GOPUSA POLL: Should US media print or show the cartoons that have caused such violent reaction among Muslims? [Archive]

Old Man

02-05-2006, 11:17 PM

However, I respect any paper or media outlet that chooses not to in order to try and calm the situations.

We have to keep in ming that these people are looking for any excuse to riot and if it wasn't this, it would be something else.

Exactly how may Islamic nations are rioting out side the middle east? I haven't been following this very much. Is this going on in France and Belgium and Denmark? What about Iraq and Afghanistan?

l1m89

02-05-2006, 11:58 PM

Yes, either we have freedom of speech or we’ll
be subjected to censorship of our Conservative
values as we display them in print and on radio.

While pornography and obscenity will continue
to be protected and mentored by the NeoComm’s,
given the chance the leftist’s would jump at
the opportunity to stifle all Conservatives.

Members of the Islamic Cult must learn how to
handle ridicule, especially since they continue to
act in such ridiculously vile fashion with their
endless acts of terrorism.

CleosMom

02-06-2006, 08:02 AM

I also voted "YES". That being said, if I were a newspaper editor I would voluntarily choose to not run the cartoons. Or pornography. Or anything that is offensive.

But the freedom to choose is paramount here.

pRIMrose

02-06-2006, 08:09 AM

100% for #1 so far - 5 to zip! http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/twothumbsup.gif

Why should the free world be held hostage to the barbaric and mentally deficient rantings of people who find very little "not" to riot about. http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif People who dance in the streets as buildings in this country come tumbling down and thousands are killed? People who think nothing of hacking off an innocent person's head? People who use themselves as human homicide bombers and "teach and preach" hate for all things not their religion? People who are as backward today as they were over a thousand years ago? For the select few who have chosen to shed this mantra and have found a way to balance their religious beliefs with the civilized world, I commend you.

I rest my case.

javajoy

02-06-2006, 09:12 AM

I voted "yes", and I can't say it better than what Primmie said.
<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr class="standard"><td>Quote </td></tr><tr class="standard"><td class="QUOTE">People who dance in the streets as buildings in this country come tumbling down and thousands are killed? People who think nothing of hacking off an innocent person's head? People who use themselves as human homicide bombers and "teach and preach" hate for all things not their religion? People who are as backward today as they were over a thousand years ago? For the select few who have chosen to shed this mantra and have found a way to balance their religious beliefs with the civilized world, I commend you.
[/QUOTE]

Javajoy
http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/usflag22.gif http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/usflag22.gif http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/usflag22.gif

Speedway

02-06-2006, 10:18 AM

Oh, let me think! They wanna kill me because I believe in Jesus. They wanna kill me because of my western abundance. They wanna kill me because I don't wear a veil. They wanna kill me because I don't believe in Allah. They wanna kill me because I make fun of Mo' Ham Ed (and hold the mayo).

What could I possibly gain by not printing the cartoons?

Well ...

Space to print something else is all.

Print 'em!

l1m89

02-06-2006, 11:16 AM

It’s Monday morning and we’re up 10 zip.
Can’t ya just feel the love?

http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rofl.gif http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rofl.gif http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rofl.gif http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rofl.gif http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rofl.gif

Mary-Lou

02-06-2006, 02:40 PM

http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/usflag22.gif http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/usflag22.gif http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/usflag22.gif Well, duh. I voted yes. And I am going to keep displaying my Piglet Piggy Bank and my Harley Davidson Piggy dressed as a Biker stuffed toy as well. How can they POSSIBLY hate my guts anymore than they already do? What are they going to do? Fly a plane into a building or something?

Pada65

02-06-2006, 03:23 PM

Now let me see - some Danish cartoonist has a cartoon published that shows Muhammed in a less then favorable light - and these "peaceful" terrorists think that it is OK to storm and burn buildings and attack people and enact trade embargoes. Riiiigghhhhtttttt. Not only do you have the terrorists on the street doing this, but their "leaders" condone or encourage it. These attacks should be denounced by every Muslim leader who is truely a peaceful Muslim. Or are they trying to make that an oxymoron?

garygt

02-06-2006, 03:42 PM

I voted no because I just don't give a damn about political cartoons. I don't care what some Danish cartoonist printed in their newspapers. I don't care about Mohammad or Allah or Islam so I don't care about someone making fun of any of them. Those idiots who are rioting in the middle east show that they are illiterate, they're ignorant of the world, they're ignorant of so-called journalism, and they're even ignorant of their own religion.
Why should some stupid cartoon cause people who are supposed to worship a "peaceful religion" care what some Dane puts in their newspapers and magazines. This whole thing shows the stupidity, ignorance, and violent religion that those rioters follow. Why do we need to get in on the frey any more than we already have? Who really cares what is in those cartoons? My experience with political cartoons is that they are as stupid as the people who use violence to rail against them.
It's certainly not censorship for our media to not print the cartoons. It's just a plain waste of column space. I get irritated by most of the things our media prints anyway. Why should this be any different?

