Cho's Photo Shoot and Cartoons of Mohammed

Last year, some CARTOONS of Mohammed that appeared in the Danish newspaper Morgenavisen Jyllands-Posten sparked riots -- violence, bloodshed, and death. The violence went on for weeks.

Muslims all over the world took to the streets in protest of the publication of these CARTOONS, leaving burned out embassies and other destruction in their wake.

Christians were attacked. Muslims torched churches and killed people.

In reporting on this major story, lib media outlets refused to display the images that started all the unrest.

CNN wouldn't show the cartoons. "CNN has chosen to not show the cartoons in respect for Islam." (GAG!)


NBC Nightly News also wouldn't show the cartoons as a sign of respect.

CBS News officially banned the reproduction of the cartoons in its coverage.

ABC dared to briefly show a couple of the cartoons -- once.

The New York Times, The Washington Post, and TIME all avoided publishing the cartoons out of respect for Muslims.

MSNBC's website had a link to the cartoons but with this disclaimer:



"Warning: Contents may be offensive"

Most of the outlets wouldn't even provide a glimpse of the cartoons because that would have been just too disrespectful, too over the line.

What bastions of sensitivity and good taste!

Disgracefully, all sensitivity and good taste was thrown out the window on Wednesday when the Cho Sueng-Hui mother lode arrived at the NBC mailroom.

Every news network website has one of Cho's self-portraits slapped on its main page. No disclaimers. No warnings.

Photos of the killer's face, chosen by the killer himself, are everywhere.

As expected, the coverage by NBC/MSNBC, Cho Manifesto ground zero, is the worst.

(I didn't watch the coverage as it aired. I saw video on the MSNBC site.)

Chris Matthews with Steve Capus and Brian Williams put on the most despicable, insensitive, exploitative display imaginable.

Williams said that they realized the "multi-media manifesto" had to be treated with "a preponderance of caution."

Yeah? I must have missed the cautious part.

He went on to justify their seemingly never-ending exhibition of Cho's photos, videos, and words.

Williams called Cho a "crazed, narcissistic killer, a mass murderer who is responsible for the largest act of gun violence in American history."

That's right. Cho currently holds the record. Quite an overachiever, that Cho.

Records, of course, are made to be broken.

Williams kept talking about Cho's writings, "pages and pages."

"It goes on and on..."

"On and on..."

Matthews said, "This kid thought that the world was listening. Well, they will be for a couple of days."

Williams said, "Yes, that's right. And I get that by airing it we're completing that equation."

Really?

Do they really get it?

They understand what narcissist Cho wanted and yet they're carrying out the ruthless murderer's wishes?

That's sick.

Williams said, "This was a sick business tonight. I admit going on the air with this stuff we felt compelled as journalists; but I'll tell you, we showed restraint because all of us are also humans, parents, and spouses."

RESTRAINT????

If that was restraint, I can't imagine how Williams would define exploitation.

Matthews added, "Well, this will go down as a major chapter in NBC News to be this part of a horrible story and have it brought right to you in the mailroom."

What a pile of self-serving crap!

It sickens me that the 32 innocents murdered by Cho were merely vehicles to transport his creepy photos and his ramblings around the globe.

The incessant airing of Cho's "presentation" is wrong.

It demeans his victims while turning him into a sort of infamous icon for the deranged to idolize.

If the crass Steve Capus really cared about showing restraint, he wouldn't have fulfilled Cho's dreams.

Why can't these news outlets show at least the same level of respect for Cho's victims and their grieving loved ones as they granted to Islam over some cartoons?

The cartoons were too offensive to be seen.

Apparently, Cho's photo shoot isn't.

Looking for Cho's multi-media project?

Turn on TV, any newscast. Go to any news website. Pick up any newspaper.

The next shooter, and there will be one, is really going to have to take it up a notch to outdo Cho.

He's left quite a legacy, brought to you by the drooling members of the press.

Someone tell Brian Williams and Chris Matthews to wipe the slobber off their faces. It's very unbecoming.

Free Speech for Muslims Only

Carsten Juste, Editor-in-Chief of the Danish newspaper Morgenavisen Jyllands-Posten, wrote an open letter to "Honourable Fellow Citizens of the Muslim World."

(Excerpt)

Morgenavisen Jyllands-Posten is a strong proponent of democracy and freedom of religion. The newspaper respects the right of any human being to practise his or her religion. Serious misunderstandings in respect of some drawings of the Prophet Mohammed have led to much anger and, lately, also boycott of Danish goods in Muslim countries.

Please allow me to correct these misunderstandings.

On 30 September last year, Morgenavisen Jyllands-Posten published 12 different cartoonists' idea of what the Prophet Mohammed might have looked like. The initiative was taken as part of an ongoing public debate on freedom of expression, a freedom much cherished in Denmark.

In our opinion, the 12 drawings were sober. They were not intended to be offensive, nor were they at variance with Danish law, but they have indisputably offended many Muslims for which we apologize.

Since then a number of offensive drawings have circulated in The Middle East which have never been published in Morgenavisen Jyllands-Posten and which we would never have published, had they been offered to us. We would have refused to publish them on the grounds that they violated our ethical code.

Morgenavisen Jyllands-Posten attaches importance to upholding the highest ethical standards based upon the respect of our fundamental values. It is so much more deplorable, therefore, that these drawings were presented as if they had anything to do with Morgenavisen Jyllands-Posten.

Maybe because of culturally based misunderstandings, the initiative to publish the 12 drawings has been interpreted as a campaign against Muslims in Denmark and the rest of the world.

I must categorically dismiss such an interpretation. Because of the very fact that we are strong proponents of the freedom of religion and because we respect the right of any human being to practise his or her religion, offending anybody on the grounds of their religious beliefs is unthinkable to us.

That this happened was, consequently, unintentional.

As a result of the debate that has been going on about the drawings, we have met with representatives of Danish Muslims, and these meetings were held in a positive and constructive spirit. We have also sought in other ways to initiate a fruitful dialogue with Danish Muslims.

Juste is so sorry. He claims that "the 12 drawings were sober. They were not intended to be offensive, nor were they at variance with Danish law, but they have indisputably offended many Muslims for which we apologize."

Michelle Malkin has posted these 12 forbidden cartoons that prompted Juste's apology. She says she has done so "for posterity and in solidarity with the paper's free speech rights."

Examples:









Are they offensive? You decide.

That's the point.

Other newspapers across Europe have taken up this free speech battle and printed the drawings.

France Soir reprinted the cartoons yesterday. Today, managing editor Jacques Lefranc was fired by the paper's owner, Egyptian magnate Raymond Lakah, for publishing them. Although Jacques Lefranc was not available for comment, his wife, Marie-Jeanne, cited that as the reason for her husband's sudden dismissal.

An AP story explains the uproar:

Islamic tradition bars any depiction of the prophet, to prevent idolatry. The drawings have divided opinion within Europe and the Middle East, where they have prompted boycotts of Danish goods, bomb threats and demonstrations against Danish facilities.

