See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Trackbacks

1. The Political Pit Bull
2. The Volokh Conspiracy
3. Iowa Voice
4. The Pretend Pundit
5. The Pretend Pundit
6. Gibbie's Bioscience World
7. Capital Region People
8. Cagey Mind
9. Captain's Quarters
10. Outside The Beltway | OTB
11. The Jawa Report
12. Wall Street Cafe aka La Ventanita
13. The Discomfort of Thought
14. Super Fun Power Hour
15. small dead animals
16. The Cranky Insomniac
17. Tammy Bruce
18. Dead-Frog.com - A Comedy Blog
19. Dead-Frog.com - A Comedy Blog
20. Dead-Frog.com - A Comedy Blog
21. Gone Hollywood
22. Op For
23. Freedom Watch
24. The Coalition of the Swilling
25. Publius Rendezvous
26. Not Exactly Rocket Science
27. The Amboy Times
28. JunkYardBlog
29. The Volokh Conspiracy
30. California Conservative
31. lead and gold
32. protein wisdom
33. Bittersweet
34. Bryan's Basement
35. Flopping Aces
36. Ed Driscoll.com
37. Pajamas Media
38. Point Five
39. SAMMENHOLD
40. whereIstand.com/centaur
41. FullosseousFlap's Dental Blog
42. adistantsoil.com
43. Freedom for Some
44. podpolia
45. AListReview
46. MY Vast Right Wing Conspiracy
47. Riding Sun
48. Cynical Nation
49. Verum Serum
50. Rhymes With Right
51. The Angry Federalist
52. blog.matthewstinson.net
53. Blue Star Chronicles
54. SAMMENHOLD
55. SAMMENHOLD
56. Stuck On Stupid
57. Just Some Poor Schmuck
58. Political Satire Fake News - The Nose On Your Face
59. Dean's World
60. Physics Geek
61. Musing Minds
62. Musing Minds
63. ShrinkWrapped
64. The Nordish Portal
65. Cake or Death
66. The Waterglass
67. Classical Values
68. House Of MIke
69. The Pretend Pundit
70. ilplazolam
71. 2-way-radios 3757
72. Blog furniture 1164071653
73. 7958-counseling credit
74. quit smoking
75. mr right
76. mr right
77. mr right
78. mr right
79. Compare prices phentermin.

Trackback URL

Comments

1. #1
   On April 13th, 2006 at 12:04 pm, Czarmangis said:

   I predeict that very soon pictures of the Moon God will be as common as the old ‘KilRoy was Here’ graffiti in the 60’s.
   FRIST/RICE 2008

2. #2
   On April 13th, 2006 at 12:06 pm, Gabriel Malor said:

   I watched it and I agree that some parts were funny and others were not.

   Parker and Stone are (obviously) well-known for their prank-like episodes, so I would hold off on blaming Comedy Central. I certainly would like to know more.

3. #3
   On April 13th, 2006 at 12:07 pm, Number 2 said:

   I was disappointed but not surprised. Matt and Trey obviously wanted to speak out, but Viacom was too scared to let them. Maybe the South Park team will release it as a Net only uncensored release.

4. #4
   On April 13th, 2006 at 12:08 pm, Dan Collins said:

   Anybody know where I can buy a Mohammed puzzle?

5. #5
   On April 13th, 2006 at 12:09 pm, Jason said:

   I thought it very telling that at the end of the program (during the Zawahiri cartoon) they had an image of Jesus defecating on the President.

   If Comedy Central did indeed cave in, that image is a stern indictment of CC’s decision to not show an image of Mohammed.

6. #6
   On April 13th, 2006 at 12:10 pm, Joe said:

   This show just gets better and better. Last night’s was superb. Parts I and II are being repeated tonight. It is the best written show on TV, always thought provoking and tweaking the left, no matter what you think of the vulgarity and some of the disgusting things they do.
   IMO, Comedy Central punked out and censored the image.

7. #7
   On April 13th, 2006 at 12:11 pm, Randy said:

   I watched it and thought it was pretty funny. The references to other cartoons was different and interesting… I wonder how comlicit those shows were in this?

