USA Today Avoids Charlie Hebdo Muhammad Cartoons, But Allows Muslim Cleric to Pen This Op-Ed

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: Jamie1

Still, it certainly makes USA Today look like they're scared. Reminded me of this:

Maybe that too is a good thing. Maybe we should be scared. Maybe that is what it takes to end the politically correct BS propaganda.

There is a war being fought, people need to realize that. Muslims who do not support this need to speak out, and then do more than simply speak out, they need to get their hands dirty and help the rest of us fight the war.

Muslims do speak out against the radicals but you never see it on MSM because they want everyone programmed to think that all of Islam is nothing but violence. Looks like it is working.

a reply to: Jamie1

Still, it certainly makes USA Today look like they're scared.

No they are not scared they are just not pea brained enough to insult an entire religion because of what some psychopaths did. If you are going to insult people insult people insult the ones that commit the crimes not the ones that live peacefully with everyone else.

originally posted by: hutch622
a reply to: Jamie1

This attack has already made people think think twice before offending Islam . But that is no reason to be giving advocates of murder a place to have their say . Why not some words from an outraged Muslim cleric .

I saw where some well known European Newspapers reprinted the cartoon and some others in defiance.

a reply to: Jamie1

I was about to start a Thread on this myself and now my post will be at the bottom of page 1 and probably be overlooked but here is the video of that conversation:

www.youtube.com...

I can't imbed the video for some reason but you really get to see just what form of 'Islam' these guys want.

I don't understand why we can't send him away to a Country which supports Sharia?? We should just send him and his followers out instead of allowing them to reap the Benefits we provide in England.

We gave them 'Freedom' from their Country's which are at war but they want to cause problems here in the UK because they want 'Sharia' which means going back to how they lived back in a 'Sharia' Governed Country and that only means that there will be wars breaking out here too eventually

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: Jamie1

Still, it certainly makes USA Today look like they're scared. Reminded me of this:

Maybe that too is a good thing. Maybe we should be scared. Maybe that is what it takes to end the politically correct BS propaganda.

Ef that! I'm not being scared of anything. Islam isn't scary, neither is terrorism. The chances of YOU being hit by a terrorist attack are pretty slim.

The Terrorism Statistics Every American Needs to Hear

We should not cower in fear because a bunch of assholes don't like the way we live or what we say.

There is a war being fought, people need to realize that. Muslims who do not support this need to speak out, and then do more than simply speak out, they need to get their hands dirty and help the rest of us fight the war.

They ARE doing that. There are Muslims RIGHT now fighting these terrorists and standing up to them, but you don't hear about them on the MSM because that doesn't help with their big picture of "BIG SCARY ISLAM". But seeing as how you are calling other people out on their inactions, how much terrorist fighting have you done specifically?

originally posted by: SLAYER69
People were killed over freedom of speech, USA Today runs this under the same rights.


People have issues only with one but not the other?

I think this speaks volumes.
Either these freedoms apply to everyone or no one.

Make up your minds peeps.

Yea but rather than memorialize those who died they let the advocate of their murder speak. As if we needed yet another round of radical diatribe to remind us. They could have at least run the story accompanied with photos of the WTC, Marine Barracks bombing, a ditch filled with ISIS victims, photos of the recent Pakistani school massacre. This guys rant needs to be spiked with context. He certainly doesn't give a dam about western style free speech.

Well i would like to embed a video here that shows the policeman being shot in the head at close range by an AK-47 and yet his head does not recoil from the shot and you don't see any blood but ATS has decided this is just gore and deleted my thread but members are well advise to search youtube and see for yourselves.

Also note that the black getaway car seemed to have white or silver wing mirrows during the shooting but the car the police found later had black mirrows but i don't think it was a trick of the light because the mirrows seem to stay white as the car drives off.

When it comes to the media its one rule for one and another for someone else.

a reply to: VirusGuard

Do you even read your own threads?
People have explained everything you have brought up in that lie of a thread.
The car had chromed wing mirrors I showed you a pic and it was the reflection of light which made them appear white.
It is in the LOL forum where it belongs.
Disgusting tbh.

a reply to: SLAYER69

That was indeed My point. In one thread the Media is portrayed as one of if not the most heinous of pushing an agenda and then in the next thread they are lauded for exposing a travesty. It begs the question, if the Media prints half-truths about politics™ and military action would Media then print TRUTH and only TRUTH as it relates to religion™, business or anything for that matter?

So the Media should only be used when they share a common view? Wasn't it in the Media that was reported that some U.S. folks were involved in financing ISIS™ ?(foe de jour- or whatever that entity is named now..) Is this a truth/half-truth/or maybe 'some truth' ?

