Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
Embassy Attacks
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="The Other Side" data-source="post: 1025032" data-attributes="member: 17969"><p>What I find hilarious is the right wings attempt to isolate OBAMA as an apologist, for siding with the terrorists and slamming on the video that depicts the Prophet Mohammad in a negative light. They use terms like traitor, appeaser and weak leader.</p><p></p><p>But wait??</p><p></p><p>Where has a president done this before??? What president condemned cartoons depicting the Prophet Mohammad in the past??</p><p></p><p>Oh wait, I know, but I am sure none of you KNOW. How about this statement from the BUSH administration.</p><p>[Eugene Volokh,February 3, 2006 at 6:00pm] Trackbacks</p><p>U.S. State Department on the Cartoons Depicting Mohammed:</p><p>Reuters reports:</p><p style="margin-left: 20px">Washington on Friday condemned caricatures in European newspapers of the Prophet Mohammad, siding with Muslims who are outraged that the publications put press freedom over respect for religion. . . .</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">"These cartoons are indeed offensive to the belief of Muslims," State Department spokesman Kurtis Cooper said in answer to a question. "We all fully recognize and respect freedom of the press and expression but it must be coupled with press responsibility. Inciting religious or ethnic hatreds in this manner is not acceptable."</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">"We call for tolerance and respect for all communities for their religious beliefs and practices," he added. . . .</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p><p>A longer version also includes this quote:</p><p style="margin-left: 20px">"Anti-Muslim images are as unacceptable as anti-Semitic images, as anti-Christian images or any other religious belief," State Department spokesman Sean McCormack told reporters.</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p><p>A <em>Reason Online</em> piece links to the shorter version, and condemns it as "a craven condemnation of an affair that is none of their business."</p><p>I'm glad to say, though, that the State Department response was a good deal more assertively pro-free-speech than the Reuters account suggests. I couldn't find the Kurtis Cooper statement, but here's the relevant excerpt from the Sean McCormack press briefing:</p><p style="margin-left: 20px">QUESTION: Yes? Can you say anything about a U.S. response or a U.S. reaction to this uproar in Europe over the Prophet Muhammad pictures? Do you have any reaction to it? Are you concerned that the violence is going to spread and make everything just --</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">MR. MCCORMACK: I haven't seen any — first of all, this is matter of fact. I haven't seen it. I have seen a lot of protests. I've seen a great deal of distress expressed by Muslims across the globe. The Muslims around the world have expressed the fact that they are outraged and that they take great offense at the images that were printed in the Danish newspaper, as well as in other newspapers around the world.</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">Our response is to say that while we certainly don't agree with, support, or in some cases, we condemn the views that are aired in public that are published in media organizations around the world, we, at the same time, defend the right of those individuals to express their views. For us, freedom of expression is at the core of our democracy and it is something that we have shed blood and treasure around the world to defend and we will continue to do so. That said, there are other aspects to democracy, our democracy — democracies around the world — and that is to promote understanding, to promote respect for minority rights, to try to appreciate the differences that may exist among us.</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">We believe, for example in our country, that people from different religious backgrounds, ethnic backgrounds, national backgrounds add to our strength as a country. And it is important to recognize and appreciate those differences. And it is also important to protect the rights of individuals and the media to express a point of view concerning various subjects. So while we share the offense that Muslims have taken at these images, we at the same time vigorously defend the right of individuals to express points of view. We may — like I said, we may not agree with those points of view, we may condemn those points of view but we respect and emphasize the importance that those individuals have the right to express those points of view.</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p><p></p><p></p><p>If that isnt good enough, BUSH HIMSELF condemned ALL CARTOONS that depicted the Prophet Mohammad in any light.</p><p></p><p>So, when you guys go on listening to RUSH, HANNITY and such, ask yourself, admid all the B.S. your listening too, why dont they mention the BUSH administrations positions?</p><p></p><p>Was BUSH appeasing the terrorists?? Was BUSH siding with terrorists? Was BUSH slamming free speech??</p><p></p><p>Amazing.</p><p></p><p>Peace</p><p></p><p>TOS</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="The Other Side, post: 1025032, member: 17969"] What I find hilarious is the right wings attempt to isolate OBAMA as an apologist, for siding with the terrorists and slamming on the video that depicts the Prophet Mohammad in a negative light. They use terms like traitor, appeaser and weak leader. But wait?? Where has a president done this before??? What president condemned cartoons depicting the Prophet Mohammad in the past?? Oh wait, I know, but I am sure none of you KNOW. How about this statement from the BUSH administration. [Eugene Volokh,February 3, 2006 at 6:00pm] Trackbacks U.S. State Department on the Cartoons Depicting Mohammed: Reuters reports: [INDENT]Washington on Friday condemned caricatures in European newspapers of the Prophet Mohammad, siding with Muslims who are outraged that the publications put press freedom over respect for religion. . . . "These cartoons are indeed offensive to the belief of Muslims," State Department spokesman Kurtis Cooper said in answer to a question. "We all fully recognize and respect freedom of the press and expression but it must be coupled with press responsibility. Inciting religious or ethnic hatreds in this manner is not acceptable." "We call for tolerance and respect for all communities for their religious beliefs and practices," he added. . . . [/INDENT] A longer version also includes this quote: [INDENT]"Anti-Muslim images are as unacceptable as anti-Semitic images, as anti-Christian images or any other religious belief," State Department spokesman Sean McCormack told reporters. [/INDENT] A [I]Reason Online[/I] piece links to the shorter version, and condemns it as "a craven condemnation of an affair that is none of their business." I'm glad to say, though, that the State Department response was a good deal more assertively pro-free-speech than the Reuters account suggests. I couldn't find the Kurtis Cooper statement, but here's the relevant excerpt from the Sean McCormack press briefing: [INDENT]QUESTION: Yes? Can you say anything about a U.S. response or a U.S. reaction to this uproar in Europe over the Prophet Muhammad pictures? Do you have any reaction to it? Are you concerned that the violence is going to spread and make everything just -- MR. MCCORMACK: I haven't seen any — first of all, this is matter of fact. I haven't seen it. I have seen a lot of protests. I've seen a great deal of distress expressed by Muslims across the globe. The Muslims around the world have expressed the fact that they are outraged and that they take great offense at the images that were printed in the Danish newspaper, as well as in other newspapers around the world. Our response is to say that while we certainly don't agree with, support, or in some cases, we condemn the views that are aired in public that are published in media organizations around the world, we, at the same time, defend the right of those individuals to express their views. For us, freedom of expression is at the core of our democracy and it is something that we have shed blood and treasure around the world to defend and we will continue to do so. That said, there are other aspects to democracy, our democracy — democracies around the world — and that is to promote understanding, to promote respect for minority rights, to try to appreciate the differences that may exist among us. We believe, for example in our country, that people from different religious backgrounds, ethnic backgrounds, national backgrounds add to our strength as a country. And it is important to recognize and appreciate those differences. And it is also important to protect the rights of individuals and the media to express a point of view concerning various subjects. So while we share the offense that Muslims have taken at these images, we at the same time vigorously defend the right of individuals to express points of view. We may — like I said, we may not agree with those points of view, we may condemn those points of view but we respect and emphasize the importance that those individuals have the right to express those points of view. [/INDENT] If that isnt good enough, BUSH HIMSELF condemned ALL CARTOONS that depicted the Prophet Mohammad in any light. So, when you guys go on listening to RUSH, HANNITY and such, ask yourself, admid all the B.S. your listening too, why dont they mention the BUSH administrations positions? Was BUSH appeasing the terrorists?? Was BUSH siding with terrorists? Was BUSH slamming free speech?? Amazing. Peace TOS [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
Embassy Attacks
Top