Apparently the Washington Post thinks that injured troops are a joke.

[Mikkel]

You mean the hypocritical muslim terrorist who have absolutly no room to talk about religious respect?

Sure. The one sin people everywhere are guilty of is definitley 'pride'. When it comes down to it (in both cases), it's an editorial cartoon. People need to learn to turn the other cheek once in a while, and lighten up.

 

[jamesrage]

Sure. The one sin people everywhere are guilty of is definitley 'pride'. When it comes down to it (in both cases), it's an editorial cartoon. People need to learn to turn the other cheek once in a while, and lighten up.

I think it is hypocritical for muslims to bitch about desecrating religious symbols when they are just as guilty.

 

[scottyz]

How is the content of this cartoon any worse than the cartoons that have been published during war time since World War 1?

 

[Kandahar]

It cracks me up when some liberals say they support the troops.They are proably right in the contex that they support the troops as props in their anti-war campain.

And the family of that dead soldier that was invited to the State of the Union Address...they were what?

 

[Donkey1499]

Really, the Washington Post just proved that it is the Al-Jazeera of American newspapers.

 

[Donkey1499]

How is the content of this cartoon any worse than the cartoons that have been published during war time since World War 1?

If you mean the American cartoons that busted on Nazis, then those were in taste because they were about the enemy. Also, the Nazis made jokes about Jews, but those were tasteless because they picked on an entire race/religion. Not a ligitimate common enemy.

 

[Deegan]

And the family of that dead soldier that was invited to the State of the Union Address...they were what?

They were the parents of a great soldier, one who every American can be proud of, I don't understand how this is relevant to the discussion?

 

[Mikkel]

If you mean the American cartoons that busted on Nazis, then those were in taste because they were about the enemy. Also, the Nazis made jokes about Jews, but those were tasteless because they picked on an entire race/religion. Not a ligitimate common enemy.

Well, you know the Nazis were a little more than 'tasteless'. Give them some credit where credit's due.

 

[Donkey1499]

Well, you know the Nazis were a little more than 'tasteless'. Give them some credit where credit's due.

I could say other things about Nazis, but that kind of language is saved for the basement.

 

[Kandahar]

They were the parents of a great soldier, one who every American can be proud of, I don't understand how this is relevant to the discussion?

The president clearly used the dead soldier and his family as political props for his agenda, which is supposedly why some people here have gotten so offended by this cartoon. It would be more accurate to say that they're offended by the use of soldiers as political props, but only when they disagree with the message or the policy.

 

[Deegan]

The president clearly used the dead soldier and his family as political props for his agenda, which is supposedly why some people here have gotten so offended by this cartoon. It would be more accurate to say that they're offended by the use of soldiers as political props, but only when they disagree with the message or the policy.

Oh, I see, only Republicans want to thank the soldier and his family for their sacrifices, I get it now. I really just never thought I would hear you admit that to us!:shock:

 

[jamesrage]

And the family of that dead soldier that was invited to the State of the Union Address...they were what?

Not a characture used as a prop in anti-war propaganda.

 

[scottyz]

If you mean the American cartoons that busted on Nazis, then those were in taste because they were about the enemy. Also, the Nazis made jokes about Jews, but those were tasteless because they picked on an entire race/religion. Not a ligitimate common enemy.

Not those ones. I mean the ones that busted on the U.S. and its war time leaders and the others that were possibly sympathetic towards the nazis. The Bush Republicans are always talking about freedom of speech/expression/press making us different from the islamofascists and then they bust a nut when anyone uses their freedoms to express views they disagree with.

 

[Donkey1499]

jamesrage and Deegan hit that shiz right on the nail. 20 kudos each!

 

[Donkey1499]

Not those ones. I mean the ones that busted on the U.S. and its war time leaders and the others that were possibly sympathetic towards the nazis. The Bush Republicans are always talking about freedom of speech/expression/press making us different from the islamofascists and then they bust a nut when anyone uses their freedoms to express views they disagree with.

Did they or anyone else say "shut up and stop printing that stuff!"? No, we're just expressing our feelings that it is wrong. I say let them print all the anti-military and anti-Iraqi Freedom stuff all they want. It just lets Americans know that the Washington Post is the Al-Jazeera of American papers. Let Americans know how the left really thinks about the troops.

 

[Scarecrow Akhbar]

I guess I should be glad that the right wingers on this forum aren't acting quite as violently as many in the muslim world to another political cartoon.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11097877/

MSNBC doesn't have the guts to post the image, which I think is this one:

What's the big deal with that? Name a person with a real mind that doesn't think terrorist when the word "muslim" pops up.

