French Satire Magazine Runs Mohammed Cartoons

Cartoon jihad redux?
World • Views: 25,511

In the wake of protests and riots as well as a terror attack against the US consulate in Libya that resulted in dozens of casualties and the death of US Ambassador Stevens and three other Americans ostensibly over a video denigrating Islam and the prophet Mohammed, a French satire magazine is publishing a series of cartoons in its latest edition that is likely to result in new protests and riots.

The French government warned the magazine, Charlie Hebdo, to not publish the cartoons for fear of causing a new wave of protests, riots, and attacks. The magazine is going ahead with publication, as is its right under the freedom of press and free exercise of speech.

The magazine Charlie Hebdo published cartoons featuring a figure resembling the Prophet Mohammed in an issue that hit newsstands Wednesday.

Magazine director Stephane Charbonnier said his staff is “not really fueling the fire,” but rather using its freedom of expression “to comment (on) the news in a satirical way.”

“It happens that the news this week is Mohammed and this lousy film, so we are drawing cartoons about this subject,” Charbonnier told CNN affiliate BFM-TV on Wednesday. “It’s more turning in derision this grotesque film than to make fun of Mohammed.”

The “lousy film” he’s referring to is “Innocence of Muslims,” an amateurish, 14-minute video that mocks the Prophet Mohammed as a womanizer, child molester and killer. The video drew international attention last week and spawned heated protests in more than a dozen countries.

France will be closing embassies and schools in many countries with large Muslim populations this Friday, and is boosting security at those facilities. That the French government has made such moves shows that they understand that there are those who will use the Friday prayers to incite others to violence, using the cartoons as a cudgel against the French, and the West in general. Militant Islamists consider any vision to be blasphemous, and these cartoons violate that precept.

It’s the clash of freedom of speech and the religious views that blasphemy warrants a death sentence. Something has to give, and it has to be the religious views - but as we all know, that’s not going to happen so long as Islamists whip their followers into a frenzy.

Those in the West who think that Islam is the enemy of all that is good and right in the world will use these riots and deaths as proof that they’re right when they pursue an anti-Islam agenda. Those in the Islamic world use these same acts as a means to further inflame passions and as a call to violence.

They are flip sides of the same coin. Both do not wish for accommodation or tolerance, but rather a clash of civilizations and war.

Freedom of speech has to win out over violence and the calls to violence. Protests against offensive speech should not resort to violence, and those who make the calls to violence need to be held accountable for their actions. Criminalizing free speech isn’t the way to go either.

At the same time, there are those who are purposefully engaging in hate speech so as to bring about conflict. These agent provocateurs are behind the offensive film that few have actually seen, and know even less about. The purpose of that film was designed to create conflict - and an entire nation was blamed for the act (the US) when it was an individual/group that took advantage of our nation’s right to free speech to inflame passions and led to protests and riots.

While the French government pressed the magazine to refrain from publishing the cartoons, the French Prime Minister indicated that freedom of expression is a fundamental principle of the French republic:

A press release issued by the French embassy in Beirut said that French PM Jean-Marc Ayrault recalled that freedom of expression constitutes one of the fundamental principles of his Republic.

‘This freedom is exercised within the framework of law and under the control of the courts when referred there,’ the statement quoted Ayrault saying.

The French PM also said that the principle of secularism is at the core of the French republican pact, along with the values of tolerance and respect for religious beliefs.

‘That is why, in light of recent development, the Prime Minister is keen on stating his disapproval of exaggerated reactions, and calls on everyone to act in a responsible way,’ the statement said.

Hizbullah’s Nasrallah has called for nationwide protests across Lebanon on this coming Monday, so it will be interesting to see what develops next week.

Jump to bottom

187 comments
1 researchok  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 7:35:27am

Here's hoping the response is mild to non existent.

2 Bob Dillon  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 10:01:02am

re: #1 researchok

We may recall that the original Danish cartoons initially caused nothing. It was when they were added to and integrated with the political desires of some radicals at a time later that all hell broke loose.
..
Patience. /

3 [deleted]  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 10:10:04am
4 Charles Johnson  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 10:39:48am

#3 kreyagg

Asshole. Go hang out at Pamela Geller's site - you're not welcome here.

5 Sol Berdinowitz  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 10:43:47am

the Clash of Cultures is not bout Christianity vs Islam, it is about enlightenment vs fundamentalism.

And this is satire, dammit, directed as they state, as much against the execrable anti-Islam film as it is against Islam itself.

6 Nervous Norvous  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 10:44:08am

re: #4 Charles Johnson

#3 kreyagg

Asshole. Go hang out at Pamela Geller's site - you're not welcome here.

As a well known asshole, I resent being lumped in with people like that.

7 Gus  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 10:44:44am

re: #5 47 turn it up to 11

the Clash of Cultures is not bout Christianity vs Islam, it is about enlightenment vs fundamentalism.

And this is satire, dammit, directed as they state, as much against the execrable anti-Islam film as it is against Islam itself.

So was fundamentalism involved in the invasion of Iraq? I remember Bush was always bringing up God and Jesus at the time.

8 Nervous Norvous  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 10:44:56am

re: #5 47 turn it up to 11

the Clash of Cultures is not bout Christianity vs Islam, it is about enlightenment vs fundamentalism.

And this is satire, dammit, directed as they state, as much against the execrable anti-Islam film as it is against Islam itself.

Outraged people want to be outraged. It's just as easy and less painful to say "That guys a jerk" and go on.

9 Sol Berdinowitz  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 10:45:04am

re: #2 Bob Dillon

We may recall that the original Danish cartoons initially caused nothing. It was when they were added to and integrated with the political desires of some radicals at a time later that all hell broke loose.
..
Patience. /

This response, coming as it did and when it did, is guaranteed to cause a biger flap than either the cartoons or the film, which was also a flop until it was pimped up and rubbed in the faces of the masses to incite a flareup.

10 Charles Johnson  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 10:45:23am

re: #5 47 turn it up to 11

the Clash of Cultures is not bout Christianity vs Islam, it is about enlightenment vs fundamentalism.

And this is satire, dammit, directed as they state, as much against the execrable anti-Islam film as it is against Islam itself.

It's deliberate incitement. Yes, they have a free speech right to do it. But they're assholes playing chest-pounding games with other people's lives.

11 Sol Berdinowitz  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 10:46:19am

re: #7 Gus

So was fundamentalism involved in the invasion of Iraq? I remember Bush was always bringing up God and Jesus at the time.

Just a fundamentalist view of US energy policy.

12 Killgore Trout  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 10:46:55am

Italiam Foreign Minister endorses blasphemy laws
Italian FM criticizes French weekly's ridiculing of Muslim prophet

"Religions are fundamental, they are important for many billions of people, and no one should allow themselves to mock them or joke about these values," Terzi said.

He criticized that some people in the West were guilty of "irresponsible sensationalism" by abusing "deep religious sensibilities that must be respected for personal advantage", according to local media.

He also pointed out that it was possible to prosecute those who had offended religion under Italy's criminal code. "I think this should be a common principle to all the countries of the world," he added.

A Syrian "freedom" group files lawsuit

Syrian organization files complaint against Charlie Hebdo

Syria's Organization for Freedom is threatening court action against magazine Charlie Hebdo for "inciting hatred". The Paris-based organization is taking action as a result of the satirical cartoons depicting the Prophet Mohammed which were published in Wednesday's edition of the magazine, reports 'France Press', citing legal sources. The complaint, filed Wednesday, accuses the French magazine of "having decided to fuel the fire by publishing caricatures mocking the Prophet Mohammed" and of "public provocation and discrimination inciting hatred or national, racial or religious violence". The court will now have to examine the complaint and decide whether to pursue legal action against the magazine. . .

13 Nervous Norvous  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 10:47:19am

I am taking this moment to let everyone know that henceforth I shall be known as Mr. Crankypants

14 Sol Berdinowitz  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 10:49:39am

Repeat from earlier thread: if these new democarcies in the Middle East want to be taken seriously and treated as democracies, then they have to learn to respect the way we do things in the west.

