The Official Blog Of Edward Cline

Come and Get It, Hillary

It’s much like the alignment of the planets to produce some catastrophic force, or the convergence of two storm systems: The U.S. remembers 9/11. On 9/11/2012, Muslim mobs assault the U.S. embassy in Cairo, hauling down the U.S. flag and raising the black flag of jihad. In Benghazi, Libya, hours later, another mob launches a military-style attack on the U.S. consulate, killing the U.S. ambassador and staff members, including two Marines, and burning the place to the ground.

Over what?

A satiric movie about Mohammad and the poisonous fraud of Islam that few Americans even knew about? Or was it about the death by drone of a Libyan Al-Qada leader?

Who knows? Who cares? This is Islam at its best. This is Islam and Muslims shining through. Muslims don’t need an excuse. The Koran tells them so.

Trying to sift through the multifaceted motives for the attacks in Cairo and Benghazi is as pointless as sorting through the ruins of the World Trade Center on 9/11, 2001 searching for the identities of the plane hijackers. Once it was known who supported, funded, recruited, and triggered the attacks, why waste any time trying to identify the expendable “martyrs”?

It was the ideology that launched the attacks, in 2001 and in 2012. It was the ideology that has launched such attacks ever since the plane hijackings of the 1970’s. It was behind the Munich massacre and every casualty-strewn bombing and murder spree committed in the name of Islam for the last five decades.

Can anyone with a handful of scruples buy the phony piety and condolences of President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton? The New York Times quotes them both:

“These four Americans stood up for freedom and human dignity,” Mr. Obama said in a televised statement from the White House Rose Garden, where he stood with Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton. “Make no mistake: we will work with the Libyan government to bring to justice the killers who attacked our people.”

The Washington Post reports:

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton condemned the attack “in the strongest terms,” adding that while the United States “deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of others … there is never any justification for violent acts of this kind.” Wednesday morning, Obama released his own statement condemning “the outrageous attack.”

During the protest in Cairo but hours before the attacks in Libya, the U.S. Embassy in Cairo issued a statement saying that it condemns “the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims — as we condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions.” An administration official later told ABC News that “no one in Washington approved that statement before it was released and it doesn’t reflect the views of the U.S. government.” The statement still appears on the embassy website, but not on the homepage. (Italics mine)

Come again? What else has been the U.S. government’s view since 2008 but to excoriate and threaten anyone with the courage to brand Islam as a murderous, looting, pedophilic, misogynist, slave-thirsty ideology?

On the other hand, the New York Times mulls over this explanation:

About 24 hours before the consulate attack, however, Al Qaeda posted to militant forums on the Web a video in which its leader, Ayman al-Zawahri, acknowledged the death in an American drone strike in June of his Libyan deputy, Abu Yahya al-Libi, and called on Libyans to avenge the death.

Walid Shoebat, a former Muslim Brotherhood member who knows the Islamic supremacist mind intimately, dismisses the movie as the chief reason for the Cairo attack. He pins the motive to a consolidation of power by Egyptian Salafist activists. Citing communications between the Nour Party and other Party members, he concludes:

It had no reference to the current movie, which means that they simply searched for anything to use as an excuse. They could find nothing major except a satirical video. Of course, you have daily satires in the United States about Muhammad that technically should be considered far worse.

So, the cause was immaterial. This was just Islam doing what it does best: killing and destroying.

The movie, “Innocence of Muslims,” was shown once, the Associated Press reports, in Hollywood to a mostly empty theater. It was cited as the reason that Muslims attacked the embassy in Cairo and launched a military type assault on the consulate in Benghazi. Or it might have been about the Danish cartoons.

Still, “Innocence of Muslims” is the kind of film that has not been produced by Hollywood ever since 9/11. Sam Bacile, an Israeli filmmaker, has shown more courage than any multi-millionaire director, producer, or actor. Hollywood has churned out many films judgmental of the U.S. and not of its enemies. Bacile remains undaunted by the outrages committed in Cairo and Benghazi. The Washington Post reported an Associated Press interview of Bacile. However, the Washington Post and the Associated Press took down that full-length article. Most of it can be found here:

The California-based property developer said to be responsible for the film “Innocence of Muslims,” Sam Bacile, insists that his 2-hour movie is an accurate portrayal of the life and values of the prophet Muhammad. “Islam is a cancer,” Bacile was quoted by the Associated Press as saying.