Palestinian gunmen briefly took up position outside the European Commission's office Thursday, demanding apologies from the governments of France, Denmark and Norway after newspapers in these countries printed the caricatures.

In Pakistan, more than 300 Islamic students protested, chanting "Death to Denmark" and "Death to France."

...France Soir argued Wednesday that religious dogma cannot be imposed on democratic and secular societies. It carried the headline "Yes, We Have the Right to Caricature God" and a cartoon of Buddhist, Jewish, Muslim and Christian gods floating on a cloud.

The publication drew a stern response from the French Foreign Ministry, which said that while freedom of expression is dear to France, it "condemns all that hurts individuals in their beliefs or their religious convictions."

How ironic that France is quick to condemn those offending Muslims while it has turned a blind eye to anti-Semitism in the country!

The French Foreign Ministry's statement is a crock.

I think it stems from an effort to stave off massive rioting among French Muslim youth, the kind that occurred last fall.

Once again, the French surrender.

Not surprisingly, Muslims around the world are not reacting peacefully to this free speech controversy.

Reuters, the news service that balks at calling a terrorist a terrorist, reports:

A dozen Palestinian gunmen surrounded European Union offices in the Gaza Strip demanding an apology for the cartoons, one of which shows Islam's founder wearing a bomb-shaped turban. Muslims consider any images of Mohammad to be blasphemous.

Afghanistan condemned the publication of the caricatures and about 400 Islamic school students set fire to French and Danish flags in protest in the city of Multan in central Pakistan.

These violent reactions and protests play right into the message of some of the cartoons that they are protesting as offensive!

Guns and fire to express outrage over depictions of Mohammed as a violent figure -- yeah, that makes sense.

Some Muslims are upset that a non-Muslim even dared to draw an image of Mohammed.

Malkin notes:

In response to the notion that the West (or Islam) has ever followed the prohibition against depicting Mohammed, Zombie has created the "Mohammed Image Archive," which contains dozens of Mohammed images from throughout history. A must-read.

In the United States, the Constitution protects the right to free speech. It does not protect the right to not be offended by free speech.

In America, free speech is answered with free speech.

For example, in response to a cartoon that one deems offensive, one is free to criticize that cartoon.

That exchange of ideas characterizes open debate and expression, something fundamental to Western societies and democracy.

In an ideal world, all people would respect the beliefs of others and exhibit tolerance. This is not an ideal world.

However, rather than squelching the free speech of the bigoted and the offensive, those spewing hate should be called out on their behavior, via the free speech of the respectful and the tolerant.

An important point: It is appropriate to raise questions about religions, beliefs, and philosophies that threaten basic human rights.

All people are created equal. All belief systems are not. Those that espouse hate and the destruction of humanity are not morally equivalent to those that promote civility, liberty, and human dignity.

I do not think one can remain silent, supposedly in the name of tolerance for others beliefs, while atrocities are being committed.

I have a problem with this.

Unidentified militants planted explosives near several Christian churches and the Vatican Embassy in Iraq, causing few casualties but triggering fresh fears among the minority Christian population.

The near-simultaneous attacks Jan. 29 in Baghdad and Kirkuk, a northern Iraqi city, were launched just as some Sunday afternoon services had ended. A blast targeting a Chaldean Catholic church in Kirkuk left one parishioner and two passers-by dead and one person injured.

...In Baghdad, a wall along the side of the Vatican Embassy suffered damage after a car bomb on the opposite side of the street detonated.

An informed Vatican official told CNS the bomb went off in front of a restaurant, which he said was the probable target of the attack. The official said terrorists in Iraq have often targeted restaurants because an explosion there "causes many victims and much damage."

However, Archbishop Fernando Filoni, apostolic nuncio in Baghdad, told the Italian Catholic newspaper Avvenire Jan. 31 that he believed the Vatican nunciature might have been the target "because at the same time there were attacks against churches in Baghdad and Kirkuk."

He added that the string of bombings happened on a Sunday "at the time (of day) when the faithful go to church."

Life for most people, but especially the Christian minority, in Iraq "continues to be very, very difficult," he said. Christians and religious are also increasingly intimidated or threatened, he added.

...The nunciature and five Christian churches were in the vicinity of six bombs, five of which exploded within a half-hour period.

A bomb planted close to the Chaldean church, St. Mari, in Kirkuk caused the most damage with three people dead and one injured, according to news reports. The other blast in Kirkuk was not far from the Syrian Orthodox Church of Sts. Peter and Paul, Latin-rite Archbishop Jean Sleiman of Baghdad told CNS. Six people were injured in that attack, according to a Jan. 29 report by the Italian-based missionary news agency AsiaNews.

On the outskirts of Baghdad, a car bomb was found and safely disabled near the Chaldean church of St. Joseph, Archbishop Sleiman said.

But a bomb exploded near another Chaldean church in Baghdad and a different explosion hit a Seventh-day Adventist church in the center of the capital, the archbishop said. Neither attack caused any casualties.

The Jan. 29 attacks were the first against churches since parliamentary elections in December. The last series of attacks against Christian places of worship occurred in 2004 when a string of bombings hit churches in Mosul and Baghdad, leaving hundreds of causalities.

The effect of the bombings on the country's Christians has been "negative, devastating," Archbishop Sleiman said.

Fear of terrorist violence has forced many Christians to leave their homes as "immigration often seems the only way out of this inferno," he said.

Why aren't the "honourable fellow citizens of the Muslim World" that Juste appeals to protesting this destruction and murder?

I think it's immoral to sit back and refuse to condemn such violence for fear that some Muslims might be offended.

As a Catholic, I have been offended by many cartoons, editorials, and articles ridiculing my faith. However, I do not respond to any of this in a violent fashion, and I condemn any Catholic that would. Instead, I choose to peacefully express my opinions.

What makes the violent reaction of some Muslims to the cartoons first printed in Jyllands-Posten even more disturbing is the fact that certain Muslim factions feel free to print racist and anti-Semitic cartoons.

These Muslims obviously do not exhibit the tolerance and respect that they demand from others.

According to Arutz Sheva:

The official newspaper of the PA continues to regularly publish hate cartoons against Israel and Jews.

...The most recent anti-Semitic cartoon was published in the PA daily Al Hayat Al Jadeeda on May 13. It depicts a Jew impaling the northern region of a map of the Arab/Islamic world with the flag of Israel, drawing blood, while at the other end is seen an Arab holding a white flag, hanging upside down.



The cartoon was drawn by Omayya Joha, a well-known Arab cartoonist who is particularly popular among PA Arabs for her radical opinions and vehemently anti-Semitic cartoon portrayals of Jews and Israel. Joha’s husband was a Hamas terrorist who was killed in a shootout with Israeli forces in 2003. Joha herself identifies with Hamas beliefs.

The following are two cartoons drawn by Omayya Joha which appeared in Al Hayat Al Jadeeda, the Palestinian Authority’s official daily newspaper during April 2005 in which stereotyped Jewish figures are depicted.





Here are more examples of Muslim freedom of expression.