Which includes freedom of speech and artistic expression.

The problem arises with the fact that a lot of the undereducated masses assume that anything published, broadcast or distributed must be government approved, as was always the case in their home countries.

The educated members of these societies know better, they just take advantage of the situation to push their own agenda. They are the ones we need to confront, as they are truly responsible for the mess, not the satirists, filmmakers or even the masses.

15 Gus  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 10:51:07am

re: #10 Charles Johnson

It's deliberate incitement. Yes, they have a free speech right to do it. But they're assholes playing chest-pounding games with other people's lives.

I support their right as well as you know. Including my waning with the initial cause being the film put out by a radical fundamentalist Coptic Christian. This is irresponsible at this point considering the timing and the reaming global volatility we see today. Now is the time for cooler nerves on both sides of this situation.

16 Nervous Norvous  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 10:51:16am

re: #14 47 turn it up to 11

Repeat from earlier thread: if these new democarcies in the Middle East want to be taken seriously and treated as democracies, then they have to learn to respect the way we do things in the west.

These include freedom of speech and artistic expression.

The problem arises with the fact that a lot of the undereducated masses assume that anything published, broadcast or distributed must be government approved, as was always the case in their home countries.

The educated members of these societies know better, they just take advantage of the situation to push their own agenda. They are the ones we need to confront, as they are truly responsible for the mess, not the satirists, filmmakers or even the masses.

Is there a satirical tradition in the Arab world?

17 Vicious Babushka  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 10:51:33am

re: #4 Charles Johnson

#3 kreyagg

Asshole. Go hang out at Pamela Geller's site - you're not welcome here.

He hates Jews too.

18 Charles Johnson  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 10:52:13am

re: #14 47 turn it up to 11

I'm at a total loss to understand how you think these "new democracies" will learn to respect free speech by having their noses rubbed in exactly the kind of hate speech that enrages their people.

This is just flat wrong, bad thinking.

19 Gus  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 10:53:24am

They will learn to accept our concept of free speech while I scream "ni-CLANG, ni-CLANG, ni-CLANG!" at their face on a daily basis. Hey! It's my right!

//

20 Sol Berdinowitz  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 10:53:31am

re: #16 Mr. Crankypants

Is there a satirical tradition in the Arab world?

Satire is one of the most advanced forms of free speech, and one of the first to be cracked down on by any authoritarian/totalitarian regime.

And satire often goes around several corners to make a point, which means it winds up offending a lot of people who do not bother to try and get the point, they just see an excuse to vent some righteous rage.

21 Kragar  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 10:53:57am

Whammy

Team Obama: It’s Romney And Ryan Who Want To Redistribute Wealth

Ben LaBolt, press secretary for the Obama campaign, said Wednesday on MSNBC that Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan are the ones who want to redistribute wealth -- from middle- and lower-income Americans to the wealthy. LaBolt was responding to recent attacks from Romney and the RNC that Obama believes in redistributing wealth.

"Want to talk about redistribution, Gov. Romney and Rep. Ryan would redistribute wealth from middle-class families to the wealthiest Americans," LaBolt said. "The president has cut taxes for middle-class families by $3,600. Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan would raise taxes on them by $2,000 to pay for tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires."

22 Nervous Norvous  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 10:54:12am

re: #18 Charles Johnson

I'm at a total loss to understand how you think these "new democracies" will learn to respect free speech by having their noses rubbed in exactly the kind of hate speech that enrages their people.

This is just flat wrong, bad thinking.

Maybe not Charles, but I'm also not sure we need to censor everything due to other people's reaction. Threatening to have a violent tantrum if someone says something you don't like is not something we should reward either.

23 wrenchwench  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 10:54:47am

re: #14 47 turn it up to 11

The educated members of these societies know better, they just take advantage of the situation to push their own agenda. They are the ones we need to confront, as they are truly responsible for the mess, not the satirists, filmmakers or even the masses.

When somebody makes a deliberately offensive film for the sole purpose of incitement, and then denies responsibility and points the finger at others who had nothing to do with it, I think that person bears some responsibility. And I think he should be roundly condemned, even though he broke no laws. Note, I am not saying he should be censored, just called out for being the hateful jerk he is.

24 Sol Berdinowitz  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 10:55:02am

re: #18 Charles Johnson

I'm at a total loss to understand how you think these "new democracies" will learn to respect free speech by having their noses rubbed in exactly the kind of hate speech that enrages their people.

This is just flat wrong, bad thinking.

They are not having their noses rubbed in it. They are being exposed to it. As far as I know, these images are not being broadcast by any state-run media or being imposed on anyone.

What is being rubbed in their nose is an incitement to violent action against an entire nation for the actions of a few ill-advised individuals.

25 Charles Johnson  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 10:55:06am

re: #22 Mr. Crankypants

Maybe not Charles, but I'm also not sure we need to censor everything due to other people's reaction. Threatening to have a violent tantrum if someone says something you don't like is not something we should reward either.

Never said we need to censor anything. But I'm absolutely going to call out hate speech, even if I support their right to do it.

Free speech doesn't mean "no responsibility."

26 Obdicut  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 10:55:08am

re: #15 Gus

It's weird that people seem to have difficulty comprehending that though some speech is and should be free-- like people screaming obscenities at women going into an abortion clinic-- it's also okay to say that that's irresponsible use of free speech and dangerous.

But I think a lot of the people pushing this actually like the danger they're causing for others, they like inflaming the situation. I think it's an odd human belief about bringing things to a head, or a confrontation, one that, of course, continually recedes into the distance, but fools chase it nonetheless.

27 lawhawk  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 10:55:21am

Thanks for the promo Charles.

There are so many competing interests here - free speech, respecting religious views of others, toleration, and incitement to violence. With this coming on the heels of the violence spurred by the mystery film, Charlie Hebdo's editors' think that it's appropriate to use satire to show just how crazy the situation is, but they're also likely to incite militant Islamists to violence over their depictions of Muslims.

Islamic doctrine on blasphemy isn't going to change anytime soon - and those who use free speech to criticize Islam or Mohammad come into direct conflict with that doctrine. Satire or otherwise.

The Tunisian government's English language pronouncement suggested the right sentiment to take - protest the cartoons, but not to go so far as to engage in violence. In other words, meeting speech with speech/assembly. Rioting, or inciting others to violence, cannot be condoned or tolerated. Peaceful protests are something to be encouraged.

28 Gus  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 10:55:31am

re: #22 Mr. Crankypants

Maybe not Charles, but I'm also not sure we need to censor everything due to other people's reaction. Threatening to have a violent tantrum if someone says something you don't like is not something we should reward either.

I'm not for censorship. Put simply, Charlie Hebdo is a fucking idiot.

29 Eventual Carrion  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 10:55:35am

re: #7 Gus

So was fundamentalism involved in the invasion of Iraq? I remember Bush was always bringing up God and Jesus at the time.

And the word crusade was used a few times also.

30 Sol Berdinowitz  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 10:57:16am

re: #23 wrenchwench

Note, I am not saying he should be censored, just called out for being the hateful jerk he is.

This is a subtle nuance that is not really inown to the burgeoning masses of the new Middle East Democracies: they know only Government Propaganda or burning in effigy.

The notion of condemning free speech without censoring it or attacking it violently is a very modern concept, one that has only recently gained ground in the West.

32 darthstar  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 10:58:14am

re: #29 Eventual Carrion

And the word crusade was used a few times also.

And let's not forget the "our god is bigger than their god" bullshit from one of our generals.

33 Vicious Babushka  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 10:58:21am

Our gamy buttocks of the day also posted here a very NSFW cartoon from "The Onion" ostensibly to illustrate that Jews, Christians, Hindus and Buddhists don't get all worked up about this stuff, but still..that cartoon was lame, stupid, in bad taste and not even funny.

