hedgehog
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jul-13-08 08:06 PM
Original message |
Anybody want to re-consider their position on the Muslim reaction to the Danish Muhammad cartoons? |
BlooInBloo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jul-13-08 08:13 PM
Response to Original message |
Jackpine Radical
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jul-13-08 08:13 PM
Response to Original message |
2. Nobody's declaring a fatwa here. |
|
Nobody's denying them the right to publish what they want. But goddammit, if they've got free-speech rights, so do we, and ours include the right to yell at them, threaten to cancel subscriptions, or whatever the hell people find appropriate.
It's not that we can't take a joke, it's that some of us are damned afraid that nonsense like this can cost votes and elections.
|
liberalmuse
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jul-13-08 08:15 PM
Response to Original message |
3. Oh, I was livid when I saw that cover. |
|
Edited on Sun Jul-13-08 08:21 PM by liberalmuse
But if you think about it, it really is funny. It's not funny that a certain percentage of our population are so stupid and that they see this as a truthful depiction (dear god, you should see the comments on FR--or not), but it is funny when you consider that the cover is kind of like a vaccination against "The Stupid". It really is quite a powerful image that encompasses everything the thugs have tried to pollute the meme pool with. It's the height of ridiculousness, and I think most Americans will see this when the sound bytes from Limbaugh, Hannity and the like start spilling forth.
|
cbayer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jul-13-08 08:25 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
7. You said that really well. |
|
I think what we are seeing here is the initial reaction, and, on reflection, many will see it as the a very powerful image and a very powerful message. It can be used advantageously if played well. I will not go to FR to see what they are saying, but they are the ones being lampooned, of that I am sure.
|
AllentownJake
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jul-13-08 08:20 PM
Response to Original message |
4. No I support free speech |
|
Doesn't mean I'll be reading the New Yorker anytime in the next few years though.
|
Blondiegrrl
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jul-13-08 08:25 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
MH1
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jul-13-08 08:24 PM
Response to Original message |
5. Who? I haven't seen anyone here suggesting that the editors of the New Yorker be killed. |
|
:shrug:
The civilized response to such offensiveness is to protest it and refuse to pay for the magazine. That's a far cry from what went on in response to the "Muhammad" cartoons.
|
crimsonblue
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jul-13-08 08:38 PM
Response to Original message |
|
fatwas for all. (hi mr nsa guy reading this :hi:)
|
Motown_Johnny
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jul-13-08 08:40 PM
Response to Original message |
9. It isn't their position that is questionable, it is their response. |
nsd
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jul-13-08 08:43 PM
Response to Original message |
|
I might cancel my New Yorker subscription, but I'm not advocating that any harm come to the editors or that they be penalized in any way other than the loss of subscription money. Big difference. Comparing the two situations is nonsense.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri Apr 26th 2024, 08:37 AM
Response to Original message |