Ken Sr.

02-06-2006, 03:53 PM

I voted no! *

I guess I couldn't find a good enough reason to vote yes. *We are certainly not being held hostage, here. *Foxnews has already shown the cartoon. *And if you can't figure out what it looks like by reading the description, then just think about it for a few minutes. *
Besides, it certainly wouldn't cause them to want to attack us more; just our existance justifies that. *On the other hand, NOT printing it doesn't gain us anything, either. *Nor will it cause them to attack us less. *However, it DOES show a lot of class. *And THAT would be a better witness to the 5M Muslims who are already HERE. *Think about that. *
*
Prim, Mary-Lou & Speedway all have valid points, but I agree with CleosMom. *<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr class="standard"><td>Quote </td></tr><tr class="standard"><td class="QUOTE">That being said, if I were a newspaper editor I would voluntarily choose to not run the cartoons. *Or pornography. *Or anything that is offensive. *
[/QUOTE]

God Bless President Bush! *
God Bless ALL of our WARRIORS! *
My brother-in-law has just chosen to extend for 6 months.
http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/flag4.gif

roger_roger_m

02-06-2006, 04:11 PM

I voted yes. As a Christian pastor I am exclusive in a religious sense therefore view Islam as a false religion and all its adherents as lost. That said, I still honor their right to be wrong and say bad things about me and mine. I will not persecute them unless they break the law. Amendment # one at work. As an American patriot I know we are at war with Muslims and anything that exposes their violent and intolerant behavior is ok by me. Print em, jail and export the rioters to Saudi or Iran.

GOP-forlife

02-06-2006, 04:23 PM

I voted yes but i am very mad, *MAD THAT I DIDN'T DRAW THE CARTOONS.

http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/usflag22.gif *http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/usflag22.gif *http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/usflag22.gif *http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/usflag22.gif *http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/usflag22.gif *http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/usflag22.gif *http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/usflag22.gif

candles

02-06-2006, 04:38 PM

I say heck, yes. With that said, does it really matter of we print them here, what are they going to do HATE US!?
Those that poke fun at others, dislike it when it is done back at them. They must just get over it, it has been months now, time to move on.

Did you see the one where Muslims were......
sorry, the devil made me do it.

Der Alte

02-06-2006, 06:26 PM

1. They are spending every day looking for an excuse.

2. They didn't complain when the Israeli's were depicted as cannibals eating Christians (by arabic news outlets.

3. Print the cartoons - they will be hitting us again as soon as they get it together. We don't know when, but we can rest assured that they will.

CSchultz

02-06-2006, 06:55 PM

I voted "YES"

We had no problem ripping the word of God from our classrooms in "62"

Had no problem taking prayer out of the school.

We have no problem tearing down the Ten Commandments, all in the name of tollerance.

We have banned the wearing of a small cross in some schools, Banned shirst with Christian statements, Banned bible study.

Banned Christian groups, and activities. All in the name of tollerance, mostly to Islamics.

So we show a few tasteless cartoons.

Small price for us to pay for the loss of our personal freedom if you ask me.

KathrynSmith

02-06-2006, 08:18 PM

I voted, "Yes." But for the media to print or show them now is useless. Everyone who really wants to see them has already went out and found them on the internet.

However, I really love what Fox is doing instead, by showing daily cartoons being printed around the globe and especially in the middle east depicting God, Christians and the Jewish. It has been more interesting to see that aspect, then the actual cartoons in "questionable taste."

Don't worry, my viewing of the arabic cartoons will not insight me to violence, marches, bombings, shootings, arson, or spark lawsuits. Promise!

The Muslims cannot be physically hurt or devistated by a cartoon, anymore than a hunk of granite with the 10 commandments can cause an athestic to go wild and irrational. Oh wait, they do that, don't they. Okay, so they can be no more driven to riot over a cartoon then our university students are driven to riot over losing a football game. Oh wait, they do that too.

Hmm?? Do the muslims have something here? Maybe Americans should riot in the streets the next time the ALCU attacks our pledge, flag, currency or monuments.