Simply put, militant Muslims cannot have it both ways.

They cannot promote hate in their speech and through their actions, and then claim to be justified in their attempts to hold the free world hostage for its speech.

FREE SPEECH FOR ALL.

DON'T TREAD ON ME

This flag was flown throughout the American Revolutionary War, indicating the courage of the colonists and their commitment to attaining their independence.

Our forefathers and generations of brave Americans following in their footsteps have fought and died to protect our freedoms, including our freedom of speech.

Today, the Muslim World is protesting our liberties and those of the Western World.

In addition to boycotting the products of countries that have published cartoons depicting Mohammed, Muslims are once again protesting with their feet.

In the past, they've stomped on the flag of Israel.



Before the liberation of Baghdad in 2003, a mosaic of George H.W. Walker Bush was the doormat for the Al-Rashid Hotel. After Saddam Hussein was overthrown, U.S. soldiers used hammers and chisels to remove the state-sponsored insult.



An AP account explains:

Taking shoes to the face is not exactly a compliment in any culture, but in the Arab world it's a particular slam. Pointing the soles of one's feet at someone is a grave insult.

So the notion of thousands of Iraqi feet trudging over the patrician features of George Herbert Walker Bush was particularly appealing to Saddam's regime, humiliated by Bush during the 1991 Gulf War to free Kuwait from Iraqi invaders.

Saddam personally picked the Al-Rashid for the insult to Bush senior. The hotel was heavily trafficked by foreign guests and the base of operations for journalists during the 1991 war - and the place where, on the night of the first American air strike in January 1991, Arab guests huddled in the basement and shouted "Death to Bush."

The mosaic, an unflattering portrait of Bush with his teeth bared in a scowl, was installed later in 1991 right in the Al-Rashid's doorway complete with a caption in Arabic and English: "Bush is criminal."

Now, the Danish flag is getting the trampling treatment.


A Palestinian woman steps on a Danish flag outside a shop in Hebron.



Other Palestinians walk all over another Danish flag, also in Hebron.



In Najaf, Iraqi Muslims have fun romping on a painting of the Danish flag.


The Washington Post, the newspaper obsessed with the Bush Administration's supposed assault and crackdown on the civil liberties of Americans, reports on the Muslim World's crackup over the publication of some cartoons.

By Molly Moore and Faiza Saleh Ambah
Washington Post Foreign Service
Friday, February 3, 2006; A01

PARIS, Feb. 2 -- Protests against European newspapers' publication of cartoons lampooning the prophet Muhammad gained momentum across the Islamic world Thursday as Pakistani schoolchildren burned French and Danish flags and Muslim presidents denounced the drawings. At the same time, more European news organizations printed or broadcast the caricatures, citing a need to defend freedom of expression.

In another day of confrontation between the largely secular nations of Europe and Muslim countries where religion remains a strong force in daily life, Islamic activists threatened more widespread protests and boycotts of European businesses. While some European officials sought to defuse the crisis, many journalists insisted that despite Islamic outrage, religious sensibilities should not result in censorship.

How out of character of the Post's usual hysterical rantings about civil liberties being destroyed!

The paper points out that "secular" Europe is at odds with religious Muslim countries. This is all about the exercise of free speech versus the exercise of religion.

In other words, it's really just a nasty cultural clash, an unfortunate misunderstanding.

The Post hesitates to take a stand in this report. That's highly, highly unusual. The paper's hard news reports typically drip with editorializations and liberal moralizations.

"We would have done exactly the same thing if it had been a pope, rabbi or priest caricature," wrote Editor in Chief Serge Faubert in Thursday's editions of France Soir, one of the newspapers that printed the cartoons.

Mahmoud A. Hashem, a businessman in Saudi Arabia reflecting broad sentiment in Muslim societies, called the cartoons just another example of a "sport to insult Islam and Muslims" after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

Under Islamic teachings, any depiction of Muhammad, the faith's founder and messenger of God, is blasphemy, including depictions that are not negative. The cartoons violated that dictum, and many of them also ridiculed the prophet. In one, he is depicted as a terrorist, with his turban holding a bomb with a burning fuse.

Check out the Mohammed Image Archive.

Political analysts from both sides described the newspapers' printing of the cartoons as a dangerous incitement in a conflict that has already alienated the growing Muslim populations of West European nations and hardened extremists in both camps.

Alexandre Adler, author of "Rendez-vous With Islam," criticized the newspapers. "We're at war," he said, citing the Iraq insurgency and the electoral victories of the radical Palestinian group Hamas and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. "And sometimes war demands censorship. In this context, anything that might strengthen the hate of the West is irresponsible."

Well, well, well.

"[S]ometimes war demands censorship."

REALLY???

The libs are not on board with that. No censorship.

American elected officials are constantly making speeches that promote the hate of the West. The libs cheer them on for taking a "principled stand" and commend their "bravery."

Are the words of these politicians irresponsible?

I think so, but the Dems and their lib media mouthpieces don't. It's patriotic.

Ask John Murtha.

The European Union's trade commissioner, Peter Mandelson, said the continued printing of the cartoons was "throwing petrol onto the flames." Acknowledging the desire to stand up for press freedom, he said newspapers must understand "the offense that is caused by publishing cartoons of this nature."

Is this kind of like Michael Isikoff writing that U.S. personnel at Gitmo flushed a Koran down a toilet?

Of course, Isikoff's report was unsubstantiated. In this instance, we know that the cartoons have, in fact, been published. That distinguishes it from a fabricated Newsweek article.

The Old Media's disproportionate coverage of abuses at Abu Ghraib, claiming torture by American troops was rampant, provides another example. They weren't concerned about making an explosive situation worse by printing disturbing photos, far from it. They reveled in it, day after day highlighting the abuses carried out by the soldiers of the Great Satan.

There was no concern whatsoever about the impact such reports might have on the overwhelming majority of U.S. personnel serving our nation with honor.

The Old Media and Dems, like Dr. Dean, Little Dick Durbin, John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, Russ Feingold, and Ted Kennedy have had no problem with making it seem like prisoner abuse by our troops is widespread and encouraged.

All of these cases are similar in that they cited violence and fanned the flames of an already raging inferno.

Obviously, the double standard is glaring.

Printing cartoons that Muslims may find offensive is inappropriate, something that the Post and other lib outlets are afraid to do.

On MSNBC's site, the cartoons are offered, but with a disclaimer. MSNBC is clearly very concerned about not being offensive, yet they make the images available, probably in the name of providing complete news coverage.



I don't have a problem with MSNBC's approach. However, I do have a problem with their selective sensitivity.

MSNBC didn't hesitate to offend Catholics with Daryl Cagle's recent cartoon.



Where was the warning for this one?
Referring to the Sign of the Cross in this fashion is an insult to Catholics. It's extremely offensive.
Are Catholics considered fair game by MSNBC, but Muslims are not?
That appears to be the case.
Like MSNBC, the very sensitive Washington Post doesn't hesitate to publish material that military personnel and their families are likely to find offensive. Tom Toles' cartoon, berating America and the tremendous sacrifices of American troops, exploiting wounded vets, is a case in point.



