Besides all the other noise, those cartoons simply are not clever or funny in the least. Anybody on this forum could do better.
A True Sign of Hope
- Thread starter smurphy
- Start date
smurphy said:
True, and i'll bet you didn't know they ran front page Abu-Ghraib stories for 404 straight days.
The bomb-turban thing reminds me of Bugs Bunny. Which led me to all those episodes where Bugs dressed up as woman in order to fool Elmer Fudd (including that one really dramatic "kill the wabbit" episode with all that great cinematography and classic music which showed them kiss full on the lips and had partial nudity).kosar said:
Anyway, I commend the cross-dressing and transexual communities for not rioting over those rather obscene and derogatory cartoons.
Nope, I was too busy counting the 400,000 mass graves Manson talked about to keep track of how many Abu Ghraib stories the Times published.kosar said:
....Only got 2 hands, ya know. .....and one of them is usually occupied courtesy of my lesbian porn addiction.
sorry for skewring your sacred cow again,guys..interesting that you take issue with me...rather than the cowards at the times...
.just pointing out the obvious...
is there a better definition of cowardice than only picking a fight with someone you know will not hit back?.....
.just pointing out the obvious...
is there a better definition of cowardice than only picking a fight with someone you know will not hit back?.....
so that means you ARE moving to france?
dude - at this point - if i ran a high profile newspaper - i MIGHT just wait it out a little bit - simply out of safety concerns for those working there.
Did Fox show the cartoons? I might be wrong, but I think they DID NOT. In fact, I don't think any TV network did. And DTB already listed the newspapers in the US who printed the cartoon - you can count them on one hand!
So - are you going to rant on the thousands of papers and dozens of networks who do not want to jeopardize the physical safety of their staff at this particular juncture the same way you crusade against the NY times????? Are you?
Much praise to those who unite and are strong like the Riverside Press-Enterprise, but I give no condemnation to anyone who doesn't wanna die over a damn cartoon.
dude - at this point - if i ran a high profile newspaper - i MIGHT just wait it out a little bit - simply out of safety concerns for those working there.
Did Fox show the cartoons? I might be wrong, but I think they DID NOT. In fact, I don't think any TV network did. And DTB already listed the newspapers in the US who printed the cartoon - you can count them on one hand!
So - are you going to rant on the thousands of papers and dozens of networks who do not want to jeopardize the physical safety of their staff at this particular juncture the same way you crusade against the NY times????? Are you?
Much praise to those who unite and are strong like the Riverside Press-Enterprise, but I give no condemnation to anyone who doesn't wanna die over a damn cartoon.
kosar said:
This from one who "watched" the whole Alito committee confirmation hearing.
And I'm just trying to be fair, but we all know how often you refresh Madjacks ! :mj13:
(Fairness is not a conservative quality, I hear).
What's with your's and Smurph's defense of NYT editorials? Smurph attacks FOX (Faux, whetever) as if it where out to destroy the cushy liberal society and yet ya'll defend that toilet paper of yellow, pandering thrd rate "journalism" pamphlet.
I guess all news outlets appeal to their particular public.
Nosigar - I'm much more in amazement over Weasel's crusade against NYT than I am in actual defense of them. If you pay attention, I never bring them up on my own. ...Kinda like DTB with Clinton. It's like - man, just move on, talk about something else, get out of whatever lil' bubble your in. There are bigger things happening as we speak.
Hey, Fox has it's good moments. I don't go out of my way with them. Usually it's in response to some "fresh pickings" stuff or in reply to O'Reilly garbage.
Hey, Fox has it's good moments. I don't go out of my way with them. Usually it's in response to some "fresh pickings" stuff or in reply to O'Reilly garbage.
Nosigar said:This from one who "watched" the whole Alito committee confirmation hearing.
And I'm just trying to be fair, but we all know how often you refresh Madjacks ! :mj13:
(Fairness is not a conservative quality, I hear).
What's with your's and Smurph's defense of NYT editorials? Smurph attacks FOX (Faux, whetever) as if it where out to destroy the cushy liberal society and yet ya'll defend that toilet paper of yellow, pandering thrd rate "journalism" pamphlet.
I guess all news outlets appeal to their particular public.
