How Bush and Blair condemn the Danish cartoons.

[gopher]

"Interesting how so many right wingers perceive opposition to the publication of these offensive cartoons as "censorship". Yet, where were these right wing extremists to condemn the Bush regime's efforts to stop Cindy Sheehan from openly expressing herself? "


There is my initial post. All it mentions is the inconsistent position right wingers take towards censorship.

Now do you get it?

 

[jimmoyer]

I get it.

We do perceive muslim reaction as a coercive force
for censorship much more than we see in Sheehan's
treatment, for Sheehan ain't getting censored.

If Sheehan gets removed from the capitol grounds
it would be no different than those protesting
too closely to an abortion clinic, because although
they are not being censored, they are disrupting
the free right to activity of others.

Criticism of Sheehan or removing her from disrupting
activity of others is not the same as censorship.

Muslim violence is a very overt coercive means
towards silencing and censoring free expression.

They certainly have the right to respond with expression
but not violence. And they freely admitted they
were responding to those cartoons. The day before
those cartoons they weren't threatening to burn down
an embassy, and all the reasons other than the cartoons
were there for them to use before those cartoons appeared.

We're still going to fight on apples and oranges here.

Do you see that more clearly ?

And then we'll go to the next step on isolating
issues and requiring parity on expression both
agreeing on that matter alone so they can tackle
the next point.

 

[gopher]

'Sheehan ain't getting censored. '

So why was she arrested in Washington DC? Why the continued threats by pro-war right wingers? Why were the crosses that she planted alongside of American flags run over by a right winger? And why wasn't that driver who desecrated our flag not arrested as a flag burner would have been?

See? Double standards!

 

[jimmoyer]

Well those matters do not involve government
censorship. Her removal from capitol grounds was
not censorship but rather the disturbing of others' rights
to activity.

If you were to continually shout and interrupt
a city council you would be removed as well and you
can bellyache all you want that such removal
is censorship, but it won't be because the newspapers
will print it and you'll have what you wanted: Your
name in the papers and what you were shouting about.

Regarding muslim violence to a rightwinger running
over crosses or a campaign worker illegally desecrating
campaign signs is really a matter of degree and on that
you have somewhat of a leg to stand on.

Your hypocrisy is evident as well as you choose
to emphasize more the treatment of Sheehan
than you hold the same standard to a much more
vicious reaction to a cartoon, as well as those muslims
who print much the same vicious cartoons attacking
the jews or the western world.

Double standard ?

 

[gopher]

Why Mrs Sheehan? Because that was the point of my initial post. And she was not shouting but merely wearing a T-shirt.

Sometimes you Bushies are worse than the Inquisition.

 

[jimmoyer]

Sheehan was there for the interruption, and
for the cameras and for
the press and certainly did shout out AND no one could
be sure that anything else other than
interruption was intended, just as no
one can be sure what might erupt at too close proximity
of protesters to an abortion clinic.

She got her free expression. Heck, even YOU know about it.

That's hardly censorship.

She got what she wanted.

An incident.

Widely reported.

 

[gopher]

Mrs Sheehan was arrested for "unlawful conduct" because she wore an antiwar shirt. But the charges were dropped because there is nothing unlawful about doing that. Still, the fact that she was not allowed to appear in the Congress with that garment is a form of censorship.

 

[Colin]

RE: How Bush and Blair co

I say, leave the troll alone, ignore him and he will get bored and move on. I think that Bush and Blair's comment on the cartoons was politically the correct thing to do. In attempting to difuse the situation and for headway to be made the backs that are currently up must be tempered. On the other hand I also think that violence is no solution nor is it going to do anything but make the people of the world that much more inclined to ignore or fight them.

 

[Hank C]

Re: RE: How Bush and Blair condemn the Danish cartoons.

Mrs Sheehan was arrested for "unlawful conduct" because she wore an antiwar shirt. But the charges were dropped because there is nothing unlawful about doing that. Still, the fact that she was not allowed to appear in the Congress with that garment is a form of censorship.

In America Cindy Sheehan, Michael Moore and others can criticize the government freely. They can make movies and make news headlines even if they are lying. Problem is in Iraq under Saddam, N Korea, Iran, China, or even Venezuela you can't!

Sheehan not being able to enter Congress and act like an idiot pales in comparison, the censorship you are talking about should direct your attention to other parts of the world. Until you do your argument of comparing the US to all out fascism makes you look foolish.