• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Fox won’t cover Koran-burning; AP to block pictures

true. i have to say that as our military leaders have said this would endanger our soldiers, how can they show it? and the other side of the coin is as i posted, why give the douche air time?

You mean the same media that showed Abu-GrabAnArab(abu ghurayb) prison abuse photos and all sorts of other things that may endanger troops? That same media somehow cars about our troops?
 
You mean the same media that showed Abu-GrabAnArab(abu ghurayb) prison abuse photos and all sorts of other things that may endanger troops? That same media somehow cars about our troops?
What an OUTSTANDING point sir.

The media fell over itself to show Abu-Garib pics, "inside Gitmo" and other things. Knowing that it would "enflame" the Muslim world and endanger our troops. But that was okay, but burn some books and we **** our selves trying to hide it.
 
You mean the same media that showed Abu-GrabAnArab(abu ghurayb) prison abuse photos and all sorts of other things that may endanger troops? That same media somehow cars about our troops?

What an OUTSTANDING point sir.

The media fell over itself to show Abu-Garib pics, "inside Gitmo" and other things. Knowing that it would "enflame" the Muslim world and endanger our troops. But that was okay, but burn some books and we **** our selves trying to hide it.

There is a significant difference between exposing government abuses and glorifying an individual's idiocy.

That you're having trouble seeing that is both typical and disappointing, all at the same time.
 
There is a significant difference between exposing government abuses and glorifying an individual's idiocy.

That you're having trouble seeing that is both typical and disappointing, all at the same time.

What's amusing is that you think you made some profound point, when all you did was make our point for us. Gov't Abuses? You mean making the military and Bush look bad.

Then you'd be correct.
 
Yes, I guess that when it's revealed that certain members of the military were doing bad things, it makes Bush and the military look bad.

However you need to characterize it for your internal model of the world to remain stable, it doesn't change the fact that there is a significant difference between exposing government abuses and glorifying one individual's stupidity.
 
Well, let's see. Some complete nobody in Podunk, U.S.A. decides to pull a cheap publicity stunt. This needs to be publicized nationally as if it were a meaningful event, why?
 
Well, let's see. Some complete nobody in Podunk, U.S.A. decides to pull a cheap publicity stunt. This needs to be publicized nationally as if it were a meaningful event, why?

Sigh,

They ARE all ready nationalizing, but they won't show "pictures or video". That's the key point.
 
Bias? I'm pointing out hypocrisy. I'm pointing out that all you have to do is threaten violence and the media cowers. They WIN. Don't you people get it? When we fear them, they WIN.

What good is freedom of speech, or freedom of the press if we let others determine what we will show because we fear their reaction! This isn't about the Flag, or the Koran, or Islam, or Christianity. This is about letting FEAR control us.

And some of you, shake in your boots.

I see your point to some certain extent.

But until we bring our boys home I am glad they are not showing the blowhard burning books. Bring our boys home and then tell them to shove it.

We should have never been over there but some of you were concerned how Hussein was treating his own citizens. Well, guess what we went in there with billions of bucks and lost and maimed many of our best.........................and how do they treat us? One lunatic here gets national press and they are ready to burn us.......Are we the biggest idiots in the world?


And I am not shaking in my boots either and neither should you because we are both thousands of miles away from that hell and safe sitting on our fat butts typing nonsense.
 
There is a significant difference between exposing government abuses and glorifying an individual's idiocy.

That you're having trouble seeing that is both typical and disappointing, all at the same time.

I was pointing out that the media doesn't give two ****s about troop safety not whether or not there is a significance between the two. Amazing how you have trouble seeing that.
 
Yeah, and I was pointing out that you're comparing apples to oranges.

If it makes you feel better about your position to continue, feel free. :lol:
 
Yeah, and I was pointing out that you're comparing apples to oranges.

If it makes you feel better about your position to continue, feel free. :lol:

How was I trying to compare apples to oranges? Did I say a measly insignificant book burning was the same thing as prison photos? People argued in both cases that the end result of showing photos would be loss of more troop lives, its not any shape or form say a measly book burning is somehow the same thing as national guard pogs staking inmates in a human pyramid. Using the prison abuse scandal only points out that the media does not give two ****s about whether or not the troops are endangered as a result of their activities.
 
Moderator's Warning:
Let's discuss the thread topic, not each other.


...

So what you're telling us is that events which would put any and every American in a Muslim country in danger should be broadcast? Interesting. I remember when the Iraq war started, the mere mention that Arabs were dying supposedly put our soldiers in jeopardy more than the fact that we had invaded a country. Now that some jerk-off bigot is about to start a **** storm that anyone with more than two brain cells would want to avoid getting involved in - it doesn't matter what the media prints or says anymore? Your bias doesn't escape us.

