Why isn't driver's ed and sex ed taught in Muslim high schools on the same day?...It's too hard on the CAMELS!!
Posted on 02/03/2006 1:31:35 PM PST by thierrya
US backs Muslims in cartoon dispute Fri Feb 3, 2006 3:28 PM ET
By Saul Hudson
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States backed Muslims on Friday against European newspapers that printed caricatures of the Prophet Mohammad in a move that could help America's battered image in the Islamic world.
Inserting itself into a dispute that has become a lightning rod for anti-European sentiment across the Muslim world, the United States sided with Muslims 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."
American Muslims welcomed the U.S. position, although it stopped short of urging American media not to republish the cartoons that include depicting Mohammad as a terrorist.
Cooper said he had no comment as to why the United States chose to pass judgment in a dispute that ostensibly does not involve America.
But the United States, which was founded by immigrants fleeing religious persecution, has previously spoken out against publications offensive to believers of other faiths.
"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.
The United States, which before the September 11 attacks was criticized for insensitivity to the Islamic culture, has become more attuned to Muslim sensibilities.
Accusations last year that U.S. officials desecrated the Koran sparked deadly riots in Asia and heightened that awareness.
DIFFERENT RESPONSE IN U.S. AND EUROPE
Major U.S. publications have not republished the cartoons.
In contrast, some European media responded to the criticism against the Danish newspaper that originally printed the caricatures by reproducing the images and fueled anger that has led to boycotts of Danish products and widespread protests.
The U.S. response contrasted with European governments, which have tended to acknowledge the tension between free speech and respect for religion but have generally accepted the newspapers' rights to print the cartoons.
Ibrahim Hooper, a spokesman for the Council on American Islamic Relations, told Reuters he welcomed the U.S. position.
The State Department reaction "was a strong statement in support of Muslims around the world. It's a reflection of the concern felt by millions of Muslims and I think it will be appreciated," he said.
"It is support for an understanding that with freedom comes responsibility."
But Stephen Zunes, a professor of politics at the University of San Francisco and a Bush administration critic, said the United States was responsible for creating far more anger in the Muslim world because of its invasion of Iraq.
"The United States is the last nation that should caution against unnecessarily inflaming sentiments in the Muslim world," he said.
The U.S. criticism of the newspapers also comes after the Pentagon complained over a Washington Post cartoon.
The Joint Chiefs of Staff sent an unusual letter to the editor published on Thursday, denouncing as "reprehensible" and "beyond tasteless" a cartoon earlier in the week portraying Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld as insensitive to U.S. troop casualties.
The cartoon portrayed a soldier who had lost his arms and legs with Rumsfeld at his hospital bedside saying, "I'm listing your condition as 'battle hardened.'"
(Additional reporting by Caroline Drees)
When are we going to wise up to the fact that these people either want to kill or convert us? -- amd it's not just that itty, bitty minority they talk about ad nauseam. All the ass-kissing in the world's not going to change that.
What did she say? Like it was ok since they're real sensitive type people??
Hey, go to Littlegreenfootballs.com and check out the pictures from "The Religion Of Peace" .... those friendly folks who brought you 9/11 and the Cole ....
How about the braindead leftwing a-holes just shut the F up and keep us out of it?
No one but a mentally incompetent pantload would be stupid enough to think that this gratuitous throat-bearing would positively affect our "battered image" in the land of the slamo-nazis. It is an anti-American act deliberately perpetrated by career "diplomats" who couldn't possibly care less who wins or loses in the WoT. And if Condi Rice signed off on this fecal smear, then that characterization includes her as well as all the aging psychopaths who have inhabited State for decades.
This is Secretary Rice's State Department saying this nonsense.
Don't blame Cooper. He's just a good little **** following orders from above. If, like me, you have a problem with what the State Department said, blame Rice. She's in charge there.
Her softness for Muslims is one reason I'd never vote for her, even if the alternative was a Hillary - McCain ticket.
Live in your little delusional "Islam is a religion of peace" bubble, but I take these people at their word when they say things like "This would never had happened if somebody had slit Rushdie's throat 20 years ago when he slandered Islam."
They are saying to us "Shut up or we will kill you." What don't you understand about that message?
Those spineless jellyfish are thumbing their noses at the Muslims and when they strike back HARD, guess who they will snap their fingers for? Like we are some fecking garcon that will come to save their worthless hides for another time.
Wake up, America! Your freedom of expression is at stake here.
"If, like me, you have a problem with what the State Department said, blame Rice. She's in charge there."
No, blame Bush. He's in charge. The buck stops with Bush.
Well the government of Dennmark did not do so either. Yet the "Moderate Muslims" of Indonesia have rioted and attacked their embassy. It was private businesses and individuals, exercising their freedom of the press and of speech, who engaged in the allegedly blasphemous potrayals of Mohemet/Mohammad. Of the rioters object to all potrayals, not just ones that show their "Prophet" in a negative light. People of other religions are not bound by the religious law of the Muslims. A law that is much more recent than Mohammad's time, and based on the worry about idolatry. I'm sure they need not worry about idolatry with regards to the Danish cartoonist.
Funny, but my copy of the First Amendment left out the part where the government gets to pick and choose.
GRRRRRR! Which proved to be totally unfounded and were probably a plant by the Democrats..
Our State Department sucks. They better learn which side they are on.
I'm thinking a lot of folks would support that. After all what great "Laws" did he give to the world? (That were not already part of the Jewish and/or Christian tradition and laws!).
I can't really disagree with what you wrote.
I'm thinking a lot of folks would support that. After all what great "Laws" did he give to the world? (That were not already part of the Jewish and/or Christian tradition and laws!).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.