Just kidding!! Really! Honest! Trust me!

lpara

02-06-2006, 11:30 PM

Welcome to http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/gopusa.gif Pada65 and roger_roger_m! Thanks for posting. Join us in other threads too, if ya want. We welcome your input http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/yes.gif

I think one of the reasons "peaceful" muslims don't denounce the protesting/terrorist ones is because they fear for their lives or the lives of their family members.

OldBaldy

02-07-2006, 01:34 AM

I voted yes. We have our own cartoonists and don't need the Danish ones. I wonder if the anti-gun cartoonists would feel the need to start "packing heat."

I can imagine the quandary the MSM editors are in. Should they publish cartoons to inflame the Iraqis and make the war and Bush look bad, or would it start such a ruckus here that an apathetic public would finally realize that we are in a real war and support the war effort.

dragonladyalso

02-07-2006, 11:44 AM

I think newspaper editors who choose to print them, should. Up to them. But I find it remarkable that not a single newspaper has printed them. Proves to me how totally irrelvent the print media has become.

As for the world wide riots - I would expect no less out of a mind-controlled, satanic cult. Hating everything keeps the heat off their rulers and their real problems.

"first they came for the Danish cartoonists, then......"

Froufrou

02-07-2006, 12:53 PM

I voted no. The answer that went with the "yes" vote just doesn't seem to apply to journalism in "today's" world, IMHO. They mostly lie and embellish and probably contributed to the fraccas through essays accompanying the cartoons in the first place.

No point in http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/poke.gif just for http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/poke.gif sake, I say.

EdieJ

02-07-2006, 12:54 PM

And I voted yes, also. Yep, show them. Show every last one of them. Right next to all the post-9/11 cartoons printed in all the Muslim newspapers.

Froufrou

02-07-2006, 12:57 PM

I can't believe what I'm reading here! There is absolutely NO value in printing these cartoons. It's not newsworthy and it's not even funny!

Where's your sense of good taste? We should stoop to their level because they printed cartoons of Arabs eating Christians?

You all are disgusting!

Terri

02-07-2006, 01:01 PM

Today's lead news story on our website and in our newletter is "US Newspapers Should Publish Cartoons, Conservative Group Insists".

We are getting a lot of feedback email on this story and it's running in favor of not publishing the cartoons in US papers and against the demands of Right March.

Those writing are saying it's unChristian to make fun of other religion's leaders, that it's intolerant of others, (yes, the T word) and that it is irresponsible to print them because it incites violence.

Terri

02-07-2006, 01:12 PM

Just saw your post, Frou.

Old Man always tells us that the forum members are much further right than most of the Republican Party. Maybe he's right, ya think?

We have a lot of religious members here but it's only in the mail that Christians are saying that printing them would be an unChristian thing to do.

jackbenimble

02-07-2006, 01:12 PM

I voted yes. But I thought the question was worded kind of oddly. It was almost as if there was an assumption that somebody should be telling the media what to do. We have freedom of the press and I think each media outlet should make its own decision yes or no free from censorship or any pressure except perhaps that of the free maerket and their customer base.

I thought about voting no because I am kind of enjoying watching the Europeans twist in the wind. They have not exactly been good allies and it is fun watching them reap the fruits of appeasement.

But the free press clearly overrides. Anybody who feels like publishing those cartoons should.

As far as whether or not in offends Muslims is concerned, I care not a bit. I think it is healthy for the world to see the "Religion of Peace" in its true colors. (yet again). I am more and more convinced that there is no such thing as a moderate Muslim. It makes me wonder about what we are going to get from Democracy in the Middle East and if we are going to like it any better than what we have now.

Regards,
Jack

02-07-2006, 01:18 PM

I think there should be a fourth option, "I don't really care." Our own American cartoonists are getting kinda "outta control."

Sometimes, ignoring a bully is the best option. http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

But I don't care one way or the other. Cartoons and the uproar over them are the least of our problems.

Terri

02-07-2006, 01:19 PM

The first answer suggests that the media themselves are censoring the cartoons for reasons of their own and I do think that is exactly what is happening.

It does not imply that someone should censor them.

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr class="standard"><td>Quote </td></tr><tr class="standard"><td class="QUOTE">I thought about voting no because I am kind of enjoying watching the Europeans twist in the wind. They have not exactly been good allies and it is fun watching them reap the fruits of appeasement. [/QUOTE]

I hear ya! http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/yes.gif

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr class="standard"><td>Quote </td></tr><tr class="standard"><td class="QUOTE">As far as whether or not in offends Muslims is concerned, I care not a bit. I think it is healthy for the world to see the "Religion of Peace" in its true colors. [/QUOTE]

I agree that it is healthy for the world to see this bizarre extreme reaction over cartoons of all things.

But, what is fascinating to me today is the difference in what many of our readers think compared to what forum members think.

Froufrou

02-07-2006, 01:39 PM

Terri, my reasons for not publishing them are not religious! *The Editor of the Mpls Star Tribune, a rag known for sensationalism, states my feelings on it fairly well...

"Like most U.S. newspapers, the Star Tribune has not published the cartoons that have sparked Muslim protests but may run them in the future.

Editor Anders Gyllenhaal called the cartoons "purposefully sacrilegious" and said the paper doesn't publish something offensive "just to prove that we can."

http://www.startribune.com/722/story/230058.html

Terri

02-07-2006, 01:46 PM

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr class="standard"><td>Quote </td></tr><tr class="standard"><td class="QUOTE">Terri, my reasons for not publishing them are not religious![/QUOTE]

I know.

I'm just saying that is the reason cited by quite a few of the people sending email about today's news story.

Terri

02-07-2006, 01:49 PM

Recently we had a few forum members who wanted to close down mosques on the grounds that Islam isn't a religion and therefore it wouldn't violate the First Amendment.

That theory left me nearly speechless. Our email on this issue seems to indicate that a majority of conservatives do recognize Islam as a religion.

Zazzo

02-07-2006, 01:52 PM

I first found out about this cartoon mess a few days ago in an article in this newsletter. It contained links to help the Danish people who are going to be suffering because of all the trade they are to be losing from the Muslim nations. How the newspaper is standing up for their rights of freedom of the press. But also how the cartoonist are now in hiding because they fear for their lives.

I voted yes to stand up for our freedom of the press. The newspapers have no problem printing all kinds of lousey cartoons showing our president in a bad light. But now they fear the Muslims and what they might do if the cartoons are printed here.

I saw the cartoons...I thought they were dumb or I didn't understand some of them. Which makes it harder to understand all the violence the Muslims are now doing over them.

New rule they invented that their religious leader can not have a picture shown of him. Anyway this is the first I heard of that ruling. But then I do not follow that religion.

I would have thought more of it if the Muslims had just stuck with a trade embargo because they were insulted or didn't like the cartoons. We do that when we don't like what a TV show or Movie offers, we can and do refuse to deal with the sponsors. I personally refuse to see some movies that have certain movie stars in it IF I don't like their politics etc. I'm not going to give my money to support something I don't like. But I'm also not going to burn down the movie theatre that is showing the movie. The violence is what I think is wrong with the Muslim worlds.

Not showing the cartoons is up to the editors but I hope they are not showing them for some other reason than fear.

http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/flag17.gif

CleosMom

02-07-2006, 01:56 PM

Frou - You're talking about "should" and I'm talking about "can". Yes they can. . . . that's what freedom of speech is all about.

But, no, they shouldn't!

I totally agree with you on this. I think the problem here is that some people are talking about "should" and others "can".

I think http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

Terri

02-07-2006, 02:08 PM

I think most of the people who chose yes meant what they said in their posts but maybe they will come back and tell us if that is not so.

Froufrou

02-07-2006, 02:08 PM

I get it, CM. And I may have to rethink my position on this.

In my absence I've found cartoons printed by Muslims in their papers...things like Sharon eating bloody children...

Evidently, Muslims take their cartoons quite seriously. Maybe they don't read very well.

EdieJ

02-07-2006, 02:24 PM

I posted my first repsonse before I was really ready to -- my phone rang and I jumped and hit the mouse when the pointer was in the wrong spot. So now I'm back...

And please note, I am not very good with words which is why I read a lot but don't post very often.

I was thinking along the lines of "if you are an editor who chooses to publish them". I believe they should have that choice. They certainly choose to publish an awful lot of cartoons that I find offensive. I cancelled my subscription to the Columbus Dispatch years ago because of it. I have that choice, too. It does work both ways. I was just saying that if they choose to publish them, they should also show the other side of the coin. I hope this explains better what I was trying to think. I try not to think too much. It hurts my brain!

Tilipots

02-07-2006, 02:29 PM

Not publishing the cartoons would be viewed as a weakness of the infidels (us)and only serve to strengthen their cause; it would be their victory.

