Thank goodness somebody at the US Embassy in Cairo has a pair:
.@ikhwanweb Thanks. By the way, have you checked out your own Arabic feeds? I hope you know we read those too.
— US Embassy Cairo (@USEmbassyCairo) September 13, 2012
It was in reply to this, as pointed out by Douglas Murray in the Spectator:
.@khairatalshater:We r relieved none of @usembassycairo staff were harmed & hope US-Eg relations will sustain turbulence of Tuesday’s events
— Ikhwanweb (@Ikhwanweb) September 13, 2012
(Screengrab of the US tweet can be seen here. I’ll get to why this is necessary in a minute.)
Isn’t that sweet? One of the Muslim Brotherhood’s Arabic tweets, to which the US Embassy tweet was referring said:
Egyptians rising up in support of the Prophet in front of the American embassy
That’s the caption to the photo of a raging mob from this article on the MB’s official website, Ikwhanonline. The article itself is a description of the incident, not really an incitement to violence or anything, but it’s revealing of the MB’s real attitude towards the violence nonetheless. I’m sure defenders of the indefensible who are media professional can explain to me how this casual description of violence jibes with their official declaration of sympathy with the US. There was no condemnation until somebody called them on it.
Any offending tweets have been deleted, of course, just like certain Beeboid tweets after they got caught. Notice that, while the MB’s social media staff seem to beavering away most days, sending out tweets practically every hour, sometimes even more often than that, there’s a huge gap of silence between 1:28pm and 11:23pm. Curious. Similarly, there’s an anomalous twelve hour gap of silence on Sept. 12 in the Twitter feed of the MB’s official website. According to Bloomberg, the MB cheekily played innocent when responding to the US Embassy.
CBS News seems to be taking the MB’s side on this one, claiming that, while the US Embassy deleted their tweet, the MB’s own tweets can still be found on their feed. This is obviously not true. But it’s pretty uncool that the US Embassy staff was forced to delete their tweets. This is the same US Embassy which tweeted an apology for the film before the attacks. What a disaster. There’s groveling dhimmitude at the highest levels of the US Government, it seems. The Leftosphere, naturally, is criticizing the US Embassy staff for being childish. I have no idea why nobody else seems to be wondering why there’s a huge gap in the MB’s twitter feed, since the US Embassy in Cairo must have been responding to something a little stronger.
However, MEMRI highlights this article from Aug. 27 by an MB member directly calling for jihad against the usual stock villains, descendents of pigs and dogs, and the US:
Praising The Traits Of The Jihad Fighter
“Fasting [during Ramadan] is one of the most powerful means to educate the human spirit for jihad. Fasting involves a spiritual effort to act in a way contrary to what is accepted, and to completely abandon desires… It also schools the Muslim in patience, resilience, endurance, and sacrifice, which are all traits of the jihad fighter…
Plus there’s a call to liberate Jerusalem. They’re not so innocent as Jeremy Bowen, award-winning BBC Middle East editor, once claimed. Bowen described the Muslim Brotherhood as being “conservative, moderate and non-violent”. Until, that is, he got caught and quickly deleted the word “moderate”. Unfortunately, though, the “non-violent” modifier is still there. This should be enough to cause his removal, but the BBC still views him as their most trusted go-to man on Middle East issues. And they expect you to trust someone who describes the Muslim Brotherhood as moderate and non-violent.
Bowen’s colleague, John Leyne, suggests that this violence could lead to better relations between the US and Egypt. No, seriously.
The filmmaker was removed from his home yesterday – voluntarily, yeah, surrounded by police – for “questioning”. Whatever his real name is, the guy is apparently on probation for a conviction for bank fraud. One requirement of his probation is that he can’t use the internet, or get someone to do something on the internet for him. That’s why the FBI had him brought in. In other words, somebody uploading that trailer to YouTube on his behalf is enough for the President of the US to have somebody investigated and brought in. The man has since been released, which pretty much tells you all you need to know about the people who run US law enforcement right now.
The BBC, which spent a huge amount of energy recently trying to figure out who made this film, has for some bizarre reason censored both the news about this incident, and the news about the twitter stuff. I wonder why?
Again, I fully expect our defenders of the indefensible who are media professional to explain this all to me in detail.
A badly made film that went on line to YouTube in June, but it wasn’t until 9/11 that the Islamist in the link below caused rioting around the world….
How does anyone, anywhere swallow this bile?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/egypt/9545515/Middle-East-protests-meet-the-hardline-tele-Islamist-who-brought-anti-Islam-film-to-Muslim-worlds-attention.html
“Muslim Brotherhood praises protests in Arabic,
expresses relief that U.S. embassy staff unharmed in English.”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/09/muslim-brotherhood-praises-protests-in-arabic-expresses-relief-that-us-embassy-staff-unharmed-in-eng.html
(shakes head) … these are the same numbskulls,
that can t get over themselves and consistently drone,
” if you cant read the koran in arabic” – ya da ya da!
legends in their own minds 😀
Compare and contrast the Mozzies reaction as opposed to the Jewish reaction to this http://www.archbishop-cranmer.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/saturdays-hunter-iranian-film-in-which.html
Also the Christian reaction to The Life of Brian, Jerry Springer The Opera etc.