I have Fox on at the office next to my desk from 9-5. So whatever coverage they had of those hearings, I had easy access to, if I chose. I wasn't staring at the hearings for 8 hours straight, but I was able to watch it if I wanted to. In that environment I prefer to watch news because your attention is not total most of the day.
Not sure what you're talking about on the other thing. I have never ONCE defended the NYT. Have I even ever mentioned them?(I guess I do remember once posting an article from David Brooks, a conservative) I don't read that paper or view it online.
Is it liberal?
Did Fox show the cartoons? I might be wrong, but I think they DID NOT--
I believe you are correct--I know Oreilly refused to air them.
I believe you are correct--I know Oreilly refused to air them.
It is strange when reading this thread. Both Right and Left plus other seem to agree. These folks are nuts and there governments are too. Little hope for the region. But then talk about the Iraq war and what a good idea it was. Well you soon have HALF the folks above thinking Iraq was good idea. And believe we can change these lost souls. We can change the world many say. Just have elections. Witch is it?
just hoping for a little honesty and integrity from the paper that provides"all the news that`s fit to print"....
instead of "this paper or news organization has chosen to not show the cartoons out of respect for Islam".....maybe something a little more to the point....
"""we spent several hours debating whether or not to show these controversial cartoons, but have decided that discretion is the better part of valor. .....we know that there are many muslims who would react violently to our publication of them.....while that violence might make for good copy, it would also put everyone of our overseas reporters in physical jeopardy.....that jeopardy costs money, because we then have to pay such correspondents more to get them to go to such insane, violent places. ....furthermore, we would likely have to put our offices into security lockdown.....the measures necessary to safeguard our security and disburse "combat pay" to foreign correspondents, would cut deeply into our budget.....and as you know, ""with our circulation and advertising revenues dropping like a rock"", our budget simply can't afford the hit. ...in a word: we are afraid.....printing these cartoons would put our lives, both financial and physical, at risk. and we are not willing to risk it.....
instead,we`ve decided to reprint the "elephant dung mary" photograph once again to try and deceive the public into buying that we believe in freedom of speech and the press...and are not just trying to promote our progressive/secular(i.e. anti-christian/anti=jew) agenda....
thank you, and have a nice day"""""....
many would have more respect for them...if they showed some sac....
instead of "this paper or news organization has chosen to not show the cartoons out of respect for Islam".....maybe something a little more to the point....
"""we spent several hours debating whether or not to show these controversial cartoons, but have decided that discretion is the better part of valor. .....we know that there are many muslims who would react violently to our publication of them.....while that violence might make for good copy, it would also put everyone of our overseas reporters in physical jeopardy.....that jeopardy costs money, because we then have to pay such correspondents more to get them to go to such insane, violent places. ....furthermore, we would likely have to put our offices into security lockdown.....the measures necessary to safeguard our security and disburse "combat pay" to foreign correspondents, would cut deeply into our budget.....and as you know, ""with our circulation and advertising revenues dropping like a rock"", our budget simply can't afford the hit. ...in a word: we are afraid.....printing these cartoons would put our lives, both financial and physical, at risk. and we are not willing to risk it.....
instead,we`ve decided to reprint the "elephant dung mary" photograph once again to try and deceive the public into buying that we believe in freedom of speech and the press...and are not just trying to promote our progressive/secular(i.e. anti-christian/anti=jew) agenda....
thank you, and have a nice day"""""....
many would have more respect for them...if they showed some sac....
Last edited:
dude.......they are one of every paper but 4 in this whole country and every tv network who made the same decision. i don't know how many thousands of papers and networks that is, but it's quite a few. you may want to let this one go. seriously.
Are you just completely gone or what? This is the kind of thing you see in some of the last writings from the Uni-bomber.
So what's up with Fox's anti-christian, anti-jew progressive/secular AGENDA?
I hate that "agenda" word. Another late creation used primarily for unfairly labeling groups of people and spinning.
Are you just completely gone or what? This is the kind of thing you see in some of the last writings from the Uni-bomber.
So what's up with Fox's anti-christian, anti-jew progressive/secular AGENDA?
I hate that "agenda" word. Another late creation used primarily for unfairly labeling groups of people and spinning.