   As for the whole Mohammed thing… I don’t know if anyone knows whether or not Comedy Central actually banned them, but my guess is yes. Did anyone see the Scientology episode that made a hypocrite out of Isaac Hayes? Well they put text on the screen when the religion was being explained that said something to the effect of “this is what they really believe”, and it was. My guess is that the white text on the black screen saying that Comedy Central refused to show the image of Mohammed was also true.

   Anyone else have a guess about this?

8. #8
   On April 13th, 2006 at 12:12 pm, Metro said:

   I’m not surprised.

9. #9
   On April 13th, 2006 at 12:14 pm, whitey said:

   I love these guys. I don’t always agree with the material, but this one was dead on. The best part of the episode was when ‘Mr/Mrs. Garrison’ said it was wrong for people to show images of Mohammed and Kyle said ‘No. It’s wrong for MUSLIMS…’. Way to go Matt & Trey! Free speech is free speech. Every time one of these groups demands we censor something because they’re offended, I can’t help but think we should continue to offend them again just on principle.

10. #10
    On April 13th, 2006 at 12:15 pm, Ian said:

    I missed one of the very few shows I look forward to on television. The thing about South Park is, even though its run by liberals, they make fun of both sides.

11. #11
    On April 13th, 2006 at 12:16 pm, Randy said:

    Dan Collins asked:
    “Anybody know where I can buy a Mohammed puzzle?”

    I only know of these because I’ve considered getting them as gifts, but you can have puzzles made with a photo one them from specialty people on eBay (I’ve had mugs and shirts done by various sellers before, and been happy with the results)

    You can get some Mohammed images put on it (assuming the seller isn’t a Muslim)

    [ed note: URL removed for formatting reasons.]

12. #12
    On April 13th, 2006 at 12:16 pm, albo said:

    I think it was part of the joke. They got everyone riled up then pulled the rug out.

    The episode actually seemed to be more about them, the Simpsons and Family Guy and the various fanboy complaints about each–South Park being too preachy, Family Guy’s unique comedy style, etc. rather than about Mohammed.

13. #13
    On April 13th, 2006 at 12:18 pm, Nugai said:

    I suspect that the “Comedy Central has refused to broadcast. . .” was more to poke at CC. After all, CC caved on the Scientology issue already, and Matt & Trey wanted to remind people of the fact.

    As others have stated elsewhere, the important message is that either everything is fair game, or nothing is.

    I’m waiting for some imam to complain about South Park showing OBL and using that to spark another round of riots and killing.

14. #14
    On April 13th, 2006 at 12:19 pm, Dan Collins said:

    Thanks, Randy. For anyone interested here’s a gallery of depictions of Mohammed through the ages:

    http://www.zombietime.com/mohammed_image_archive/

15. #15
    On April 13th, 2006 at 12:20 pm, Dain said:

    Viacom also owns MTV, I think it’s safe to assume they wouldn’t air it for “sensitivity” issues. After all MTV refused to show the images.

16. #16
    On April 13th, 2006 at 12:20 pm, Allah said:

    Just posted at Media Blog: Comedy Central did indeed censor the episode.

17. #17
    On April 13th, 2006 at 12:23 pm, Thief said:

    1. I thought the parody of the spoiled brats of the White House Press Corps was dead on:

    “MRPRESIDENTMRPRESIDENT!!!!”
    “Yes, you…”
    “And what exactly is this ‘1st Amendment?’”
    “You know… the right to free speech…”
    “AAAAAAGH!!!!! MRPRESIDENTMRPRESIDENT!!!!”

    2. “If you don’t show Mohammed, then you’ve made a distinction between what is OK to make fun of and what isn’t. Either it’s all OK or none of it is. Do the right thing.” When a couple of cartoonists defend free speech more than any politician, academic, artist, business executive, or journalist, then this country has a serious problem.

    3. This goes the same for Comedy Central. Steve Spruiell just contacted CC’s spokesman, and yes, they were the ones who refused to show Muhammad. (Link: http://media.nationalreview.com/094921.asp)

18. #18
    On April 13th, 2006 at 12:23 pm, Hollywood_Freaks said:

    I believe that Comedy Central did not censor the image and this was the work of Matt and Trey.

    If they were to censor it, they wouldn’t go about doing it like that. They would cut to commercial or just take the scene out and move on to the next one.