34 Sol Berdinowitz  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 10:58:30am

re: #27 lawhawk

The Tunisian government's English language pronouncement suggested the right sentiment to take - protest the cartoons, but not to go so far as to engage in violence. In other words, meeting speech with speech/assembly. Rioting, or inciting others to violence, cannot be condoned or tolerated. Peaceful protests are something to be encouraged.

And that is a sign of major progress in the Middle East.

35 wrenchwench  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 10:58:37am

re: #30 47 turn it up to 11

This is a subtle nuance that is not really inown to the burgeoning masses of the new Middle East Democracies: they know only Government Propaganda or burning in effigy.

The notion of condemning free speech without censoring it or attacking it violently is a very modern concept, one that has only recently gained ground in the West.

The guy who made the film is in the US. We should call him out as a hateful jerk.

36 Four More Tears  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 10:58:56am

re: #22 Mr. Crankypants

Maybe not Charles, but I'm also not sure we need to censor everything due to other people's reaction. Threatening to have a violent tantrum if someone says something you don't like is not something we should reward either.

We can call someone irresponsible without censoring them.

37 Nervous Norvous  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 10:59:05am

re: #25 Charles Johnson

Never said we need to censor anything. But I'm absolutely going to call out hate speech, even if I support their right to do it.

Free speech doesn't mean "no responsibility."

I agree with that 100%. However we also need to educate Muslim countries that assholes like that don't speak for the majority any more than the images we see of the violent reaction are an accurate reflection of all Muslims.

38 Charles Johnson  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 10:59:28am

re: #30 47 turn it up to 11

This is a subtle nuance that is not really inown to the burgeoning masses of the new Middle East Democracies: they know only Government Propaganda or burning in effigy.

The notion of condemning free speech without censoring it or attacking it violently is a very modern concept, one that has only recently gained ground in the West.

There are millions of people in the Middle East who fully understand the concept of free speech. These rioters are a tiny fraction of the population.

39 Gus  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 10:59:56am

It's not just the cartoons or films folks. The Muslim world has been under an awful lot of pressure since the 9/11 attacks and most of it unjustified including the invasion of Iraq. The short list being SIOA, Geert Wlilders, BNP, EDL, and so on. Do you think this is occurring in a vacuum?

40 wrenchwench  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:01:30am

re: #37 Mr. Crankypants

I agree with that 100%. However we also need to educate Muslim countries that assholes like that don't speak for the majority any more than the images we see of the violent reaction are an accurate reflection of all Muslims.

How do you educate a country?

41 Nervous Norvous  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:02:16am

Mitt Romney getting ready to hold his first campaign event since Friday. Opening himself up to questions from the public. Wonder what the vetting process is like for those folks who actually get to ask?

42 Sol Berdinowitz  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:02:27am

re: #38 Charles Johnson

There are millions of people in the Middle East who fully understand the concept of free speech. These rioters are a tiny fraction of the population.

They might understand the concept, but they have had little experience in practicing it in everyday life.

The real bastards here are the ones who instrumentalize it to promote their agenda.

43 Nervous Norvous  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:03:18am

re: #40 wrenchwench

How do you educate a country?

Slowly and carefully. I'm not saying it's easy, but we need to find ways to let people in the Arab world know that we don't see dissent as a bad thing.

44 darthstar  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:03:19am

Remember when Mitt Romney forced a bunch of miners to take a day without pay for his photo-op? Well, he's now using those same unpaid miners in an ad.

45 wrenchwench  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:04:45am

re: #43 Mr. Crankypants

Slowly and carefully. I'm not saying it's easy, but we need to find ways to let people in the Arab world know that we don't see dissent as a bad thing.

You don't educate a country. You educate people.

46 darthstar  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:05:01am
47 blueraven  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:05:27am

re: #40 wrenchwench

How do you educate a country?

By publishing more hateful speech of course! /

48 Nervous Norvous  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:05:34am

re: #45 wrenchwench

You don't educate a country. You educate people.

Okay if you're going to be fussy about semantics, you need to educate the people of a country. Fair enough?

49 lawhawk  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:05:45am

re: #38 Charles Johnson

There are people who have fought and died in revolutions to get that right, including in Libya, Tunisia, and Egypt. A growing number are fighting and dying in Syria to get that right. Totalitarian and autocratic regimes such as those of Khadafi, Mubarak, and Assad regularly clamped down on any kind of criticism of the government, and free speech was wishful thinking.

Now, these countries have overthrown (or are in the process of trying to overthrow) the old regimes, and are struggling to find balance between free speech, protecting individual rights, and creating a modern society that is tolerant all while respecting the Islamic faith. It's not going to be easy, but the Tunisian government seems to have made progress - and the Libyan government (and its citizens) have shown that they do not tolerate the violence either - as shown by the outpouring of grief and respect for Ambassador Stevens.

50 Charles Johnson  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:06:23am

It's just wrong to generalize from these riots to include everyone in these countries as "ignorant of free speech." Every newscaster on the scene has reported that the demonstrations are actually very small. But it doesn't take many violent nutjobs to start a riot.

I'm seeing an AWFUL lot of generalizing and stereotyping going on in this issue.

51 darthstar  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:06:44am

I knew it...it was a plot by the Romney campaign to dominate the front pages...

52 wrenchwench  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:06:45am

re: #48 Mr. Crankypants

Okay if you're going to be fussy about semantics, you need to educate the people of a country. Fair enough?

Yes.

Sometimes clear speech is needed to enable clear thinking.

53 Kragar  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:07:08am

Cocksuckers. Support the troops my ass. Bunch of fucking bastards.

Senate Republicans Kill Veterans’ Jobs Bill

54 darthstar  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:07:19am

More positive headlines:

55 Nervous Norvous  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:07:21am

re: #47 blueraven

By publishing more hateful speech of course! /

That's not the position I'm taking. I'm saying that you aren't going to get people to stop saying offensive things, in that offense is in the eye of the beholder, so you have to find ways to help the people who would otherwise be offended realize that those saying the offensive things don't represent every American's point of view.

56 Obdicut  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:07:21am

When I was an escort at a woman's health clinic, I didn't hold the handful of hatefilled, screaming protesters against the Catholic church, even though in this case they were all Catholics. I didn't hold it against the Catholic church even though I think the Catholic church is very misguided on the issue of abortion, and even though there are a lot of individual priests and bishops who have said reckless things. I know that most Catholics are just ordinary people wanting to live their lives, and even if they see abortion as a sin and a tragedy, it's not uppermost in their mind, and it's not a subject that fills them with hate. I don't hold the very large number of Christian supremacists in our government against the US, or against religious people in general. I think that the ultra-religious actually suck more for the moderately religious than they do for athiests like me. At least I get to reject the whole dang thing.

I don't hold the terrorists, dictators, and hateful religious leaders against Muslims in general, either. I know that out of the 1.2 billion Muslims, most of them are just trying to live their lives like normal people. This is pretty easily demonstrable by the fact that Muslims in the US, where we've got that Enlightenment stuff mostly going on, are much more moderate than Muslims in countries plagued by extremists and Wahabbists.

In short, it's not about Islam, it's about religious extremists. And doing something that's determined to offend Muslims is as useful as doing something determined to offend Christians. It sends entirely the wrong message. If you want to satirize religious extremists, that's entirely different from satirizing the actual religious figures of the faith that is shared by ordinary people.

57 darthstar  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:09:28am
58 Nervous Norvous  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:10:18am

re: #50 Charles Johnson

It's just wrong to generalize from these riots to include everyone in these countries as "ignorant of free speech." Every newscaster on the scene has reported that the demonstrations are actually very small. But it doesn't take many violent nutjobs to start a riot.

I'm seeing an AWFUL lot of generalizing and stereotyping going on in this issue.

I'm not saying that everyone is ignorant of free speech, just that the overreaction is not something we should respond to by censoring ourselves. We need to condemn the people putting out this crap, but I don't think we want to get in the business of Standards and Practices telling people "you can't print that" because it might offend someone.

59 blueraven  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:10:41am

re: #53 Kragar

Cocksuckers. Support the troops my ass. Bunch of fucking bastards.

Senate Republicans Kill Veterans’ Jobs Bill

Assholes.

That should really help their senate takeover prospects.
/

60 Sol Berdinowitz  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:10:52am

re: #56 Obdicut

In short, it's not about Islam, it's about religious extremists. And doing something that's determined to offend Muslims is as useful as doing something determined to offend Christians. It sends entirely the wrong message. If you want to satirize religious extremists, that's entirely different from satirizing the actual religious figures of the faith that is shared by ordinary people.

It is about Enlightenment vs Fundamentalism, and the front passes through nearly all religious groups.

61 Nervous Norvous  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:11:03am

re: #52 wrenchwench

Yes.

Sometimes clear speech is needed to enable clear thinking.

Agreed. But clarity is in the eye of the beholder, much like offensiveness.

62 darthstar  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:11:13am

And the impact from the 47% remarks still have yet to be fully realized...this is mostly due to the fucked up Libya comments from Romney.

63 HappyWarrior  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:11:34am

re: #53 Kragar

Cocksuckers. Support the troops my ass. Bunch of fucking bastards.

Senate Republicans Kill Veterans’ Jobs Bill

Dickheads. Really, I've been seeing the Romney SuperPAC ads accusing Obama of not doing enough on jobs and I've just been screaming: "That's because your party has blocked what he's been trying to do to solve that problem." Agh and people will fall for it of course.

64 Charles Johnson  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:11:39am

re: #58 Mr. Crankypants

I'm not saying that everyone is ignorant of free speech, just that the overreaction is not something we should respond to by censoring ourselves. We need to condemn the people putting out this crap, but I don't think we want to get in the business of Standards and Practices telling people "you can't print that" because it might offend someone.

Neither should we react by pounding our chests and getting even MORE offensive. That's just stupid.

65 Four More Tears  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:12:06am

I don't read Spanish, but a picture is worth something something.

66 Feline Emperor of the Conservative Tears  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:12:19am

re: #40 wrenchwench

How do you educate a country?

Give them all a copy of the Bible of course.
/

67 Gus  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:13:06am

re: #66 Feline Emperor of the Conservative Waste

Give them all a copy of the Bible of course.
/

Thank goodness we stopped doing that.

//

68 Nervous Norvous  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:13:09am

re: #64 Charles Johnson

Neither should we react by pounding our chests and getting even MORE offensive. That's just stupid.

I don't think I ever suggested that. We need to condemn the people putting this crap out, but I don't think we have to handle the Muslim world with kid gloves either.

69 Sol Berdinowitz  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:14:02am

re: #64 Charles Johnson

Neither should we react by pounding our chests and getting even MORE offensive. That's just stupid.

We aren't. An ill-advised group of individuals is. And I don't agree with their approach either.

70 BongCrodny  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:14:16am

re: #53 Kragar

Cocksuckers. Support the troops my ass. Bunch of fucking bastards.

Senate Republicans Kill Veterans’ Jobs Bill

****

"While only five Republicans voted with the Democrats to waive the GOP budget point of order measure, Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) led the GOP opposition. “When we find ourselves in $16 trillion of debt and we pay for a five-year bill over 10 years, we make the problem worse,” he said."

It should be noted that this bill was to cost $1 billion over five years.

One sixteen-thousandth of the debt.

So this bill would have added .00001625% to the deficit.

In simpler terms, if you were in debt $100,000, this would have added $1.63 to your overall debt.

Fuckers.

71 Feline Emperor of the Conservative Tears  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:14:25am

I see on CNN that Mitt is playing up Obama "redistributing wealth". The party of the Lie and the Candidate of the Lie.*

* - Given that they are knowingly taking quotes completely out of context I do not accept any claim that they are accurately quoting Obama.

72 Charles Johnson  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:14:38am

re: #58 Mr. Crankypants

I'm not saying that everyone is ignorant of free speech, just that the overreaction is not something we should respond to by censoring ourselves. We need to condemn the people putting out this crap, but I don't think we want to get in the business of Standards and Practices telling people "you can't print that" because it might offend someone.

And again - you're arguing against a point I'm not making. I never said, and I don't believe, that we should censor this magazine, the Coptic nut who made the film, or anyone else. But that doesn't mean they have a license to just spew hatred without consequences, either.

My right to free speech will be used to denounce the idiots who are yelling FIRE! in a crowded theater. Most of these people are using "free speech" as an excuse to air their own prejudiced hatred.

73 Nervous Norvous  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:14:50am

re: #63 HappyWarrior

Dickheads. Really, I've been seeing the Romney SuperPAC ads accusing Obama of not doing enough on jobs and I've just been screaming: "That's because your party has blocked what he's been trying to do to solve that problem." Agh and people will fall for it of course.

Youtube Video
74 Lidane  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:15:30am

re: #53 Kragar

Cocksuckers. Support the troops my ass. Bunch of fucking bastards.

Senate Republicans Kill Veterans’ Jobs Bill

Pfft. Everyone knows that soldiers are lazy, shiftless victims that don't take responsibility for their own lives because they're part of Mitt's 47% that are dependent on government.

///

75 Four More Tears  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:15:36am

re: #70 BongCrodny

****

It should be noted that this bill was to cost $1 billion over five years.

One sixteen-thousandth of the deficit.

So this bill would have added .00001625% to the deficit.

In simpler terms, if you were in debt $100,000, this would have added $1.63 to your overall debt.

Fuckers.

We need to elect Mitt Romney. Only then will we have a license to deficit-spend.

76 HappyWarrior  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:16:12am

Mitt Romney knows all about fiscal responsibility. That's why his own campaign is in debt.

77 Feline Emperor of the Conservative Tears  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:16:32am

re: #73 Mr. Crankypants

[Embedded content]

You just have to think Obama has a set of "Do Nothing" Congress ads waiting for release. There are some interesting parallels running between this election and the 1948 Truman-Dewey contest. (No slur intended on Thomas Dewey you - he just happens to be the candidate of the same party as nominated Romney.)

78 Killgore Trout  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:16:39am

re: #38 Charles Johnson

There are millions of people in the Middle East who fully understand the concept of free speech. These rioters are a tiny fraction of the population.

I don't think that's correct. It depends on the country but it appears that those whop support the right to criticize religion are in the minority in Most Muslim Countries.
Majorities Reject Banning Defamation of Religion: 20 Nation Poll

Of the seven nations where most people agree with that criticism of religion should be prohibited five have overwhelmingly Muslim populations -- Egypt (71%), Pakistan (62%), Iraq (57%), Indonesia (49%), and the Palestinian territories (51%). Another two -- India (59%) and Nigeria (54%)-- have historically been plagued by sectarian violence.

I think Pew or Gallup did a worldwide survey of Muslims a few years ago. Their stats are probably similar.

79 darthstar  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:16:58am

Love the hat.

Image: eldiario19sept.png

80 Four More Tears  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:17:00am

The man has a point.

81 Sol Berdinowitz  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:17:18am

re: #72 Charles Johnson

Most of these people are using "free speech" as an excuse to air their own prejudiced hatred.

And when they butt heads with people who use "offense against our religion" to promote their prejudiced hatred, we have a reall f*cking mess on our hands, don't we?

We really did not have as much of this sort of problem back when more of these these countries were dictatorships, did we?

82 Feline Emperor of the Conservative Tears  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:17:39am

re: #76 HappyWarrior

Mitt Romney knows all about fiscal responsibility. That's why his own campaign is in debt.

He took his own advise and kicked the debt down the road. Just a practice run for the administration once it takes office.

83 wrenchwench  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:17:46am

re: #78 Killgore Trout

I don't think that's correct. It depends on the country but it appears that those whop support the right to criticize religion are in the minority in Most Muslim Countries.
Majorities Reject Banning Defamation of Religion: 20 Nation Poll

I think Pew or Gallup did a worldwide survey of Muslims a few years ago. Their stats are probably similar.

