There was no apology, Romney was wrong

The discourse over Mitt Romney's statement regarding the events in Libya seems to have lost focus on a couple of points:

The statement of the U.S. Embassy in Cairo, in response to the odious and bigoted anti-Muslim film shown on the Internet before the attack in Benghazi, was that we deplore public utterances which are designed to inflame religious hatred. Was Mr. Romney saying he was against that? After all, what other purpose for making the film makes sense? There was no "apology" offered. Even if one had been offered, would it not simply be saying that some of our brethren embarrass us by their inflammatory and irresponsible behavior?

The Libyan government has apologized for the crime that killed our ambassador, a true friend of the Libyan people. Would Mr. Romney, following his own reasoning, not disdain their apology simply as an act of weakness? Or are there two standards?

On the other hand, the "Arab Street" needs to learn that in a democracy such as ours even obnoxious speech is protected by the First Amendment. They have yet to learn to live in a world of open exchange.

Hide Comments


Loading comments...
Hide Comments