19. #19
    On April 13th, 2006 at 12:25 pm, Bill Lalor said:

    Michelle I know you’re not a huge fan of SP, so thanks for posting. I didn’t see last night’s episode but saw the first — glorious free speech. I hope everyone saw the Katrina/”Day After Tomorrow” episode, too. Not quite as thorny an issue, but similar genius. No show is better at debuking tired cliches and piercing the euphemistic MSM flab.

20. #20
    On April 13th, 2006 at 12:26 pm, Courtney said:

    I also thought the part where President Bush had to explain the First Amendment to the White House Press Corp was interesting.

21. #21
    On April 13th, 2006 at 12:26 pm, Emily said:

    I sent Comedy Central a note on their website this morning suggesting that they grow a pair. First they cave to the Catholic League, then the Scientologist cult, now this?

    Did they not understand when they recently ordered two more seasons of South Park that Trey Parker and Matt Stone will tweak ANYONE and ANYTHING? They’re satirists. For heaven’s sake, they portrayed God as a short, fat, ugly alien-looking creature.

    However, I do want to encourage some self-examination here. Were you as offended when Comedy Central banished the episode showing the Virgin Mary bleeding out of her rectum? Not only will that episode never be repeated on television, it won’t even come out on DVD.

    Again, the point is that free speech is an all or none proposition. Either everything’s open to satire or none of it is. You’re allowed to be sickened, offended and scream just as loudly.

22. #22
    On April 13th, 2006 at 12:27 pm, Steve said:

    My (ironically) favorite bit was the guy standing up at the town meeting and reminding everyone that freedom of speech is a precious gift and an inherent human right that must be protected at all cost, while the rest of the town ignores him and feels it is safer to just put their heads in the sand to show Muslims how tolerant they are. I watched the episodes back to back and I’m not sure what one it was in.

23. #23
    On April 13th, 2006 at 12:29 pm, Catholic Dan Collins said:

    Emily–
    That’s just plain silly. Everybody knows the BVM didn’t have a rectum.

24. #24
    On April 13th, 2006 at 12:30 pm, Hollywood_Freaks said:

    Wow, I stand corrected. This is really quite sad.

25. #25
    On April 13th, 2006 at 12:30 pm, Bob Diethrich said:

    Of course I have half a mind that this whole thing is just one big publicity stunt now. Think about it, as Michelle says the whole internet/blogosphere is buzzing about it. I bet they are trying to get the controversery stirred up and then they will “cave in” to demands for a repeat with the image shown, and the ratings will be huge!

26. #26
    On April 13th, 2006 at 12:33 pm, Aaron said:

    My thoughts:
    How many protest do you except to see in the streets today with South Park showing Jesus “crapping” on people and being “crapped” on? Will you see any calling for the deaths of Matt Stone and Trey Parker?

    Again, difference #3,456 between fundamentalist Christians and fundamentalist Muslims. I don’t really care if you make fun of Jesus - I still know He’s God. Apparently Muslims aren’t that confident.

27. #27
    On April 13th, 2006 at 12:34 pm, Jim said:

    South Park’s cartoon citizens may indeed have had their heads buried in the sand.

    But Comedy Central has it’s head rammed firmly up it’s ass.

    Free the Mohammed Twelve! (cartoons, that is!)

    Jim
    Sloop New Dawn
    Galveston, TX

28. #28
    On April 13th, 2006 at 12:34 pm, Anon E Mousse said:

    My guess is that CC wussed out. SP has already shown mohammed before so why not show it know. I’m sure Matt and Trey used this in their argument to show mohammed again. They must have agreed that if they were going to be censored, CC had to place the black text frames in place. If they censored themselves, the context in which the episode ended, the jesus defication scene, would make no sense and no real statement. After all, in last nights epsiode they explain how SP episodes are preachy and full of messages and family guy episodes are comprised of out of context jokes that make no sense to the actual plot. If Matt and Trey censored themselves they would be stooping to Family Guy’s level.

29. #29
    On April 13th, 2006 at 12:35 pm, California Conservative said:

    I’d argue that South Park’s controversial episode was about two things. First, generating greater awareness of the issue and it’s cultural implications. Perhaps moreso than the media’s past coverage of the story, they’ve successfully promoted the notion that bowing to Muslim fanatics over cartoons (or any free speech) is ridiculous and a slippery slope which democracies must not tolerate.

    Secondly, it’s about ratings.