French media needs the gov't to allow them to print articles??
Really?? They don't have a free press???
I am kind of finding what this guy is saying kind of . welll I don't know what my cat just came and started mauling me for cuddles and I lost my train of thought

ain't worth getting back I will just say this

the day that our press has to submit cartoons to the gov't for approval is the day that any doubt that our gov't isn't just another weapon in it's arsenal!!! that's if they haven't erased all doubt already!

a reply to: Jamie1

Seems to me we display racism towards the Muslim communities these days simplify by expressing our opinions yet when the shoe is on the other foot we are supposed to simply remain quiet due to the perception of political correctness currently doing the rounds. Simply a double standard in my opinion, so sad.

a reply to: VirusGuard

Okay lie was a strong word.
Uneducated guess is better.
Not even going to entertain your ideas because they were shown to be wrong.

originally posted by: buster2010
a reply to: Jamie1

Still, it certainly makes USA Today look like they're scared.

No they are not scared they are just not pea brained enough to insult an entire religion because of what some psychopaths did. If you are going to insult people insult people insult the ones that commit the crimes not the ones that live peacefully with everyone else.

Well, for that broad stroke, we could apply that to any of the major headlines of whackbags that kill....all the school shootings, the LEO shootings and on and on...why get rid of guns because of a few extreme cases? If we can say get rid of guns, why can't we say get rid of the Quran or Muslim religion? Similar arguments, except one is a object/group of people that inspires many to extremism, and the other is simply a tool (one of many) for extremists to use.

I personally have no doubt in my mind that my guns will never attack me.....I have a bit more hesitance to say the same about a person with extreme views, though it is unlikely (as has been pointed out), it is a lot more likely than my guns attacking me on their own.

a reply to: andy06shake

Seems to me we display racism towards the Muslim communities these days simplify by expressing our opinions yet when the shoe is on the other foot we are supposed to simply remain quiet due to the perception of political correctness currently doing the rounds. Simply a double standard in my opinion

You are bang on but its because we sheep need to let more sheep into the field even when we have so little grass to eat ourselves because the farmer wants to make more profit.

Sooner or later they will star race wars just like the British did in India if we let them but don't go after the sheep but go after the farmer.

originally posted by: buster2010

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: Jamie1

Still, it certainly makes USA Today look like they're scared. Reminded me of this:

Maybe that too is a good thing. Maybe we should be scared. Maybe that is what it takes to end the politically correct BS propaganda.

There is a war being fought, people need to realize that. Muslims who do not support this need to speak out, and then do more than simply speak out, they need to get their hands dirty and help the rest of us fight the war.

Muslims do speak out against the radicals but you never see it on MSM because they want everyone programmed to think that all of Islam is nothing but violence. Looks like it is working.

What is your stance and view on Sharia Law?

originally posted by: JimNasium

So when the Muslim™ gets pissed over a cartoon is akin to Chris†ian getting upset over what a Muslim said...

Seriously?

Your moral false equivalency is idiotic.

You're comparing the WORLD being upset because Islamic a##holes want to commit mass murder over a cartoon, with the Islamic a$$holes being upset over the cartoon.

Dumb.

originally posted by: buster2010
a reply to: Jamie1

Still, it certainly makes USA Today look like they're scared.

No they are not scared they are just not pea brained enough to insult an entire religion because of what some psychopaths did. If you are going to insult people insult people insult the ones that commit the crimes not the ones that live peacefully with everyone else.

Great. Let's make sure we abide by a group of people who are so emotionally unstable that a cartoon causes them to commit mass murder.

Yep. Must make sure we don't do anything to insult this group of stellar citizens and bastions of freedom.

Pure idiocy.

So... did anybody actually read the article this referenced article was commenting on?

Original Op-Ed

I think the point is being missed. He's not (at least overtly... I can't speak to his personal beliefs or actions) advocating violence against anyone. He's saying that if we deliberately ignore warnings around topics which are directly referenced in religious doctrine, we are ACCEPTING the risk that someone will want to retaliate.

The suggestion that every news outlet should reprint the cartoons... that's the most obvious "missed the point" suggestion going. It's not just freedom of speech we have to deal with, but freedom of people to practice their religion (which views publishing images of Muhammad as an insult to their prophet, and is specifically included as something people should be killed over).

Now, I don't think anyone has the right to press their religion on anyone else -- much less kill anyone because they don't believe in the same god/God/gods/prophets/prophecies/animal spirit -- but I do think people need to read the article with a critical eye... not read a response to the article with a different bias, and take that as the same thing.

If anything, he's advocating understanding of the religious impact of unlimited freedom of speech. And he's right. If we're aware of the potential consequences of our actions (consequences which could be delivered by one or two fanatics even without any sort of backing from a religious community), and take those actions anyway, have we not accepted the risk of those consequences?

a reply to: Jamie1

I used to have this quote as my signature


Voltaire said

"To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize."