Support Whirled Peas from The Insomniac
Do you begin to see then, what kind of world we are creating? It is the exact opposite of the stupid hedonistic Utopias that the old reformers imagined. A world of fear and treachery and torment, a world of trampling [Read More]

Tracked on February 16, 2006 11:49 AM

MSM seem capable of hyping only one single story at at time.

Right now, it is Cheneygate...

In a few days it will be something else.

TIZ

Hey, I am ticked off, why does the MSM show pictures of dubious worth but not of pictures of Mo?

pathetic!

The more I see of things like the MSM's handling of this cartoon "controversy", the Cheney hunting accident, rehashed Abu Graib photos, the non-coverage of real Iraq and Middle East news, the more contempt I have for most of the West's MSM.

Cowardly, hypocritical, feckless, reckless, thoughtless, ignorant, bigoted...are just a few of the adjectives that come to mind to describe most of them.

Short, sweet and to the point.

Right on the money.

Dave "Cowardly, hypocritical, feckless, reckless, thoughtless, ignorant, bigoted...are just a few of the adjectives that come to mind to describe most of them."

And none of these apply to any of us over here.

I was just over at Western Standard, this is the exact topic they are discussing there. There sure seems to be a one sided slant on this story. Why are they so scared??????

http://westernstandard.blogs.com/shotgun/2006/02/a_tale_of_two_i.html#trackback

what they should really show are the pictures they have of Abu Ghraib when Saddam ran the place . . . the current pictures are nursery school pranks in comparison.

So why won't they tell the whole story of Abu Ghraib and show the pictures they have.

Maybe the same reason that the Globe & Mail & the Toronto Star won't show the pictures they took on 9/11 of Muslims, Canadian citizens, dancing in the streets of downtown Toronto in rapturous joy at the bestial murder of thousands in NYC/WTC

Amen to that, Dave.

The real challenge for the MSM will be their support or lack thereof for the Western Standard when the thought police (so-called Hate Crime allegations and HR tribunal) harassment begins. They have all "chosen" not to publish the cartoons for various phony reasons all the while defending the principle of freedom of the press.

Anyone hear that pin drop?

CBC and Neil McDonald did they're usual disgusting report on how bad the terrorist's are being treated in prisons in Iraq. What a bunch of crap.

Sitting in Washington safe and sound, you think your pretty safe. Why don't you head over there and see what the real coalation forces have to endure and put up with?

Irony/Sarcasm from Wretchard: One left liberal moonbat's poem (sic) written 11 Sept., 2001. "Make soup".

Baa-baa Black Sheep

Excerpt:

I mention this small detail because it is the best way to enter into the spirit of absurdity with which USS Iowa's memory is being treated. Let me close this discussion with a reading from my favorite September 11 poem, perhaps the one we truly deserve.

Wage Peace
by Judyth Hill, September 11, 2001

Wage Peace with your breath.
Breathe in firemen and rubble.
Breathe out whole buildings and flocks of red-wing blackbirds.
Breathe in terrorists
Breathe out sleeping children and fresh mown fields.
Breathe in confusion and breathe out maple trees.
Breathe in the fallen and breathe out life long relationships intact.

Wage peace with our listening: hearing sirens, pray loud.
Remember your tools: flower seeds, clothing pins, clean rivers.

Make soup.

Play music; learn the word "thank you" in 3 languages.
Learn to knit: make a hat.
Think of chaos as dancing raspberries.
Imagine grief
as the outbreak of beauty or gesture of fish.

Swim for the other side.
Wage peace.

Never has the word seemed so fresh and precious.
Have a cup of tea and rejoice.
Act as if armistice has already arrived.
Celebrate today.

http://www.wagingpeace.org/articles/2002/09/11_hill_wage-peace.htm
http://www.fallbackbelmont.blogspot.com/

So let me see I understand this correctly...MSM is reluctant to publish the cartoons, not because they're necessarily blasphemous, but to avoid inflaming the muslims and causing additional violence.

But publishing 3 year old photos of abuse of muslim prisoners, involving soldiers who have already been punished for their actions, which will NOT avoid additional and unecessary violence, well that's OK?

The 4th estate is a 5th column.

Interesting how the argument a week ago was that it was their 'freedom of speech' to decide what to print or not to print. Now it's their 'freedom of speech' that they DO print. How about this, you've got your blogs, you can print whatever the hell you want, THEY own their own papers and will print whatever the hell THEY want. Why use up your freedom of speech by griping about how others are using theirs?

Fred "what they should really show are the pictures they have of Abu Ghraib when Saddam ran the place . . . the current pictures are nursery school pranks in comparison."

The at-least-it-was-worse-under-Saddam defence wore thin a long time ago. When did a pyschotic despot become the benchmark? Not as bad as Saddam=A OK. Am I the only person who finds this kind of justification disgusting?

And it may not even be true anymore. We've got prisoners in Baghdad who have been partially skinned alive. No one cares of course. We're much more interested in cartoons, hunting trips and whatever other piece of puff that happens to be enjoying 15 minutes of notoriety.

Now maybe all the people being tortured and summarily executed in Iraq are terrorists in which case you may not care. But they're not. The militias are settling old scores and taking out their political rivals. These include secularists, human rights organizers and religous minorities.

I hear a lot of talk here about emulating the values of the great generation that won WWII. Well here's a good place to start. That generation founded the concept of human rights. It wasn't a left or right issue then so why should it be one now?