The unshaven unhappy person is supposedly Mohammed...the famous one, not the half-billion others.

 

[Donkey1499]

MSNBC doesn't have the guts to post the image, which I think is this one:

What's the big deal with that? Name a person with a real mind that doesn't think terrorist when the word "muslim" pops up.

Actually even I am offended by that. And I'm not surprised that Muslims are offended by either. That is actually a pic of the Prophet Muhammed, and he has a bomb for a turban. That suggests that Muhammed and Islam is a terroist religion, and it's not. It's tasteless humor is all. If you want to attack Bin Laden or any other Arab, fine, But don't bring in a religous icon like Muhammed.

 

[Kandahar]

Not a characture used as a prop in anti-war propaganda.

So you don't really have any problem with an injured/dead soldier being used for political purposes, as long as you agree with the political purpose.

 

[Scarecrow Akhbar]

Should South Park be censored for this bit of fun?

No, but I don't blame Christians for getting excited about it.

Then again, South Park set the record for the number of times "sh it" was said on a single airing...

People choose to watch South Park.

People choose to read the Washington Post. I'm not one of them. That disgusting cartoon they used IS a reflection of their editorial boards opinion and mindset, or it would not have been published on their pages. The Washinton Post is simply a flagship of the Surrender Monkey flotilla.

Towelheads demanding violence against a newpaper for publishing the dumb muslim picture are out of line, and why that particular cartoon got published in the first place.

 

[Gibberish]

Actually even I am offended by that. And I'm not surprised that Muslims are offended by either. That is actually a pic of the Prophet Muhammed, and he has a bomb for a turban. That suggests that Muhammed and Islam is a terroist religion, and it's not. It's tasteless humor is all. If you want to attack Bin Laden or any other Arab, fine, But don't bring in a religous icon like Muhammed.

Exactly. It would be like having a comic of Jesus in a KKK outfit hanging a black man. All because majority of KKK members are christians.

 

[Donkey1499]

So you don't really have any problem with an injured/dead soldier being used for political purposes, as long as you agree with the political purpose.

This whole post is about politics. I don't know about the rest of em' but I think it was offensive to use a crippled soldier for an anti-war cartoon. It was the image of the soldier and what was being said to him that was offensive. If the cartoonist just had Rummy sitting at his desk talking to a doc on the phone that troops should be listed as battle-hardened; then that would be ok, cuz then that would be just about a public figure, and public figures are fair game.
But let them print stuff like that, cuz when pro-troop readers get pissed off, they'll unsubscribe and the WP will have no one to blame but themselves.

 

[Kandahar]

This whole post is about politics. I don't know about the rest of em' but I think it was offensive to use a crippled soldier for an anti-war cartoon.

Yet if a crippled soldier was somehow used in a pro-war cartoon, you would be praising the cartoonist for recognizing the selfless sacrifice of our soldiers. You're only offended because you didn't agree with the anti-war message, not because of the crippled soldier.

It was the image of the soldier and what was being said to him that was offensive. If the cartoonist just had Rummy sitting at his desk talking to a doc on the phone that troops should be listed as battle-hardened; then that would be ok, cuz then that would be just about a public figure, and public figures are fair game.

Of course, then the joke wouldn't make any ******* sense.

But let them print stuff like that, cuz when pro-troop readers get pissed off, they'll unsubscribe and the WP will have no one to blame but themselves.

Agreed; if you don't like what they print, don't read it.

 

[Donkey1499]

Exactly. It would be like having a comic of Jesus in a KKK outfit hanging a black man. All because majority of KKK members are christians.

Right. Private Citizens, soldiers, and religious icons shouldn't be in political cartoons. Now some jokes would be ok, like if Jesus went to Africa and started shooting fish out of his sleeve to feed the hungry, just the image of fish flying out of someone's sleeve is funny. Why? I don't know, sometimes my brain is a stranger to me, much like the back of my hand, who I don't know very well.

 

[Kandahar]

Right. Private Citizens, soldiers, and religious icons shouldn't be in political cartoons.

You have GOT to be kidding me.

 

[Donkey1499]

Yet if a crippled soldier was somehow used in a pro-war cartoon, you would be praising the cartoonist for recognizing the selfless sacrifice of our soldiers. You're only offended because you didn't agree with the anti-war message, not because of the crippled soldier.



Of course, then the joke wouldn't make any ******* sense.



Agreed; if you don't like what they print, don't read it.

Fair enough. I don't read the WP anyways. And I admit that the soldier used in a pro-war comic would be fine, as long as it wasn't too political.