Posted on 07/04/2013 10:18:47 AM PDT by lbryce
WASHINGTON Her image has been plastered on banners in Tahrir Square, crossed out with a blood-red X or distorted and smeared with insults. She is too cozy with Egypts deposed president and the Muslim Brotherhood, the signs say, and should leave the country.
Anne W. Patterson, a press-shy career diplomat who has been American ambassador to Cairo since 2011, suddenly finds herself a target in a dangerous political upheaval, a symbol for angry young Egyptians of Americas meddlesome role in their countrys affairs.
With the Egyptian military ousting President Mohamed Morsi on Wednesday, Ms. Patterson will have to navigate a perilous course between Mr. Morsis opponents and his enraged Islamist supporters, both of whom have grievances with the United States.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
D*mn it! That WAS very close to what I’m looking for. Thank you very kindly for that link. Unfortunately it appears they covered themselves by providing the training to “all interested parties”.
First as someone who has spent 28 years as an FSO and 8 years as a naval officer, I have put my life on the line for this country and don't deserve anyone's scorn. Whether it was serving in Vietnam during the Tet offensive or being in our embassy in Tehran when it was being overrun, I don't consider myself to be suckling at the teat of the American taxpayer. And I am a taxpayer as well. I don't need pukes like you demeaning my service or that of my colleagues.
We need a professional corps of government bureaucrats whether it is in the military, CIA, NSA, FBI, the Forest Service, etc.
I think your tagline--It must be noon, because I'm drunk somewhere.--says it all.
And who would be the right person for the job?
(1) Only if the career is more important than your principles.
(2)Not Enough.
(3)I remember Hume Horan. Sometimes you have to take one for the team. Like Amb. Patterson needs to do.
(4) There is a way to pursue your government’s objectives
while incurring the least resistance. There is a word for it...Diplomacy.
She needs to resign in order to serve her country. That’s what she signed up to do. And she gets a nice pension, too.
Patterson was appointed by Bush 43 as ambassador to the Islamic Republic of Pakistan and served admirably there for three years.
Which 3 admirable years were those?
Rant all you want. Anne Patterson is the personal representative of the President of the United States, as are all US ambassadors. Blame Obama, not his messenger.
Translation: You have done nothing.
Most ambassadors are indeed career diplomats (to my knowledge), but when you realize that the ambassadorships to ALL our most important allies in attractive capitals are ALWAYS filled with POTUSes’ buddies, fundraisers and lobbyists, then you have to ask why we need career diplomats in the first place? Because the likes of Caroline Kennedy would never take up the Burundi post?
I think we need to connect the dots between Anne Patterson and Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dorhn. Those two were in Egypt in 2010 stirring up trouble.
Connect them and then Obama can be taken down.
Do I need a signed, sworn statement from Obama/ glean his political playbook to know that associating with murderous terrorists to make a determination about any repercussions of circumstances he facilitates? The actions he has taken, the political, military support he's provided would seem rather incriminating regarding Obama's political objectives.
The government workers always “serve”, don’t they, “admirably”, with “great sacrifice”. You should see these pencil pushers living it up in foreign capitals.
Look what's happening with the egotistical boob Kerry. He has what he considers to be a reasonable approximation to "his own mind" and he is constantly stumbling trying to get Obama's message out.
Granted Obama's message is inherently inconsistent and murky, but Kerry is only making it worse ... if that is possible.
Anne Patterson is taking one for the team. She is the target of the mobs. Her life is in danger.
There is a way to pursue your governments objectives while incurring the least resistance. There is a word for it...Diplomacy. She needs to resign in order to serve her country. Thats what she signed up to do. And she gets a nice pension, too.
She can be replaced in Cairo and be reassigned to a position in the Department. She is being considered as a possible Assistant Secretary for NEA. Why should she resign from the Foreign Service? She has done nothing wrong.
Fair enough. Nevertheless these cushy appointments are nothing other than rewards.
July 31, 2007 October 5, 2010. And Pakistan was and is a very dangerous place for American diplomats.
Your girl won’t do the right thing. Taking shots at citizens you claim to be serving won’t change that. Thank you for the times you have served our country. But you are wrong. She needs to go to serve Obama (whom she took an oath to serve) and her country from which she has received so very much.
LOL. Tin foil hat time.
Apparently not. See post #71 of my response to Toll.
FReeper wildbill posted on
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3039051/posts?page=8#6
needs to be shared
Why do the morons in the State department and the politicians continue to send ambassadors to Muslim countries who are almost guaranteed to be ignored and/or disrespected? I refer to women ambassadors of course.
The fact is that women in almost all Muslim countries have a different status in the culture. It is part of their religion and the region seems to be reverting back to a stricter form of Islam which doesnt bode well for liberation of women.
In our arrogance, we seem to feel that by pushing our women in diplomatic jobs into positions of power that interact with government officials that we will change their culture or that they will ignore their own feelings of superiority in dealing with them.
I often wonder if Muslims dont privately think we are insulting them and their culture by sending women ambassadors to their countries. We should take into consideration the mores of the culture that represents such a large segment of the world.
This isnt a misogynist rant. I respect the many talented women in our diplomatic corps, but surely our purpose shouldnt be to put their careers ahead of the national interest. Why not take the ambassadorships such as England and France that traditionally go to rich male campaign donors off the table as political plums doled out by Presidents to their supporters. Let our most talented women serve thereor in posts in countries which dont have a religious bias against women. It isnt our job to change the world to meet our own cultural preferences..
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.