The primitive reactions to these cartoons are to serve only two purposes: to frighten non-Muslim populations into submission (conversion under threat of the sword/ death) and as a diversion to cover what's really happening in this forced conversion of the world's countries. The goal of the Muslims is but one; that the whole world be Muslim, bowing to Allah . Period.

Mary-Lou

02-07-2006, 02:30 PM

http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/usflag22.gif http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/usflag22.gif http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/usflag22.gif I agree with you, Zazzo. The decision should belong to the newspaper editor, not the government, and the decision should be governed by "good taste" rather than fear of reprisals.

lpjortner

02-07-2006, 02:38 PM

I voted "No" because while I think that every media outlet has the right to publish them; I don't think that a decision not to publish them represents "media censorship" either and probably is good sense. *At this point, the cartoons are widely available on the Internet and continued or repeated publishing of them strikes me as sensationalism and fans the fires unnecessarily...unle ss your aim is to tee off Muslims, which is not a legitimate media function in my opinion.

As for Iran's 'threat' to publish cartoons of the Holocost 'to see if the West will apply the same standards of free speech', I say bring it on Mullahs. *There is nothing new under the black crescent of their brand of Islamofacist bigotry against Jews as it has been perpetrated for decades. *Let them show themselves for the bigots you are and help raise awareness of those who are not wise to you yet. *Let freedom ring!

Of course, by trying to exercise their intolerance extra-territorially to non-Muslm countries (from Rushdie to the present), they have jumped their internal idiocy and intolerance to the world stage already.

Froufrou

02-07-2006, 02:42 PM

Our Admin has kindly supplied me with a better link to the anti-semitic cartoons Muslims like. I apologize to our friends of the Jewish faith and side with you in wishing to combat such ignomous kwap.

The point Terri helped me understand is that if they are going to rail against Danish papers for their cartoons, then why have they published these?

http://www.tomgrossmedia.co m/ArabCartoons.htm

Ken Sr.

02-07-2006, 03:16 PM

Quote *
As far as whether or not in offends Muslims is concerned, I care not a bit. *I think it is healthy for the world to see the "Religion of Peace" in its true colors. *

I agree that it is healthy for the world to see this bizarre extreme reaction over cartoons of all things.

Jack & Terri make good points here. * *

CAN we print them? *YES. *SHOULD we print them? *WHY? *We don't have to PROVE that we have freedom of the press.

At this point whoever wants to see them will find them somewhere and this would only cause another distraction to deal with. *We ALREADY have our own pile of poop to shovel up. *My mother used to say "..the more you stir a pile of poop the more it stinks", so why should we stir it up? * * *

There's a good proverb that fits in here, too:

He that passeth by, and meddleth with strife belonging not to him, is like one that taketh a dog by the ears.
Proverbs 26:17

God Bless President Bush!
God Bless ALL of our WARRIORS!
http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/flag17.gif

TomThumb

02-07-2006, 03:34 PM

I voted "No". Can we print them? Yes. Should we print them? No. Why in the world would you make it a point to antagonize a mad dog? My Momma taught me that years ago. BTW I looked up the cartoons and most made no sense.

A_Quiet_Knight

02-07-2006, 03:40 PM

I can understand the medias reluctance to republish these cartoons for the reason they stated. *However, I can't understand why they choose to ignore the same rational when it comes to Crist, or the Cristian relegion. *I can only assume that they believe its ok to trash Christians, but not other relegions.

Luckyme

02-07-2006, 04:00 PM

I voted yes, but only because of the way I interpreted the question.

I don't like the way the media is 'censoring' the news they give us by mostly distorting or reporting only one side of political news. I want them to report what actually happens or is said and let us decide for ourselves what we think about it.

In my opinion, the media is not doing it's job which is to report the news and not give judgments on it. That is the job of commentators. I would prefer that all media be mindful of what is really important and be much more impartial on what they bring to the public.

I don't see that printing these cartoons brings anything to the table other than to show once again how radical Islam can be. But if by printing them, it serves as a wake up call about the enemies in our midst, I am for that.

Mary-Lou

02-07-2006, 05:18 PM

http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/usflag22.gif *http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/usflag22.gif *http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/usflag22.gif Oh My Oh My! here is some NEW News about this whole thing! It is now being reported that THREE FAKE Cartoons, which were far more offensive and downright pornographic, were slipped into the pile by some Danish Muslim Clerics in a conspiracy to produce the rioting! They circulated three pictures (One of which was of a Frenchman dressed up as a pig for a hog-calling contest and had nothing to do with islam) and deliberately distributed these "cartoons" along with the twelve that were in the Danish Newspaper over FIVE MONTHS AGO! I am researching the links now, but this is amazing! it's the the Q'oran Flush Story or the Fake Memo story! This is unreal. I'll get back to you with links as soon as I get them. Stay Tuned!