    Mission accomplished on both.

30. #30
    On April 13th, 2006 at 12:36 pm, Retread said:

    I spent last night and this morning thinking the censored screen was part of the story line, so I’m surprised to find out that CC did in fact censor the image. I’d like to hear their reasoning, given that they allowed Jesus to poop on the president. If it was nothing more than Muslims have a tradition of not depicting Mohammed, that’s pretty weak, IMO, since I don’t think either of the creators are Muslim.

    OTOH, if you recorded the show, look at the credits: Mohammed shows up for a few seconds from the Super Best Friends episode.

31. #31
    On April 13th, 2006 at 12:36 pm, Cicero said:

    I would like to point out that there is a big difference between refusing to air something because a bunch of terrorists are threatening violence if you do, and refusing to air something because someone has politely told you that they find it offensive and asked you not to.

    I have seen the Muhamond cartoons, and I must say that if I were a Muslim I would find the mildly offense. Of course, considering the abuse they’ve heaped upon Jews and Christians this offense seems rather hypocritical.

    Personally I suspect that this violence is not really about the Muhamond cartoons, but is rather a bit of Phyc-Warfare in order to try and convince us that we are some how at fault and so therefore our response to the violence will be half hearted and insufficent. These are terrorist for goodness sake, thay are going to kill people anyway.

    It’s this liberal feel-good phyc mumbo-gumbo that elevates harmony and “tolerance” above truth and righteousness. I see bullies use this same tactic in the principal’s office all the time. They rough some kid up, and then when they are hauled into the principal’s office they whip up so fake tears and a story of some childish outrage and the teachers/principal then take the line that “both of you were partially at fault. Lets all make up,” and seend you back to class. On the way back (unless the principal is smart enough to send an escort) the bully beats the other kid up again.

    The same kind of thought is being applied here and it is incredibily stupid. Why are we basing our definition of fairness from the world view of seven year old bullies?

32. #32
    On April 13th, 2006 at 12:41 pm, Mike said:

    I thought that was the ironic part about it. Fox shows the Family Guy episode uncensored while Comedy Central does censor it. It was just a stunt. Like the episode that was too be shown on (a couple years ago) April 1st, when we all find out who Cartman’s Dad is - IT WON’T BE SEEN TONIGHT, INSTEAD YOU’LL SEE (whatever).

33. #33
    On April 13th, 2006 at 12:41 pm, ewilderm said:

    I didn’t get a chance to see the first part, but I saw last night’s episode. It’s disappointing that Comedy Central censored Mohammed, but it’s not surprising since they caved into Tom Cruise for not showing a rerun of an episode ripping on Scientology. Overall, a crude but great point was brought up about the entire issue.

    Don’t forget about the scene with the reporters and the First Amendment. Michelle, it would be great if you post some of the transcript of that scene.

    I’ve been watching South Park since its inception and they have yet to disappoint. For those of you who haven’t seen previous seasons, I suggest renting or buying some the DVD’s and look for the messages woven into many plotlines from the Underpants Gnomes episode to the Getting Gay with Kids in the Rainforest episode. You won’t be disappointed.

34. #34
    On April 13th, 2006 at 12:43 pm, Eric said:

    Right on Jim in Galveston!

    The question is, will the uncensored version of this episode appear on a future DVD? I think not.

    It seems the Islamic/Lunatic gestapo has found methods of limiting critical thought and free speech.

    The same tactic has been used for years to stifle others opinions. It used to be attacks of being “racist”, then “homophobic”, now being “insensitive to Muslims”.

    So how about this? How ’bout we photoshop Michelle Malkin’s picture to portray her and Muhammed doing a “High-Five”? Would that be offensive? Let’s test our limits here..

35. #35
    On April 13th, 2006 at 12:43 pm, Jeff in NC said:

    I saw it. I loved it (except for Bush getting crapped on by Jesus…)
    Anyone else notice the stark absense of Christians rioting in the streets and hitting themselves with chains?

36. #36
    On April 13th, 2006 at 12:43 pm, Greg M said:

    Lets see if I have this right… Jesus, God incarnate to 2,000,000,000 Christians can be depicted in a totally degrading manner with no fear of reprisal, but Mohammed, a simple (but important) prophet to 1,500,000,000 Muslims can’t even be shown for fear of violence or even death?