Have Catholics rioted over Cagle's cartoon? Have they burned him in effigy?
Has the U.S. Military turned its guns on the Washington Post in response to its tasteless cartoon?
No.
Violence does erupt when Islam is mocked in cartoons. I'm sorry, but that's an overreaction.




The Associated Press reports on tens of thousands of Muslims around the world protesting the cartoons. European leaders are in CYA mode, while angry Muslims display how peaceful they are by committing acts of violence and calling for the beheadings of the infidels behind the cartoons.

Danish Prime Minister Fogh Rasmussen, in a meeting with the Egyptian ambassador, reiterated his stance that the government cannot interfere with issues concerning the press. On Monday, he said his government could not apologize on behalf of a newspaper, but that he personally "never would have depicted Muhammad, Jesus or any other religious character in a way that could offend other people."

Early Friday, Palestinian militants threw a bomb at a French cultural center in Gaza City, and many Palestinians began boycotting European goods, especially those from Denmark.

"Whoever defames our prophet should be executed," said Ismail Hassan, 37, a tailor who marched through the pouring rain along with hundreds of others in the West Bank city of Ramallah.

"Bin Laden our beloved, Denmark must be blown up," protesters in Ramallah chanted.

In mosques throughout Palestinian cities, clerics condemned the cartoons. An imam at the Omari Mosque in Gaza City told 9,000 worshippers that those behind the drawings should have their heads cut off.

"If they want a war of religions, we are ready," Hassan Sharaf, an imam in Nablus, said in his sermon.

About 10,000 demonstrators, including gunmen from the Islamic militant group Hamas firing in the air, marched through Gaza City to the Palestinian legislature, where they climbed on the roof, waving green Hamas banners.

"We are ready to redeem you with our souls and our blood our beloved prophet," they chanted. "Down, Down Denmark."

...Hundreds of Turks emerging from mosques following Friday prayers staged demonstrations, including one in front of the Danish consulate in Istanbul.

"Hands that reach Islam must be broken," chanted a group of extremists outside the Merkez Mosque in Istanbul.

In Jakarta, Indonesia, more than 150 hardline Muslims stormed a high-rise building housing the Danish Embassy on Friday and tore down and burned the country's flag.

Pakistan's parliament unanimously voted to condemn the drawings as a "vicious, outrageous and provocative campaign" that has "hurt the faith and feelings of Muslims all over the world." About 800 people protested in Pakistan's capital, Islamabad, chanting "Death to Denmark" and "Death to France." Another rally in the southern city of Karachi drew 1,200 people.

Fundamentalist Muslims protested outside the Danish Embassy in Malaysia, chanting "Long live Islam, destroy our enemies."

DEATH

BEHEAD

DESTROY

BLOW UP

EXECUTE

The idea that Islam is a peaceful religion is getting more and more difficult to accept.

President Bush frequently refers to Islam as being hijacked by militants. At present, it certainly appears that the hijackers are piloting the plane and in complete control.

Frankly, "peaceful" Muslims seem to be in the minority. Without question, they are losing the PR battle.

These silent, peaceful Muslims should be far more outraged over the images that the vocal militant Muslims are giving the world than over any cartoon images of Mohammed.

Does Islam teach violence?

Is there a place for tolerance in Islam?

CARTOON ALLEY

An eye for an eye, a cartoon for a cartoon.

The cartoons keep on coming and so do the protests and the violence.

Some European publications are exhibiting their right to freely print what they want. While many nations in Europe are trying to be sensitive to the concerns of Muslims, officials refuse to be kowtowed by angry extremists into censoring the press.

Rhymes With Right has the latest image in the global Cartoon Crisis.


The satirical French weekly Charlie-Hebdo also printed a new drawing under the headline "Muhammad Overwhelmed by the Fundamentalists" that showed the prophet with his head in his hands, remarking, "It's hard to be loved by idiots."

Paris - A French court refused to order the confiscation of a magazine on Tuesday which local Muslim organisations tried to prevent from publishing controversial cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad.

The satirical weekly Charlie-Hebdo was due to publish on Wednesday 12 cartoons originally printed by the Danish paper Jyllens-Posten which have caused outrage in the Muslim world.

"This is good news to us all," Charlie-Hebdo editor Philippe Val told reporters after the ruling.

"We are defending the principle of the right for caricature and satire."

I don't know anything about Val other than what's included in this article -- one sentence.

If he sincerely is defending freedom of expression, then that's admirable. However, if he's exploiting the Cartoon Crisis purely to garner attention for his weekly in the name of personal profit, then he's an opportunist. In that case, the whole thing becomes a self-serving stunt instead of a fearless defense of freedom.

The judges rejected demands by French Muslim organisations, including the French Council of Muslim Faith (CFCM) and the Grand Mosques of Paris and Lyon, which had argued the paper was undermining the principle of the respect of faiths.

The court did not rule on the contents of the claim, but rejected it on a technicality, saying the plaintiffs had failed to follow several points of procedure in filing their suit.

How convenient that the court could throw out the claim on a technicality! Rather than actually having to address the issue, the judges could evade the matter.

I'm sure they were thankful that they didn't have to make a decision that could have prompted Muslim radicals to add them to their hit list.

Sources at Charlie-Hebdo said the weekly's offices and some staff had been placed under police protection ahead of Wednesday's publication, which will also feature a cartoon of Prophet Muhammad burying his face in his hands and saying: "It's hard to be loved by fools".

Obviously, the staff at Charlie-Hebdo feel strongly about standing up for free speech. In spite of the stakes being so high and facing the possibility of physical harm, they are not backing down.

I assume that the weekly will benefit from all the publicity surrounding the matter. Perhaps it's not as much about principle as it is about profit. Nevertheless, whatever the motivation, those at Charlie-Hebdo are making it clear that they will not be censored.

There was an interesting column about the cartoon frenzy in Wednesday's Washington Times by David R. Sands.

He writes:

Lost in the furor over cartoons of the prophet Muhammad is the fact that his likeness has long been portrayed in the collections of some of the world's greatest museums and libraries without exciting alarm or comment.

While rare in the 1,400 years of Islamic art, depictions of Muhammad are found in the collections of such institutions as New York's Metropolitan Museum of Art, the Bibliotheque Nationale de France in Paris and the Edinburgh University library.

Muhammad has been portrayed in the work of revered Muslim artists and of such Western figures as William Blake, Auguste Rodin and Salvador Dali -- as well as the creators of the cable-TV cartoon series "South Park."

None of those depictions aroused the anger seen in reaction to a set of satirical cartoons that appeared in Danish and other European newspapers -- a violent response that continued to roil the Muslim world yesterday.

...Many of the best-known Islamic portrayals of Muhammad are miniatures done in the 14th and 15th centuries by mystical Persian artists who argued that their small, imperfect efforts could never be taken for the actual prophet, and thus were not blasphemous.

