I didn't really want to post on the new Abu Ghraib photos because they're nothing but propoganda for terrorists and we all know that already. But I see many other bloggers all had the same thought as I did, immediately when they heard about these "new" Abu Graib photos being released. Why is it the media has no problem airing these, but they won't show, or at best will blur out the stupid Mohammad cartoons?!

We've all seen leaders of various countries out condemning and apologizing for the cartoons which weren't even bad to begin with, unless you count the fake ones that some Imams used to start this whole controversy months after the original publishing of the real cartoons. There have been suspensions and shut downs at media outlets around the world simply for publishing a couple stupid cartoons. But do we ever see this when Christianity or Judaism is insulted? No. And do you know why? Because we are civilized people who don't strike fear in the hearts of the media. Radical Muslims are killing people and destroying cities around the world all because of some stupid and fake cartoons.

But remember Abu Graib? Media outlets were in a race to see who could show the most photos, and particularly who could show the most graphic images without "crossing the line". Remember how the NY Times managed to squeeze out 43 front page stories in 47 days! I'm sure there were more after that, but that's shocking enough I think. Especially when you factor in they never did a frontpage story on beheadings by terrorists.

Far left groups have been pushing for the release of more Abu Graib photos for a long time... Why? To hurt our troops. Period! There is no other reason for the release of these photos, which is why I'm not linking to them. You can find them if you really want to. The story was blown up by the liberal media to harm the war effort in the first place, because that goes back and hurts the President. But those responsible for the abuses were sentenced to jail and dishonorably discharged. But that wasn't enough for the media. They need more violence incited by the images to further their agenda, no matter who it hurts.

So this week we have an Australia television program air the "new" images. Does it further the story in any way? No. Does it stand to get people killed? What do you think!? People were killed over the fake Koran/toilet thing, and over these stupid cartoons and that is all that stands to come from showing these newly released images. Jane Hall looked like an idiot trying to defend this on O'Reilly last night.

So everyone has been asking those same questions about the media's hypocrisy here...

Michelle Malkin is waiting (but I hope not holding her breath) for an answer.. Blackfive has a bunch of photos from Abu Ghraib that you won't see in the MSM either. Why? Oh because they are positive, and don't stand to get troops killed.

But I'd like to take it a step further than Malkin and many others. Why is the media so giddy over new Abu Graib photos, but they have never shown us the photos of people jumping from the WTC buildings on 9/11 (graphic images.) Of course I don't think these should be shown out of respect to those who died, and their families. But the media doesn't seem to concerned about military men and women and their families when they show the pointless Abu Graib photos.

So lets see, you won't show the Muhammad cartoons because that is "incitement" (remember being that the media is a liberal one, they have no concept of "personal responsibility"). I can't stand that "incitement" or "provocation" excuse, but that's what they use to excuse bad behavior all the time. Anyway, why are the Abu Ghraib photos not incitement as well? And 9/11 jumper photos aren't going to incite the Muslim world. And we're civilized so it won't incite us, but might strengthen a weakening resolve.

I don't think I need to go on, you get it, right? The point is the outrage over the cartoons is ridiculous (considering the "bad" ones were fake) and the the media is afraid to print them. Yet they print the REAL Abu Ghraib photos, that stand to only get people killed, with a big smile on their faces. Why? Is your media serving you or the enemy? What does that make them? Another quick example that just popped in my head was the staged/fake photo after we precision bombed in Pakistan a few weeks ago. Of course that is just a tiny example, but it's still fresh in my mind.

Anyway, the lefties would have you ignore the double standard of the MSM and point fingers at us for the double standard. But that's BS. The cartoons were something printed in one paper. Those who chose to print them in the aftermath did so as an exercise in free speech while it's under attack in Europe and of being unafraid of Muslim extremists, and the story was/is ongoing. Abu Ghraib has been dealt with and people have been jailed, and showing these images SERVES NO PURPOSE but to get people killed. If you can explain how they further the story, go right ahead... but you can't because they don't. I'm actually surprised that al-Gore didn't personally deliver the images to his buddies when he was in the region (baselessly) blasting America the other day.

More:
Drumwaster's Rants, Church and State, Iowa Voice, Stop The ACLU, BLACKFIVE, The Jawa Report, Dr. Sanity, The Unalienable Right, protein wisdom, HomefrontSix, Red State Rant, Cake or Death, EU Rota, Slapstick Politics, FullosseousFlap's Dental Blog, 1918 News Server, A Blog For All, Free Constitution, The Patriette, RepublicanWitch, Oblogatory Anecdotes, Blue Star Chronicles, The American Mind, The American Mind, Outside The Beltway | OTB, Two Babes and a Brain, Right Minded, Brain Droppings

Open Trackbacks/Linkfests:
Right Wing Nation, Linkfest Haven, Blue Star Chronicles, TMH's Bacon Bits, Outside the Beltway, Don Surber