American Power

Sunday, September 16, 2012

Old Glory's Revenge: Muslim Protester Dies After Ingesting Smoke From Torched U.S. Flags in Pakistan

Blazing Cat Fur reports, "The Unfathomable Will of Allah: Muslim Dies After Being Made Unwell From Smoke of Burning US Flags at Mo Movie Demo."

And following the links takes us to the International Herald Tribune's Express Tribune, in Pakistan, "Ultimatum to U.S.: ‘Criminalise blasphemy or lose consulate’":

Around 10,000 people participated in the main rally organised on The Mall by the Tehreek Hurmat-i-Rasool (THR). The participants marched from Nila Gumbad to Masjid-i-Shuhada on The Mall. Despite a ban on rallies on The Mall, the road remained blocked for vehicular traffic from noon to 6pm.

The rally was addressed by Jamatud Dawa chief Hafiz Muhammad Saeed, THR head Ameer Hamza, JD leader Hafiz Abdul Rehman Makki, Pakistan Muslim League (Zia) head Ijazul Haq, Jamaat Ulema Islam-Sami (JUI-S) leader Asim Makhdoom and Jamaat Ahle Hadith ameer Hafiz Abdul Ghaffar Ropari.

One of the participants of the rally, Abdullah Ismail, passed away after he was taken to Mayo Hospital. Witnesses said he had complained of feeling unwell from the smoke from US flags burnt at the rally.

He felt "unwell." No doubt. Karma's a bitch.

Also at the New York Times, "Pakistanis Try to Storm U.S. Outpost; One Is Killed." (The "one" killed died of gunfire.)

Obama's Foreign Policy of Reconciliation Lies in Tatters

From Janet Daley, at Telegraph UK:

The President appears to be rethinking his stance on American interference abroad. Will he let the electorate know before the election?

What exactly is the nature and intention of Barack Obama’s foreign policy? What has the net effect been of his emphasis on apology and reconciliation with the Muslim world? How does he now see America’s global role? Bizarrely enough, none of these questions was being discussed in the immediate aftermath of last week’s attack on the United States consulate in Libya, which resulted in the first killing of an American ambassador since 1979. A spectacularly successful White House spin operation saw to it that the only topic for debate in the media was Mitt Romney’s Gaffe – a statement by the Republican presidential candidate that was diplomatically inept and mistimed, but trivial in comparison to the monumental issue of the President’s stance on America’s future relations with the Middle East.

As it happened, the Romney Gaffe – which appeared to exploit the tragedy for opportunistic political purposes – was almost immediately cancelled out by a much more serious Obama Gaffe, in which the President demoted Egypt from being an ally of the United States to the far more dubious status of being “not an enemy”. This utterance was so potentially explosive in its consequences that it had to be corrected within hours by a White House spokesman and the State Department. So the Gaffe score now being more or less at stalemate, perhaps we could discuss the substance of the matter?

The Obama pledge to transform America’s relationship with Muslim countries – the “new beginning” he promised in his Cairo speech back in June 2009 – which was a major plank of his anti-Bush political identity, is looking doomed. The rocket attack in Benghazi was almost certainly a pre-planned al‑Qaeda operation, but the rioting that followed in Egypt and a swath of other Islamic countries had the chaotic quality of truly spontaneous activity. It may have been a puerile five-minute video clip (taken from an idiotic film of fraudulent origins) that served as a pretext, but it was clear that anti-Americanism of the old-fashioned kind had just been waiting for its moment. That is not Obama’s fault: hatred of the Great Satan preceded him as indeed it preceded George Bush. But the question is whether the Obama answer to that problem – to try to conciliate (or, as the Republicans would have it, “appease”) the Muslim countries – is, or could ever have been, the answer.

More at that top link.

It's an excellent analysis, although Romney made no gaffe with his initial comments on Egypt. That's the leftist media spin, and Daley's buying it. See Jennifer Rubin, "Media and Obama out to lunch — Romney had it right."

And on O's Egypt-not-an-ally gaffe --- a real "gaffe" gaffe if there ever was one --- see Allahpundit at Hot Air, "White House: On second thought, Egypt is still kinda sorta an “ally”."

