My Advice Exactly

PJB, on the New Yorker cover:

Again, it is only a cartoon.

Where was this logic from PJB re the Mohammed cartoons?  Then, he wanted us to yield to the sensitivites of the Religion of the Perpetually Outraged.

They’ll Be Perpetually Outraged Until Virgins Come

AP:

Danes nab suspects in cartoonist plot

COPENHAGEN, Denmark – Danish police said Tuesday they have arrested three people suspected of plotting to kill one of the 12 cartoonists behind the Prophet Muhammad drawings that sparked a deadly uproar in the Muslim world two years ago.

Two Tunisians and a Dane of Moroccan origin were arrested in pre-dawn raids in western Denmark, the police intelligence agency said.

The Dane was suspected of violating Danish terror laws but likely would be released after questioning as the investigation continues, said Jakob Scharf, the head of the PET intelligence service. The two Tunisians would be expelled from Denmark, he said.

The agency did it mention which cartoonist was targeted. However, according to Jyllands-Posten, the Danish newspaper that first published the drawings on Sept. 30, 2005, the suspects were planning to kill its cartoonist Kurt Westergaard.

(snip)

Islamic law generally opposes any depiction of the prophet, even favorable, for fear it could lead to idolatry.

I support the right of Muslims to enforce such laws — in places like Tunisia and Morocco.

See what all the fuss is about.

They’re Angry Alright

New York’s Catholics are indignant over the naked chocolate Jesus statue. While they plan to do a lot about it, read this article carefully.

What is more interesting here is words you won’t read.

You don’t read “riot,” “wilding,” “behead,” or words like that. Those are words you did read in the Muslim reaction to the Mohammed Cartoons.

Jean Marie Who?

With each passing day and each statement like this, Nicolas Sarkozy creeps closer and closer to becoming the President of France.

Our Sensitivities Don’t Matter

Here are two related stories:

* The Borders chain of bookstores will not stack a certain periodical whose latest issue publishes the infamous Mohammed Cartoons. The chain's management claims that it fears for the safety of Borders employees and customers. The implication is that American Muslims will arsonize Borders Bookstores if they think one issue of one magazine contains blasphemous cartoons.

Whether this means that Pat Buchanan now owns the Borders Bookstore Chain remains to be seen.

* A caller to the Michael Savage radio show earlier this week told the host about how he was engaging in a one-man protest against illegal aliens in some jurisdiction in southern California. He was holding an American Flag, and eventually, the Police Department in the city caught up to him and forced him off the particular street he was on. The Police said that they wanted him off the street, because illegal aliens were coming to start a mass street demonstration, and the Police feared for his safety.

Both of these stories prove that in Official America, the sensitivities and feelings of white people don't matter. ("Lump it, honkey.") Whether in the bookstores, the cartoons, or the flag-bearing man, the feelings of Muslims and Mexicans are paramount.

Look Within

From Dennis Prager in WND:

There’s a certain consistent pattern regarding the worldwide Left’s assessment of culpability for Muslim terror. It is the fault of the murdered.

The most recent example is the blaming of Denmark, or at least the Danish newspaper, for publishing cartoons of Muhammad. From Kofi Annan to the New York Times – and the other American newspapers that declared respect for religious symbols a new journalistic virtue – liberal and leftist opinion always condemns violent Muslim demonstrations, but always with a “but.” The “but” is that in the final analysis, it was the Danish and other European papers’ faults for insulting the Muslim prophet.

Mr. Prager, you should also have a look at a certain someone that is your WND stablemate if you want to find people that wrongly criticize the Danes and the Europeans for the Muslim anti-Cartoon riots. I think his last name starts with a B, and he’s definitely not a left-winger.

They’re Just Cartoons

From World Net Daily:

Tom and Jerry, the lovable cat and mouse locked in cartoon combat, is a Jewish conspiracy, according to an Iranian official…..”The Jewish Walt Disney Company gained international fame with this cartoon,” said Bolkhari…..According to the professor, “Tom and Jerry” was created to irradicate the association between mice and Jews created in the minds of Europeans by Hitler.

The article then goes on to say that Tom and Jerry is a creation of Hanna-Barbera, not Disney.

C’mon people.  They’re animated cartoons.  They are figments of people’s imaginations.

Only a stupid, moronic, juvenile mind could attach any more meaning than that to an animated cat and mouse whose pretend antics are meant to entertain a six-year old.

You’re getting yourself all worked up over CARTOONS~!  Then again, you all have proven in the last several weeks that Cartoons seem to be very important to your sensitivities.

Chickens and Eggs

I think I have solved a “the chicken or the egg” question I had.

In an earlier blog post, I mildly criticized Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.

Her contention was that the cartoon riots in the Middle East were provoked by unfriendly Middle Eastern governments.

My contention was that, while that might have been true, any provocation on the part of those governments would not have been successful unless the average person in those countries had a fanatical mindset that was easily provoked.

Playing fast and loose with the English language, as you can see, I invented a new adjective to describe that propensity, “whoopupable.”

Now comes this news from the AP:

Thousands of Muslims defied a ban on rallies Friday in Pakistan’s capital, joining protesters across the country in condemning the Prophet Muhammad cartoons printed by some Western newspapers.

The current government in Pakistan is pro-Western and pro-American, so nobody could claim with any good evidence that the Pakistani government is doing any “whooping up.” In fact, with the ban on ralles in Islamabad, it’s trying to preclude such riotous protests, as futile as those efforts are.

This only proves that my “whoopupable” thesis is far closer to the truth than Miss Rice’s “whooping up” thesis.

A Failure of the Failures

Bill Bennett and Alan Dershowitz have joined forces in a Washington Post Op-Ed criticizing the MSM for censoring the Great Danish Cartoons.

The irony in Messrs. Bennett and Dershowitz saying these things is that the reason why the MSM have censored them are fundamentally the same philosophical reasons why both Bennett and Dershowitz oppose immigration control – that is, sensitivity to the feelings of non-whites.

Remember, it was Bill Bennett, and his neocon friend, Jack Kemp, who were among the loudest mouths against California’s Proposition 187 in 1994.

And we don’t even need to elaborate on the love that Mr. Dershowitz has for the Council of Conservative Citizens.

Rage Against the Infidel Machine

Muslim anger over the Cartoongate non-scandal is now spreading to American targets. All over Muslim countries and non-Muslim countries with large Muslim minorities, Muslims are attacking American installations, mulling boycotts of American products, organizing a rally against President Bush when he vists India later this year, among other things.

What did we in the collective sense do to deserve this?

I’ll tell you what “we” did:

* President Bush, to the extent he has said anything at all about them, has opposed the cartoons.

* The U.S. State Department has come out officially against the cartoons and sided with Muslims.

* The most right-wing of legitimate American newspaper columnists, one Patrick J. Buchanan, has had two columns within the last several weeks taking even harder swipes at the cartoons, the cartoon artists, newspapers that run or reproduce them, and us Infidels that enjoy the cartoons, and he has demonstrated tacit sympathy toward the Muslim revelry.

* As far as I can tell, no major American MSM outlet has shown the cartoons. In fact, in most instances, when showing film of someone reading a newspaper with the cartoons, the MSM will blur out the cartoon images as if they were pornographic.

* Former President Bill Clinton did them all one better. While visiting Pakistan, he suggested that such cartoon artists and newspapers that run or reproduce them should be convicted using “hate speech” laws in countries that have them.

* And this is coming from the same Bill Clinton, while, during his Reign of Error, by his actions in trying to broker an Israeli-Palestinian “peace deal,” and his conducting the wag-the-dog War on Serbia in 1998-9, took incessant action that accrued to the empowerment of Muslims.

The fact that the “religion of peace” has taken swipes at two kinds of white peoples that had nothing to do with the Great Cartoons – Jewish people, in terms of mocking the Holocaust, and now Americans, PROVES that the “religion of peace” THINKS that these Great Cartoons were a conspiracy of white civilization in general.

So in their minds, the proper retribution is to mock the most horrible thing that ever happened to what they believe is that “flagship” division of the white race (Jews) and attack symbols and installations of white civilization’s mightiest military-economic superpower (The USA).

No good deed goes unpunished. Therefore, I propose a toast to bad deeds.

Those Two Fascists

The radical Islamists of the world can’t even get their ducks in a row when it comes to insulting people.

Over this last weekend, there were the usual riotous protests over Cartoongate in the Middle East (and there apparently will be until the Twelfth of Never), while in New York City, Islamic groups organized a big protest march that was relatively peaceful.

In one Middle Eastern event, a woman was seen holding a sign that read, “Hitler Was Right,” or something similar.  Meanwhile, in Gotham, one of that event’s participants waved a flag that looked to be a blend of American and Nazi Reich flags; this was supposed to be a form of disapproval of whatever “sins” this person thought the American government is committing vis-a-vis Cartoongate.

