E-Mail 'US media will print Abu Ghraib photos but not controversial cartoons' To A Friend

Email a copy of 'US media will print Abu Ghraib photos but not controversial cartoons' to a friend

Loading ...

29 Responses to "US media will print Abu Ghraib photos but not controversial cartoons"

andrew says:

February 6, 2006 at 9:49 am

Will Al-Jazeera run the cartoons? if they do, should we bomb them for inciting muslim anger?
omapian says:

February 6, 2006 at 10:12 am

Since there are no actual images of the prophet, the simple cartoons could depict any fanatic. How is it that so many people recognize these images and take offense? The cartoon becomes inflammatory only when someone in authority claims is a prohibited image. Seems like a pure case of terrorists’ propaganda producing intended results.
They do not have to blow up buildings to get tolerant people to submit to their demands.
steve says:

February 6, 2006 at 10:19 am

The author forgets completely about context. Most ideologues make that same mistake. Peace
tommy in nyc says:

February 6, 2006 at 10:19 am

😕 I wouldn’t get all high and mighty on this one ST. I know fundie Christians(delusional as they may be) get all up in arms about films describing Christ in what they see in a negative light. Boycotts? There’s been plenty called for by many religious instituations because members of their constitunents were”offended” Sure the violence over these cartoons is truly stupid but is anybody really surpised. The old cliche about stones in glass houses is apt pharse when it comes to discussing this subject.
Sister Toldjah says:

February 6, 2006 at 10:27 am

Get real tommy. You and the rest of your pals on the left who compare the reactions of Christians to how they are portrayed in the media versus the reactions of Muslims to these ‘offending’ cartoons have no leg to stand on. Boycotts are one thing. Mass rioting, violence, and death are quite another. Ya’ll just can’t help but try to and morally equate the actions of Christians to Muslims, can you?
Sister Toldjah says:

February 6, 2006 at 10:29 am

Reposting this trackback from Right Voices (some of their trackbacks keep popping up in an old thread for some reason)

[…] One point that is center to the discussion is the fact that our MSM had failed to show these cartoons out of respect for “muslims” everywhere…..ABC has now broken ranks and shown some of cartoons. SisterToldja has a link to Tim Blair, in which he states that the MSM had no problem running Abu Garib photos, but somehow, by showing the cartoon, muslims will be offended? […]
sanity says:

February 6, 2006 at 10:33 am

Yes that religon of peace, we can see it in action now can’t we?

The cartoons don’t represent how they act and how they are told to act by the clerics who whip them into frenzy, what they are told to do by their most holy of books.

In a nutshell, it does not say to coinside peacefully with the infidels, it says to wipe them all out. Make truces if necessary till you have the strength to break them and wipe out the infidels.

I do not think there was this much RIOTING (I will not downgrade it and say row) even when the newspapers published a false account of koran flushing, ect.

I would think the flushing and defiling of thier most holiest of books would be more offensive that a cartoon, but we did not have rioting/burning embassies/killing priests and others over the flushing, just over a cartoon.

Yes, this is the religon of peace. Thier actions speak volumes.
omapian says:

February 6, 2006 at 10:35 am

There are still many people who do not appreciate the beauty, and uniqueness, of our democratic republic. A government that exists with consent of the governed can disagree sharply, but without violence.
Those who try to equate the boycott of ‘French’ fries with the killing of infidels simply demean legitimate debate.
tommy in nyc says:

February 6, 2006 at 10:54 am

[-x Well ST I did not condone what these lunatics over in the ME are doing as I stated. What I will try to illustrate is there anybody surpised? Shoot there was once a time in this nation’s history where people tried to claim the bible supported segration. Down in your neck wasn’t it?
Baklava says:

February 6, 2006 at 10:55 am

ST:

Boycotts are one thing. Mass rioting, violence, and death are quite another.

That’s the essential thing that libs don’t seem to get on this story. There are lawful ways to register your displeasure about an artist/cartoonist/writer/movie and there are unlawful ways. Burning/killing/beheading to get your way should once and for all be understood are not ways to levy a complaint. There are many liberals who get this who were on the Sunday talk shows. I suggest the liberals who don’t look at their words REAL hard because you are in the extreme.

BTW, Bill Kristol mentioned that not only were these cartoons published 5 months ago but they were pushed into the radical muslim world recently with 3 other more extreme cartoons that were not even published by the Danish newspaper. I haven’t heard this from anyone until then. I think it’s a significant piece of the puzzle.
tommy in nyc says:

February 6, 2006 at 10:57 am

down in you neck of the woods is what I meant my sentance to read. One other thing this is an example of why I gained sanity and stayed away from organized religion. Going crazy over a freaking book or cartoon is pretty off the wall to me. Check out George Carlin the comedian and then you may have a better understanding.
camojack says:

February 6, 2006 at 10:58 am

You can check out my latest exercise in freedom of expression HERE.

I’m sure certain folks would find it controversial…

:)):))
PCD says:

February 6, 2006 at 10:59 am

Tommy, you are dancing, but the tune is flat.

The riots are orchastrated by Imams who crave power more strongly than Hillary. If I were to make a comparison, it would be that the Islamics rioting are reacting just like Code Pink, the denizens at Daily Krap, and the Milwaukee Democrat tire slashing squad.
Baklava says:

February 6, 2006 at 11:02 am

I lived in VA for 21 years Tommy. I never heard anyone from “down” there ever claim the bible supports segregation.

Seems to me the only thing that REMAINS true is your willingness to make accusations. Why do you like doing that?

One of the most maligned segment of the United States to me is Southerners because I’ve been in CA for 14 years and see more racism here than where I grew up. Might I remind you where race riots were mostly? Northern cities, LA. What am I saying? That there is racism all over and I’m not sure where you get off changing the topic and smearing one area of the country when the issue is lawlessness due to free speech. Try to stay focued..
:-s
Sister Toldjah says:

February 6, 2006 at 11:05 am

MY understanding is fine, tommy. It’s you who don’t understand – in your quest to equate Christians with Islamofascists. So many of your pals on the left love to do this in order to try and nullify the comments of Christians on issues relating to religious extremism. “Bbbbbbut ya’ll do it too!” seems to be the popular rallying cry from the usual suspects. Sorry, but it’s not going to work this time around.
Lorica says:

February 6, 2006 at 1:28 pm

There was a piece on Drudge showing the timeline of the cartoons. They were originally published in September. So obviously there is something going on that these people are only now rioting over them. I mean they can’t possibly be so backward that it takes 5 months for a reaction.

I also find it rich that Steve is scolding the author about taking things out of context. Good Lord, what next, “A”s on Bart’s report card?? =)) – Lorica
The media taking sides » 4thelittleguy.com says:

February 6, 2006 at 2:00 pm

[…] Sister Toldjah has an excellent post about the latest example of the MSM’s ideologically driven reporting. In the last couple of days, most American media outlets have refrained from printing controversial political cartoons “out of respect for Islam”. […]
steve says:

February 6, 2006 at 3:36 pm

The interesting part of this story that nobody seems to mention is the fact that the large Muslim population in the United States has been very quiet on this entire episode. Maybe they are the enlightened ones? Peace
Baklava says:

February 6, 2006 at 3:39 pm

Let’s hope!
PCD says:

February 6, 2006 at 3:55 pm

steve, the Muslim population of the US has been too silent on many issues. They should have been outraged by 9/11 and been very vocal in condemning Bin Laden and his followers.
NoisyRoom.net » The media taking sides says:

February 6, 2006 at 6:06 pm

[…] Sister Toldjah has an excellent post about the latest example of the MSM’s ideologically driven reporting. In the last couple of days, most American media outlets have refrained from printing controversial political cartoons “out of respect for Islam”. […]
benning says:

February 6, 2006 at 8:04 pm

And CAIR has not been silent on this. As expected.

Andrew, the muslims have been showing these cartoons, plus the ones added by muslims, to muslims. That’s how they incite the ignorant to fury.

tommy, you might look up the race riots in NYC during the Civil War. I think you’ll find quite a few since then, too. Weren’t there some with Al Sharpton’s sanction? Y’all ain’t quite as pure as you think.
Big Bang Hunter says:

February 6, 2006 at 10:23 pm

– I won’t even respond to the moon-bats anymore. When a person can think themselves into enough of a pretzel to equate (angry debate and name calling/political cartoons) = (blowing up women and children/cutting off the heads of civilians/using IUD’s in public places to achieve max carnage) I think they’ve lost the capacity to rational thought. So why even bother.

Soooooooo my “Moderate Islamic Clerics/Leaders”. How many Fatwa’s have you issued against the murdering heathans that are running around commiting heineous war crimes in the name of Allah?

– Bang **==
andrew says:

February 6, 2006 at 10:31 pm

” How many Fatwa’s have you issued against the murdering heathans that are running around commiting heineous war crimes in the name of Allah?”

Not everyone can issue fatwas. And not everyone who does it is doing it properly. Like bin laden? He’s not supposed to be doing it.
Big Bang Hunter says:

February 6, 2006 at 10:36 pm

– Andrew you have mastered the lefts fine art of willful ignorance and totally missed the point as usual. Hopefully you’ll all be just as adroit at falling on your Marxist faces at the ballot box in the future….

– Bang **==
andrew says:

February 6, 2006 at 11:00 pm

“Andrew you have mastered the lefts fine art of willful ignorance and totally missed the point as usual. ”

I agree. I am ignorant of who you want issuing fatwas. Since you know all about them.
blogagog says:

February 7, 2006 at 4:06 am

It is unimportant who can rightfully issue a fatwa. It only matters if it is acted on. If I issue a fatwa on Israel and a palestinian kills some Israelis, who cares if I had the right to issue it?

The same would go for a fatwa on terrorists. I’d be very happy to see some of these coming from the Muslim world, religiously legal or not. I’d be curious to see how many fatwas are issued that don’t involve killing someone. I’m sure it happens once in a while so they can keep the ‘religion of peace’ misnomer, but I’d bet it’s pretty rare.
Baklava says:

February 8, 2006 at 10:59 am

Chirac slams media
Senor Valquez says:

February 16, 2006 at 4:19 pm

New article on leaked additional Abu Ghraib pictures now at the Irony Party of Australia electronic pamphlet:

US Concerned New Torture Pictures Could Give Wrong Impression

A spokesman for the US State Department has described the broadcast of newly leaked pictures of the mistreatment of prisoners held by the Coalition in Iraq by as ‘unnecessarily provocative and irresponsible’, suggesting the screening of images of horrific abuse could create an impression the world’s only superpower is less than scrupulously and fanatically fair and humane in its handling and interrogation of prisoners captured by necessity in the course of the Global War on Terror.

http://www.ironyparty.org/newsfeed.htm

Comments are closed.