37. #37
    On April 13th, 2006 at 12:44 pm, Chris J. said:

    I’m sure the censored Mohammad images were scripted into the show. The entire episode builds up to the climatic scene where the Fox network executive is forced to decide whether or not to air the images. After all the drama, he decides to do the right thing and stand up for free speech, even under the threat of violence.

    Of course the ultimate punch line of the whole thing is that once everyone on the show has learned a lesson about the importance of freedom of speech, Comedy Central still goes ahead and censors the scene for us anyways!

38. #38
    On April 13th, 2006 at 12:45 pm, Xrlq said:

    I’ve TiVo’ed the episode but not yet viewed it. However, I’m convinced it was a gag, a simultaneous swipe at the western media for chickening out on the Danish cartoons, and against CC for doing the same with the Trapped in the Closet episode. Based on last week’s teasers, I wasn’t expecting Part 2 episode to exist at all.

39. #39
    On April 13th, 2006 at 12:47 pm, Anon E Mousse said:

    I agree the Presidential Press conference should win these guys an emmy. I loved how between questions the reporters would be bouncing allover the room and just blurting out incomprehensible “Mr. President” over each other. Teh best question was when they asked the President “How long had the First Amendment been presidential policy?”

40. #40
    On April 13th, 2006 at 12:48 pm, Brett said:

    “…when we all find out who Cartman’s Dad is - IT WON’T BE SEEN TONIGHT, INSTEAD YOU’LL SEE (whatever).”

    Hey, that “(whatever)” just happens to be the best South Park episode ever made. It was the HBC movie-of-the-week “Terrence and Phillip: Not Without My Anus… based on a true story”

    “What are you doing?”
    “We’re looking for treasure!”
    “Is that some sort of metaphor for a search that cannot be defined?”
    “Nooo… we’re looking for tresure…”

41. #41
    On April 13th, 2006 at 12:52 pm, Dave R said:

    Thanks for the Comedy Central feedback link. I just thanked them for doing their part in the collapse of Western society and asked if we could get the Chappelle Show back on the air if we threaten violence against the network.

42. #42
    On April 13th, 2006 at 12:53 pm, Sister Toldjah said:

    I watched it, Michelle, and had also wondered whether the censoring of the image of Mohammed there at the end was supposed to be a joke or if it was an official Comedy Central policy. Am disappointed to read today that they didn’t censor it to be humorous

43. #43
    On April 13th, 2006 at 12:54 pm, Wurly said:

    A reporter should contact Jon Stewart and ask if the Daily Show supports South Park or Comedy Central.

44. #44
    On April 13th, 2006 at 12:58 pm, christopher said:

    Ah, Hollywood…the last bastion of free speech, nobly defending the ramparts of Western Civilization. Hark! Is that not George Clooney leading the valiant charge against the quislings of Viacom and their Islamic overlords? What a brave soul he is…

45. #45
    On April 13th, 2006 at 1:02 pm, Adam said:

    It’s ridiculous and shows a double standard catering to their own interests that Comedy Central was unwilling to show the muhammed image. Of course, it’s ridiculous and shows a double standard catering to her own interests that Malkin would not defend South Park when the Catholic protested over an episode (that’s actually what this episode is about. They’re protesting Comedy Central’s caving on their Catholic and Scientology episodes).
    http://www.boingboing.net/2005/12/30/bloody_mary_war_on_x.html
    You’re either for freedom of speech or you’re not.

46. #46
    On April 13th, 2006 at 1:05 pm, Forrest said:

    I emailed CC immediately after the episode with my complaint, and then to my cable carrier asking them to remove CC from its lineup - of course that wont happen but one can dream.

47. #47
    On April 13th, 2006 at 1:07 pm, Kevin C. said:

    My feelings on the whole issue can be summed up in two words: Comedhimmi Central.

48. #48
    On April 13th, 2006 at 1:08 pm, TexasRainmaker said:

    Frankly, I think too much credit is being given to the network. It’s clear this was a ratings stunt. Clearly people were watching to see if they’d do it. If they hadn’t censored the images, most people would’ve moved on (with the exception of a few psycho islamonutjobs). But by censoring, they continue the controversy and, in effect, generate MORE interest.