Is 'criticism' the same thing as 'defamation'?

84 makeitstop  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:17:51am

re: #65 Mocking Jay

I don't read Spanish, but a picture is worth something something.

[Embedded content]

que mil palabras.

85 Kragar  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:18:09am

re: #65 Mocking Jay

I don't read Spanish, but a picture is worth something something.

[Embedded content]

But Romney will earn us the respect of those filthy foreigners!
///

86 Lidane  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:18:18am

re: #65 Mocking Jay

I don't read Spanish, but a picture is worth something something.

[Embedded content]

Haha, that's awesome. BTW, it's a reference to this character:

[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]

87 Charles Johnson  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:18:30am

re: #78 Killgore Trout

I don't think that's correct. It depends on the country but it appears that those whop support the right to criticize religion are in the minority in Most Muslim Countries.
Majorities Reject Banning Defamation of Religion: 20 Nation Poll

I think Pew or Gallup did a worldwide survey of Muslims a few years ago. Their stats are probably similar.

How does that refute my point that there are millions of people who understand free speech in the Muslim world? I didn't say anything about a "majority."

88 Feline Emperor of the Conservative Tears  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:19:18am

re: #79 darthstar

Love the hat.

Image: eldiario19sept.png

I presume the hat and freckles are a reference to some cultural comic figure?

89 HappyWarrior  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:19:27am

re: #77 Feline Emperor of the Conservative Waste

You just have to think Obama has a set of "Do Nothing" Congress ads waiting for release. There are some interesting parallels running between this election and the 1948 Truman-Dewey contest. (No slur intended on Thomas Dewey you - he just happens to be the candidate of the same party as nominated Romney.)

This is actually the election this one reminds me of most too. I really hope Obama does that too because we keep on seeing ads accusing the president of not doing enough on the economy when we all know what's been holding him up.

90 BongCrodny  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:20:29am

We've got two and a half million followers of Islam in this country alone, and they aren't rioting.

It ain't the religion, it's the religious assholes.

91 HappyWarrior  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:20:56am

re: #90 BongCrodny

We've got two and a half million followers of Islam in this country alone, and they aren't rioting.

It ain't the religion, it's the religious assholes.

It always is.

92 Ben G. Hazi  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:21:01am

A little OT, but I thought it was cool:
[Link: xkcd.com...]

93 Gus  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:21:11am

Speaking of which...

They're comin' fer are freedums!!11ty

94 b_Snark  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:21:20am

re: #13 Mr. Crankypants

I am taking this moment to let everyone know that henceforth I shall be known as Mr. Crankypants

Sure glad you didn't choose Mr. Crappypants

95 Charles Johnson  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:21:21am

re: #78 Killgore Trout

If 62% of Pakistanis don't support the right to criticize religion, and the population of Pakistan is 176,745,364, that means there are about 67,163,238 Pakistanis who DO understand the concept of free speech.

96 Feline Emperor of the Conservative Tears  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:21:34am

re: #91 HappyWarrior

It always is.

And you can also drop "religious" from the sentence and it's still accurate.

97 EdDantes  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:21:45am

re: #77 Feline Emperor of the Conservative Waste

Someone said back then, " You have to know Dewey to really dislike him."

98 blueraven  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:22:08am

re: #62 darthstar

And the impact from the 47% remarks still have yet to be fully realized...this is mostly due to the fucked up Libya comments from Romney.

[Embedded content]

Image: 9-19-12-3.png

99 Four More Tears  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:22:20am

re: #93 Gus

Speaking of which...

They're cummin fer are freedums!!11ty

[Embedded content]

uhhh

100 Shiplord Kirel  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:22:42am

re: #83 wrenchwench

Is 'criticism' the same thing as 'defamation'?

It is if you put careerist bureaucrats in charge of making the determination. The more scoffers and heathens they can prosecute, the higher their budgets and the greater their opportunities for advancement.

101 Gus  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:23:02am

re: #99 Mocking Jay

uhhh

Fixed.

102 Nervous Norvous  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:23:08am

re: #79 darthstar

Love the hat.

Image: eldiario19sept.png

It's been done:

Youtube Video
103 HappyWarrior  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:24:07am

re: #96 Feline Emperor of the Conservative Waste

And you can also drop "religious" from the sentence and it's still accurate.

Yep. Assholes: They're just assholes.

104 Lidane  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:25:29am

re: #88 Feline Emperor of the Conservative Waste

I presume the hat and freckles are a reference to some cultural comic figure?

Yes. To El Chavo, who is the title character in the show El Chavo del Ocho. The show's been around for about 40 years now.

The show centers on poor, homeless Mexican kids. El Chavo basically spends all his time daydreaming about all the things he'd have if only he was rich.

The picture here is basically turning it on its head and referring to Mitt's whine that if only he was Mexican, he'd be winning.

105 Killgore Trout  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:26:14am

re: #95 Charles Johnson

If 62% of Pakistanis don't support the right to criticize religion, and the population of Pakistan is 176,745,364, that means there are about 67,163,238 Pakistanis who DO understand the concept of free speech.

34% according to the poll.

106 Charles Johnson  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:27:52am

re: #105 Killgore Trout

34% according to the poll.

Right. Like I said, millions of people who understand the concept of free speech.

107 Amory Blaine  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:29:05am

re: #79 darthstar

Love the hat.

Image: eldiario19sept.png

Mmmm. Churros.

108 Nervous Norvous  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:29:23am

re: #94 reflections of a redneck

Sure glad you didn't choose Mr. Crappypants

Mr Crankypants was our nickname for the Peanut when he was a baby since he was a very unhappy baby until we learned he was lactose intolerant and switched him to soy formula. Mr. Crappypants came later after he started eating solid food and we experienced the joy of Toxic Diaper Syndrome.

109 Charles Johnson  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:29:33am

And we're certainly not going to help those people in the Middle East who are pushing for more enlightened societies by getting up in their faces, telling them they should just get over it, and doubling down on hateful imagery and bigotry.

110 darthstar  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:29:53am

re: #106 Charles Johnson

Right. Like I said, millions of people who understand the concept of free speech.

BUT THEY LOOK NOTHING LIKE US!

111 SpaceJesus  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:29:53am

How in the world does Pakistan have that many people

112 darthstar  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:30:18am

re: #111 SpaceJesus

How in the world does Pakistan have that many people

They like fucking?

113 Targetpractice  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:30:28am

OT:

Let the wingnut excuse-making begin:

Fast And Furious Report: No Evidence DOJ Leadership Knew Of Gunwalking Tactics

There is no evidence that Attorney General Eric Holder and high-ranking officials at the Justice Department knew that guns were allowed to “walk” during an ATF operation known as Fast and Furious, according to a report released on Wednesday afternoon by the department’s internal watchdog.

Following a 19-month investigation, the Inspector General found that the decision not to take action against low-level “straw purchasers” was made by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) and the Arizona U.S. Attorney’s office. Their decision, according to the report, “was primarily the result of tactical and strategic decisions by the agents and prosecutors, rather than because of any legal limitation on their ability to do so.” Dennis Burke, the head of the U.S. Attorney’s office at the time, resigned from his position in August 2011.

The IG report is considered to be the most comprehensive and least partisan account of the scandal available to date. Unlike investigators with Rep. Darrell Issa’s House Oversight Committee, DOJ investigators had access to criminal investigation files.

114 Killgore Trout  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:30:40am

re: #111 SpaceJesus

How in the world does Pakistan have that many people

Fucking. That's how people happen.

115 Sol Berdinowitz  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:30:56am

re: #111 SpaceJesus

How in the world does Pakistan have that many people

Probably short on birth control and sex ed, too...

116 Nervous Norvous  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:31:06am

re: #107 Amory Blaine

Mmmm. Churros.

I gave you the upding for churros.

I had to explain to my son, who tends to think I'm mad at him when I'm not, that most likely what I am thinking about is tacos, delicious tacos.

