UK Bans Cartoon Deemed "Insulting" to Bush

BBC News ^ | November, 27, 2002

[nwrep]

Satire ads banned for Bush 'insult'

Broadcasting watchdogs in the UK have banned adverts for the satirical cartoon 2DTV after ruling that they were insulting to US President George W Bush.

The commercials were to be broadcast to promote a Christmas video for the ITV1 show.

Uisdean Maclean, TV ad watchdog The Broadcast Advertising Clearance Centre (BACC) ruled that the ads were offensive because they questioned the president's intelligence, and without having asked his permission.

[nwrep]

Another blow to the freedom of speech in UK. Atleast these liberals seem to be uniformly cognizant of offensive speech aimed at liberals and conservatives alike, unlike their American counterparts.

[BlueAngel]

I sure am getting tired of people insulting our President.

President Bush is so far above any of them. God Bless him for all that he must go through on a daily basis.

[winner3000]

On this thanksgiving let's all include President Bush and our elected officials in our prayers. May God help them make the right decisions in these difficult times. Amen.

[per loin]

I hope to see Bush complain to the Brits about banning those ads.

[ICE-FLYER]

Here are the cartoons:

[ICE-FLYER]

Its pretty tame compared to how American Liberals have painted the best President since Reagan. They will not stop either as their incredible failure, lawbreaking Bill Clinton, will never match George W. even with grand rewriting of history as they are so often inclined to do.

[xm177e2]

The silly thing is, liberals are complaining about "the squashing of dissent" here in America, while Bush is pushing for more free speech than the Euro-peons.

I wonder if this English law could be applied to the song mocking Gerhard Schroeder? Is that the sort of thing the law bans?

[Peter Libra]

The curious thing about this kind of censorship is this. In George W Bush's case it seems to me that the more scurrilous, the more insulting, the more the ill thought rant- the better this gentleman looks.

In the Second World War, London took a bit of a pounding. I rememember the cry now ie:

London can take it

Yep, GWB can take it and what is more- he doesnt even have to fire back either. Witness the demise of lawyer and communications director Duclos. She should have taken Communications 101.

None of my business..... but a sweat breaks out when one thinks of a few votes in Florida.

[Capt. Tom]

Yep, GWB can take it and what is more- he doesnt even have to fire back either. Witness the demise of lawyer and communications director Duclos

She paid the price of free speech. - Tom

[Black Powder]

Even the prez himself would laugh at those.

[Jesse]

"I sure am getting tired of people insulting our president."


Yes, they should all be quartered and hanged. Disagreement with der Fuerher should be made a capital offense.

[bluefish]

The poster didn't say "I'm getting tired of people disagreeing with President Bush." It was "I'm getting tired of people insulting President Bush." There's a difference. Before opening your yap, you should nail your foot to the floor.

[Jesse]

I read it. Eat me./

[Peter Libra]

As a private person, yes by all means ,free speech. As a well paid functionary in communications and in high government,she is not quite free. I have to pay taxes for these high paid guardians of the old friendly border relationships.

Like I go over to Michigan every week, old chap. I do not say to ye olde customs officer- " hey you moron, I am spending money in the USA, let me through". Hey, I have more sense.

I act polite and get the ok and drive on. Sorry for the santimonious rant here though.

[Texasforever]

Disagreement with der Fuerher should be made a capital offense.

Breath into a paper bag, you are hyperventilating. BTW what is a “Fuerher”? I can’t find a reference in any language.

[bluefish]

Then why the nonsensical reply? No Thanks/

[Koblenz]

I like Bush of course, but this seems a bit ridiculous for the government to do. One question: was this show and ad on a government-owned TV channel? There's another reason not to have the government owning media: it clouds the whole censorship thing. Right now, people in the USA complain about the tastefulness of certain NEA-funded art. They object to having their tax dollars fund this crap. But while most people don't like privately-funded crap, few people call for censorship of it.

[weikel]

So your in favor of banning any criticism of Bush...?