It is obvious to everyone but State Department wonks, The New York Times, and every other venue of the MSM that the twin attacks were intended as a middle finger shoved up the U.S.’s nose. There was nothing spontaneous about either attack. They were planned.

Planned and known to the Islamic supremacist governments of Egypt and Libya, both of which the Obama administration had a direct hand in establishing, in the name of “democracy.”

So, who tipped off the savages about a movie no one had even heard of? Is it beyond credibility that members of the Nour Party and their counterparts in Libya were offered the movie as bait? By whom? We’ve seen the duplicity of the Obama administration at work before.

More importantly than any of these ruminations about how and why the attacks occurred, is how the stress on Bacile’s movie comports perfectly with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s hand-holding with the Organization of Islamic Cooperation’s campaign to globalize the criminalization of any and all forms of criticism of Islam. Many observers, columnists and pundits have been wondering for months just what the Obama administration was planning as a reelection-salvaging event. Most hypothesized that it would a Syrian intervention.

Surprise. It is a doubling down on the “necessity” of censorship to prevent more “violence.” Pamela Geller reported in 2011 in American Thinker:

Today the Islamized State Department will be meeting with the Islamic supremacist Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) to discuss strategies and develop action plans in which to impose the restriction of free speech (or blasphemy, as truthful speech about Islam is considered in Islamic law) under the Sharia here in America.

Geller quotes Clinton on the occasion of the State Department hosting an OIC conference on how to silence critics of Islam:

“We also understand that, for 235 years, freedom of expression has been a universal right at the core of our democracy. So we are focused on promoting interfaith education and collaboration, enforcing antidiscrimination laws, protecting the rights of all people to worship as they choose, and to use some old-fashioned techniques of peer pressure and shaming, so that people don’t feel that they have the support to do what we abhor.”

Geller notes:

“Peer pressure and shaming.” That is exactly what these useful idiots try to do with anyone and everyone who tells the truth about Islam and jihad: me, Robert Spencer, Wafa Sultan, Nonie Darwish, and more.

The Cairo and Benghazi attacks, pegged to the excuse of the Danish Mohammad cartoons and the Bacile movie, comprise a part of that strategy and action plan. The Eurasia Review reports on a recent meeting of the OIC.

They would also be deliberating on challenges faced by 1.5 billion Muslims; more importantly lack of unity among the Muslim States, Islam phobia campaign and linking terrorism with Islam, disturbances in some Muslim states and other unpalatable problems facing the Muslim ummah (nation) on political, social, economic, educational and development fronts. (Italics mine)

The 57-member Organisation of Islamic Conference (OIC) headquarters in Jeddah has announced that it will hold the 4th “extraordinary” two-day session of the Islamic Summit Conference in Makkah from August 14 (26th Ramadan) called for by King Abdullah “to examine the situation in many countries of the Islamic world, intensify efforts to confront this situation, address the sources of discord and division therein, reunify the Islamic Ummah and promote Islamic solidarity.”

I would not call Clinton et al. “useful idiots.” That is a generous assessment of her character and the willingly dhimmi behavior of the State Department and of the Obama administration. That estimate implies that Clinton especially is utterly clueless about the nature of Islam. She knows. Obama knows. Our greatest “Islamic” enemy is not any Muslim, but our own leaders.

So, I say to Hillary, and Huma Abedin, and General Dempsey, and all the other compromisers and haters of freedom of speech: Bring it on. Come and get it. Just try to muzzle me. You’ll have a fight you never counted on, and I won’t be alone. I will mock, criticize, and condemn Islam to my heart’s content. Just try shutting me up. I’m calling you out.


Political Money Talks


To Preserve the Peace, or the State?


  1. revereridesagain

    The past day and a half has been like watching the pieces of a steel trap slam inexorably into place. You just dropped in the last, key, piece: the OIC's "extraordinary" — and I just bet it was! — Islamic Summit Conference barely a month ago, focused on the eradication of "Islam phobia".