The answer is obvious.  There’s just so much rage and hate in the realm of radical Islam over these piddley cartoons that they’ll grasp at straws to insult the white infidel world in any way they believe the white infidels could be insulted, even if doing so means that they must simultaneously support and implicitly oppose 1930s German-era fascism.

Bill Clintonejad

Former President Bill “Pat Buchanan” Clinton is siding with the Muslims in the Cartoongate non-scandal.

Unlike Buchanan, and thankfully so, Clinton is taking his opposition to a new level.  From the Daily Times of Pakistan:

Former US president Bill Clinton on Friday condemned the publication of Prophet Muhammad’s (PBUH) caricatures by European newspapers and urged countries concerned to convict the publishers.

Paying close attention to the third to last word in that sentence, this means that Clinton wants European countries that have “hate speech” laws to use them to convict such cartoon artists.

This means that Bill Clinton, and presumably his dippy wife, too, supports the concept of adopting those (what would be unconstitutional) laws domestically.  Just remember, she wants to be President in 2008.

Clinton said he had no objection to peaceful demonstrations being held worldwide, but this was not the time for violence. He said it was the time to promote inter-faith harmony and stand together on the issue.

Clinton is referring to anti-cartoon riots held in the Middle East.  By virtue of their behavior, asking them to protest against the cartoons yet do so peacefully is like asking a pig to roll around in the mud puddle but not get dirty.

Clinton said people in the US had also condemned the publication and were deeply concerned over it.

He must be referring to his newfound friend, Pat Buchanan.

He said they respected Islam, as it was the fastest growing religion in the US.

Oh joy.

Ask Libra

About 15,000 Muslims protested in London’s Hyde Park yesterday over Cartoongate.

From CNN:

“Now there is a demonization of the Muslim community, so we have to speak up to prevent something like the Holocaust from happening,” [Taji Mustafa, spokesman for the Muslim Action Committee] said.

Hmmm, let’s look at the balance scales.

On one side, you have cartoons. They weren’t too milquetoast, but not too harsh, either.

On the other side, you have days on end of rioting, pillaging, killing, and assassination plots, in revenge for those cartoons.

The verdict is in. Their side is far closer to committing genocide.

Proving My Point Again

A Muslim cleric in Pakistan has put up a $1 million reward to anyone who murders any cartoon artist who mocks Islam and/or Mohammed.  This proves that criticism and ridicule of radical Islam is WORSE than murders and assassinations on the part of Islam’s extremist devotees to avenge such ridicule, doesn’t it, Mr. Buchanan?  (Insert sarcasm tag here.)

Not Again, Pat

From Pat Buchanan’s latest column (February 11, 2006):

Since 9-11, President Bush seems to have understood that if we wish to win the war on terror, we must separate the Islamic masses from the monsters. To defeat the Islamic extremists, we must win the hearts and minds of the moderates…..Those cartoons – insulting, blasphemous, provocative to Muslims – have wiped out much of what Bush had accomplished. The cartoons have given the Muslim radicals visible proof to show the masses that the West mocks what they hold sacred.

No, what they have accomplished is to consolidate white Caucasian civilization against radical Islam, to heal “rifts” between the European and American governments (if you believe that the “rifts” were ever that wide, and I don’t), and to demonstrate to the civilized world the necessity to keep unreformed, radical Islam in permanent check.

All Muslims believe that to depict the face of the prophet or to ridicule him as Salman Rushdie did is a sacrilege.

And then riot when it happens.

Why have conservatives rushed to show solidarity with the European editor-idiots who plastered these mocking cartoons all over Page 1?

Racial solidarity.  And I say it’s about time.

Conservatives rage in rebuttal that Islamic nations tolerate cartoons, books, billboards and TV shows far more anti-Semitic and anti-Christian than these cartoons were anti-Islamic.

But not rage on the streets in order to burn things and kill people wantonly.  Our rage is entirely on pen and paper, or electronically.

It is a battle for the hearts and minds of Islamic peoples. And if we are to have any hope of winning that battle, we cannot condone insults to what they hold most sacred and dear: their faith.

I don’t give a rat’s tail about their “hearts and minds,” especially now.  And for President Bush to care is the wrong policy.  All that matters is keeping the radical Islamic world in permanent check, militarily, economically, diplomatically, or however.  Once that’s done, then we can start knitpicking over “hearts and minds.”  Until then, no use bickering over how to drain the swamp while we’re up to our knees in gators.