...The famous "Book of the Assumption of Muhammad," thought to have been painted around 1436 in Herat, Afghanistan, shows Muhammad mounted on a human-headed horse being led by the Archangel Gabriel on a tour of Paradise and Hell. The original is in the collection of the French Bibliotheque Nationale.

...Even more plentiful are miniatures showing scenes from the life of the prophet with his face and hands covered or his features purposely obscured.

...[Alan A. Godlas, who teaches Islamic studies at the University of Georgia,] compared the Islamic opposition to portraying Muhammad to the reaction of many Protestant churches against the religious imagery and the worship of saints in the Catholic Church.

The great divide in Islam between Shi'ite and Sunni interpretations is reflected in attitudes toward art, said to Islamic scholar Ibrahim Moussawi in Beirut.

"For the most part, Shi'ite Islam has no problem portraying the prophet Muhammad in a respectful manner," he said. "Much Shi'ite art depicts the revered Imams Hussein, Ali and others."

Next time outlets like CNN insist that depicting Mohammed is a horrible affront to Islam, keep this in mind.

The real issue in the global Cartoon Crisis seems to be the lack of respect more than it is the mere portrayal of the prophet. At least some Muslims see it that way.

I think some radical Muslim groups are using the cartoon controversy to flex their muscles. They are seizing the opportunity to get the politically correct lib elitists to submit to their demands.

Not surprisingly, CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) is calling for the removal of Mohammed from books, public buildings, and I suppose milk cartons, too.

Read more about CAIR and its terrorist connections.

Ibrahim Hooper, the spokesman for the group said, "We have expressed the Muslim community's concerns about a variety of images of the Prophet Mohammed, whether it be in textbooks, editorial cartoons or even in the Supreme Court."

Hooper is referring to a marble frieze of Mohammed that has been in the courtroom since the building opened in 1935. The group tried to have it removed, but the court did not capitulate to CAIR's demands.


The prophet of Islam, Muhammad (c.570-632) can be seen on the North Wall Frieze in the Supreme Court courtroom, in Washington DC. Liz O. Baylen (THE WASHINGTON TIMES)

According to Hooper, Muslim leaders still objected to the sculpture but that did not "mean we are going to force our views on others."

Oh, of course not. Who would ever think that some Muslims would attempt to force their views on others?

Right.

Violent protests, riots, embassies in ashes, deaths over cartoons -- Noooo, they wouldn't think of trying to force their views on others, would they?

Tolerance is a two-way street.

To be respected, one should show respect.

The reality is things like torching embassies, committing kidnap, airing tapes of hostages pleading for their lives, and beheading innocents on TV doesn't exactly breed respect.

Calling All Anti-Semitic Cartoonists!

Al Jazeera reports on a contest being held by Iran's largest selling newspaper, Hamshahri.

The paper is asking for Holocaust cartoon contributions.
"It will be an international cartoon contest about the Holocaust," Farid Mortazavi, the graphics editor for Hamshahri newspaper, which is published by Tehran's conservative-run municipality, said on Monday.

He said the plan was to turn the tables on the assertion that newspapers can print offensive material in the name of freedom of expression.

"The Western papers printed these sacrilegious cartoons on the pretext of freedom of expression, so let's see if they mean what they say and also print these Holocaust cartoons," he asserted.

Are we to believe that Farid Mortazavi, a graphics editor, is completely unaware of the plethora of anti-Semitic cartoons that already fill Arab publications?

Actually, I think it would be great for Western papers to print the trash coming out of the Arab World.

Let everyone see their venom. Sounds like a terrific idea to me.
Iran's fiercely anti-Israeli regime is supportive of so-called Holocaust revisionist historians, who maintain the systematic slaughter by the Nazis of mainland Europe's Jews as well as other groups during World War II has been either invented or exaggerated.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Iran's hardline president, prompted international anger when he dismissed the systematic slaughter by the Nazis of mainland Europe's Jews as a "myth" used to justify the creation of Israel.

Ahmadinejad is a danger to all free people.

This guy wallows in pushing the Free World's buttons.

The people who buy into his propaganda are sure to regret it some day, probably sooner than later.
Mortazavi said Tuesday's edition of the paper will invite cartoonists to enter the competition, with "private individuals" offering gold coins to the best 12 artists - the same number of cartoons that appeared in the conservative Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten.

Ooh, gold coins!

That's a nice prize, but it doesn't compare to seventy-two virgins.

Can't the "private individuals" do a little better than gold coins?

Nonethless, I would imagine that there are plenty of budding artists that would gladly present their anti-Semitic artwork to Hamshahri without any incentive.
Last week the Iranian Foreign Ministry also invited Tony Blair, the British prime minister, to Tehran to take part in a planned conference on the Holocaust, even though the idea has been branded by Blair as "shocking, ridiculous, stupid".

Blair also said Ahmadinejad "should come and see the evidence of the Holocaust himself in the countries of Europe", to which Iran responded by saying it was willing to send a team of "independent investigators".

I like Blair when he's not in CYA mode and trying to appease. When he wants to be, he's very tough.

"Independent investigators" from Iran sent to Europe to research the Holocaust -- how disgusting!

One can guess what the findings of these investigators would be. In fact, I could write out their report right now.

The summary: It didn't happen.
I hope the judges in the cartoon contest are very careful when awarding the gold coins. There are so many Holocaust cartoons already out there, they have to guard against plagiarists.

Browse through these instance of free speech.Tom Gross Media.com
Palestinian Media Watch

I can't be certain, but I don't think any Arab embassies were torched as a result of these cartoons -- no massive protests, no riots, no deaths, no burning of flags.

In another development in the Cartoon War, European Jewish Press reports:
A Dutch Jewish organization has filed charges with the public prosecutor after a Belgian-Dutch Muslim political organization, the Arab European League, posted several anti-Semitic cartoons on its website last Saturday.

The Arab European League has claimed that it posted these images to test the West’s reaction.

While the cartoons depicting prophet Mohammed wearing a turban-shaped bomb have enflamed Muslims from Indonesia to Lebanon, the Muslim organization in Europe wants to show that it is not only Muslims who can be offended and has attempted to exact revenge.

The cartoons published on the AEL’s website feature anti-Semitic and inflammatory images including a scene where Anne Frank is in bed with Adolf Hitler. In the cartoon Hitler is pictured saying to Anne Frank "Write this one in your diary, Anne."

Another has Steven Spielberg and Lord of the Rings director Peter Jackson discussing making a film on the Holocaust with Jackson quoted as saying "I don’t think I have that much imagination."

Lebanese born Dyab Abou Jahjah, the AEL’s founder, defended the group’s actions on the Dutch television program Nova Saturday. "Europe has its sacred cows, even if they’re not religious sacred cows," Jahjah told the program.

The internet site did issue a disclaimer to accompany the cartoons saying that the cartoons were part of an exercise in freedom of speech.

How thoughtful!

That shows great sensitivity.

The internet site regularly posts articles skeptical of the Holocaust or that six million Jews died and articles supporting the view of the Iran’s President that Israel should be destroyed.



I bet the creator of this cartoon, posted on the Arab European League's website last Saturday, regrets not saving it to enter in Iran's contest.

Bad timing.

THAT'S ALL FOLKS!

Amir Taheri, an Iranian author, writes how wrong world leaders and the Media have been about the Mohammed cartoon crisis.

The protests and riots were not the result of spontaneous combustion among Muslims. They were the result of a calculated effort, manufactured by extremists.

Taheri provides this chronology:

The cartoons were published last September and, for more than three months, caused no ripples outside small groups of Salafi militants in Denmark.

In December, a group of Danish Muslim militants filled their suitcases with photocopies of the cartoons and embarked on a tour of Muslim capitals.

They failed to get to Tehran: The Iranians, being Shi'ites, saw them as Sunni activists bent on mischief. But they managed to go to Cairo, Damascus and Beirut and, were allowed to send emissaries to Saudi Arabia.

The Danish Muslim group also did something dishonest — it added a number of far more derogatory cartoons of the Prophet to the 12 published by the Jyllands-Posten newspaper, and misled its interlocutors in Muslim capitals into believing that all had appeared in the Danish press.

In Cairo, the Muslim Brotherhood told the Danish group that this was not the time to kick a fuss over the cartoons. The brotherhood was busy plotting its election strategy and pretending to be a "moderate" political party. The last thing it wanted was to be branded as a rabid anti-West force. The brotherhood leaders suggested that the matter be put on ice until January.

The Danish militants also received a negative reply from Hamas, the Palestinian radical movement. Hamas was busy trying to win a general election and needed to reassure at least part of the Palestinian middle classes. The Hamas advice was: Wait until after we have won.

The emissaries found a more sympathetic audience in Qatar — where the satellite-TV channel Al Jazeera (owned by the emir) specializes in inciting Muslims against the West and democracy in general. The channel's chief Islamist televangelist, Yussuf al-Qaradawi (an Egyptian preacher who is also a friend of Ken Livingstone, the mayor of London), was all too keen to issue a "fatwa" to light the fuse. He then mobilized his network of Muslim Brotherhood militants in Europe to attack the cartoons and claim, falsely, that images were not allowed in Islam and that the Danish paper had violated "an absolute principle of The Only True Faith."

Thus the call for Jihad received its supposed "theological" green light.

Read more.

No wonder all those Danish flags were at the militants' disposal, available to be dramatically set ablaze so news photographers could capture the images and spread the flames around the world.

There was nothing spontaneous about this. The Free World was duped by Sunni-Salafi groups, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and Bashar al-Assad.

All the hand-wringing about sensitivity and debate about freedom of expression was the result of a plot. The schemers exploited religious faith to achieve their ends, encouraging unrest in the Muslim World and a battle with the West.

Taheri goes on:

People watching TV news may think that the whole Muslim world is ablaze with righteous rage translated into "spontaneous demonstrations." The truth is that the overwhelming majority of Muslims, even if offended by cartoons which they have not seen, have stayed away from the street shows put on by the radicals and the Iranian and Syrian security services.

...The destruction of Danish and Norwegian embassies and consulates happened in only two places: Damascus and Beirut. Anyone who knows Syria would know that there are no spontaneous demonstrations in that dictatorship. (Even then, the Syrian secret police failed to attract more than 1,000 rent-a-mob militants.) And the Syrian government refused the Norwegian Embassy's request for additional police protection. It was clear that the Syrians wanted the embassies sacked.

The rent-a-mob attacks in Beirut were more cynical. The Syrian Ba'ath — which has been murdering, imprisoning or deporting Sunni-Salafi militants for years — was suddenly transformed from a radical secular and Socialist party into "the Vanguard of the Faith." The mob that committed the atrocities in Beirut was bused from Syria and consisted of Muslim Brotherhood militants who are never alloweddemonstratetate on their own account.

The Muslim crowds that have demonstrated over the cartoons seldom exceeded a few hundred; the Muslim segment of humanity is estimated at 1.2 billion. And only three of Denmark's embassies in 57 Muslim countries have been attacked.

For over a week now, the world has been obsessed with these cartoons.

The matter has been billed as a global crisis and a signal of the Apocalypse. When discussing the situation, liberal elitists have twisted themselves into knots, trying to accommodate their allegiance to political correctness as well as civil liberties. American-based news outlets have been played by militant schemers, once again proving themselves to be the useful idiots that they are.

All of this over a sham.

No one enjoys having their religious beliefs mocked. I believe Muslims the world over were justifiably offended by the cartoons; but that's a separate issue from this orchestrated effort to inflame the Arab World, led by militants using faith as a means to enrage.

The Danish Muslim gang who lied by adding cartoons that had never been published has done more damage to the Prophet and to Islam than the 12 controversial cartoonists of Jyllands-Posten.

The fight between Denmark and its detractors is not between the West and Islam. It is between democracy and a global fascist movement masquerading as religion.

As far as I'm concerned, I consider this cartoon uproar officially debunked. It's been exposed as empty pretense on the part of the violent demonstrators.

Taheri is so right when he states that this fight isn't Denmark v. protesters, or the West v. Islam.

His conclusion that the fight is really "between democracy and a global fascist movement masquerading as religion" is an excellent summation.

Enough said.

Bin Laden and the Cartoons

A new message from Osama bin Laden surfaced yesterday, threatening to punish the European Union.

He's ticked off about the Danish cartoons.

CAIRO, Egypt -- Osama bin Laden, in a new audio message posted Wednesday, condemned the publication of drawings that he said insulted the Prophet Muhammad and warned Europeans of a "severe" reaction to come.

The message, which appeared on a militant Web site that has carried al-Qaida statements in the past and bore the logo of the extremist group's media wing al-Sahab, showed a still image of bin Laden aiming with an assault rifle.

"The response will be what you see and not what you hear and let our mothers bereave us if we do not make victorious our messenger of God," said a voice believed to be bin Laden's, without specifying what action would be taken.

The five-minute message, bin Laden's first this year, made no mention of the fifth anniversary Wednesday of the U.S.-led invasion in Iraq.

It came as the Muslim world marks the Prophet Muhammad's birthday Thursday and amid the reigniting of a two-year-old controversy over some Danish cartoons deemed by Muslims to be insulting. Islamic law generally opposes any depiction of the prophet, even favorable, for fear it could lead to idolatry.

Bin Laden described the drawings as taking place in the framework of a "new Crusade" against Islam, in which he said the pope has played a "large and lengthy role."

On Feb. 13, Danish newspapers republished a cartoon showing Muhammad wearing a bomb-shaped turban to show their commitment to freedom of speech after police said they had uncovered a plot to kill the artist.

Danish intelligence service said the reprinting of the cartoon had brought "negative attention" to Denmark and may have increased the risk to Danes at home and abroad.

The original 12 cartoons first published in a Danish newspaper triggered major protests in Muslim countries in 2006. There have been renewed protests in the last month.

Ben Venzke, the head of IntelCenter, a U.S. group that monitors militant messages, called Wednesday's message a "clear threat against EU member countries and an indicator of a possible upcoming significant attack."