And Fred before you dismiss me as a complete partisan I agree with you the MSM should have posted pictures of Muslims celebrating acts of terrorism. Let's turn over all the rocks shall we?

If you have already supported the Danes by buying Danish products maybe it's time to join the battle closer to home.
The Western Standard is like no other publication in Trudeaupia. Get a subscription or buy a gift subscription for somebody that really needs it.

Jose:
Fill us in on the "nearly skinned alive" story. Do you recall the source? You didn't by any chance also equate Gitmo with the Soviet Gulag did you? Amnesty International did, as I recall, but retracted the statement while adding that it really increased interest in the organization.

The torture and abuse images present an interesting dilema for many.... it's hard not to notice that the same voices clamoring "freedom of speech" and "freedom of the press" with regard to the Muhammad cartoons are the same ones who would suppress the images of torture and abuse by Americans at places like Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay because they only serve to unnecessarily inflame anti-American passion and outrage.

stageleft: You miss the essential point I think, which is: MSM re-runs the Abu Graib pics years later which clearly enrage the islamofascists, offends the 99.9999+% of innocent soldiers who are risking their lives, undermines the war effort giving the enemy a moral equivalency crutch, WHILE AT THE SAME TIME refrains from publishing standard-fare satirical cartoons. It's the hypocrisy of it all.

And about BDS: Bush Derangement Syndrome. MSM is outright seditious, no doubt about it.

Media spokespeople have said they opposed publication of the Danish cartoons on the grounds that printing them would not only inflame Muslims but would put troops in harms way. So presumably, their publication of the Abu Ghraib photos will help calm Muslims down and help our soldiers improve relations with the Muslim world.

What an transparently hypocritical bunch of cowards. Don't forget: "Piss Christ" -- published. Three year old Abhu Ghraib photos? -- no problem. Published. Yet now they want us to believe that they won't publish line doodlings from Denmark out of respect for religion.

The rest of us are going to have to deal with the ramifications of their cowardice in 10 - 15 yrs. Thank you, free press.

EBD: Indeed! And let us not forget the great patriot-soldier Sharon who literally ended the suicide bombing, being the subject of The Cartoon of the Year in the UK -- portrayed eating a palestinian baby -- a clear, unabashed reference to the infamous blood libels.

And let us never forget the Canadian Islamic Congress' Elmasry saying in a radio interview that all 18+ yr old Israelis are fair game for suicide bombers with nary a sanction, even from his university where he continues to teach. And this the guy threatening the WS with "hate" crime prosecution.

ABOLISH ALL HATE LAWS NOW.

Mohammed Allah: Boo >>

BBC Spooked by al-Qaeda (Network pulls TV episode over fears it will upset Muslims)

The Sun (U.K.) ^ | February 15, 2006 |
BBC Spooked by al-Qaeda

By THOMAS WHITAKER and SARA NATHAN

BBC bosses are ready to AXE a £1million episode of hit drama Spooks in which an al-Qaeda terrorist is shot dead — in case it upsets Muslims.

Filming the assassination plot for the MI5 drama took four weeks.

But actor Shaun Dingwall who plays a renegade Christian gunman, fears he could become a target for fundamentalists if the scene is aired.

In the episode, due to be shown later this year, a religious nut played by Shaun, 35, guns down the fanatic on the steps of London’s High Court.

But production sources admitted it could be canned. One said: “In the climate of Muslim fury over cartoons, Shaun isn’t sure about it all.”

Shaun refused to comment last night.

But Sun security adviser Andy McNab urged the BBC to keep the scene. He said: “Self-censorship would be the thin end of the wedge.”

Labour MP Stephen Pound added: “Giving terrorists a veto over what is shown on TV is the road to madness.

“Al-Qaeda will be objecting to Gardener’s Question Time next. Where does it stop?” >>>
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1579897/posts

me no d...

I'm critical of Gitmo but no I don't agree with the "gulag of our times" statement. It's not that bad, but I wouldn't be proud of it either.

It hasn't recieved much attention but here's one article:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,7374-1874817,00.html

No skinning here but more Iraqi police torture

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/11/AR2005121101002.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/16/AR2006021600180.html

To america's credit it was an american soldier that broke this story. My hat's off to him. The general trend in these torture stories is that it has nothing to do with being tough on crime/terrorism as it serving some other political purpose of the militias. Maybe we shouldn't be giving these militias any money:

http://partridge.gnn.tv/blogs/7174/Iraqi_death_squads_recieve_US_and_British_funds

Here's a quick breakdown of all some of the main factions involved

http://www.onlinejournal.org/Special_Reports/Chin103102/chin103102.html

Presumably the inmates at Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghureib can still walk and talk and will one day see their loved ones again. Something that is forever denied to the 3000+ innocents massacred on Sept. 11 2001.

I will feel sorry for these inmates the day that Osama bin Laden turns himself in, apologizes for Sept. 11, denounces any further acts of terrorism, and falls to his knees begging for our forgiveness.

MSM should not be looking in my direction for any crocodile tears for these people, who sufferred a frat house hazing at the worst.

Actually, as a heterosexual male I'm personally offended by photos of a bunch of fat, hairy, naked Arab prisoners. Shouldn't I get some consideration?

Just file a lawsuit like everyone else Brian. Better act quick though, looks like the courts are filling up fast.

EBD "Three year old Abhu Ghraib photos? -- no problem. "

Do you think the media should reward a government for supressing those photos for three years?