama campaign will use diversion tactics to divert attention from his failures. Such tactics would not work if we had an impartial media. Most of the media will not hold him accountable. For example you are probably not aware that the credit rating of the US was lowered again. The severe repercussions of this downgrade include spiraling interest costs and a lack of buyers for our debt.

2) Comment by agagent - 22/09/2012

It was Reagan’s fault. We should not have played peacemaker when there was no peace. He admitted it and pulled our troops out.

3) Comment by misterfalcon - 22/09/2012

Didn't read the comments, but I hope that the writer is aware that (1) the embassy and not the President issued the statement (2) the statement was issued before the attacks began. The criticisms stand and show that Romney has not surrounded himself with good decision makers capable of vetting his public statements during the campaign, if that's so, what kind of people would he put in place after an (increasingly unlikely) election win in November. With Romney, the Republicans basically re-ran John Kerry as a GOPer. They're going to have similar results. That's why attention from the politicos has shifted to the Senate and House races, were the real power is, anyway, irt the kind of purse string decisions that need to be made regarding the current mess our last Republican Executive sank us into.

4) Comment by DMJ - 22/09/2012

Hundreds of Americans were killed in Beirut during the 80s. Was that Reagan's fault? I didn't think so. Hypocrites.

5) Comment by agagent - 22/09/2012

It could have been different had the Obama administration listened to the recommendations and warnings. The Obama administration’s failures doomed the 4 Americans in Benghazi to brutal deaths. The coverup by the Obama administration was that the attack was spontaneous and blaming an obscure video. The terrorist are just as good as community organizers at agitating political unrest and using the video as a pretext for their planned and coordinated attack. The terrorists hate us just because of who we are and the way we live. We should avoid being so vulnerable to their attacks like our ambassador was in Benghazi, Libya.

6) Comment by agagent - 22/09/2012

Obama has had to “walk back” his narrative of the Benghazi murders while Romney has not. Obama sent our ambassador to a very volatile part of Libya, housed in an unsecured interim facility, without U S Marine protection, and with rules of engagement that severely limited its defense. Security assessments urged the state department to use U S forces and not depend on hired security or host country protection in such unstable situations, or wait until conditions improve. There were repeat attacks in Benghazi, Libyan officials warned of this attack, the violence in Benghazi was proceeded by violence in Egypt, and it occurred on a day we knew the terrorist wanted to strike back.

7) Comment by ABayouBoy - 22/09/2012

One more thing....The Romneys paid approx. 14% taxes on an income of about 23 million last year. My family paid about 10% more than the Romney's on an income of far less. Also, why doesn't he want to divulge his income tax returns for but the last two years? The fact is that it would show information regarding their tax haven bank accts. in the Caymen Islands? with monies not reported to the IRS, I'll bet. The wealthy have their tax breaks, don't they.

8) Comment by ABayouBoy - 22/09/2012

We all know that there are Muslim fanatics in the Mid-East. The best thing that the US can do is to reduce our dependency on foreign oil, and thus, reduce Americas presence there. Never forget those who have died in our defense, but also remember that Mitt Romney represents the 1% of the most wealthy, and has their best interests at heart. Sadly, I'm not included in this 1%. So, in order to look out for my best interests, I may be forced to choose between the lesser of two evils, so to speak. And remember that Romney has already made his position clear on the 47%? who don't pay taxes? My A**!. Sheeple, you all have been warned.

9) Comment by Gnat1966 - 21/09/2012

Could Mr. McMillan please explain to me how the embassy statement could have condemned or mentioned events that had not happened when the statement was issued!!! Think he needs to educate himself a little!

10) Comment by nimby? - 21/09/2012

sometimes I'd rather hear what people think than what they are supposed to think ....

11) Comment by DMJ - 21/09/2012

Question....if everyone already knew that, then why did it need admitting by anyone? Gotcha.