...Adam Raisman, senior analyst at the SITE Institute, said that the message's release coincides with an increased buzz in online jihadi forums calling for revenge against Europe over the cartoons.

But Raisman noted that bin Laden's message did not specifically mention the republishing of the cartoons, only the publishing, and it did not give any other time landmarks to prove it had been recorded since then.

Raisman also noted bin Laden's silence on Wednesday's fifth anniversary of the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq.

"The tape doesn't give any specific evidence that would allow us to determine when it was recorded," Raisman said.

..."You went overboard in your unbelief and freed yourselves of the etiquettes of dispute and fighting and went to the extent of publishing these insulting drawings," he said, according to a transcript released by the SITE Institute, another U.S. group that monitors terror messages. "This is the greater and more serious tragedy, and reckoning for it will be more severe."

Blah, blah, blah.

The flames of the controversy over the cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed have been kept burning for over two years. Initially, angry reaction to the cartoons included worldwide protests, rioting, and violence. Muslim extremists have continued to work to assassinate one of the cartoonists, Kurt Westergaard.

Now, the big man himself, bin Laden, reminds his followers that they must make Europe pay for the affront. Bin Laden vows that Europe will feel their wrath.

The al Qaeda leader also implicates Pope Benedict as being involved in a "new Crusade" against Islam.

Because bin Laden didn't specifically refer to the republishing of the cartoons and because he doesn't say anything that provides evidence as to when the message was recorded, it doesn't have a lot of punch.

It seems somewhat disconnected, like it was pulled out of al Qaeda's library of bin Laden taped messages.

The recording would have greater impact if it didn't seem like a two-year-old tape. Bin Laden really should have endorsed a candidate in the race for president of the United States or said something, anything to indicate that he's not functioning on a two year delay.

Arrests in Denmark Cartoonist Plot

UPDATE, February 14, 2008: Copenhagen police arrest six in fifth night of riots

Six youths were arrested in Copenhagen for setting cars and dumpsters ablaze and throwing stones at police in a fifth night of riots in a predominantly immigrant area of the Danish capital, police said Friday.

"We've had six arrests so far. They've been charged with throwing stones at police and setting fires to cars and waste containers," Chief Inspector Henrik Olesen of the Copenhagen police told AFP.

At least 11 cars were torched in various neighbourhoods of Copenhagen, and 10 others in the nearby town of Kokkedal.

On Thursday, 17 youths were arrested for rioting the previous night.

"We don't know why they're rioting. I think it's because they're bored. Some people say it's because of the cartoons but that's not my opinion," Olesen said.

He was referring to the reprinting of a controversial cartoon of the Prophet Mohammed in 17 Danish newspapers on Wednesday.

...Protests have flared up again in several Muslim countries including Kuwait and Pakistan following the reprinting. The Palestinian Islamist movement Hamas also condemned the publication.

The caricature was reprinted this week after Danish police uncovered a plot to kill the cartoonist.

Three people were arrested for planning the murder, including two Tunisians who have lived in Denmark for more than seven years and whom Denmark has decided to expel without a trial.

That decision has been heavily criticised by human rights associations and some politicians and legal experts in Denmark.

________________

It's been two years since the controversy over the cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed caused worldwide protests, rioting, and violence.

Muslim extremists have been working to assassinate one of the cartoonists. Thankfully, they've been unsuccessful.

COPENHAGEN, Denmark -- Danish authorities on Tuesday arrested three people suspected of plotting a cartoonist's assassination for his depiction of the Prophet Muhammad wearing a bomb-shaped turban that enraged Muslims two years ago.

Three of Denmark's largest newspapers said they would reprint the cartoon on Wednesday to show they would not be intimidated by fanatics. It was one of 12 Muhammad cartoons published in 2005 and then again in 2006 that led to protests in Muslim countries.

Investigators said they foiled the plot in its early stages in a pre-dawn raid in the western Denmark city of Aarhus. The police intelligence agency, PET, said two Tunisians and a Danish citizen of Moroccan origin were arrested.

"The case shows that, unfortunately, there are in Denmark groups of extremists that do not accept and respect the basic principles on which the Danish democracy has been built," Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen said.

Tuesday's arrests were meant "to prevent a terror-related assassination of one of the cartoonists behind the cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad," PET chief Jakob Scharf said. Investigators believe the plot had not advanced far enough to try the suspects.

Scharf said the 40-year-old Danish suspect faced a preliminary charge of violating a Danish terror law, but will likely be released after questioning. The two Tunisians will be expelled from Denmark, he said.

He did not name the intended target, but Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten said it was the paper's cartoonist, Kurt Westergaard.

Westergaard, 73, drew one of the 12 Muhammad caricatures that were first published by the paper on Sept. 30, 2005, and then reprinted by other Western media in early 2006.

...The cartoonist and his wife, Gitte, 66, have been living under police protection for more than three months because of "concrete murder plans" against him, Jyllands-Posten reported.

Westergaard told Denmark's TV2 News network that the couple had been forced to move between several locations, both in Denmark and abroad. He praised the intelligence service for their protection.

"They have certainly saved my life, I am convinced of that," he said.

Westergaard drew a cartoon. As a result he and his wife are under police protection and they can't live in one location too long.

Free speech sometimes comes at a very high price.
_____________________

Michelle Malkin: Mohammed cartoon reprint: Show your solidarity

FREEDOM AND RESPONSIBILITY

I think it's highly offensive to ridicule the beliefs of others. I believe in tolerance. I think it's possible to disagree without being disrespectful.

I can empathize with Muslims that are offended by cartoons that they consider to be mocking their faith. I understand their outrage. I really do.

As a Catholic, I am bombarded with affronts to my religion in the form of cartoons, jokes, editorials, and comments.

Constantly!
I have no problem comprehending the Muslims' feelings of being assaulted. On a regular basis, I share those same feelings in respect to my personal faith.

HOWEVER, I realize that I live in a free society, and being insulted comes with the territory. Liberty can be a double-edged sword. The society that permits me to practice Catholicism freely also permits others to freely degrade it.

The U.S. even grants tax dollars to support artists that choose to attack my religious beliefs.

If one of the cartoons, an image of Mohammed, hung on a gallery wall in New York would that incite violence or would it be art?

We know Piss Christ, Andres Serrano's photograph of a crucifix submerged in his own urine, was defended by liberals. That was deemed artistic expression, not desecration. Although it caused some uproar and offended some Christians in the U.S. in the late 1980s, there were no riots. The fact that the National Endowment for the Arts was supporting Serrano's "art," that tax dollars had gone to the creator of Piss Christ, irritated many; but there were no fires, no calls for beheadings.


In 1999, "artist" Chris Ofili's The Holy Virgin Mary, with its elephant dung and pornographic images in a picture of the Virgin Mary, was controversial and sparked protests. Again, no deaths or riots resulted because of this tasteless "work of art." Again, the secularist liberal elite championed it as a totally appropriate expression by an artist, rather than an affront to Christians.



