Anger Over Mohammed Cartoon

[Kitsune]

The Muslim world is protesting? Maybe not as many as you might think.

Muslims have every right to protest, but the overreaction was unnecessary. In reality, the number of original demonstrators was tiny: 300 in Pakistan, 400 in Indonesia, 200 in Tripoli, a few hundred in Britain (before Saturday’s bigger reconciliation march), and government-organised hoodlums in Damascus burning an embassy. Beirut was a bit larger. Why blow this up and pretend that the protests had entered the subsoil of spontaneous mass anger? They certainly haven’t anywhere in the Muslim world, though the European media has been busy fertilising the widespread ignorance that exists in this continent.

Ooo, scary! ~1,000 over-reacting protestors worldwide! Why is that the media, here, tends to make everyone think it is damn near all of them? Wouldn't this, you know, perpetuate the cycle?

In other news, the freedom of the press takes another turn. It seems a lot of people that are sure that we should have the right to publish some insulting cartoons think there are some photos that shouldn't be published. Or what about video?

I guess cartoons "don't hurt the troops", so that makes it okay.

[glatt]

Originally Posted by Kitsune

In other news, the freedom of the press takes another turn. It seems a lot of people that are sure that we should have the right to publish some insulting cartoons think there are some photos that shouldn't be published. Or what about video?

I guess cartoons "don't hurt the troops", so that makes it okay.

Here's a link to some of the photos. They should have just released all the photos at once. Letting them out in dribs and drabs just keeps pulling the scab off the wound.

[tw]

Originally Posted by glatt

They should have just released all the photos at once. Letting them out in dribs and drabs just keeps pulling the scab off the wound.

Maybe you forget why these photos are still relevant. We Americans have endorsed and encouraged torture. Those who most advocate and encourage this - ie Cheney, Rumsfeld, Gonzales - are still in power, maintain that such practices are good for America, and, well, you do know about force feeding tortured prisoners in Guantanamo.

What we also know about Abu Ghriad is that most all prisoners were innocent. The great majority were released after three weeks - given something like $10 for their time and to be used to get home. You tell me who the great Satan is in this story?

Did we eliminate the problem? No. Most of us so hate what American stands for as to vote for the mental midget and his band of 'torture is good' promoters.

Want to stop such pictures? Impeachment is the word. Impeachment for crimes against humanity. Oh. Religious extremist don't believe this is a crime - as they also did during the Spanish Inquisition.

Keep those pictures dribbling. They will remind us that we are party to a great 'immoral' action - and don't speak out.

Most all those who were tortured - many of whom were also killed (ie that Iraqi General) were innocent. But since our emotions said they must be evil, then their death was a good thing? Ask yourself where this is called moral. Keep those pictures coming so that the guilty may eventually appreciate who evil ones really are. Shame that those pictures are so necessary. Absolute shame.

[glatt]

"they" in my post refers to the administration, which fought releasing them in the first place. I recall that they showed all the pictures to memebers of congress at the time, but only released some to the press. The rest they wanted to hide because they were even worse than the hooded wire guy and naked pyramid ones. You can't keep a lid on photos like this. They will get out. In order to maximize damage control, they should have released them all at once. It would have been slightly more painful at the time, but they wouldn't be resurfacing at a time that the world is in turmoil over a bunch of cartoons. What I'm saying is that the administration handled the fallout from these pictures poorly.

What I'm not saying is that the press shouldn't be printing them. I think the press should print them as they get them.

[tw]

Originally Posted by glatt

What I'm saying is that the administration handled the fallout from these pictures poorly.

That's not true. Clearly those enlisted men brought dog collars and leashes to Iraq so they could intentionally torture and degrade prisoners. The administration rightly identified those enlisted men as an isolated group of torturers. Clearly neither General Miller, other officers, nor senior administration officials had anything to do with what is in those pictures. Actions that were documented by FBI agents who then left the locale due to repeated torture and other maltreatment. Clearly those pictures are only isolated examples of a few deviant Americans - not something that was initiated by Cheney, Gonzales, Rumsfeld, Wolfovitz, and George Jr's agenda. Clearly the White House acted responsibly; were forthcoming, transparent, and honest.

But then the victims were Muslim. They deserved what they got. Or maybe our administration instead lies? Why would I even suggest such nonsense.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Gosh TW, I didn't know you were so good at sarcasm. It's a talent you rarely display