117 HappyWarrior  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:31:33am

Mmmmmmmm Mexican food.

118 Killgore Trout  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:32:24am

re: #115 47 turn it up to 11

Probably short on birth control and sex ed, too...

Viagra is really popular in India, not sure about Pakistan.

119 SpaceJesus  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:32:36am

Look at this fucking thing. This is Pakistan's national animal. Perhaps its horns have some kind of aphrodisiac properties?

[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]

120 engineer cat  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:32:40am

4th straight poll gives Warren lead over Brown in Massachusetts Senate race - @thehill

121 Sol Berdinowitz  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:33:23am

re: #109 Charles Johnson

And we're certainly not going to help those people in the Middle East who are pushing for more enlightened societies by getting up in their faces, telling them they should just get over it, and doubling down on hateful imagery and bigotry.

We are not the ones getting in their faces. The Danish Mohammed cartoons and the hideous film would have disappeared without a trace had people in their own countries picked the up and done the rubbing.

122 darthstar  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:33:57am

re: #115 47 turn it up to 11

Probably short on birth control and sex ed, too...

Their population density isn't the worst, however.

[Link: www.infoplease.com...]

123 HappyWarrior  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:34:04am

re: #119 SpaceJesus

Look at this fucking thing. This is Pakistan's national anthem. Perhaps its horns have some kind of aphrodisiac properties?

[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]

That Markhor looks like it could play a wise, old mentor type character in a film.

124 Nervous Norvous  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:34:14am

re: #109 Charles Johnson

And we're certainly not going to help those people in the Middle East who are pushing for more enlightened societies by getting up in their faces, telling them they should just get over it, and doubling down on hateful imagery and bigotry.

I dont' think we double down, I think we have to solve the problem at both ends. Condemn the hateful voices and try to help the people who are pushing for more enlightened societies. But what we can't do is let people threatening violence lead us into censorship.

That's what I meant originally, however inarticulately expressed.

I don't think we're in disagreement. But it's a very short drive from "you shouldn't say that" to "you can't say that" and I don't want us to get in the car.

125 The Questionable Timing of a Flea  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:35:23am

re: #95 Charles Johnson

If 62% of Pakistanis don't support the right to criticize religion, and the population of Pakistan is 176,745,364, that means there are about 67,163,238 Pakistanis who DO understand the concept of free speech.

Um...

Door number three is that there are people who understand the concept of free speech but don't feel it has value, because the people selling the idea don't seem to be worth emulating.

We're talking about areas of the world where the countries that endorse "Enlightenment" freedoms have been bad actors for about two centuries, and all the while talking about freedom and enlightenment.

126 darthstar  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:35:23am

re: #118 Killgore Trout

Viagra is really popular in India, not sure about Pakistan.

Viagra is really popular in the US. And India was closing on 600 million people long before penis pills. That's a stupid fucking comment. Seriously.

127 engineer cat  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:35:36am

the right to criticize religion

we have the constitutionally protected right to walk up to very large, dangerous looking, angry people with chains in their hands and tell them to shove it up their ass, but that doesn't mean it's a wise thing to do

128 darthstar  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:37:28am
129 Charles Johnson  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:37:33am

re: #124 Mr. Crankypants

I dont' think we double down, I think we have to solve the problem at both ends. Condemn the hateful voices and try to help the people who are pushing for more enlightened societies. But what we can't do is let people threatening violence lead us into censorship.

That's what I meant originally, however inarticulately expressed.

I don't think we're in disagreement. But it's a very short drive from "you shouldn't say that" to "you can't say that" and I don't want us to get in the car.

I have to disagree. I think there's a HUGE gap between "you shouldn't say that" and "you can't say that." One is free speech, the other is censorship. These are not even close to being the same thing.

And yes, I think this French "satire" magazine should not have published these cartoons. I think it's stupid, counter-productive, and is putting at risk many people who have nothing to do with the issue, for no reason except to sell magazines.

They have a right to do it. But they suck.

130 HappyWarrior  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:37:57am

re: #122 darthstar

Their population density isn't the worst, however.

[Link: www.infoplease.com...]

Bangladesh. Anyhow, it's intriguing to me how India and China together comprise a huge fraction of the world's overall population. I am not a math fan but I like looking at demographics. It's equally interesting how equally sparsely populated Canada is compared to Bangladesh and others.

131 Feline Emperor of the Conservative Tears  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:38:12am

re: #128 darthstar

That result might imply that the US citizenry is less stupid than they were four years ago.
(ROFL)

132 darthstar  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:38:52am

re: #131 Feline Emperor of the Conservative Waste

That result might imply that the US citizenry is less stupid than they were four years ago.
(ROFL)

Or tits>abs.

133 Feline Emperor of the Conservative Tears  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:39:02am

re: #130 HappyWarrior

Bangladesh. Anyhow, it's intriguing to me how India and China together comprise a huge fraction of the world's overall population. I am not a math fan but I like looking at demographics. It's equally interesting how equally sparsely populated Canada is compared to Bangladesh and others.

Taiga and Tundra is not known for its ability to support a high population density.

Edit: Of humans that it. Mosquitoes on the other hand...

134 Sol Berdinowitz  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:39:27am

re: #131 Feline Emperor of the Conservative Waste

That result might imply that the US citizenry is less stupid than they were four years ago.
(ROFL)

Perhaps it has grown less receptive to populist demagogues. I think they hit peak receptivity in 2010 and have been going downhil ever since.

135 Lidane  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:39:33am
136 Four More Tears  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:39:39am

re: #124 Mr. Crankypants

I dont' think we double down, I think we have to solve the problem at both ends. Condemn the hateful voices and try to help the people who are pushing for more enlightened societies. But what we can't do is let people threatening violence lead us into censorship.

That's what I meant originally, however inarticulately expressed.

I don't think we're in disagreement. But it's a very short drive from "you shouldn't say that" to "you can't say that" and I don't want us to get in the car.

Bullpuckey. We condemn racist speech left and right. We don't censor it, though.

137 Nervous Norvous  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:40:10am

re: #132 darthstar

Or tits>abs.

This.

138 Nervous Norvous  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:40:38am

re: #134 47 turn it up to 11

Perhaps it has grown less receptive to populist demagogues. I think they hit peak receptivity in 2010 and have been going downhil ever since.

The Wingularity is at hand!

139 HappyWarrior  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:40:54am

re: #133 Feline Emperor of the Conservative Waste

Taiga and Tundra is not known for its ability to support a high population density.

Well, I know, I didn't expect them to have a high density but they have one of the lowest overall.

140 Nervous Norvous  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:42:08am

re: #135 Lidane

[Embedded content]

I'd pay NOT to see that. Might be a great way to raise money:

"Send me campaign contributions or I release the sex tape!"

141 Targetpractice  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:42:53am

re: #140 Mr. Crankypants

I'd pay NOT to see that. Might be a great way to raise money:

"Send me campaign contributions or I release the sex tape!"

"Here's $100! Just please, don't make me see it!"

142 HappyWarrior  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:42:55am

re: #135 Lidane

[Embedded content]

Agh, Andy, it's too early for rum here.

143 HappyWarrior  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:43:36am

He(Romney) did think Gene Hackman would be a good choice to play his wife. Heh of course in fairness to Mitt he misunderstood the question.

144 Nervous Norvous  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:44:48am

re: #143 HappyWarrior

He(Romney) did think Gene Hackman would be a good choice to play his wife. Heh of course in fairness to Mitt he misunderstood the question.

I'm thinking Amy Pohlert with Robert Downy Junior as mitt, although with contacts to give him the same dull shoebutton eyes.

145 lawhawk  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:44:56am

re: #125 The Ghost of a Flea

Alternative door number 3 - people value free speech, but see certain limits on speech (blasphemy/hate speech).

The poll repeatedly cited above doesn't give any indication that those who are in the 62% are for limiting criticism of religion are for or against free speech in other circumstances. We'd need additional polling to find that out - that there's a spectrum of people who don't believe in free speech at all, those who believe there are limitations, and those who don't believe in any limitation at all.