We are all entitled to hold such views. But if we wish to exercise our right to air them in print or broadcast, we should expect to reap what we have sown.

And so should they.

Five centuries ago, Christians would have responded to insults as Muslims do today. However, given our pathetic protests of Hollywood sacrileges such as “The Last Temptation of Christ,” one could argue that Muslims are simply more devout and resolute in defense of their faith than the milquetoast Christians of modernity.

What I could argue is this means that we have reformed and they have not.  If you want to say that we have reformed a little too much, I agree, but nevertheless we have reformed.

Like Catholics and Protestants in the 16th century, Muslims do not believe all religions are equal.

By their modern, year 2006 going on 7th century actions, radical Islam is proving that some pigs aren’t as equal than others.

And if we are unwilling to curb our tongues when it comes to their faith, or to condemn those among us who use their freedom to insult the Islamic religion, we should probably pack up and get out of the Middle East. Before they throw us out.

So this means that “our tongues” are worse than “their” violence.  I agree that perhaps we shouldn’t be involved militarily as much as we are – after all, we have our own border to worry about.  But I hardly think they have the power to “throw us out” inasmuch as our own traitors and quislings and fifth columnists will help them along.

As you can see from the fair-use snippets here and the column itself, and throwing in Buchanan’s last column that I took great sorrow in criticizing, Buchanan’s argument is that “our” provocation is responsible for “their” violence.

I divided Buchanan’s chronological age with my own to yield the quotient of 2.35.  Since he has lived 2.35 times longer than I have, there are certain things he should understand 2.35 times better than I understand.  The fact that he and I differ on this is surprising.

But, if you follow Buchanan’s argument, and parlay it to the other great local issue of this day, he should then agree with the NAACP that the cops, not the fleeing PTBs, are at fault for the damage for police chases.  After all, the police did the “provoking.”

One Word Feeds The Fire

The Cartoongate non-scandal has not only been a hot issue, but this blog has devoted many words and many days to covering the story.  The volume of coverage has invoked a relatively rational flame e-mailed criticism from someone who considers him/herself a critic of our worldview.  Quoting from the e-mail, the sender of which shall only be identified as B.B.:

You’re all a bunch of hypocrites for bashing the Muslim faith and their reaction to those wrong headed cartoons.  Remember that it wasn’t that long ago all the bad things that Christianity did.  Pillaging crusades, inquisitions, burning at the stake anyone who didn’t agree with the Church.  You mentioned Galileo Galilei [in yesterday's blog post], but you didn’t say that it was the Catholic Church that wanted to shut him up.  How about all that intolerance?

The historical facts of B.B’s statement here are undeniable.  But the statement does deserve a response.  Ironically, the response to the statement may be found in the statement itself.  In fact, the whole crux (no pun intended) to the proper response to this statement may be found in ONE single word within the statement.

I’ll give you a few minutes to figure that out.

[Webmaster fixes and eats a sandwich.]

Found it yet?  Okay, I’ll give you a little more time.

[Webmaster makes his daily rounds to technology and computer blogs.]

Give up?

The single word is at the end of B.B.’s second sentence.  That word is “did.”

Now, can you tell me why the word “did” is the key to my response?  I’ll give you some time.

[Webmaster watches last night's episode of  24 on tape.  Beep.  BEEP.  Beep. BEEP....]

Okay, I’ll give.

“Did” is important because it invokes a verb of the past tense.  Therefore, B.B. is referring to things that Christendom did in the past.  The reason that the word is “did” and not “do” is because these are things that Christendom did in the past, but are not doing now.  The reason why Christendom is not doing these things now, like they did in the past, is that Christendom REFORMED itself sometime between the Crusade/Inquisition ages and now.

This kind of self-reformation has not yet taken place in the Islamic world, at least outside of countries named Turkey, definitely not enough so that they have a self-deterrent against their terrorist propensities.  Therefore, the reformed, civilized people have to keep the unreformed fanatics in permanent check until they do so.

More Mohammed Funnies

Download a free comic book: “Mohammed’s Believe It or Else!”
at http://islamcomicbook.com/

More recent Mohammed cartoons (before the infamous ones) Here

The main source for images:
http://www.zombietime.com/mohammed_image_archive/recent/
http://www.zombietime.com/mohammed_image_archive/

–D.F.

