Posted on 01/07/2015 9:51:01 AM PST by Colehill1999
WASHINGTON (CBSDC) — The White House criticized French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo in 2012 for publishing cartoons mocking the Prophet Muhammad.
Then White House Press Secretary Jay Carney questioned the magazine’s judgment after publishing images of Muhammad naked.
“We are aware that a French magazine published cartoons featuring a figure resembling the Prophet Muhammad, and obviously we have questions about the judgment of publishing something like this,” Carney told reporters in September 2012.
Carney stated that the images would be “deeply offensive to many and have the potential to be inflammatory.”
(Excerpt) Read more at washington.cbslocal.com ...
With sincerest apologies to all Methodists, myself included, who are not murderous terrorists
May all those poor people who were killed in this attack, Rest In Peace.
Pork be upon them.
My guess is he did not have any “questions about the judgment” of producing those.
Those were free speech donchaknow.
Have to be protected at all costs. ACLU will jump right in if you want to display "art" like that and anyone raises so much as a peep in protest.
It'll be interesting to see how the ACLU reacts to this one. Yes, I know the 'A' stands for "American." They'll probably wrap themselves in our flag if anyone asks them. Which won't happen.
But they have to be readying their contingency plans for when a Charlie Hebdo happens here.
My bet: they define mass murder as "a form of speech or political expression" and side with the shooters
oh so O wants to personally censor the French press, TOO?!? Anything goes if it is to protect the IslamoNazi murderers, no matter where they are in the world...
The enemy islamist in Chief.
“potential to be inflamatory”
But they don’t say that about sharpton and his hate speech about the cops.
They are filthy hypocrites.
We obviously we have questions about the judgment of...
everything this administration does.
They’d like it.
Judging by the comments, it isn't working.
RE: White House Questioned French Magazine’s ‘Judgment’ In 2012 For Publishing Naked Muhammad Cartoon,
_____________________________________
OK, anybody has the picture of that?
Not to the families of the victims. No sir. But to the mosque the terrorists belong to. Apolgizing for the hateful cartoons Charlie Hebdo published.
After all, he sent a sympathy card to muzzies when muzzies beheaded that sweet grandmother in Oklahoma City. Why wouldn't he side with the terrorists again?
Ask Joe Biden.
I suspect he keeps it under his matress for... Well, lets not be specific.
One must not question the motives of Muslim terrorists or the warnings of our Muslim king. “Allah Akubar”.....or whatever.
The objection to those anti-Christian paintings or “artworks” in New York was not that the artists had no right to do them, but that they were being exhibited in spaces or at exhibitions paid for with public funds.
““We are aware that a French magazine published cartoons featuring a figure resembling the Prophet Muhammad”
So the White House declared him “Prophet”.
Yes you're right, and thanks for reminding me.
However, the "free speech" argument was the one the other side made, and succeeded with, both in the court of public opinion and in actual court, as I recall.
““We are aware that a French magazine published cartoons featuring a figure resembling the Prophet Muhammad”
So the White House declared him “Prophet”.
Yes. This from the same political party that goes to the mattresses over a crucifix on public land. "Separation of Church and State!" they scream.
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.