If anything, based on prior polling, we've seen movement towards a more free speech around the world, and that's a good thing.

146 lawhawk  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:46:03am

re: #142 HappyWarrior

It's beer o'clock somewhere.

147 darthstar  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:46:50am

Following Romney's lead:

148 darthstar  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:47:08am

re: #146 lawhawk

It's beer o'clock somewhere.

It's beer o'clock everywhere.

149 Sol Berdinowitz  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:47:25am

re: #145 lawhawk

Alternative door number 3 - people value free speech, but see certain limits on speech (blasphemy/hate speech).

There are people who make the argument that the Koran is hate speech, other make similar claims about parts of the Bible.

In the end, there will not be any sort of stable peace or democracy in the world until we learn to disagree on certain issues without getting violent or repressive about it.

150 Lidane  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:47:26am
151 darthstar  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:48:44am

Now THAT is what I call controlling your campaign's message...not.

152 Obdicut  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:48:54am

re: #145 lawhawk

There are anti-blasphemy laws in Ireland, Poland, Italy, and various other countries in Europe have laws against "religious insult". Some of these are of the form that recognize that daubing pigs blood on the door of a temple is not the same thing as spray-painting a wall.

153 HappyWarrior  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:49:03am

re: #144 Mr. Crankypants

I'm thinking Amy Pohlert with Robert Downy Junior as mitt, although with contacts to give him the same dull shoebutton eyes.

I think they're too young heh just as Hackman's too old and retired for Mitt.

154 Lidane  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:49:10am

This is excellent news for John McCain Mitt Romney!

155 darthstar  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:49:33am

Heh...

Image: enhanced-buzz-27411-1348079795-3.jpg

156 darthstar  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:50:27am

Deer, meet headlights.

Image: enhanced-buzz-16741-1348079881-8.jpg

157 wrenchwench  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:50:43am

re: #92 Gert Fröbe

A little OT, but I thought it was cool:
[Link: xkcd.com...]

That was big.

158 makeitstop  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:50:46am

re: #154 Lidane

[Embedded content]

This may finally disprove the old adage 'any publicity is good publicity.'

159 Lidane  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:50:47am

re: #144 Mr. Crankypants

Downey's too short, even with lifts in his shoes. Heh.

Plus, Mitt might think he's Tony Stark, but he's really more Gordon Gekko.

160 Lidane  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:52:33am

Ouch:

161 HappyWarrior  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:53:30am

re: #160 Lidane

Ouch:

[Embedded content]

He's winning all the superlatives that no one likes to win.

162 Gus  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:53:51am

re: #160 Lidane

Ouch:

[Embedded content]

Sizzle.

163 Big Steve  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:53:51am

NPR had a great story on a Muslim Rage twitter thing. It is Muslim's tweeting and making fun of the whole thing. This is the way to silence the hate by making fun of it. Some of the tweets:

"I'm having such a good hair day. No one even knows. #MuslimRage" — Hend
Lost your kid Jihad at the airport. Can't yell for him. #MuslimRage — Leila

Link atMuslim Rage Hashtag

164 Obdicut  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:53:57am

re: #151 darthstar

Now THAT is what I call controlling your campaign's message...not.

[Embedded content]

The thing is, there's nothing Romney actually wants voters to focus on about him. He doesn't want them looking at his record as Mass governor, he doesn't really want the Olympics (where he sought more government money than anyone previously ever had) looked at, he doesn't want his time at Bain looked at-- he just doesn't want to be looked at.

They can't control the message because they don't have anything about Romney they actually think they can sell. He has no positive attributes, except that he'll say over and over that he'll do whatever extremist social conservative shit they want to get done. That he'd be delighted to ban all abortion in the US. His only positive is only a positive to the hardcore socons.

165 darthstar  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:54:07am

It's time for the bandwagon fans to start jumping in. Nobody wants to back a loser, and Mitt Romney is a loser.

Okay...time to go meet one of my former employees for lunch to see if I can steal her away from the old company.

Laterz.

166 HappyWarrior  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:56:05am

re: #164 Obdicut

The thing is, there's nothing Romney actually wants voters to focus on about him. He doesn't want them looking at his record as Mass governor, he doesn't really want the Olympics (where he sought more government money than anyone previously ever had) looked at, he doesn't want his time at Bain looked at-- he just doesn't want to be looked at.

They can't control the message because they don't have anything about Romney they actually think they can sell. He has no positive attributes, except that he'll say over and over that he'll do whatever extremist social conservative shit they want to get done. That he'd be delighted to ban all abortion in the US. His only positive is only a positive to the hardcore socons.

I've yet to see one positive ad about Mitt. Granted most of Obama's ads have been negative too but all the ads I've seen done by or on Mitt's behalf have been negative. When you're running against an incumbent, you need to tell us who you are and what you're for more so than what you're against.

167 Shiplord Kirel  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:56:27am

I think George Hamilton would be ideal as Mitt. Make-up could easily lighten his famous tan and probably fluff out his hair to give him even more of the necessary plastic movie star look.
Given his former business ties to Ferdinand and Imelda Marcos, Hamilton could also be expected to have some empathy for his character.

168 Kragar  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:57:51am

re: #167 Shiplord Kirel

I think George Hamilton would be ideal as Mitt. Make-up could easily lighten his famous tan and probably fluff out his hair to give him even more of the necessary plastic movie star look.
Given his former business ties to Ferdinand and Imelda Marcos, Hamilton could also be expected to have some empathy for his character.

I'm still going with Henry Czerny

169 Gus  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 12:00:00pm

re: #160 Lidane

Ouch:

[Embedded content]

The high numbers for "how does he make you feel are interesting. With Obama it's "proud" at 51% while Romney's high is "worried" at 48%.

170 Four More Tears  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 12:01:45pm
171 Targetpractice  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 12:03:00pm

Yes, the 47% is full of moochers, like these guys:

4,000 of the richest in Romney's '47%'

Nobody's really talking about this slice of the pie, but Mitt Romney's "47%" who pay no federal income tax include several thousand of the highest-income households in the country.

The Tax Policy Center estimates that 4,000 households with incomes over $1 million ended up with zero federal income tax liability in 2011. Another 14,000 made between $500,000 and $1 million.

Combined, those households represented just 0.025% of the more than 76 million who did not pay.

But their presence in the No Tax Club underlines the fact that the tax code is chock full of tax breaks and exceptions benefiting people up and down the income scale.

172 Feline Emperor of the Conservative Tears  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 12:03:04pm

The Romney campaign is selling generalities as the "not-Obama". The GOP is selling fear. That they are primarily being associated with negative terms is not surprising.

173 Brother Holy Cruise Missile of Mild Acceptance  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 12:03:45pm

so the hornet's nest has already fallen from the tree and the hornets are pissed so what does this guy do? Run up and kick it really hard. Genius...

174 goddamnedfrank  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 12:11:47pm

Is there any rhyme or reason behind RCP's decision to drop polls? I've been following it for awhile and they seem to fluctuate the age of the oldest polls in their average. Sometimes it's between two and three weeks, today it's six days.

175 SanFranciscoZionist  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 12:23:08pm

re: #2 Bob Dillon

We may recall that the original Danish cartoons initially caused nothing. It was when they were added to and integrated with the political desires of some radicals at a time later that all hell broke loose.
..
Patience. /

That's the thing. These things don't spontaneously catch fire, they get promoted.

176 SanFranciscoZionist  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 12:24:13pm

re: #12 Killgore Trout

A Syrian "freedom" group files lawsuit

Syrian organization files complaint against Charlie Hebdo

Well, that's sort of...it's not even ironic, it's just annoying.

177 Summer Seale  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 12:29:32pm

Ok, I haven't commented in a very, very, long time. But here goes:

Most of you are probably not tied into the Francophone sphere. having lived and worked in France for over two years, I can safely say that I'm still a little bit in it (although I live in Israel now).