Mary-Lou

02-07-2006, 05:32 PM

http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/usflag22.gif *http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/usflag22.gif *http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/usflag22.gif
Here's One. I'll see if i can find more:
Fake cartoons (http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/13808143.htm)

And Here's Another:

Caution, Harsh Images (http://gatewaypundit.blogsp ot.com/2006/02/danish-imam-who-faked-cartoons-linked.html)

Amawalk John

02-07-2006, 06:47 PM

I'm sure there are valid reasons for not printing the cartoons. *Sports Illustrated and Hustler Magazine, magazines printed in braile for the blind, scientific journals and the like come to mind. *However, when the Associated Press and major news outlets like CNN refuse to run the cartoons, there seems to be more than a little room to criticize their sins of ommission.

CNN, whose long history of conspicuous omissions in its broadcasts of items that might be critical of foreign host governments, particularly that of Saddam Hussein's *Story here (http://www.opinionjournal.c om/extra/?id=110003336) has left for itself no room whatever for ambiguity about its failure to run the pictures of the cartoons.

Given the questionable "news" run on many MSM networks and newspapers, the argument of erring on the side of decency or accuracy rings hollow in my ears.

Forgive me, but what I'm hearing and seeing is just more white liberal guilt run amok in the handling of news.

spena

02-07-2006, 07:33 PM

I voted yes! But the real question is,
why haven't they already been published? It is news and that is their job. Post the news! It's the MSM at it's liberal best by not doing so.
They don't hesitate to post cartoons mocking Jesus and Buddha! Why publish
cartoons or anything that mock Jesus one day and defend your press rights, then the next day refuse to do the same
with Mohammad and declare your respect of it's followers?
What hogwash! But thats the MSM for you. They will continue to publish what they want you to know and not both sides of any story.

l1m89

02-07-2006, 09:30 PM

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr class="standard"><td>Quote </td></tr><tr class="standard"><td class="QUOTE"> Sometimes, ignoring a bully is the best option. http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif
[/QUOTE]
Ignoring bully’s today will guarantee that tomorrow
those bully’s will be back, emboldened by their
successes of yesterday and increasing their level
of outrageous behavior and assault.

Letting a bully get away with their bullying is
taken by them as appeasement and a sign of
weakness and submission.
Knock’m down today, tomorrow they’ll be
stronger and even more outrageous.

If Hitler had been put down in 1938 or ’39 his
Axis Allies would not have been so emboldened
as to proceed with actions that led us into WW2.

CSchultz

02-07-2006, 09:47 PM

I recall, back in the 70's.

Hustler magazine was under great pressure in what (and I agree) was construed as publishing obscinities.

Larry Flint, (publisher) came out with a magazine, about the war.

It has been a long time, so my facts may be inaccurate, but I do remember looking at it.

It had a decapitated body, color pictures of bloody war victims, parts blown off, etc...

He stated that his pictures of people performing bizarre sexual acts / positions, was freedom of speech,

And that if Americans wanted to see "OBSCENE" they could look at the war.

Do I agree with his publication?... No.

But did he have the right to print it?
.....Well, .... I must say,..Yes.

To this day, I still remember reviewing that magazine as if it were yesterday.

Those images are still vivid in my mind.

He made a very valid point.

I have a big http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/twothumbsup.gif for any rag that refuses to retalliate by publishing cartoons that antagonize the muslims.

Nothing good will ever come from aggrivating other people.

But if they do decide to print this type of literature,...

By our laws, they have that right.

It is wrong to do,
But it is also the bed that we Americans have made.

JMHO.

OldBaldy

02-07-2006, 11:10 PM

I supported publishing the cartoons so readers could see what the ruckus was all about. To be cowed into not publishing them constitutes a victory for the radical Muslims. Besides, as a matter of "tastlessness," the MSM has no reluctance to politicize a quadruple amputee in a cartoon, or make fun of Jesus freaks, right-wing kooks, dangerous gun owners, GWB, etc., and to make sure that no one misses the point there is always the adjacent editorials.

OldBaldy

02-07-2006, 11:11 PM

Deleted duplicate post.

Pada65

02-07-2006, 11:22 PM

Hi Charley,

I totally agree when you say "Remember that YOU, are the reason that Jesus came into this world."

