12 September 12
redictably,
Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney tried to make political
hay of the tiny demonstrations in Cairo and Benghazi by Muslim
militants. The Benghazi mob turned violent in clashes with police and
the consulate ended up being burned and the US ambassador and three staffers were killed.
Romney seized on the frantic tweets of the Cairo
embassy issued *before the attacks*, which condemned the sleazy Youtube
videos by American Islamophobes that had provoked the ire of the crowds,
as evidence that the Obama administration was siding
with the attacking mobs.
First of all, really? Romney is trying to get
elected on the back of a dead US diplomat?
Second of all, really? He
thinks the State Department thought the attack on themselves was
justified?
Third of all, really? Romney is selective. When it comes to
Christianity, Romney decries a "war on religiion."
But apparently he thinks there *should* be a war on Islamic religion.
(Except that Romney hopimself condemned Terry Jones's Qur'an burning a
couple of years ago.)
Romney's intervention (he is just a civilian at
the moment) in American foreign policy is unwise and risky, not to
mention distasteful.
To read Cole's entire column, go to readersupportednews.org
No comments:
Post a Comment