49. #49
    On April 13th, 2006 at 1:08 pm, William Doiron said:

    I can understand WHY CC didn’t air the picture-they have their employees’ safety to think about. That doesn’t make it right, of course. Kudos to Matt and Trey for having the guts to try this. Incidentally, it looks like they revived the show in the process.

50. #50
    On April 13th, 2006 at 1:10 pm, Bucktowndusty said:

    Michelle, This issue, like illegal immigration, boils down to one simple reality. White men (older men in public positions of power) lack testosterone and courage, plain and simple. As Paula Cole’s song asks, “Where have all the cowboys gone?”

51. #51
    On April 13th, 2006 at 1:16 pm, CWB said:

    Theres lots of comment posts, so other folks may have noted this already, but what I found to be instructive and (if deliberate) a brilliant setting-up of Comedy Dentral to have to defend an indefensible double-standard:

    After the mohammed image was censored, the boys ran a segment showing Jesus crapping on an American flag. repeatedly.

    some folks took that as an insult by SP against JC and the flag. I saw it differently and i hope i am right. The purpose of THAT segment was to underscore the moral idiocy of Comedy Central, who have no trouble allowing on-air depictions of Jesus crapping on the american flag. But any depiction of Mohammed is unacceptable.

    thots?

52. #52
    On April 13th, 2006 at 1:16 pm, CWB said:

    Theres lots of comment posts, so other folks may have noted this already, but what I found to be instructive and (if deliberate) a brilliant setting-up of Comedy Dentral to have to defend an indefensible double-standard:

    After the mohammed image was censored, the boys ran a segment showing Jesus crapping on an American flag. repeatedly.

    some folks took that as an insult by SP against JC and the flag. I saw it differently and i hope i am right. The purpose of THAT segment was to underscore the moral idiocy of Comedy Central, who have no trouble allowing on-air depictions of Jesus crapping on the american flag. But any depiction of Mohammed is unacceptable.

    thots?

53. #53
    On April 13th, 2006 at 1:18 pm, dean_acheson said:

    I am not so sure that Southparks are ‘run’ by liberals. I love the show, and the politics to me seem more libertarian than anything else…

54. #54
    On April 13th, 2006 at 1:18 pm, Jeff B. said:

    I’m reminded of the original South Park short where Santa Claus fights Jesus. Puts the ridiculousness of Islamic censorship into perspective.

55. #55
    On April 13th, 2006 at 1:19 pm, Billy Freer said:

    Comedy Central must pay for its evil self-censorship.

56. #56
    On April 13th, 2006 at 1:22 pm, Cat H. said:

    YOu can see the orignial Super Friends epsiode here:

    http://youtube.com/watch?v=xVrWtamt6fA

57. #57
    On April 13th, 2006 at 1:22 pm, Mark said:

    There’s a difference between the RIGHT to say something that other people might be offended by, versus the OBLIGATION to say it.

    We’re not obliged to keep rubbing the cartoons in the nose of the world to defend our right of free speech, and given that the U.S. generals in Iraq have repeatedly said we are fighting a war for the hearts and minds of Muslims, I think a good case could be made for the fact that continuing to publish the cartoons is not only unnecessary, it is stupid and contrary to our goals.

    But hey, Michelle, you’re free to be the obnoxious gal at the table, offending people just to assert your right to offend them.

58. #58
    On April 13th, 2006 at 1:23 pm, Mark said:

    There’s a difference between the RIGHT to say something that other people might be offended by, versus the OBLIGATION to say it.

    We’re not obliged to keep rubbing the cartoons in the nose of the world to defend our right of free speech, and given that the U.S. generals in Iraq have repeatedly said we are fighting a war for the hearts and minds of Muslims, I think a good case could be made for the fact that continuing to publish the cartoons is not only unnecessary, it is stupid and contrary to our goals.

    But hey, Michelle, you’re free to be the obnoxious gal at the table, offending people just to assert your right to offend them.

59. #59
    On April 13th, 2006 at 1:23 pm, Mark said:

    There’s a difference between the RIGHT to say something that other people might be offended by, versus the OBLIGATION to say it.

    We’re not obliged to keep rubbing the cartoons in the nose of the world to defend our right of free speech, and given that the U.S. generals in Iraq have repeatedly said we are fighting a war for the hearts and minds of Muslims, I think a good case could be made for the fact that continuing to publish the cartoons is not only unnecessary, it is stupid and contrary to our goals.