I know that most of you will probably think that Charlie Hebdo is a hate magazine, or anti-immigrant magazine, or some other thing, or has a right-wing agenda, or an agenda to piss off Muslims, but such is not the case.

Actually, Charlie Hebdo is pretty much on the left, but satirizes everyone. And when I say everyone, I actually mean everyone. The Pope, Christians, Jews, Communists, Conservatives, Obama, DSK - you name it, they mock it. They mock it, satirize it, poke it, and deflate it. They aren't a right-wing magazine with an agenda at all. I know that many have characterized it as such, or said that it's ill-conceived to publish these images, but that is exactly what they do.

Last year, their office was firebombed. I remember, I was in France at the time. They have had police protection ever since. They are not people who are going to shut up. If politicians come out and tell them to stop, they're going to caricature those politicians. If people start apologizing of them, they're going to caricature those people. And if right-wing Front Nationale people are going to march in favor of it, you can bet that they're going to rip them a new one too.

I miss Hitchens the most at a time like this. I know that he'd absolutely support their expression without hesitation - regardless of what people's perceived notion is on the matter, just as he supported the Danish cartoonists.

I'm sorry for saying this, but I totally disagree with those who think that they shouldn't have published them. Frankly, I'm a little fed up of tip toeing around problems such as this. I'm not an apologist for the right wing, and anyone who remembers me here will know what a special place they hold in my heart for satirization and mockery. However, neither am I an apologist for mobs who would rule our conversation.

A more than a century ago, being an atheist, such as myself, and speaking out against the Church could wind you in jail. A mob could take you at your house and kill you, in certain parts of the world. The very idea of saying "God does not exist" was literal blasphemy and a crime under most penal laws. They burned us at the stake for it, tortured us for it, persecuted us for it, and buried us alive for it, but we didn't shut up. Real people died because of this - people whose names we don't even know, because they were stricken from the records.

In the Muslim world today, atheists such as myself are still under attack - in hiding. Some of them are in prison because they simply said "God does not exist". Some may even be executed for it.

When it comes to mocking religion - any religion - I won't shut up about it. I won't take into account the sensibilities of those who adhere to it. I am not going to treat Muslims differently than I treat anyone else, and I support others who do the same as I do.

So I cannot, in good conscience, not be supportive of Charlie Hebdo and their decision to mock yet another religious group. I support it. I do not believe that religious sensibilities trump freedom of speech. Every day, I say that God does not exist, and I know that in many parts of the world where the riots are happening, that this actually is illegal to say. They would have me imprisoned, or lynched, or executed for saying those words just as surely as if I had published cartoons "defaming" Mohammed. So, yes, I support the publication of those cartoons.

In so doing, I do not stand with those right-wing anti-Muslim groups which are, almost exclusively, Christian fundamentalist and trying to push their own God on everyone else. I do so as a proud atheist who believes in the right to not only say "God does not exist", but also to mock everything about a religion which tries to say that he does.

178 Charles Johnson  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 1:36:11pm

re: #177 Summer Seale

My point is simple -- while the mobs are still in the street, it's incredibly irresponsible to throw more fuel on the fire. It's not the publishers of Charlie Hebdo who will pay with their lives, either -- it's the innocent people caught up in violence that has nothing to do with them.

I absolutely agree that we should support free speech, but motivation matters too. And Charlie Hebdo's motivation for doing this is simply to drum up controversy and sell magazines. I support their right to do it, but I believe it was dangerously irresponsible to do it like this, at this moment in time, and I don't believe they should be held up as models of free speech. I wouldn't dream of doing anything to stop them, but they suck for doing it.

179 Summer Seale  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 1:51:44pm

re: #178 Charles Johnson

I absolutely support your freedom to say that and to disagree with what they've done. =)

I listed my own personal reasons why I do support it. I fully realize that many here do not agree, but I felt that I had to explain why people such as myself find ourselves in need of openly stating our support.

180 Eclectic Infidel  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 1:51:56pm

re: #177 Summer Seale

Well said sister - and I completely agree.

If there is blame to go around, it ought to be placed squarely on those committing the violence.

I also agree with our esteemed blog owner that with free speech comes responsibility. Yet, at the end of the day, if but a handful of Muslims weren't so damned sensitive, publishing said cartoons wouldn't even be a major issue.

181 danhenry1  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 1:56:02pm

The generally accepted ideas behind the prohibition about screaming 'Fire', in a theater, was a generalization that ones free expression..Stops, When the goal, is to humiliate, and endanger those in the 'public'. That is kind of universal I would argue.
We are the most advanced civilization, I'm, not talking just the US...we are responsible for making this 'all good'.

182 Patricia Kayden  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 1:58:34pm

Muslim extremists cannot hold hostage the free speech rights of those in democratic countries. Sorry. There's no reason why their religious beliefs cannot be insulted/mocked/offended. Their rioting and killing (and threats of violence) shouldn't be used to stifle freedom of speech. And I understand completely that not all Muslims support the overreaction that we saw in Libya, Egypt and other Islamic countries in the last couple of weeks.

183 Decatur Deb  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 2:26:21pm

re: #182 Patricia Kayden

Muslim extremists cannot hold hostage the free speech rights of those in democratic countries. Sorry. There's no reason why their religious beliefs cannot be insulted/mocked/offended. Their rioting and killing (and threats of violence) shouldn't be used to stifle freedom of speech. And I understand completely that not all Muslims support the overreaction that we saw in Libya, Egypt and other Islamic countries in the last couple of weeks.

Yes there is. It's called good manners. Good manners are not an accident, they are the lubricant that keeps us from offing each other at provocation.

May they be published? Yes.
Should they be published? No.

184 electrotek  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 6:55:07pm

re: #182 Patricia Kayden

Patricia, it's not like we don't have our share of crybabies in this country who get upset if there's a "Fuck the Troops" fan page on Facebook and start questioning the limits of freedom of speech as well.

It seems like people will support freedom of speech when it suits them and disregard it when it doesn't. Both Muslim extremists based in the West and the anti-Islamic wingnuts are both equally guilty.

185 Summer Seale  Wed, Sep 19, 2012 11:54:37pm

re: #183 Decatur Deb

Yes there is. It's called good manners. Good manners are not an accident, they are the lubricant that keeps us from offing each other at provocation.

May they be published? Yes.
Should they be published? No.

Decatur, please re-read my post above to see what constitutes a breach of bad manners. I think it's fairly clear that my mere existence is considered a breach of bad manners for these people.

186 Obdicut  Thu, Sep 20, 2012 3:43:25am

re: #177 Summer Seale

I support their right to do it, and I think they're dumb to do it. I'm an atheist too.

In what way does satirizing Islam actually improve the standing of atheists? Do you think satire actually helps people to break away from religion and come to atheism?

I'm just not sure what you think the value of the satire is. Satire of the powerful gives voice to the powerless. This isn't satire of the powerful.

187 SidewaysQuark  Thu, Sep 20, 2012 1:36:43pm

re: #186 Obdicut

In what way does satirizing Islam actually improve the standing of atheists? Do you think satire actually helps people to break away from religion and come to atheism?

No, but satire of religion can be damn funny. Take "The Life of Brian", for example. Making people laugh is a higher calling than "being sensitive to people's feelings".


This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh
The Pandemic Cost 7 Million Lives, but Talks to Prevent a Repeat Stall In late 2021, as the world reeled from the arrival of the highly contagious omicron variant of the coronavirus, representatives of almost 200 countries met - some online, some in-person in Geneva - hoping to forestall a future worldwide ...
Cheechako
3 days ago
Views: 118 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1
Texas County at Center of Border Fight Is Overwhelmed by Migrant Deaths EAGLE PASS, Tex. - The undertaker lighted a cigarette and held it between his latex-gloved fingers as he stood over the bloated body bag lying in the bed of his battered pickup truck. The woman had been fished out ...
Cheechako
2 weeks ago
Views: 279 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1