Depict Mohammed with a bomb in his turban and your head office may be blown up and your reporters murdered.

Which would you choose? No brainer huh?

We`ve all become dhimmis.

Did you ever think why the NYT can get away with what it does to Christians, as opposed to being concerned about “deeply offending” Muslims? It’s been a long while, after all, since any bunch of Christians got together to perform terrorist bombings on blasphemers

Christians have yet to exact any real price for the Virgin Mary depiction.

I do agree that it is a double standard that christians don’t burn down embassies while muslims do.

But the whole point is that if no paper published a picture of the dung Madonna, it would still be offensive. But if no paper published a cartoon of Mohammed, it would not offend.

What offends people about the dung Madonna is not that a photo is printed, but that there was dung on the original. The photo does nothing about that.

To paraphrase Darth Vader: “I find your lack of moral clarity disturbing.”

Your defense of what is obviously a clear double-standard is, in and of itself, offensive. Grow a backbone.

Oh yes. They’re awful.

- Bang

- Bang

The idea is that with the muslim carttons the offense is printing the pictures, but with the christian art, its with the making of the art, not with showing pictures of it.

“Ok Andrew. I see your point. A picture of Mary splotched with elephant dung is different than a Picture of Mohamud with a lit bomb in his turbin. Of course”

Right. in the picture you can’t see what it is.

- You Christiam infidel dogs publish pictures of our religious icons, and you deserve to have your hands cut off or be beheaded/murdered. We Isalmic “freedom fighters” can blow up women and children, bomb embassies and school buses, and just generally do anything we want and we have a right, and get a pass.

- What a pure steamimg pile of one sided Theorocratic/Fascist dung…..

- Bang

I mentioned this a few days ago. The fill in host for Rush today talked about it at length today. I was trying to listen to which newspaper was reporting on this thuggery. It was a Danish newspaper that talked about the original cartoons were a contents for Muslims to draw about tolerance. An imam in Denmark (prominent) didn’t like them and staged local protests last September that got nowhere. He figured he had to spruce up the problem and added cartoons that were even uglier with Mohammed on a body of a pig and others. To the muslim world these were the cartoons that were shown and these were the cartoons that Muslims were rioting about and calling for the Denmark government to do something about.

The sorry tragedy in all of this is the editor calling for the “tolerance” cartoons in a contents in the first place, is receiving death threats even though he was well meaning and has had to hire protection..

- The point I see in that stupid piece of lexiconal acrobatics is on the top of your Liberal head…

- BTW…it turns out that that cartoon and a few others were “added” to the original group that the Danish newspaper ran, by the Mullah from Denmark that started all of this roting from his recent tour through the ME. Is there no means or ends you lying Liberals won’t go to in apoligizing for the Murdering thugs of this world?

- Bang