    But hey, Michelle, you’re free to be the obnoxious gal at the table, offending people just to assert your right to offend them.

60. #60
    On April 13th, 2006 at 1:28 pm, OA said:

    Matt and Trey are not conservatives. Neither are they liberals. Though I do feel some of their derision is uncalled for and tactless (even for South Park) it’s always evocative and speaks to some issue. This uproar is representative because it’s not some “right wing conspiracy” or some “loony left” ploy but a narrative by two fairly regular American guys. It’s so hypocritical on the part of CC and there isn’t a banal political line they can harp on to avail them.

61. #61
    On April 13th, 2006 at 1:29 pm, john g said:

    Everybody was discussing it on http://www.southparkstudios.com.
    Looks like CC DID censor it!
    Big F U to Comedy Central!

    GO SOUTH PARK! GO M&T! GO MICHELLE! GO USA!

62. #62
    On April 13th, 2006 at 1:33 pm, RedState Patriot said:

    I wrote the following to CC using the Link you provided Michelle.

    I find it appalling that you would NOT show the M. Cartoons. it’s ridiculous. You allow personally offensive denigration of my Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ with Defecation but refuse to show depictions of M. because you believe it would be innapropriate?

    Have you heard of the term double-standard?

    As a Christian, who purposely doesn’t watch south park because it is offensive, I find it extremely offensive that attacks and denigration of the leader of my faith would be denigrated but it’s not ok for the leader of another faith.

    That’s flat out WRONG and there is no excuse for it.

    RedState Patriot

63. #63
    On April 13th, 2006 at 1:35 pm, P. Ingemi said:

    The bottom line apparently for comedy central is that an offensive image of Christ is AOK but a static image of Mohammad is verboten is unacceptable.

    Well I guess we don’t need that network anymore.

64. #64
    On April 13th, 2006 at 1:35 pm, Anon E Mousse said:

    Here is something funny i noticed. Google News has no thread in relation to SP on their home page news site. Not even in the entertainment section.

65. #65
    On April 13th, 2006 at 1:37 pm, Jamie Irons said:

    Thanks, Michelle, for this report and for allowing commentary.

    One small point that deserves emphasis: in this case, as in the Border’s Books case of a few weeks ago, apparently decisions were made out of fear of Muslim reprisal, fear of violence being done to businesses or institutions in this country.

    Isn’t that a tacit admission that we have a problem? Evidently there are active, or potentially active, Islamofacist terrorists, and many supporters, all ready to commit mayhem when provoked by some trivial “outrage”?

    Who, and where, are these people? Why are we so afraid of them? Is our future to be one of progressively circumscribing our freedoms so as not to “offend” these idiots?

    What the hell are we afraid of?

    Jamie Irons

66. #66
    On April 13th, 2006 at 1:40 pm, John said:

    I did not watch this show.

    But I am horrified that my Religion is fair game, but you touch one of the PC pet religion and all hell breaks loose.

    We Christians get the message. We don’t matter.

67. #67
    On April 13th, 2006 at 1:41 pm, Christopher Johnson said:

    I’m as conservative a Christian as there is, Mark, and I don’t much like seeing my Lord and Savior made fun of. But do you want to know something? If we have to censor something because Muslims might have a temper tantrum, then eventually Muslims will claim to be “offended” by the rosary this person carries around, the fish symbol that person has on her car or the Bible that other person reads at his desk.

68. #68
    On April 13th, 2006 at 1:41 pm, RAGE said:

    You know I am not the brightest bulb but sometimes I have to wonder. These media outlets do not seem to have a problem insulting other beliefs and thought but cowardly turn away when it comes to Islam.

    It kinda reminds me of Theo Van Gogh, is it this what they are afraid of?
    It seems people have no issues pointing out freedom of speech is nessesary even when it insults others or calls it hate speech when it suits but this is America.

    Should we be afraid?

69. #69
    On April 13th, 2006 at 1:43 pm, Avi Green said:

    I must admit, this is flat-out confusing, but then, they should have the courage to show a picture of Mohammed no matter what. I’m certainly glad that Oregon’s TV news was brave to run a broadcast on the cartoons from Denmark, that’s for sure.