Road Deconstruction Ahead

If a broken clock is right twice a day, then a corollary could be that even the most accurate clock will eventually drift.

I hate to do this to you, Pat, but your latest column begs for it.

So, here goes nothing.

Quoting Pat Buchanan:

That demagogues and agitators are exploiting those cartoons of Muhammad to advance a war of civilizations and expel Europeans from the Middle East seems undeniable…..But that does not excuse the paralyzing stupidity of that Danish paper in running those cartoons – or the arrogant irresponsibility of European newspapers in plastering those cartoons all over their front pages…..What was the purpose of this juvenile idiocy by the Europress? Is this what freedom of the press is all about – the freedom to insult the faith of a billion people and start a religious war?

The main problem I have with this argument is that Buchanan seems to be drawing a moral equivocation between newspaper cartoons ridiculing the ridiculous assertions of a radical branch of a major world religion, and the widespread mayhem and rioting done on the part of some of those practitioners of that major world religion.

Even if you think the Danish cartoons were wrong, the sort of perfidy which would lead one to draw them and publish them is FAR less horrible than the evils of rioting, burning and killing in the name of the faith so “blasphemed” in said cartoons. I’m not Mohammed, but if I were Mohammed, I would be more embarrassed by the events in Syria than the events in Denmark.

Buchanan also seems to equivocate the European MSM publishing and re-publishing the Danish cartoons, and their disdain for Fundamentalist and Evangelical Christians. I believe he is right insofar as the Euro MSM hates religion altogether, but it does not follow that radical Islam is any more or even equally undeserved of criticism and ridicule that the Euro MSM might heap on, say, the American Southern Bapitst Convention.

As an example, I rhetorically asked Fundamentalist Christians in this space yesterday if they would burn down the Saudi Embassy if they found out that Saudi papers published anti-Christian cartoons. If, for the sake of discussion, Pat Robertson knocked on my door and told me that there were anti-Christian cartoons in Saudi papers, so I should join him in torching the Saudi Embassy, I would slam the door in his face after saying a few choice words.

Ceteris paribus, if you transpose this hypothetical scenario to Iran, my Iranian analogue would be far more likely to join the Iranian equivalent of Pat Robertson to burn some buildings. Ceteris paribus, the Iranian equivalent to Pat Robertson would be far more likely than the real Pat Robertson to incite this racio-religious violence.

Therefore, some faiths and offshoots thereof deserved to be mocked by virtue of their actions and behavior and implications.

And enhancing this point is the last paragraph from Buchanan’s column:

What has happened in Europe is that the secular press, which loves to mock the beliefs and symbols of religious faith, has now insulted a deadly serious religion that answers insults with action.

Radical Islam was begging to be mocked even before the Danish cartoons were drawn, and because they answered “insults” with violent “action,” it proved my point even more so.

Buchanan did thankfully get this point right:

…..German Interior Minister Wolfgang Shauble haughtily dissented, “Here, in Europe, governments have nothing to say about which publisher publishes what.”…..What hypocrisy. When it comes to what Germans are most sensitive about, Hitler and the Holocaust, they are ruthless censors. British historian David Irving has spent three months in a Viennese prison awaiting trial on Feb. 20 for speeches he made 15 years ago in Austria. Skeptics and deniers of the Holocaust are prosecuted, fined and imprisoned in Europe with the enthusiastic endorsement of the European press.

And now, the clock is back on schedule.

Two Way Street

From the Washington Times:

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice yesterday accused Syria and Iran of deliberately inciting Islamic outrage over the publication of cartoons in a string of European newspapers that mocked the prophet Muhammad…..”Iran and Syria have gone out of their way to inflame sentiment and to use this to their own purposes,” she told reporters. “The world ought to call them on it.”

What Miss Rice is saying here, in essence, is that the main reason there’s so much mayhem in the Middle East over Cartoongate is because certain governments are “whooping up” passion and anger in their people.

I can buy this argument to a point.

In 2000, when Elian Gonzales was the hot issue, there were mass protests in Havana to demand that the boy be returned to Cuba. Since Cuba is not exactly known as a hotbed of civil liberties, the fact that there were protests at all was prima facie evidence that Fidel Castro was provoking the protests.

And so it goes in those two other hotbeds of civil unliberties, Iran and Syria.

But I said “to a point.”