Ginormous Sunday Rule 5

Libya's Mohamed Yousef el-Magariaf: Attack On U.S. Embassy Was 'Planned — Definitely, It Was Planned by Foreigners...'

Listen to Libyan President Mohamed Yousef el-Magaria.

This has to be the most devastating interview I've heard all week, at CBS, "'Face the Nation' transcripts, September 16, 2012: Libyan Pres. Magariaf, Amb. Rice and Sen. McCain":

BOB SCHIEFFER: Was this a long-planned attack, as far as you know? Or what-- what do you know about that?

MOHAMED YOUSEF EL-MAGARIAF: The way these perpetrators acted and moved, I think we-- and they're choosing the specific date for this so-called demonstration, I think we have no-- this leaves us with no doubt that this has preplanned, determined-- predetermined.

BOB SCHIEFFER: And you believe that this was the work of al Qaeda and you believe that it was led by foreigners. Is that-- is that what you are telling us?

MOHAMED YOUSEF EL-MAGARIAF: It was planned-- definitely, it was planned by foreigners, by people who-- who entered the country a few months ago, and they were planning this criminal act since their-- since their arrival.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Mister President, is it safe for Americans there now?

MOHAMED YOUSEF EL-MAGARIAF: The security situation is-- is difficult, not only for Americans, even for Libyans themselves. We don't know what-- what are the real intentions of these perpetrators. How they will react? So-- but there is no specific particular concern for danger for Americans or any other foreigners. But situation is not easy ...

This guy's an interesting dude, a heavyweight of Middle East politics. And a relative moderate by regional standards. Check Magariaf's profile at Wikipedia. He's survived three assassination attempts and was once Libya's ambassador to India. Not a political neophyte whatsoever. He defected from the Ghaddafi regime in 1980.

Ambassador Susan Rice also appeared on this morning's "Face the Nation," among other broadcasts. She's offering an entirely different interpretation of events, as reported earlier, "Ambassador Susan Rice: U.S. Not 'Impotent' in Muslim World."

When hard intelligence data is made public the administration is going to be battered, bruised, and groveling before the people.

This is now a foreign policy election as important as any in recent decades. The immediate analogy is to Jimmy Carter and the Iranian hostage crisis of 1979, when economic concerns were also of extreme importance. Indeed, Ronald Reagan first asked Americans if they were better off than they were four years earlier at that time. But the turmoil in Iran, the abduction of our diplomats and the Carter administration's inept response to the crises became key flashpoints of the campaign. The timing is different this year. Operation Eagle Claw, the Desert One rescue mission that failed on April 24, 1980, was more than six months before the November election. That time lag gave Americans lots of time to decide which candidate would better secure American interests in a dizzying period of international conflict. But while the timeline is quite different today, the utter degree of humiliation is not. If Americans blamed Jimmy Carter personally for our troubles, throwing him out of office and electing Reagan to the helm, there's really no reason to think that can't happen again. America's foreign policy is literally aflame across the Middle East. We're seeing anti-American protests in more than 30 countries. It's all on Obama's watch, after three years of unprecedented appeasement of the Muslim world.

Perhaps voters will filter out world events as they struggle to make ends meet amid the Obama Depression. Indeed, if the president wins a second term it means that they've accepted Democrat arguments for "shared sacrifice," that they want government to build a dominant role as the safety net of last resort. Such a result will mean a substantial shift in the political culture of the United States, away from individualism towards more dependence on the state. Will it last? Perhaps, especially as long as the economy fails to create new jobs and to lift hopes of opportunity. But outside events have a way of placing tremendous constraints on the U.S. domestic realm. If Obama's record is any indication, global hostility to America will continue, while in the meantime U.S. foreign policy will continue to marginalize our key allies such as Israel. It's all a recipe for continued long-term instability with a great likelihood of armed conflict. Moscow will be emboldened to expand its interests in Syria and beyond, continuing to prop up the Assad regime, which will amount to a de facto alliance between the Kremlin and the mullahs in Tehran.