ANYONE deeming these "art works" to be tasteless, inappropriate attacks on Christianity had the right to protest -- freedom of expression answered with more freedom of expression.

NO ONE deeming these "art works" to be tasteless, inappropriate attacks on Christianity had the right to make death threats, engage in rioting, or cause property damage.

In sum, I can personally relate to the anger Muslims are experiencing. My faith is berated by others every day. I know what that's like.

What I do not share is their response.


Feb. 4: Angry demonstrators set fire to the Danish embassy in Damascus.


Feb. 4: A Syrian firefighter struggles to extinguish a blaze inside the Danish Embassy in Damascus.

Feb. 4: Palestinian Hamas supporters burn a Danish flag during a demonstration in the Gaza Strip.


Feb. 4: Palestinian men draw a Danish flag with a swastika, a Star of David and a cross on the ground during a protest in the West Bank.


Today, the violence over images that were originally published back in September rages around the world. That reaction is extremely inappropriate. In my opinion, it is far more troubling than any insensitive cartoon could ever be. It appears that the rioters are just looking for an excuse to behave badly.

The Muslims' violent reaction reveals a disturbing instability and extremism that should trouble anyone who values their freedoms.

Another disturbing revelation is that some news outlets are not standing up for the precious right of freedom of expression.

LONDON (Reuters) -- Britain's normally provocative newspapers have so far refused to publish the cartoons of Prophet Mohammad that have outraged the Islamic world, prompting some commentators to question whether they have become too politically correct.

The best-selling tabloid Sun said it had chosen not to print the cartoons out of respect for its Muslim readers while other papers said it was important not to inflame religious tensions in the country.

What's with the Sun? Remember these?



Suddenly, the Sun has decided to be respectful. That's odd.

American Old Media are also running scared.

That staunch defender of free speech, the New York Times, writes:

Major American newspapers, including The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Los Angeles Times and The Chicago Tribune, did not publish the caricatures. Representatives said the story could be told effectively without publishing images that many would find offensive.

"Readers were well served by a short story without publishing the cartoon," said Robert Christie, a spokesman for Dow Jones & Company, which owns The Wall Street Journal. "We didn't want to publish anything that can be perceived as inflammatory to our readers' culture when it didn't add anything to the story."

In a midafternoon meeting on Friday, editors at The Chicago Tribune discussed the issue but decided against publishing the cartoons. "We can communicate to our readers what this is about without running it," said James O'Shea, the paper's managing editor.

Most television news executives made similar decisions. On Friday CNN ran a disguised version of a cartoon, and on an NBC News program on Thursday, the camera shot depicted only a fragment of the full cartoon. CBS banned the broadcast of the cartoons across the network, said Kelli Edwards, a spokeswoman for CBS News.

What a load!

These outlets couldn't get enough photos from Abu Ghraib. Couldn't they have effectively communicated that story without REPEATEDLY publishing the offensive photos?

Oh, that's right!

Those photos served to inflame the Arab World with hate for President Bush, his Administration, and the American military. Those photos just had to be seen OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN, right?

The editors at the Times make me sick. In their world, breaking the NSA wiretapping story, something that has seriously undermined efforts to counter terrorism on American soil, was the right thing to do. They didn't care about how that would compromise national security; yet publishing cartoons offensive to Muslims is off limits.


HYPOCRITES!

How about a little consistency?

It is an abuse of our hard-won freedoms to exercise them recklessly.

I did not choose to post some of the "controversial" cartoons to offend Muslims or incite violence. I did not post the Piss Christ or The Holy Virgin Mary to upset Christians. I did so to illustrate that freedom of expression and tolerance are the foundations of a free society; and respect is an integral part of a civil society.

TOLERANCE.

_______________________________

Freedom of Expression Solidarity Blogburst

The Blog from the Core
Michelle Malkin
Face of Muhammad
Little Green Footballs
Barcepundit here and here
Slapstick Politics here and here
Wade's Inn
JamulBlog
Sobekpundit's photoshopSouthchild
Bastiat Says No
Scrappy O'Leary
Queer Conservative
FreeBornJohn
Willamette PI
Six Conservative Guys
Adventures of Prissy
Liberty Bell
Bbmoo's relations
Joe Gringo
Little Red Soapbox
Combat medic in Iraq
Holstein Grove
Frog Blog
Noonz Wire
Samir K
Extreme Centre
Out of the Valley
DANEgerus
RJ Lippincott
Steve Janke
II
Flagrant Harbour
My Side of the Couch
Don Singleton
Ed Morrissey
The Politburo Diktat
Transformed View
Thoughts of a regular guy
Kathy Shaidle
TJIC.com
Emily Zanotti
Andy MacDonald
Lifelike Pundits
Tales of a Wandering Mind
Church of Entropy
Two Babes and a Brain
Magnificat
The Citizen Journal
Wikipedia
Riehl World View
Savage Republican
Born Again Redneck
Don Miguel de la Piedra
Jihad Watch
Neal Boortz
WAmbulanceMichael Graham
Texas Rainmaker
Right Wing Nation
A Conservative Force
Wide Awake Cafe
Black Sheep Cafe
Robot Guy
commentary.co.za
Y-2-Dray 4-Ever
tjic.com
Western Critic
Air Force Pundit
Small Wars Journal
You Talk About
Mr Minority
Michigan Blog
Industrial Blog
Inside Larry's Head
Been there, done that
Right Number One
Drinking From Home
Civil Commotion
Marvin's Word
American Lights
Klein's Quips
Peenie Wallie
Limburg Letter
Scipio the Metalcon
JamulBlog
Bear to the Right
Dangerous Dan
WunderKraut.com
Posse Incitatus
Harleys, Cars, Girls, & Guitars
Left wing = Hate
Holstein Grove
The Noonz Wire
GOP and the City
Flagrant Harbour
The Political Pit Bull
Atlas Blogged
Random Thoughts Of Yet Another Military Member
FullosseousFlap’s Dental Blog
Don Singleton
Rocket's Brain Trust
Jessica's Well
TacJammer
Angry in the Great White North
UrbanRepublican
Dr. Sanity
Darleen's Place
Bill's House O Insomnia
House of the Dog
Freedom Folks
Small Town Veteran
A Blog For All
Church and State
Inside Larry's Head
Free Constitution
This isn’t writing, it’s typing
Rattrap's Rants
Hard Talk
Citizen Journal
Iowa Voice
Sugar Ray Dodge
NoisyRoom.net
Black Sheep Press
Red hot cuppa politics
CDR Salamander
A geezer's corner
Deep Keel
And THAT is MY Opinion...
Palmetto Pundit
Void Where Prohibited
Super Fun Power Hour
Striderweb
Oscar Poppa
Peaceful Display of Tolerance and Love
Stuck on Stupid
RightWinged.com
Mike's Noise
The Johnsville News
Truth Is Stranger
Irons in the Fire
Occasus Pars Clamo
The Citizen Journal
Freedom Eden
Fifth Virginia
Celestial Junk