12) Comment by tradewinns - 21/09/2012

wow, just today obama admitted the attack on our embassy in libya was an act of terror. (everyone knew that the first day) he is on top of everything, just as he is on the economy! outrage and condemnation of romney for speaking out doesn't mean he was/is wrong, he isn't.

13) Comment by krl777 - 21/09/2012

The US embassy response was entirely appropriate. “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.” [end quote] It didn't say that we will prosecute the idiots who made the film, nor should it have. It didn't apologize for the American value of free speech, nor should it have. It simply distanced the US government from the actions of the idiots who made the scurrilous video. That is the proper thing to do when the mirror-image idiots in the Muslim world are preparing to go on a rampage of a sort which in the past had led to dozens of deaths and millions of dollars worth of damage in their own countries. Romney's response was vacant and vile: "“I'm outraged by the attacks on American diplomatic missions in Libya and Egypt and by the death of an American consulate worker in Benghazi. It's disgraceful that the Obama administration's first response was not to condemn attacks on our diplomatic missions, but to sympathize with those who waged the attacks.” [end quote] The Cairo embassy statement was released before the violent attack on the Libyan consulate, and the Cairo embassy was never in significant danger, so Romney is an idiot for condemning the Cairo embassy for trying to tamp down the violence before it happened rather than issuing a useless fell-good outraged response, thus choosing to fuel, rather than to check, the violent response to the video. Furthermore, the embassy statement didn't "sympathize" with those who waged the attacks -- it acknowledged the FACT that people in the Islamic world were outraged by the silly video. It attempted to thwart destructive expression of that outrage. There really are just too many idiots in the world. We don't need one of them serving as President of the US.

14) Comment by DMJ - 21/09/2012

Fact check: The embassy (not the President) issued a statement condemning the video BEFORE the attacks happened. Romney then used the attack to score cheap political points, which many found opportunistic, petty and even dispicable.

15) Comment by [e-mail] - 21/09/2012

What Mr. Romney said was on the mark and everybody knows it; Americans have the right of free speech and we should not be forced to kowtow to any fanatics, Islamic or otherwise, demanding that we villify, lock up, or censor something that does not please them. Who are we to listen to our enemies? Since when does one gain anything by doing what his enemies want him to do? Appeasement never works, and apologizing for our way of life to those who hate is is wrong.

16) Comment by Whatnow - 21/09/2012

If Obama is elected a second time, just think of the mess he will inherit.

17) Comment by jdk944 - 21/09/2012

Yes, Obama isn't responible for anything!! A Leader, leads and the "buck, so to speaks, stops with him. But not Obama. I mean NOTHING going on in this country is his fault!! Talk about pathetic - Obama is out running campaign funding venues and doing late night appearances on Letterman etc., but Romney was the only one stepping up at the time of the incident to condemn it. But Obama had no problem in the past in shooting from the hip on nonissues like the Henry Louis Gates situation!! But, oh, that's different!!

18) Comment by lovemykids - 21/09/2012

Was not the statement from the embassy released before the murders in hope of quieting the mobs? Did not Romney release a statement before he new all the details? Admit it, Romney stepped in "it" up to his knees.

19) Comment by chem - 21/09/2012

As postscript56 said, Romney's only purpose was to try to make political points using the unfortunate death of Americans in the land of crazies. The letter writer conveniently left out all of the republican politicians who criticized Romney for his statement.

20) Comment by postscript56 - 21/09/2012

Romney's purpose, as is the purpose of all Republicans everywhere, is to criticize Obama. Period. Romney thought he had all the excuse he needed to pander to that element of the wingnut right that believes Obama is weak, Obama apologizes for America, Obama is a socialist, Obama is a Muslim, Obama's not even an American! Plus, Sharia law will supplant our Constitution, the socialists are taking away our right to own guins and worship as we want, and the government is forming death panels to kill off all those dependent voters it is creating. Let's not forget those weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, either. Come back from the edge of the abyss. Then we can talk.