Secretary Rice is wrong: The U.S. is becoming increasingly impotent to shape the course of events in the region and to secure America's traditional interests. The administration has offered a flawed theory of the region, based on literally bowing down to our allies and enemies alike. The reckoning is coming. There's likely to be more Americans killed and increasing tensions among the great powers. Without a change in direction of U.S. policy, the American eagle will be scurrying in fear in the face of the Russian bear and the Iranian lion. And our allies will decide that they have no friend in Washington, and they'll resort to self-help to secure their survival. It's an altogether ugly picture, but now clearly coming into focus in this fateful week after the 11th anniversary of the September 11th attacks.

UPDATE: Linked at Blazing Cat Fur and The Lonely Conservative. Thanks!

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu: Place a 'Red Line' Before Iran

This is the other big story out of the Middle East, at Fox News, "Netanyahu: US must draw a 'red line' with Iran over nuclear weapons":

WASHINGTON – Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu made a direct appeal to American voters on Sunday to elect a president willing to draw a "red line" with Iran, comparing Tehran's nuclear program to Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh and reminding Americans of the devastating repercussions of failed intelligence.

His remarks were an impassioned election-season plea from a world leader who insists he doesn't want to insert himself into U.S. politics and hasn't endorsed either candidate. But visibly frustrated by U.S. policy under President Barack Obama, the hawkish Israeli leader took advantage of the week's focus on unrest across the Muslim world and America's time-honored tradition of the Sunday television talk shows to appeal to Americans headed to the polls in less than two months.

Tehran claims its nuclear program is peaceful. Netanyahu said the U.S. would be foolish to believe that, using football metaphors and citing example of past terrorist attacks on U.S. soil to appeal to his American audience.

"It's like Timothy McVeigh walking into a shop in Oklahoma City and saying, 'I'd like to tend my garden. I'd like to buy some fertilizer ... Come on. We know that they're working on a weapon,'" Netanyahu said.

More at the link.

And at The Hill, "Israeli PM Netanyahu: Iranian leaders guided by strong ‘fanaticism’." (There's "Meet the Press" video at the link, via Memeorandum and The Other McCain.)

Sunday Cartoons

At Flopping Aces, "Sunday Funnies."

More at Legal Insurrection, "Branco Cartoon – Got Bibi’s Back."

Also at Reaganite Republican, "Reaganite's Sunday Funnies," and Theo Spark, "Cartoon Round Up..."

CARTOON CREDIT: Above, William Warren.

Ambassador Susan Rice: U.S. Not 'Impotent' in Muslim World

From Jake Tapper at ABC News:

U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice told me this morning on “This Week” that the United States is not “impotent” in the face of violent protests sweeping the Muslim world being aimed at American interests.

“We’re not impotent,were not even less popular to challenge that assessment” said Rice. ” What happened this week in Cairo, in Benghazi and many other parts of the region was a result, a direct result, of a heinous and offensive video that was widely disseminated, that the U.S. government had nothing to do with, which we have made clear is reprehensible and disgusting.”

President Obama has been very public since the start of his presidential term that he intended to heal relations with the Middle East that were damaged during the Bush administration.

More at that top link. And also the banner headline at The Daily Caller, "'We're Quite Popular In Libya' - Ambassador Susan Rice: Mideast crisis not an 'expression of deep-seated anti-American sentiment'."

At the video above, Rice indicates that President Obama "picked up the phone" and told President Morsi in Egyp to get with the program. Okay, sure. Morsi doesn't want to lose his foreign aid. But if the U.S. had real power --- if Obama's Cairo foreign policy had any real effect --- those protests would have never taken place to begin with. And with protests, the Egyptian military could have smashed them with the blink of an eye. What popularity? The banner at the ABC News clip has 33 countries now mounting anti-American protests. This is the biggest popular repudiation of America I can remember in my lifetime. And Ambassador Rice is sticking with the meme that the "Innocence of Muslims" video is 100 percent the cause of all the violence and outrage? It's getting obscene to listen to this administration's dissembling and lies. Daniel Halper has that, at the Weekly Standard, "U.S. Ambassador to U.N. Doubles Down on Claim that Film Responsible for Middle East Mobs" (via Memeorandum):

This morning on Fox News Sunday, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice, doubled down on the Obama administration's claim that an Internet video is responsible for anti-American mobs across the Middle East....