When there were unconfirmed reports of Korans being flushed down toilets in Gitmo, I don't recall any media organizations agreeing not to report on the story because it might endanger Americans overseas. I remember them rushing to print the story despite the fact that there was no solid evidence that this had ever occurred. As a result of this erroneous report, there were riots around the globe that left 15 dead.

Well, let's see. Some complete nobody in Podunk, U.S.A. decides to pull a cheap publicity stunt. This needs to be publicized nationally as if it were a meaningful event, why?

It doesn't. The people who decided it needed to be publicized nationally are the ones who are now furiously trying to distance themselves from the predictable results of their actions.

As pointed out above, the fact that some whackjob wanted to burn a Koran is not new. The only thing that made this incident different is that the media gobbled it up and spread it across the front page of newspapers nationwide.

Random guy on the street: "I'm an asshole"
Police officer: "That's interesting, here's a megaphone so everyone can hear you"
Random guy on the street with a megaphone: "I'M AN ASSHOLE!"
Police officer: "You're under arrest for being disruptive."
 
Random guy on the street: "I'm an asshole"
Police officer: "That's interesting, here's a megaphone so everyone can hear you"
Random guy on the street with a megaphone: "I'M AN ASSHOLE!"
Police officer: "You're under arrest for being disruptive."

:lol:

TED,
Not entirely in agreement with you, but had to thank you for the funny.
 
I'm not impressed with him or the other idiots doing this either. But to "not" show or cover it, but the media covers Flag Burnings and other highly offensive events... that's my problem. They FEAR the reaction, and that's not right man, not at all.

The media's being responsible for once.

The ugliest Americans get ratings. But in the case of anti-Muslim bigotry, that ugliness can have a price:

*empowering others to act out on their fears - e.g. coverage of the NY Cultural Center protests led to wing-nut preachers thinking they could take it a step further

*these events get replayed on world news and end up fueling radical extremists to take actions against Christians and Americans.

*strategic relationships with certain tribes in Afghanistan are jeopardized as tribal leaders have to answer to their 'base'. This must be incredibly frustrating to the men on the ground who have put in months, years winning over Muslims, then to have it all dashed to pieces by a handful of ignorant a-holes like Terry Jones.

FOX News should be running stories of Christian leaders starting to reach out to their Islam counterparts. We saw the Muslims in other countries cheering on 9/11 -- but what better way to shut them up, undercut their extremist leaders than to show Muslims being embraced as part of the American religious tapestry.

I'm stunned at the so-called Christians, those protesting the Cultural Center and those remaining silent; they have forgotten how powerful forgiveness is. It's a core message in the Bible. Heal the wounds of 9/11 by embracing the Cultural Center. Imagine broadcasting the images of Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists and 9/11 families standing outside the Cultural Center on its opening. Let that be how the Muslim world sees us.
 
The media's being responsible for once.

Remind me again, who was it that made this guy front page news?

Heal the wounds of 9/11 by embracing the Cultural Center. Imagine broadcasting the images of Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists and 9/11 families standing outside the Cultural Center on its opening. Let that be how the Muslim world sees us.

And if we did that, Al Qaida would dissolve and would hand over Bin Laden, right?
 
I'm not afraid of Osama bin Laden, but I am afraid of this nonsense.

When Sharia comes to America, it won't come in the form of an invading army, it'll come when we let it in because we're too afraid of hurting their feelings. The day Muslims can control public criticism through threats of violence is the day that we stop being a republic with free speech and start becoming a society coerced into respecting a certain kind of worldview.
 
Remind me again, who was it that made this guy front page news?



And if we did that, Al Qaida would dissolve and would hand over Bin Laden, right?

No, maybe folks in Afgh. or wherever the **** will be less inclined to take homemade bombs and try to blow the **** out of americans occupying their country. Possibly less will join the taliban. But its too late theyve already burned and exploded all sorts of crap over this.
 
I'm not afraid of Osama bin Laden, but I am afraid of this nonsense.

When Sharia comes to America, it won't come in the form of an invading army, it'll come when we let it in because we're too afraid of hurting their feelings. The day Muslims can control public criticism through threats of violence is the day that we stop being a republic with free speech and start becoming a society coerced into respecting a certain kind of worldview.

If it isn't via contract law, it'll require a Constitutional amendment.

Somehow I don't think that's going to make it through as a feel-good measure.
 
If it isn't via contract law, it'll require a Constitutional amendment.

Somehow I don't think that's going to make it through as a feel-good measure.
It doesn't have to be legal coercion, just an atmosphere of fear so great that nobody has the guts to criticize.
 
Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeah, the day the United States as a nation was any such place, it wouldn't be the United States anymore.

Somehow I don't think that's going to happen either.
 
Back
Top Bottom