However, all the Muslims extremists want to do is destroy all Jews and Christians and any other religions that do not recognize Allah and Muhammed as being the only God and Prophet. They do NOT co-exist with any other religion.

"All a good men has to do to lose his freedoms is NOTHING".

By kowtowing to these extremists, and be afraid to "offend them" by publishing a cartoon, gives them a victory and embolden them to seek even more later on. Sitting back and "doing nothing" will cost us EVERYTHING.

These demonstrations and violent attacks were not started because of the original cartoons and their publication. They are the direct result of a lying Muslim leader who created false cartoons and claimed to the other Muslim leaders that these were also being "published".

Give them an inch and they will take a mile.

l1m89

02-08-2006, 08:06 AM

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr class="standard"><td>Quote </td></tr><tr class="standard"><td class="QUOTE"> MSM has no reluctance to politicize a quadruple amputee in a cartoon, or make fun of Jesus freaks, right-wing kooks, dangerous gun owners, GWB, etc., and to make sure that no one misses the point there is always the adjacent editorials.
[/QUOTE]http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/salute1.gif
Does our MSM even understand that they will
be among the very first who will be attacked and
sacked if the terrorists ever get a foothold in our
USA. The groups that will stand in the way of
terrorists are the very ones our MSM vehemently
denounces and ridicules.

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr class="standard"><td>Quote </td></tr><tr class="standard"><td class="QUOTE"> all the Muslims extremists want to do is destroy all Jews and Christians and any other religions that do not recognize Allah and Muhammed as being the only God and Prophet. They do NOT co-exist with any other religion.

"All a good men has to do to lose his freedoms is NOTHING". [/QUOTE]
Never turn your back on bully’s, or pretend that
they’re not a threat to your health and well-being.

02-08-2006, 11:55 AM

My local paper on Monday, printed a cartoon, one side showed and obvious muslim yelling, "How dare the infidels publish anything that shows us as being anything but peaceful and good?"

The next panel showed a microphone asking, "what about honor murders, legal rape, homicide bombings, genital mutilation, legal beating of wives and children...?" and the muslim looking at his watch, "oh, gee, gotta go...by...."

Summed it up for me!

Viet-Nam Vet

02-08-2006, 12:27 PM

Dr. Daniel Pipes had an interesting comment about these cartoons. I will attach a link to his comments.

My Webpage (http://www.danielpipes.org/article/3360)

I think his blog puts this entire fiasco into clear focus. I quote from this article:

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr class="standard"><td>Quote </td></tr><tr class="standard"><td class="QUOTE">More specifically, will Westerners accede to a double standard by which Muslims are free to insult Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism, and Buddhism, while Muhammad, Islam, and Muslims enjoy immunity from insults?[/QUOTE]

jim verdolini

02-08-2006, 01:02 PM

I voted to publish because I doubt the motives of those papers that will not. You and I know the Post or Times would not hesitate to post a hideously offensive picture, cartoon, or article attacking Christianity. They would do it because they simply do not care about anyones sensitivities on religion. They would do it because they know Christians or Jews will respond with howls of outrage, letters to the editor, and perhaps harmless boycots. They will not publish these cartoons because they also know some nutty islamofascist might very well show up at their home and try to harm them or theirs.

That is the difference...I accuse the media of cowardice and hypocrisy.

They should have the stones TO publish in defiance of the violence and threats. To not do so is to appease violence, which only makes the next demands more outrageous.

hbear

02-09-2006, 12:56 PM

I voted no because I don't like the cartoons that have made fun of our soldiers etc. We have the freedom to print the cartoon but why do it-- especially after seeing all of rioting. I abhor their religion and believe they are lost, evil souls but I don't believe in deliberately provoking. "Whatever you do unto the least of these you do unto me"[/QUOTE] The Danes have done it and I don't see why it is necessary for us to follow suit. http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/usflag22.gif http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/usflag22.gif

Mary-Lou

02-09-2006, 01:12 PM

http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/usflag22.gif http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/usflag22.gif http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/usflag22.gif It seems that the violence is not the result of the cartoons at all, but a carefully planned conspiracy by Al Qaeda connected clerics to cause an uprising at a prcisely plotted time and place. It seems that the Egyptian press already printing the "offending" cartoons MONTHS ago, See Here (http://www.christian-underground.com/blog/read/index.php?aid_=968)
and there was no rioting then. There is also proof (in a previous post) that far more offensive FAKE cartoons were PLANTED by these same clerics to deliberately stir up the mobs on a preplanned day, perhaps to coincide with the Hamas victory in the PA, or the saddam trials, or some other event. Who can say how these "people" think? But the whole thing is a set-up and the Danes, the newspaper, the cartoons, and even the Q'oran actually have NOTHING to do with it. It is mind boggling how organized these evil, demonic, vile minions of satan truly are.