CHRIS WALLACE: Joining us now our ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice. Ambassador, welcome back to Fox News Sunday.

AMB. SUSAN RICE: Thank you.

WALLACE: This week, there have been anti-American protests in two dozen countries across the Islamic world.Tthe White House says it has nothing to do with the president's policies. Let's watch.

JAY CARNEY: This is not a case of protests directed at the United States writ large or at U.S. policy. This is in response to a video that is offensive.

WALLACE: You don't really believe that?

AMB. RICE: Chris, absolutely I believe that. Because, in fact, it is the case. We had the evolution of the Arab Spring over the last many months but what sparked the recent violence was the airing on the Internet of a very hateful very offensive video that has offended many people around the world. Now, our strong view is that there is no excuse for violence. It is reprehensible and never justified. But in fact there have been those in various parts of the world who have reacted with violence. Their governments have increasingly and effectively responded and protected our facilities and condemned the violence and this outrageous response to what is an offensive video. But there is no question what we have seen in the past with things like Satanic Verses and cartoons of the Prophet Mohammad there have been such things that have sparked outrage and anger and this has been the proximate cause.

More at Memeorandum.

BONUS: From Scott Johnson at Power Line, "Fools and Knaves, Pt. 3."

Added: From Ed Morrissey at Hot Air, "Rice: Benghazi attack was spontaneous; Libya: No, it wasn’t":

There seems to be lingering confusion about the nature of the attack on the Benghazi consulate that cost four Americans their lives, including the first US Ambassador killed in the line of duty since 1979, J. Christopher Stevens. UN Ambassador Susan Rice insisted on Fox News Sunday that the attack on the consulate on the 11th anniversary of 9/11 was a spontaneous demonstration that just “spun out of control.” Rice also doubled down on the administration’s claim that the violence is all about the video...

Well, it's not "confusion." It's deceit and obfuscation. The administration is lying. As pointed out at Power Line above, the Libyan government is claiming a pre-planned attack on the U.S. diplomatic compound. But keep reading at the post. Ed does cite additional information to that effect, but he attempts a balancing approach that doesn't seem warranted given the awful dishonesty the administration's adopted so far during the crisis.

More: From National Review, "Libyan President Contradicts Administration on Benghazi Attack."

More still: Blue Crab Boulevard links, "Liar, Liar." Thanks!

U.S. Preparing for Long Siege of Arab Unrest

A big front-page report at today's New York Times:

WASHINGTON — After days of anti-American violence across the Muslim world, the White House is girding itself for an extended period of turmoil that will test the security of American diplomatic missions and President Obama’s ability to shape the forces of change in the Middle East.

Although the tumult subsided Saturday, senior administration officials said they had concluded that the sometimes violent protests in Muslim countries may presage a period of sustained instability with unpredictable diplomatic and political consequences. While pressing Arab leaders to tamp down the unrest, Mr. Obama’s advisers say they may have to consider whether to scale back diplomatic activities in the region.

The upheaval over an anti-Islam video has suddenly become Mr. Obama’s most serious foreign policy crisis of the election season, and a range of analysts say it presents questions about central tenets of his Middle East policy: Did he do enough during the Arab Spring to help the transition to democracy from autocracy? Has he drawn a hard enough line against Islamic extremists? Did his administration fail to address security concerns?

These questions come at an inopportune time domestically as Mr. Obama enters the fall campaign with a small lead in polls. His policies escaped serious scrutiny in the initial days after the attack that killed four Americans in Libya last week, in part because of the furor over a statement by Mitt Romney accusing the president of sympathizing with the attackers. White House officials said they recognized that if not for Mr. Romney’s statement, they would have been the ones on the defensive.

As of Saturday night, the worst of the crisis appeared to have passed, at least for now. The Egyptian government, responding to administration pressure, cracked down on protesters in Cairo on Saturday, and in Libya the government rounded up suspects in the violence that killed four Americans on Tuesday. Leaders in Saudi Arabia and Tunisia appealed for calm.

Still, images from the past week of American flags being torn down and burned, an Islamic flag being raised and embassies being overrun by angry mobs introduce a volatile element into a re-election effort in which foreign policy has been a strength. Some critics and commentators were already evoking the images of the Iranian hostage crisis that doomed another presidency.WASHINGTON — After days of anti-American violence across the Muslim world, the White House is girding itself for an extended period of turmoil that will test the security of American diplomatic missions and President Obama’s ability to shape the forces of change in the Middle East.

Although the tumult subsided Saturday, senior administration officials said they had concluded that the sometimes violent protests in Muslim countries may presage a period of sustained instability with unpredictable diplomatic and political consequences. While pressing Arab leaders to tamp down the unrest, Mr. Obama’s advisers say they may have to consider whether to scale back diplomatic activities in the region.

The upheaval over an anti-Islam video has suddenly become Mr. Obama’s most serious foreign policy crisis of the election season, and a range of analysts say it presents questions about central tenets of his Middle East policy: Did he do enough during the Arab Spring to help the transition to democracy from autocracy? Has he drawn a hard enough line against Islamic extremists? Did his administration fail to address security concerns?

These questions come at an inopportune time domestically as Mr. Obama enters the fall campaign with a small lead in polls. His policies escaped serious scrutiny in the initial days after the attack that killed four Americans in Libya last week, in part because of the furor over a statement by Mitt Romney accusing the president of sympathizing with the attackers. White House officials said they recognized that if not for Mr. Romney’s statement, they would have been the ones on the defensive.

As of Saturday night, the worst of the crisis appeared to have passed, at least for now. The Egyptian government, responding to administration pressure, cracked down on protesters in Cairo on Saturday, and in Libya the government rounded up suspects in the violence that killed four Americans on Tuesday. Leaders in Saudi Arabia and Tunisia appealed for calm.

Still, images from the past week of American flags being torn down and burned, an Islamic flag being raised and embassies being overrun by angry mobs introduce a volatile element into a re-election effort in which foreign policy has been a strength. Some critics and commentators were already evoking the images of the Iranian hostage crisis that doomed another presidency.

Hmm... Looks like the mainstream press is starting to come around on this. These revolts are an historic disaster for U.S. foreign policy and the Obama administration, and there will be domestic political repercussions --- which is why, of course, the White House press corps attacked Mitt Romney for having raised these very issues, and not the president who's the source of so much of what's wrong with our international relations.

More at that top link.

CARTOON CREDIT: Legal Insurrection.

The Lamest Thing You'll Read All Day

Seriously lame.

At the Los Angeles Times, "Occupy movement turns 1 year old, its effect still hard to define."

Lame because, on the one hand, Occupy's had an enormous effect. From the White House down the the dregs of the Democrat fever swamps, anarcho-communism has been welcomed by one of the two major political parties in American politics. The movement's also given the MSM flacks something to cheer on while the left stumbles to find some kinda message that appeals to people not to stupid too vote Democrat in the first place. But the piece is lame on the other hand because with this front-page spot, the Times makes the case, as is so common, that Occupy essentially has to become a tea party-type organization to remain vital. Progressive media types have never grasped the fundamental difference between Occupy and the tea party. With the former, you had an anti-capitalist movement originating on the fringes of the radical left, on the campuses, the unions, and the alternative media, which was later piggybacked by the establishment left once the Zuccoti Park criminals got their fifteen minutes of fame. The tea party, however, bubbled up from everyday Americans shocked at what was happening to their country. It got exposure through Fox News, quite a bit of exposure, but for the most part the tea party sprung spontaneously from the outrage of the silent majority. And its effect has been enormous. Occupy's manifesto is Marx and Engels. The tea party's manifesto is Thomas Jefferson and the Federalist Papers. Amazing how the media beat the doors down to mainstream communism but the founding philosophy of the nation was demonized as horribly retrograde and fundamentally racist. I shake my head sometimes.

But read the piece at the Times. I don't expect we've heard the last of Occupy, in any case. The left will always be with us. The anarchists and communists and Jew-haters will keep up their hatin' no matter what the label.

RELATED: ICYMI, at FrontPage Magazine, "Occupy Wall Street: The Communist Movement Reborn."

Saturday, September 15, 2012

Nakoula Basseley Nakoula Taken Into Custody

It's the anti-Islam filmmaker, "Sam Bacile."

He was taken in for "voluntary" police questioning. I love that, "voluntary." Talk about making George Orwell proud.

See Protein Wisdom, "Blasphemer found, detained by LA Police. Allah be Praised!"

(Police released the guy after questioning, nice chaps that they are.)

And get this, at Breitbart, "Anti-Islam Filmmaker Donated Million Dollars To Obama Campaign."

BONUS: At Instapundit, "WHY BARACK OBAMA SHOULD RESIGN..."

From the Command Center

At the photo: My old Acer mini-laptop at the forefront, which I'm using until I can buy a new one, since my kid trashed my last one. Speaking of kids, my 11-year-old guy is sitting at left playing games on my older son's Apple laptop. On the television, "The Matrix Reloaded." The series has been playing the last couple of months on Cinemax's "Thriller-Max" channel. And to the right of the screen is a half-consumed glass of Blue Moon Belgian White. It's the first time I've tried it. I'm not a big "craft beer" kinda guy. I like Corona, frankly. But this one tastes good, and I've also enjoyed Hep Cat Blonde Ale of late at the local Lamppost Pizza Parlor.

The Muslim World Still Hates America

From Andrew Coyne, at the National Post, "The real lesson of embassy attacks: U.S. will always have enemies." He takes jabs at both left and right here, but it's a thoughtful piece:

What the last few days does show, as if we needed reminding, is that a lot of people in the Muslim world still hate America. Even if the proximate cause were, as reported, a crude anti-Muslim video that happened to have been produced in the United States, the crowds’ fury plainly has as much to do with where the film was made as what was in it. The protests have become, if they were not originally, arenas for the venting of rage at the U.S. in general — and at its president in particular. “Obama, Obama, we are all Osamas,” rioters in Tunis chanted. In Jalalabad, Afghanistan, they burned him in effigy.

If this seems a remarkable turn of events, it shouldn’t. The notion that the election of a president with Muslim roots, or the adoption of a more conciliatory tone in American foreign policy, would mollify America’s detractors in the Third World, was always a fantasy. If it is unlikely the protests were caused by Obama’s “weakness” — Mitt Romney’s campaign went so far as to claim they would not have taken place if he were president — then neither, it seems, has his presence in the White House done anything to prevent them. Perhaps there is less anti-Americanism abroad as a result of his presidency, but it certainly hasn’t been extinguished. Which is fine. Because there isn’t anything to be done about it, and no point in trying.

It is a mistake to suppose that hatred of America must have some rational cause, any more than other prejudices. It does not. It is a constant, unlikely to change no matter what propitiatory gestures the U.S. might offer. It has nothing to do with what foreign policy it pursues, or whether the president’s middle name is Hussein. It exists because America exists, and if America did not exist it would attach itself to something else.

Hatred of America is a form of self-hatred, the fruit of frustration and despair in the Muslim world at their relative decline. And not only in the Muslim world. Anti-Americanism will always be with us so long as people need a bogeyman on which to hang the evils of the world. It speaks to all that is small and envious and insecure in us, and unfortunately that, too, is a constant.

Also, see Lee Smith, at the Weekly Standard, "The Video Didn’t Do It." (Via Memeorandum.)

PHOTO CREDIT: iOWNTHEWORLD: "President Obama Skips Intel. Briefing One Day After Embassy Attacks, Media Silent on the Issue."

Candice Swanepoel Topless in Latest Victoria's Secret Photo Shoot in Miami

At London's Daily Mail, "Candice Swanepoel takes her Victoria's Secret calendar shoot one step further as she goes topless on Miami beach."

Two Marines Killed in Taliban Attack in Afghanistan's Helmand Province

The Los Angeles Times reports, "Two Marines killed in attack on Afghan base where Prince Harry is deployed."

Also at The Lonely Conservative, "2 US Marines Killed in Taliban Attack in Afghanistan – Updated." And The Other McCain, "Report: 2 Marines Killed in Afghanistan."

More at National Post, "Heavily armed insurgents storm Prince Harry’s base in southern Afghanistan, killing two U.S. Marines."

Al-Qaeda Claims Responsibility for Attack on U.S. Consulate in Libya

Yeah, because, you know, the protests are all about this stupid viral video on YouTube.

At the Times of Israel, "Al-Qaeda indicates responsibility for killing US envoy in Libya, urges more attacks."

Al-Qaeda indicated responsibility on Saturday for Tuesday’s attack on the US consulate in Benghazi, in which US Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans were killed.

The terror group said the assault was executed in revenge for a US drone strike in June that killed the organization’s number two, Abu Yahya al-Libi. Libi was a Libyan national who served as lieutenant to Ayman al-Zawahiri, the head of al-Qaeda.

“The killing of Sheikh Abu Yahya only increased the enthusiasm and determination of the sons of (Libyan independence hero) Omar al-Mukhtar to take revenge upon those who attack our Prophet,” Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula said.

In a statement, the terror group urged more such attacks. ”Whoever comes across America’s ambassadors or emissaries should follow the example of Omar al-Mukhtar’s descendants, who killed the American ambassador,”it said. ”Let the step of kicking out the embassies be a step towards liberating Muslim countries from the American hegemony.”

Eastern Libya’s deputy interior minister, Wanis el-Sharef, said Friday that four people had been arrested in connection with the attack. Other reports Saturday said the Libyan authorities have identified 50 people involved in the attack.

In an audio recording released to coincide with the 9/11 anniversary, Zawahiri asserted an Islamic duty to “liberate” every inch of Muslim lands, and called upon Muslims to “purify” their countries of corrupt leaders during what he termed a period of “American weakness.” Muslims should “topple the western proxies” left in their countries “and especially the Saud clan and the gulf sheiks in the Arabian peninsula,” he declared.

More at the link.

And at ABC News, "Al Qaeda Praises Libya Consulate Attack as Anti-American Protests Subside."

Afghans Burn Obama in Effigy (VIDEO)

Because, the protests are all about the film, and not at all about Obama's foreign policy or the American people themselves.

At Agence France Press, "Afghans burn Obama effigy at film demo," and Vlad Tepes, "Protests in Afghanistan burn Obama in effigy."

Pamela Geller: President Obama Sanctions Anti-American Protests Across Mideast

She goes there.

At Atlas Shrugs, "Video: Pamela Geller on Fox and Friends, Islamic Supremacists in an Uproar."

Charlie Cook: Obama Could Win It

I trust very few elections forecasters, with Charlie Cook being one big exception.

At National Journal, "Obama’s a Good Bet":

By this time next week, there should be enough national and state-level polling data to present a pretty clear picture of where this election stands, post-Labor Day and after whatever bounces the candidates may have gotten from the conventions. But we have seen enough data in recent weeks to draw some preliminary conclusions about the contests for the White House, the Senate, and, to a lesser extent, the House.

The presidential race is still close and, in a tight election, either candidate can win. Any number of events, not the least of which are debates, campaign gaffes, and domestic or international developments, could put President Obama or Mitt Romney over the top. Although it is pretty clear that Obama has an edge over Romney in national and swing-state polling, the size of his advantage remains in doubt. Every event or development should be judged on whether it might change the path of this election.

My view is that if Obama is reelected, it will be despite the economy and because of his campaign; if Mitt Romney wins, it will be because of the economy and despite his campaign. This economy is an enormous millstone around Obama’s neck, yet he and his campaign have managed to secure the upper hand—albeit with a very tenuous grip. At the same time, despite an enormous advantage that the sluggish economy and the sentiment for change affords him, Romney and his campaign, to an astonishing degree, seem to have squandered too many opportunities and undermined his chances of winning.

It should be emphasized again and again that this campaign isn’t over and that the race is still awfully close. But without a change in the trajectory, it’s a good bet that Obama will come out on top. The questions are whether the opportunity will arise for that trajectory to change and whether the Romney campaign be able to effectively capitalize on it.

EXTRA: At the New York Times, "Poll Finds Obama Is Erasing Romney’s Edge on Economy."

(The economy is by far the leading issue for voters, but foreign policy is going to become a tough topic for Obama in the weeks ahead, so again, my sense is it's still way to close to call.)

PHOTO CREDIT: The White House Flickr Page.

President Obama, Secretary of State Clinton Speak at Dover Airbase for U.S. Diplomats Killed in Libya

I watched it live, and commented on it as well, so I might as well post it.

PREVIOUSLY: "White House Denies Islamic Protests Are Reaction to Obama's Foreign Policy."

Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Calls On Muslims Worldwide to Unite Against United States and 'The Evil Zionists' Behind Controversial Muhammed Video

Hey, the Obama administration's appeasement policies are bearing fruit. Our mortal enemies are rallying the entire Middle East around a solid programmatic agenda: to unite against "Zionism and the U.S. government," and to make those behind the anti-Islam film "face a punishment proportionate to this great crime," which would of course be death to the infidels. The Jewish Telegraphic Agency reports, "Iran’s supreme leader blames ‘evil Zionists’ for anti-Islam film."

And see this outstanding piece at the Wall Street Journal, "Amid Chaos, Extremists Spur Violence: Inflamed by Anti-Islam Video, Marchers Target U.S. and Other Western Allies; Iran Calls for a 'United Response'":

BEIRUT—Many of the protests that spread across the Muslim world on Friday, with violent mobs targeting diplomatic compounds of the U.S. and its allies started out as relatively small and restrained but rapidly grew out of control when groups of extremists riled up the crowd.

Similar scenes were repeated in parts of the Middle East, Africa and Asia, as crowds of men and women carried placards denouncing the video trailer for a purported film called "Innocence of Muslims," and directed their anger toward the U.S. and Israel. American flags were burned in Lebanon, Iran, Iraq, Nigeria and Bangladesh during protests.

The sudden eruption of anger against the U.S. and its allies isn't new in the Islamic world. But the violence targeted at Americans in the fledging democracies of the Arab Spring presents a precarious challenge for its newly elected leaders. They must balance defending the U.S., an important ally that helped them come to power, against appeasing the raw sentiments of a minority of Islamist radicals with the power to destabilize the region.

In Benghazi, Libya—where a violent attack Tuesday on the U.S. Consulate resulted in the death of U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans—several conservative imams preached a message of tolerance and nonviolence across their mosques during the Friday noon prayer.

Approximately 100 men stood in front of the city's largest hotel shouting slogans against the U.S. and the anti-Islamic video. Unlike Tuesday night, Friday's protest was muted, with no one brandishing guns. Many in the crowd carried the flag used by militant Islamists,

Mohammed al-Mifty, 25 years old, carried a hand-drawn sign saying, "They degrade our prophet and no one cares, but an American dies and the world turns upside down." His motivation for taking to the streets Friday was to defend Islam, he said. That is the reason why he also participated in the protest on Tuesday evening in front of the U.S. consulate.

The violence also reached Tunisia, one of the most moderate Muslim countries and the birthplace of the Arab Spring. Three people died during clashes as protesters stormed the U.S. Embassy compound, climbing over walls and breaking a locked gate. They set fire to cars parked in the embassy parking lot, and the American school sending huge plumes of black smoke into the air.

Demonstrators brought down the American flag and raised the black flag common to militant Islamist movements. Three people were killed and 28 injured, according to Tunisia's state-controlled news agency.

A Tunisian official said U.S. embassy security personnel gave Tunisian security forces permission to enter the embassy grounds and push out protesters with tear gas and bird shot after they forced their way into the compound. Armed with rocks and Molotov cocktails, protesters clashed with police into the night in the streets around the sprawling U.S. Embassy compound.

They later set the administration building of the nearby American school on fire. Around nightfall, a small group of protesters breached the walls of the U.S. compound and set a small fire inside the embassy building. according to witnesses.

A local Tunisian staff member at the U.S. Embassy said American staffers had been told to stay home in anticipation of the protests. The American School had similarly told students to stay home on Friday.

UPDATE: Linked by Barbara at American Freedom. Thanks!