The Muslim reaction to any slight, however feeble, is totally over the top and we in the west should start treating them like we would treat a small child having a tantrum. Instead we bow down to them and appease.
The duplicity of the Muslim Brotherhood is politically matched by that of INBBC’s chums at Al JAZEERA (which like INBBC supports the Muslim Brotherhood, of course):-
“The Two Faces of Al Jazeera”
by Oren Kessler
http://www.meforum.org/3147/al-jazeera
INBBC: a political arm of the MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD.
INBBC has unofficially adopted the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) political position on Islam.
Checking INBBC’s political priorities on Islam over the past week, the following aspects of presentation are apparent in INBBC’s political work:
1.) Afghanistan: here the emphasis is to highlight criticism of NATO and the West, and to relegate criticism of Islamic jihadists and Muslims. The deliberate jihadist murders there of four U.S troops by a lying Muslim assassin, gets relegated as news and inaccurately described, avoiding the term ‘Islamic jihadist’ for the perpetrator.
2.) the nature and extent of the Islamic jihad murders and
violence at Western embassies have also been relegated and misreported by INBBC.
INBBC merely repeated its mantra that is was an unseen video which caused the attacks against the West, not the pre-planning of Islamic jihadists for 9/11 event.
And the extent of global Islamic violence was under-reported online by INBBC e.g. the Islamic jihad attacks in PARIS seems top have been too close for comfort for INBBC to report
‘Jihadwatch’:
“Looks like we won’t always have Paris”
“100 Muslims detained after violent protest near U.S. embassy in Paris”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/09/100-muslims-detained-after-violent-protest-near-us-embassy-in-paris.html
Will INBBC see the light and support Israel and boycott Iran regime?
Will the political left, inc NUJ and INBBC forsake the Muslim Brotherhood, and instead boycott the Islamic Republic of Iran because, e.g. of this?:-
“Iran resurrects Salman Rushdie threat.
“Iran has seized on widespread Muslim outrage over a film insulting the Prophet Mohammad to revive the death threat against Salman Rushdie, raising the reward for killing him by US$500,000 (£320,000).”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/9546513/Iran-resurrects-Salman-Rushdie-threat.html
NYC writer Daniel Greenfield smacks it over the fence as usual:
“Let us dispense with any pretense that if we do criminalize defamation of religion or prosecute Mohammed cartoons as a hate crime, that this will be because we are tolerant or respect religion. It will be because we are afraid of Muslims”
http://sultanknish.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/anti-american-savages-of-post-american.html?m=1#comment-form
Twitter. Stealth Edits. Censorship. And post-event ‘investigations’.
‘Seemingly stung, the Brotherhood replied some 20 minutes later, saying “we understand you’re under a lot of stress, but it will be more helpful if you point out exactly the Arabic feed of concern.”‘
Some may remember a while ago a BBC employee got in a bit of hot water over abusing his position to stir up protest. David P was first off the mark and got a prompt response, with tweets and Google Docs excised from archive record (if a non-official record slap on the wrist as I recall).
I have a complaint ongoing on the removal of an entire article (about Michelle Obama on Letterman).
Interestingly, having ‘tidied up’, the BBC is also not above po-faced asking what is being referred to, secure in the knowledge of what lies ahead trying to progress things further. FoI-backed if necessary.
Seems they are in good company
As to the US response… we have a new puppy.
When he does wrong you need to be firm. Any weakness afterwards… any… a sneaked treat make up… a tickle under the chin… until the lesson has been learned, and you are facing a lifetime of grief.
What’s this about sending a Michelle Obama piece down the memory hole?
‘What’s this about sending a Michelle Obama piece down the memory hole? ‘
There was a full online article, featuring her on Letterman under the banner of ‘what she would not be watching’ (the GOP Convention). It was commented upon here as it coincided with a cherry vulture telling this blog what was and was not newsworthy. I think this coincided with you pointing out some key, black, female women had made significant speeches that were deemed unworthy of note, so the irony was telling.
The piece existed, and was used as an example of what the BBC does like.
Then… it vanished. The whole thing. Not just the footage (deemed commercially proprietary), but the whole piece.
I have challenged this as a matter of precedent (what else can the BBC ‘vanish’ retroactively as if it never existed, on whim?). They answered once ‘as courtesy’ to say that it happens ‘rarely’, which I did not accept.
Now they are refusing to say any more.
Unaccountable power corrupted absolutely.