    The trap is already being sprung, with the grotesque spectacle of the Joint Chief of Staff strong-arming a bible-thumping Florida preacher who, if he resists the pressure, will display a kind of courage of which the general is no longer capable:

    So yes, bring it on. The worst mistake they can make is springing that trap and imposing outright censorship. Because now any of us who still harbored the hope that we were being paranoid about this will know that it is real, and what we must do.

    And just a thought, but it's easier to try to shut us up when you know where to find us…

  2. Roxanne

    Thanks for doing the work of journalism that so many American reporters just won't do, along with excellent analysis. You shed needed light on the seemingly "spontaneous" outpourings of hatred, savagery and destruction in Libya and Egypt. I don't think they'll win in the end, but as we saw yesterday, a lot of collateral damage can occur in the meantime.

  3. Tad M Jones

    In my most pessimisstic moods I hope Israel will at least wait for the day of the presidential election to strike Iran, and or report a strike, so no pretense whatsoever can be used for a possible emergency suspension of elections.

  4. jayeldee

    “Many observers, columnists and pundits have been wondering for months just what the Obama administration was planning as a reelection-salvaging event. Most hypothesized that it would [be] a Syrian intervention.

    ”Surprise. It is a doubling down on the ‘necessity’ of censorship to prevent more ‘violence.’ “

    Possible, but it seems improbable—that is, as a “salvaging” ploy. If the administration is involved in this (and nothing would surprise me), it would seem more likely that the motive is to set the stage for some dramatic swashbuckling; like, you know, moving battleships around, and dispatching some marines thither and yon, and stuff like that—and then, to pull off a few “dramatic” drone strikes, a bit closer to Election Day.

    I think the full scale assault on free speech–the stage for which is now being set, as you’ve amply demonstrated–is more likely to occur during a second term, when the cost of a possible domestic backlash (well, one can hope, can’t one?) would be vastly reduced: that is, with no reelection at stake. Which is a very good reason (should we need another) to jettison this bunch, and bring in Whatsisname, and HIS bunch.

  5. Ed

    lThanks for this, Edward. Conscientious, rational, free-thinkers of all races and nationalities must stand up to primitive, violent Islam. It isn't enough to agree, silently, with the cautious, appeasing "moderates" of the sundry political parties, talking-head news networks and kowtowing bloggers. Individuals must state, publicly, and in no uncertain terms, that they are not afraid of a 7th-century ghost and his modern-day slaves, slaveholders and bomb-throwers.

    I wrote a little tune called "The Mohammed Song" in 2006, at the height of the Jyllands-Posten cartoon controversy, and uploaded the video to YouTube. In addition to the few-thousand views it received, a hundred or so Islamist crazies, spewing comical, hysterical, primitive English, threatened in the comments to hunt me down, cut off my head, rape my mother, rape my sister, rape my sheep, burn down my house and, incidentally, to annihilate America and all her filthy infidels. I laughed and laughed. Did I take them seriously? Nope. Did they succeed in raping and murdering me and my family and my livestock? Negative. Is America still here? Yup.

    I hope Americans of conscience and backbone (and all civilized people of the world) will speak out against violent religions of all stripes, nationalities and deities. If anyone reading this wishes to see my most recent and updated–but, probably, not the last–version of "The Mohammed Song," just click my name and follow the webpage link.

    Thanks again, Edward. Who's afraid of the big, bad Mo? Not you, and not me.

    Only Ed and The Almost

  6. jayeldee

    And speaking of "possible domestic backlashes" (as I did, in my comment above), there is this:

    From which, I quote:

    'The Riverside County man who was a script adviser to the film [Innocence of Muslims] and who has a long history of anti-Islamic activism told the Press-Enterprise newspaper that he has received multiple death threats.

    ' "I'm really tired," Steven Klein said when he answered the door of his home in Hemet, Calif., Friday with a pistol in his hand and clad only in a pair of white shorts stained with what appeared to be ink spots.

    'The newspaper said Klein, a Vietnam veteran, appeared agitated. While waving the gun, he told the newspaper he was standing up for his First Amendment rights in helping with the film and said he is prepared to die for those rights.'

    And he's quite right, to so "prepare".

    Now picture 1,000–or 100,000–Steven Kleins. There's your backlash.

Leave a Reply

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén