Obama's Plan To Use The Military Against American Citizens

[Peach]

Dude, I've already seen Hillary's carelessness before, first hand.

It's a Clinton trait. While in Somalia the Clintons felt it would look bad if they allowed us to drive around a hostile city in armored vehicles. They felt that Muslims would be offended. They were more concerned about offending Muslims than protecting their own troops they put in harms way.

They chose to start gluing Kevlar plates in the wheel wells of our Hummers so that they wouldn't be noticed. Inside of the vehicles they velcroed Kevlar blankets which pretty much came loose under fire and smacked into us when a bullet hit the doors. The bullet-proof glass they put in our windows were easily pierced when an AK round hit it. Every one of those Rangers and Delta Operators that died on Oct 3rd 1993 died because they had no armored vehicles when thousands of Somalis started shooting at them.

The reason all of this was so fucked up is we were the only troops that didn't have armor.

Everyone else had it. Canada, Pakistan, the French, everyone in the UN command had armor.....except the Americans.

Like I said, I've seen this act before....first hand.

Geirge HW Bush began "Operation Restore Hope". It began as a relief effort; when were armored vehicles requested? Magor Gen. Garrison asked Preident Clinton for anything that was refused? His statements do not support that claim. Garrison did not enter the Army when Clinton took office in 1/93. He had been in charge in Somalia for a long time. He did not retire until after Aidid died, the DAY after in fact. Why not didcuss the Magor Gen. in charge at the time?
____________________________________________________________________________

Garrison took full responsibility for the tactical setbacks experienced in Operation Gothic Serpent. This effectively ended his career. Mark Bowden, the author of Black Hawk Down: A Story of Modern War, described Garrison as a military ascetic. According to Bowden's description Garrison tirelessly worked to serve his country and would do anything for his soldiers. Some of Garrison's subordinates have also spoken publicly about their former commander. Staff Sergeant Dan Schilling, an Air Force Combat Controller who took part in Operation Gothic Serpent shared his feelings about Garrison in the book The Battle of Mogadishu: Firsthand Accounts From The Men of Task Force Ranger. On page 187 of the text Schilling stated "I should pause here for a moment to say a few words about General Garrison. Many know his record and command history. I'm not the person to expound on his exploits; in fact I don't know the man very well. But I will say he is the finest general officer I have ever worked for and probably ever will. He understood his men and how we thought, what we wanted and needed, and understood the situation anywhere he was, immediately and completely. He is the finest leader an operator could ask for. It wasn't a shame that his career was derailed after our deployment; it was a criminal act committed by political cowards."

Guess you don't want to take the word of somebody who was there.

Not my problem. That's the problems with you libs. You can't believe it unless it's on CNN.

And this horseshit about Clinton being handed a bad deal,......it turned bad when Clinton took it from Bush. All of the shit didn't start going bad until Clinton was POTUS. He pulled out the Marines and left a sparse contingent of 10th Mountain and my JSOTF.

Taskforce Ranger was brought in to hunt for Aideed after he murdered a bunch of UN peacekeepers.

Yes, however, Garrison made the decisions, not Bill Clinton. The original plan was formulated under GHWB, obviously, he did not plan for the shift from delivering food to armed conflict.

 

[mudwhistle]

Geirge HW Bush began "Operation Restore Hope". It began as a relief effort; when were armored vehicles requested? Magor Gen. Garrison asked Preident Clinton for anything that was refused? His statements do not support that claim. Garrison did not enter the Army when Clinton took office in 1/93. He had been in charge in Somalia for a long time. He did not retire until after Aidid died, the DAY after in fact. Why not didcuss the Magor Gen. in charge at the time?
____________________________________________________________________________

Garrison took full responsibility for the tactical setbacks experienced in Operation Gothic Serpent. This effectively ended his career. Mark Bowden, the author of Black Hawk Down: A Story of Modern War, described Garrison as a military ascetic. According to Bowden's description Garrison tirelessly worked to serve his country and would do anything for his soldiers. Some of Garrison's subordinates have also spoken publicly about their former commander. Staff Sergeant Dan Schilling, an Air Force Combat Controller who took part in Operation Gothic Serpent shared his feelings about Garrison in the book The Battle of Mogadishu: Firsthand Accounts From The Men of Task Force Ranger. On page 187 of the text Schilling stated "I should pause here for a moment to say a few words about General Garrison. Many know his record and command history. I'm not the person to expound on his exploits; in fact I don't know the man very well. But I will say he is the finest general officer I have ever worked for and probably ever will. He understood his men and how we thought, what we wanted and needed, and understood the situation anywhere he was, immediately and completely. He is the finest leader an operator could ask for. It wasn't a shame that his career was derailed after our deployment; it was a criminal act committed by political cowards."

Guess you don't want to take the word of somebody who was there.

Not my problem. That's the problems with you libs. You can't believe it unless it's on CNN.

And this horseshit about Clinton being handed a bad deal,......it turned bad when Clinton took it from Bush. All of the shit didn't start going bad until Clinton was POTUS. He pulled out the Marines and left a sparse contingent of 10th Mountain and my JSOTF.

Taskforce Ranger was brought in to hunt for Aideed after he murdered a bunch of UN peacekeepers.

Yes, however, Garrison made the decisions, not Bill Clinton. The original plan was formulated under GHWB, obviously, he did not plan for the shift from delivering food to armed conflict.

The cause of the conflict is still under wraps.

What I saw was this:

The UN was in charge of the city armory. It was supposed to be full of confiscated weapons.

We pulled a surprise inspection and discovered they were empty. Then all Hell broke loose. 24 UN peacekeepers were attacked an hacked to pieces with machetes. The city errupted and all of the UN garrisons came under attack. After things cooled down Aideed became a wanted man. Here we were the only country without armor and the mission changed from humanitarian to an expeditionary mission. We requested tanks or APC s and were refused.

Who was president?

Bill Clinton.

The place went to shit under Bill Clinton, not Bush. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Operation_in_Somalia_II

 

[Bfgrn]

The quote shows that Hillary didn't even want to recognize the purpose of her testimony.

Nobody ever said it was a random act. It's clear you've already forgotten the story that the administration is trying to sell to us.

They floated the video as an excuse for the violence. They claim that the violence was a protest over the video.

What has been revealed is that they knew early on that there were no protests in Benghazi. They also know that security was lapse at the compound and that armed al Qaeda affiliates attacked with military grade weapons, not college students, or normal citizens with a grievance.

The hearing was supposed to discover what Hillary knew, and when. When she said "What difference does it make", it's like asking a witness in a murder trial a question of motive and method of death of the deceased, and the witness instead says "What difference does it make?"

You can't see how ridiculous this is?

I used to think you were intelligent. You're just a gullible government stooge.

The hearing was pure political theater.

The video WAS a factor in the attack. A Deadly Mix in Benghazi

When she said "What difference does it make" notice she said "at this point." In other words, we can do analysis later about whether it was a video sparking outrage or a planned attack by terrorists. And let's not forget she did say "we have no doubt they were terrorists." The priority was to understand what happened and to make sure this kind of tragedy could be prevented in the future.

You are a right wing brain dead hack and the ******* stooge.

The video wasn't a factor. You repeating it over and over can't make it so.

And put that woman in office will assure that it happens again.

Her mindset makes it a certainty.

The video WAS a factor...and you are WRONG that Al Qaeda was behind it...

Months of investigation by The New York Times, centered on extensive interviews with Libyans in Benghazi who had direct knowledge of the attack there and its context, turned up no evidence that Al Qaeda or other international terrorist groups had any role in the assault. The attack was led, instead, by fighters who had benefited directly from NATO’s extensive air power and logistics support during the uprising against Colonel Qaddafi. And contrary to claims by some members of Congress, it was fueled in large part by anger at an American-made video denigrating Islam.

 

[mudwhistle]

The hearing was pure political theater.

The video WAS a factor in the attack. A Deadly Mix in Benghazi

When she said "What difference does it make" notice she said "at this point." In other words, we can do analysis later about whether it was a video sparking outrage or a planned attack by terrorists. And let's not forget she did say "we have no doubt they were terrorists." The priority was to understand what happened and to make sure this kind of tragedy could be prevented in the future.

You are a right wing brain dead hack and the ******* stooge.

The video wasn't a factor. You repeating it over and over can't make it so.

And put that woman in office will assure that it happens again.

Her mindset makes it a certainty.

The video WAS a factor...and you are WRONG that Al Qaeda was behind it...

Months of investigation by The New York Times, centered on extensive interviews with Libyans in Benghazi who had direct knowledge of the attack there and its context, turned up no evidence that Al Qaeda or other international terrorist groups had any role in the assault. The attack was led, instead, by fighters who had benefited directly from NATO’s extensive air power and logistics support during the uprising against Colonel Qaddafi. And contrary to claims by some members of Congress, it was fueled in large part by anger at an American-made video denigrating Islam.

**** the NYTimes.


The video was an excuse, and the administration lied that it was simply an impromptu protest, not an armed assault by militants.

 

[jillian]

**** the NYTimes.

wingers are so classy...

the NY Times is the paper of record.... fake news sued for the right to lie.

gee.... I wonder which should be given more credence.

and i'm sure you loved the times when judy miller published all of the bush white house propaganda in the run up to Iraq.

but why quibble, right?

 

[Bfgrn]

The video wasn't a factor. You repeating it over and over can't make it so.

And put that woman in office will assure that it happens again.

Her mindset makes it a certainty.

The video WAS a factor...and you are WRONG that Al Qaeda was behind it...

Months of investigation by The New York Times, centered on extensive interviews with Libyans in Benghazi who had direct knowledge of the attack there and its context, turned up no evidence that Al Qaeda or other international terrorist groups had any role in the assault. The attack was led, instead, by fighters who had benefited directly from NATO’s extensive air power and logistics support during the uprising against Colonel Qaddafi. And contrary to claims by some members of Congress, it was fueled in large part by anger at an American-made video denigrating Islam.

**** the NYTimes.


The video was an excuse, and the administration lied that it was simply an impromptu protest, not an armed assault by militants.

How many reporters did Faux news send into Libya to investigate the attack?

The video WAS a factor.

 

[mudwhistle]

The video WAS a factor...and you are WRONG that Al Qaeda was behind it...

Months of investigation by The New York Times, centered on extensive interviews with Libyans in Benghazi who had direct knowledge of the attack there and its context, turned up no evidence that Al Qaeda or other international terrorist groups had any role in the assault. The attack was led, instead, by fighters who had benefited directly from NATO’s extensive air power and logistics support during the uprising against Colonel Qaddafi. And contrary to claims by some members of Congress, it was fueled in large part by anger at an American-made video denigrating Islam.

**** the NYTimes.


The video was an excuse, and the administration lied that it was simply an impromptu protest, not an armed assault by militants.

How many reporters did Faux news send into Libya to investigate the attack?

The video WAS a factor.

**** Fox News.

Nobody saw the thing.

Yet they said it must be bad.

Obama said it was disgusting, yet in fact it was honest. Seems Obama was the one who was more disgusted.

I saw it, and it sucked, but iit depicted Muslims doing what they do best, trashing the property of non-Muslims.

How disgusting.....

 

[mudwhistle]

Was the video a factor in the two previous attacks against that consulate?

 

[mudwhistle]

I wonder why the Egypt American ambassador decided to send out an apology before any attacks started?

 

[JimBowie1958]

**** the NYTimes.

wingers are so classy...

the NY Times is the paper of record....

roflmao

They openly admit to having a liberal bias and will often not give the conservative view of a topic at all. This means that they cannot be objective.


New York Times - SourceWatch

In 2003, the Times admitted to journalism fraud committed over a span of several years by one of its reporters, Jayson Blair, and the general professionalism of the paper was questioned, though Blair was immediately fired following the incident. Questions of affirmative action in journalism were also raised, since Blair was African American. Several top officials, including the chief of its editorial board, also resigned their posts following the incident.

In 2004, the Times made another significant admission of journalistic failings, publishing an editorial letter admitting that its flawed reporting during the buildup to war with Iraq helped promote the misleading belief that Iraq possessed large stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction. [1]

http://www.fee.org/library/detail/the-totalitarian-times

Stalin, the intellectuals claimed, had created a country and an economy that was impervious to the internal collapses that were endemic to capitalism, an economy that provided jobs and food for everyone. However, there were nasty rumors from the Land of Plenty that there was famine in Ukraine.

One influential newspaper, however, openly and authoritatively denied there was any famine at all. This was the “Newspaper of Record,” the most important newspaper in the United States and perhaps the world. The newspaper was the New York Times, and it said there was no famine and that any reports to the contrary were lies from Trotskyites and disgruntled capitalists.

Later that decade, Stalin proceeded with his now-infamous “show trials” in which he claimed that a number of the original Bolsheviks that put him into power actually had plotted with Leon Trotsky to overthrow the “Man of Steel” and re-impose capitalism. While some people expressed doubts, the New York Times, led by its man in Moscow, Walter Duranty, insisted that Stalin had uncovered massive plots against him.

We now know that the “Newspaper of Record” engaged in suppression of the truth, and the man most responsible, Duranty, still has his picture hanging in the lobby of the Times building as one of the paper’s many winners of the prestigious Pulitzer Prize. That his stories were lies apparently does not bother either the Times management or the committee that hands out the prizes.

And there is no consensus among the general population that the New York Times is a standard for anything other than bullshit.

Ken Langone Trashed The New York Times As A Credible Source Of Journalism - Business Insider

During the exchange, Langone trashed The New York Times as a credible source and ripped into the guest, University of California, Santa Barbara professor Nelson Lichtenstein, for using the Times as his source.

What's more is he said Walmart is likely to be telling the truth.

Here's an excerpt from a transcript:

Ken Langone: "I have a question for you, sir. Do you have any specific facts to substantiate the opinion you just put on this television show?

Nelson Lichtenstein: Well, yes. Walmart has been in the past, has repeatedly been cited.

Langone: No, I'm asking you, if — I'm asking you if you have any facts. Don't cite somebody else. That's hearsay.

Lichtenstein: Do I, no, I'm not an investigator of Walmart and I read the New York Times article and the New York Times article was pretty devastating.

Langone: Oh, the New York Times, that pillar of journalism that never has any opinions. Let me tell you what. In a selection of who is more likely to be telling the truth, Walmart or the Times, the Times doesn't even get in the race. Well, let me say this. You're saying your source is the New York Times? Shame on you as a professor...

Of course, the corporate owned press doesn't want such doubtful discussion of its flagship print news propaganda organ to be questioned and generally just ignores such statements.

Libtards like you defend it all the time because of its bias and support of totalitarians like Stalin and Mao.

But with the internet thank God the rest of us can just go around these institutions of lies and get the information ourselves.

 

[westwall]

The video WAS a factor...and you are WRONG that Al Qaeda was behind it...

Months of investigation by The New York Times, centered on extensive interviews with Libyans in Benghazi who had direct knowledge of the attack there and its context, turned up no evidence that Al Qaeda or other international terrorist groups had any role in the assault. The attack was led, instead, by fighters who had benefited directly from NATO’s extensive air power and logistics support during the uprising against Colonel Qaddafi. And contrary to claims by some members of Congress, it was fueled in large part by anger at an American-made video denigrating Islam.

**** the NYTimes.


The video was an excuse, and the administration lied that it was simply an impromptu protest, not an armed assault by militants.

How many reporters did Faux news send into Libya to investigate the attack?

The video WAS a factor.

Bullshit. The CIA knew within minutes that it was a coordinated attack. Obama and his drones and sycophants have been pointing to a ******* video that virtually no one even knew about.

In other words it was a lie, then, now, forever.

 

[Asclepias]

I got a false alarm this morning. The dog was barking and I was sure the military was coming to take the families on our street to forced labor camps. Turned out to be the garbage collectors.

 

[jillian]

Was the video a factor in the two previous attacks against that consulate?

does it matter?

was it a factor when bush had 13 benghaaaaaaaaazzzzzzzzziiiiiiiiiiiiis?

 

[jillian]

I got a false alarm this morning. The dog was barking and I was sure the military was coming to take the families on our street to forced labor camps. Turned out to be the garbage collectors.

so I guess there were no FEMA camps.

 

[dilloduck]

Was the video a factor in the two previous attacks against that consulate?

does it matter?

was it a factor when bush had 13 benghaaaaaaaaazzzzzzzzziiiiiiiiiiiiis?

LMAO BDR strikes again

 

[mudwhistle]

Was the video a factor in the two previous attacks against that consulate?

does it matter?

was it a factor when bush had 13 benghaaaaaaaaazzzzzzzzziiiiiiiiiiiiis?

Yet another lie.

BTW, how many consulates came under attack in one day on 9-11-2012?

FYI, more embassies came under attack in the 70s, 80s, and 90s.....

 

[SteadyMercury]

Gee, only for six years have we heard about how Oblama is building camps and is going to force Americans into them....

Yup, and before that we heard it about Bush from the idiots on the other side of the aisle.

Insane paranoia knows no political ties.

 

[Bfgrn]

**** the NYTimes.


The video was an excuse, and the administration lied that it was simply an impromptu protest, not an armed assault by militants.

How many reporters did Faux news send into Libya to investigate the attack?

The video WAS a factor.

Bullshit. The CIA knew within minutes that it was a coordinated attack. Obama and his drones and sycophants have been pointing to a ******* video that virtually no one even knew about.

In other words it was a lie, then, now, forever.

A video 'no one knew about' huh?

Then you must know who attacked our consulate in Benghazi and what their motivation was? Please let us know. But you CAN'T, can you?

Here is what you CAN do...PROVE that the anti-Islamic film had nothing to do with the attack.

But here is your problem...you CAN'T.



Here is your other problem...

Anti-US protests spread to
20 countries throughout
Muslim world

From ASSOCIATED PRESS
Last Updated: 2:29 PM, September 14, 2012

Protesters shout slogans during a demonstration near the US embassy in Amman against a film
they claim was insulting to Prophet Mohammad.

CAIRO — Angry protests over an anti-Islam film spread across the Muslim world Friday, with demonstrators scaling the walls of US embassies in Tunisia and Sudan and torching part of a German embassy. Amid the turmoil, Islamic militants waving black banners and shouting “God is great” stormed an international peacekeepers base in Egypt’s Sinai and battled troops, wounding four Colombians. …

The day of protests, which spread to around 20 countries, started small and mostly peacefully in countries such as Indonesia, Malaysia, India, Afghanistan and Pakistan. The most violent demonstrations took place in the Middle East. In many places, only a few hundred took to the streets, mostly ultraconservative Islamists — but the mood was often furious.

Jordanian protesters burn a US flag in front of the Kurdi Mosque near the USA embassy in Amman.

The demonstrators came out after weekly Friday Muslim prayers, where many clerics in their mosque sermons urged congregations to defend their faith, denouncing the obscure movie produced in the United States that denigrated the Prophet Muhammad. It was a dramatic expansion of protests that began earlier this week and saw assaults on the US embassies in Egypt and Yemen and the storming of the US Consulate in Benghazi, Libya.

Several thousand battled with Tunisian security forces outside the US Embassy in Tunis. Protesters rained down stones on police firing volleys of tear gas and shooting into the air. Some protesters scaled the embassy wall and stood on top of it, planting the Islamist flag that has become a symbol of the wave of protests: A black banner with the Islamic profession of faith, “There is no god but Allah and Muhammad is his prophet.”

Police chased them off the wall and took the flag down. Two protesters were killed and 29 people were wounded, including police.

The heaviest violence came in Sudan, where a prominent sheik on state radio urged protesters to march on the German Embassy to protest alleged anti-Muslim graffiti on mosques in Berlin and then to the US Embassy to protest the film.

“America has long been an enemy to Islam and to Sudan,” Sheik Mohammed Jizouly said.

Soon after, several hundred Sudanese stormed into the German Embassy, setting part of an embassy building aflame along with trash bins and a parked car. Protesters danced and celebrated around the burning barrels as palls of black smoke billowed into the sky until police firing tear gas drove them out of the compound. Some then began to demonstrate outside the neighboring British Embassy, shouting slogans.

Several thousand then moved on the American Embassy, on the capital’s outskirts. They tried to storm the mission, clashing with Sudanese police, who opened fire on some who tried to scale the compound’s wall. It was not clear whether any protesters made it into the embassy grounds.

Egypt's Morsi said his TV address that "it is required by our religion to protect our guests and their homes and places of work," he said.

He called the killing of the American ambassador in Libya unacceptable in Islam. "To God, attacking a person is bigger than an attack on the Kaaba," he said, referring to Islam's holiest site in Mecca.

His speech came after President Obama spoke with Morsi by telephone. The Obama administration has been angered by Morsi's slow response to the attack Tuesday night on the US Embassy in Cairo. He made little more than vague statements about it for days without an outright condemnation of the breach, in which police did nothing to stop protesters from climbing the embassy walls.

His silence reflected the heavy pressure that Morsi, a longtime figure from the Muslim Brotherhood, faces from Egypt's powerful ultraconservative Islamists. They are using the film issue to boost their own political prominence while challenging Morsi's religious credentials.

Leaders of Egypt's Jihad group, a former militant organization, held a conference in the Egyptian city of Alexandria and said anyone involved in "defamation" of the prophet should be killed. They called on Morsi to cut relations with US

"I appeal to President Mohammed Morsi to cut our relations with those monkeys and pigs," said Rifaei Taha, a leading member of the group.

Several hundred people, mainly ultraconservatives, protested in Cairo's Tahrir Square after weekly Muslim Friday prayers and tore up an American flag, waving the Islamist flag. A firebrand ultraconservative Salafi cleric blasted the film in his sermon in Tahrir, saying Muslims must defend Islam and its prophet.

Anti-US protests spread to 20 countries throughout Muslim world - NYPOST.com

 

[mudwhistle]

How many reporters did Faux news send into Libya to investigate the attack?

The video WAS a factor.

Bullshit. The CIA knew within minutes that it was a coordinated attack. Obama and his drones and sycophants have been pointing to a ******* video that virtually no one even knew about.

In other words it was a lie, then, now, forever.

A video 'no one knew about' huh?

Then you must know who attacked our consulate in Benghazi and what their motivation was? Please let us know. But you CAN'T, can you?

Here is what you CAN do...PROVE that the anti-Islamic film had nothing to do with the attack.

But here is your problem...you CAN'T.



Here is your other problem...

Anti-US protests spread to
20 countries throughout
Muslim world

From ASSOCIATED PRESS
Last Updated: 2:29 PM, September 14, 2012

Protesters shout slogans during a demonstration near the US embassy in Amman against a film
they claim was insulting to Prophet Mohammad.

CAIRO — Angry protests over an anti-Islam film spread across the Muslim world Friday, with demonstrators scaling the walls of US embassies in Tunisia and Sudan and torching part of a German embassy. Amid the turmoil, Islamic militants waving black banners and shouting “God is great” stormed an international peacekeepers base in Egypt’s Sinai and battled troops, wounding four Colombians. …

The day of protests, which spread to around 20 countries, started small and mostly peacefully in countries such as Indonesia, Malaysia, India, Afghanistan and Pakistan. The most violent demonstrations took place in the Middle East. In many places, only a few hundred took to the streets, mostly ultraconservative Islamists — but the mood was often furious.

Jordanian protesters burn a US flag in front of the Kurdi Mosque near the USA embassy in Amman.

The demonstrators came out after weekly Friday Muslim prayers, where many clerics in their mosque sermons urged congregations to defend their faith, denouncing the obscure movie produced in the United States that denigrated the Prophet Muhammad. It was a dramatic expansion of protests that began earlier this week and saw assaults on the US embassies in Egypt and Yemen and the storming of the US Consulate in Benghazi, Libya.

Several thousand battled with Tunisian security forces outside the US Embassy in Tunis. Protesters rained down stones on police firing volleys of tear gas and shooting into the air. Some protesters scaled the embassy wall and stood on top of it, planting the Islamist flag that has become a symbol of the wave of protests: A black banner with the Islamic profession of faith, “There is no god but Allah and Muhammad is his prophet.”

Police chased them off the wall and took the flag down. Two protesters were killed and 29 people were wounded, including police.

The heaviest violence came in Sudan, where a prominent sheik on state radio urged protesters to march on the German Embassy to protest alleged anti-Muslim graffiti on mosques in Berlin and then to the US Embassy to protest the film.

“America has long been an enemy to Islam and to Sudan,” Sheik Mohammed Jizouly said.

Soon after, several hundred Sudanese stormed into the German Embassy, setting part of an embassy building aflame along with trash bins and a parked car. Protesters danced and celebrated around the burning barrels as palls of black smoke billowed into the sky until police firing tear gas drove them out of the compound. Some then began to demonstrate outside the neighboring British Embassy, shouting slogans.

Several thousand then moved on the American Embassy, on the capital’s outskirts. They tried to storm the mission, clashing with Sudanese police, who opened fire on some who tried to scale the compound’s wall. It was not clear whether any protesters made it into the embassy grounds.

Egypt's Morsi said his TV address that "it is required by our religion to protect our guests and their homes and places of work," he said.

He called the killing of the American ambassador in Libya unacceptable in Islam. "To God, attacking a person is bigger than an attack on the Kaaba," he said, referring to Islam's holiest site in Mecca.

His speech came after President Obama spoke with Morsi by telephone. The Obama administration has been angered by Morsi's slow response to the attack Tuesday night on the US Embassy in Cairo. He made little more than vague statements about it for days without an outright condemnation of the breach, in which police did nothing to stop protesters from climbing the embassy walls.

His silence reflected the heavy pressure that Morsi, a longtime figure from the Muslim Brotherhood, faces from Egypt's powerful ultraconservative Islamists. They are using the film issue to boost their own political prominence while challenging Morsi's religious credentials.

Leaders of Egypt's Jihad group, a former militant organization, held a conference in the Egyptian city of Alexandria and said anyone involved in "defamation" of the prophet should be killed. They called on Morsi to cut relations with US

"I appeal to President Mohammed Morsi to cut our relations with those monkeys and pigs," said Rifaei Taha, a leading member of the group.

Several hundred people, mainly ultraconservatives, protested in Cairo's Tahrir Square after weekly Muslim Friday prayers and tore up an American flag, waving the Islamist flag. A firebrand ultraconservative Salafi cleric blasted the film in his sermon in Tahrir, saying Muslims must defend Islam and its prophet.

Anti-US protests spread to 20 countries throughout Muslim world - NYPOST.com

How's that hope and change working for ya?

BTW, you need to read your own cut and paste jobs.

These protests were a couple of days later after the video was blasted all over the world as the cause of attacks in Benghazi. Tuesday was 911, but these attacks happened the following Friday after prayer.