Thursday, February 09, 2006
Not Publishing Cartoons Is Not Censorship
"Why do you think we didn't see rioting and protests like this when people were being kidnapped and heads cut off?"
Many countries and papers have chosen not to publish the incitive cartoons. Some call this censorship, but there is nothing wrong with not publishing the cartoons. The most important aspect of the cartoon controversy has been overlooked.
The Cartoons Suck!
They are not clever or amusing. I am offended that they received any attention at all.If they were funny or interesting, I would be all for them being published globally. I want to see who is so fucking off their rocker that a cartoon sets him off. Maybe even a few of the radical idiots will kill each other. I'm all for it. It's just like Iraq. If our presence there radicalizes people, GREAT! I'd rather they be open about it. I want them to go underground and blow themselves up instead of passively propagating their fragile ideology. Pussies.
But the cartoons suck.
Two out of ten isn't so bad.
Bruce Dearborn Walker
It just may be harder for you to laugh I geuss
I noticed that Omar indicates that in the Middle East (or at least Iraq) Muslims have some real disparaging jokes about "The Prophet" (no examples given) and as far as he knows, the jokes never started a riot.
Perhaps someone can get a line on these jokes to make some good "cartoons" about "The Prophet that has no "authorized" recorded image but everyone can recognize".
And these guys who have been going about with the (bad) "cartoons" remind me of the Bible thumpers who carry around copies to Playboy and Penthouse to show people just how bad they are. "They only read the stories" of course.