Pada65

02-09-2006, 02:50 PM

Sorry Corgi's Mom.

Your use of the quote "Whatever you do unto the least of these you do unto me"[/QUOTE] is being misused. HE was speaking of the least of his people. Not his Satanic enemies who are only interested in destroying all memory of HIM and HIS people.

hbear

02-09-2006, 03:43 PM

Sorry Colonel but Jesus was talking to the Disciples(Matt 25:40) telling them about the day of God's Judgement. His church had not been established yet. Have to stick with my no vote. http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/usflag22.gif

Pada65

02-09-2006, 05:06 PM

OK Honey Bear,

We have a semantical difference. In which case we are BOTH right. (Which infers, by it's own nature, that we are both wrong as well.) C'est la vie.

My own "gut feeling" is that we are facing the minions of the anti-Christ in the bodies of these fanatics. (Anyone who advocates the complete and utter destruction of Israel has to bear that title.)To appease them and avoid confrontation is to give them a "victory" of sorts.

You and I are both on the same side - we just have different opinions on how to solve the problem.

God Bless & Keep You
for you are one of the his people.

hbear

02-09-2006, 07:27 PM

You are right Col. Joel, we ARE on the same side. Love, joy, peace, patiece,kindness, gentleness and self-control. http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/flag17.gif

Froufrou

02-09-2006, 07:39 PM

I now pronounce you Col. and Bear!

http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/winkie.gif

Welcome Col., and good to see you Corgigirl! http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wavey.gif

Pada65

02-09-2006, 09:27 PM

Careful frou. My wife of almost 49 years might object to that "union". http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/usflag22.gif

ndiamonds4ever

02-10-2006, 12:51 AM

[I]Definitely! Everything else is written and discussed http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif . What's the difference between this and anything else which is printed? America has Freedom of the Press. I believe we'd all like to know what this is all about. http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/flag17.gif

azwhitewolf

02-10-2006, 03:00 AM

Step One: Respect the First Ammendment.

Step Two: Respect the Second Ammendment.

If Step One fails, proceed to Step Two.

My other opinion:

If you can show naked boobs and butts on prime time TV, depict strippers and rape situations, say pretty much every curse word except "F" and "S", show my religious symbols "dunked in piss", burn my country's flag IN my country, listen to women's orgasms on filthy "Morning Zoo" radio shows and THAT is covered under the First Ammendment...

Then so is drawing a religious leader who calls those to martyr innocent people "For Allah", a killer.

The difference between America and many of these other countries - is we can defend our land without the police.

Speedway

02-10-2006, 01:19 PM

Actually I've notice lately that no word is off limits any more. It's really difficult to watch TV these days and not be offended. Oh, maybe I should go blow something up!

jonessa2

02-11-2006, 11:08 PM

I am Proud to be an American.
We have taken things from our immigrant ancestors and turned this country into what we have today.
We moved away from the dark middle ages and emerged as a Country that believes in 'Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness."

What has happened is that europe, arabia, asia, and africa have not evolved much beyond its quaintness and are STILL fighting wars over religion. OVER religion!! People have immigrated to the US for the freedoms that we have, and now these fanatics want to bring their barbarism to our Homeland. I do not want to fight anyone over religion. For gosh sakes, the Brits and the Irish are still fighting each other over being Catholics or lutherans.

I voted unsure over the question, because I believe thatwe should have the right to print these kinds of things, but I would consider it an example of the decay of our values, honor, and character to do so.

From what I have been reading, it is the mullah that intiated this mess in the first place.

It doesn't take much to stir up inhabitants that still have a bush, or tribe mentality...they haven't 'evolved' into a society that comprehends or craves the Rights that each person should hold close to their heart. It's not because 'they' are not smart enough or don't have the ability....it's just that 'they' don't know any better. The people that govern or have control over these people want the continuation of ignorance so they can continue ruling with the powerful tool of mass hysteria and frenzy.

Who is there to defend my Christ, when france allows the desecration of our religious entites.
europe and arabia are such a volitle panorama of the 'old,' confused and fearful of the 'new', that it seems that they may have the upper hand in manipulating our history to indeed repeat itself.