The reason why that dog won’t hunt the whole day for me is because, while it is true that the Iranian and Syrian governments are doing some “whooping up,” it wouldn’t result in violence unless their general public was “whoopupable.”

To cite the example in the above blog post again, Pat Robertson could try and “whoop me up,” but I’m not biting.

Miss Rice is right to lay part of the blame on the governments doing the “whooping up,” but she would also do well to cite radical, fundamentalist, unreformed Islam for shaping the mindsets of its adherents to be “whoopupable.”

A Word is Worth a Thousand Words

Here is a question to those of you who would consider yourselves Fundamentalist Christians.

If you were made to think that, for example, Saudi Arabian soldiers flushed a copy of the HOLY BIBLE down a toilet, (assuming that you would be dumb enough to believe that it was physically possible), and if you heard that a newspaper in Saudi Arabia published cartoons mocking Jesus Christ and His remarkable life and death and Resurrection, would you hoof it to Washington, D.C. and torch the Saudi embassy, and/or hunt down, stalk and snipe at Saudi businessmen in America?

I know your answer to those questions is a single word that is two letters long. That single two-lettered word would be just as good as a 100,000-word dissertation about the fanatical propensities of Islamic extremists.

Sandal-Licking State Department

So, the U.S. State Department officially sides with the offended Moslems over their European counterparts, freedom of the press and free speech in the Cartoon Wars.

Fact: These same Moslem goons that demand respect for Islam blasted huge centuries-old Buddhist sculptures off the side of a mountain because they offended Allah. (Taliban in Afghanistan)

Fact: Soldiers in the Gulf War were not allowed to display openly Christian symbols.

Fact: The National Endowment for the Arts funded “artists” who displayed Christian symbols submerged in urine and religious portraits made with elephant dung.

Can anybody tell me how those silly cartoons can be as offensive as that?

–D.F.

More Hate Speech from the Religion of Peace

Michelle Malkin’s Blog Site has posted photos of our Islamist bretheren in England showing their tolerance for the freedom of cartoon artists to draw controversial cartoons. Thanks to “Greg” for submitting this link.

Once again, UK authorities, you wanted to throw Nick Griffin into the trash can for his trying to alert us to this kind of extremism (“hate speech.”) Where are you now?

Great Danes

Lately there has been news about how some cartoons in Denmark are irritating the Moslems. They are (surprise!) threatening Europeans for daring to dishonor the great Mohammed, or Muhammad, or whatever the hell the guy’s name is wearing the sheets and towel. I found the offending cartoons and submitted them to the St. Louis CofCC Webmaster, so that they may be uploaded to this website for downloading and viewing, if anyone cares to see them. It is all in one piece.

While I don’t understand the foreign language in the captions, they don’t seem all that bad otherwise. No farm animal or child molesting is going on. The only funny one shows an Arabic guy in heaven telling a line of smoldering newly-arriving bombers that they ran out of virgins.

Other publishers in Europe reran the cartoons as a sign of solidarity. I thought we could too. Draw an anti-Islamic cartoon and put it on your refrigerator. If you have the guts and can afford to lose your job, put one up at work, too – Right next to the picture of the burning towers on September 11th. Or did they make you take that one down already so it wouldn’t offend somebody?

–D.F.

[Webmaster's Note: D.F. later sent me this link to what appears to be an England-based Islamic extremist organization. Read some of the words on that site, and then compare them to the anti-white, anti-police rant quoted in the blog post, "The First Embers." Eerie, isn't it? I wonder why authorities in the UK haven't tried to string these people up on "Hate Speech" charges like they just tried to do to Nick Griffin.]

And The Beat Goes On

From the Reuters News Service:

The United States backed Muslims on Friday against European newspapers that printed caricatures of the Prophet Mohammad in a move that could help America’s battered image in the Islamic world.

Inserting itself into a dispute that has become a lightning rod for anti-European sentiment across the Muslim world, the United States sided with Muslims outraged that the publications put press freedom over respect for religion.

“These cartoons are indeed offensive to the belief of Muslims,” State Department spokesman Kurtis Cooper said in answer to a question.

I wonder if the dipsticks in the State Department actually believe that OBL will now love us just a little bit more.

But the United States, which was founded by immigrants fleeing religious persecution, has previously spoken out against publications offensive to believers of other faiths.

This means our State Department thinks that, because once upon a time, white Europeans had stiff debates with each other about Christian theology, we should today throw our white European brothers over a cliff to satisfy a racio-religious movement which hates both white Europeans and white Americans.