[kajingawd]

politically correct pandering.

[satchmodog9]

my brain boiled out of my ears when I read the US governments opinion on this subject yesterday. You elect republicans to project strength and uphold your values. We wind up with liberal pc crapola.

[coconutt2000]

I don't read any opposition to Free Speech in the quotes.

What I heard was a call for common sense. Printing inflammatory cartoons that are offensive to a militant and terrorist religion is only asking for trouble. We, the U.S, are too busy fighting terrorists in the Middle East to come to Europe's rescue when they piss of their resident Muslims.

[Mercat]

I agree with the article but I don't like the term "Bushies."

[MamaTexan]

And, having chosen to issue an opinion, why did the administration take a position that is, frankly, shameful and wholly antithetical to the basic freedoms that Americans hold dear?

I never thought I'd say this about a member of the MSM, but.......

Bravo!

[dawn53]

I haven't seen the cartoons. Have they been printed in any newspapers/publications outside of Europe?

[chatham]

But everybody shuts up when the Muslims people of "Peace" hack off the head of a Journalist, or Blow up thousands of men women and children who are innocents.

Our "State Department " should have been cleaned out years ago.

Bush would better serve the American People by Doing SOMETHING ........ANYTHING to stop the invasion from Mexico.

[DTogo]

"These cartoons are indeed offensive to the belief of Muslims," said department spokesman Kurtis Cooper. "We all fully recognize and respect freedom of the press and expression, but it must be coupled with press responsibility."

In diplo-speak this could be read another way: Yes, we know you Muslims find the cartoons offensive, but you too should act responsibly with your own press.

[jec41]

I wonder what would be the effect if the same papers printed cartoons portraying the same image for Hindus, Buddhists, Christians, and Jesus.

[woofie]

FIRE!!!!!

There, I said it....

[Plutarch]

These cartoons are indeed offensive to the belief of Muslims," said department spokesman Kurtis Cooper. "We all fully recognize and respect freedom of the press and expression, but it must be coupled with press responsibility."

[zook]

Great. Now let's see the Post print the cartoons.

[SkyPilot]

I wonder if the State Dept's spokesman is the same twit who was involved in a question and answer session during the Gore/Bush 2000 Presidential Campaign.

_________________________________________________________________________

Kurtis Cooper, from Indiana, is a 24-year-old student at the School of Media and Public Affairs. He is not impressed with either candidate. He supported the candidacy of Republican John McCain and has not been won over by either of the major party candidates. He said Governor Bush would squander the budget surplus, but he disagrees with Vice President's Gore's foreign policy and finds him "morally reprehensible" for campaign fundraising irregularities. "Either way, I feel like it's a lose-lose situation," he said.

[kalee]

Has the NY Post published the cartoons?

[Beckwith]

The State Department can hardly be described as part of the Bush Administration.

[jordan8]

Will the New York Post run the pictures? Does the editorial board of the New York Post now say that Muslim immigration into the West was a historic, disastrous mistake and should be immediately cut off? I'll say it again, Muslim terrorism in the West is a by-product of the genocidal self-loathing of the Western elite spread by television. The Post supports the root cause of the terrorism but blanches at one of an ugly pogroms ugly offshoots. They support injecting Western civilization with AIDS but are disgusted at the sight of the little blue pimples they've helped cause.

[tiki]

How many times have we screamed bloody loud when Christianity was satired in a blasphemous way? Granted, we're not going to go on a Jihad but as much as we hate it, it is their religion and they obviously believe it.

[El Gato]

Interestingly, the NY Slimes article puts the same words in the mouth of a different person. That one as high as you can get and be a State department spokesman, IOW the official spokesman for the State Department who usually is the one who does the daily press briefings. Neither story, nor this give the context in which the statement was (supposedly) made. Rueters says it was made in response to a question, but still gives no context as to when and where, while the NYT story says it was part of a prepared statement.

Very curious.

[poinq]

The big question is what the State Department is saying. If they are saying that the newspapers should respect all religions and not ridicule them, then I am agreeing with the State Department. If they are saying that the demonstrators have the right to burn down embassies than I am not. I do believe that the demonstrators have the right to boycott EU products if they so chose.

If they are saying that the cartoons are in bad taste. They may be correct. If they are saying the newspapers didn't have the right to print them. Then they are wrong.

The middle east is a strange place where both sides are almost always wrong. They firmly believe in the two wrongs makes a right. We can mostly just watch it combust until they seem tired of it.

[bray]

Did the NYPost print the cartoons in "solidarity" of Free Speech or were they afraid?

Pray for W and Our Freedom Fighters