I saw O’Reilly talking about this too.

Ironic that just earlier today was telling someone on here about that particular episode. As has been said, “some groups” are acceptable to make fun of… and others, you have to be edgy if you want to challenge them. Can anyone else think of a program that has mocked Muhammad in the same way some shows mock Chrisitians, Jews, or Mormons?

The brilliance of South Park is that EVERYONE gets it… and when they say EVERYONE, they mean everyone.

Anyway, that was the first part of a two part episode (or more)… we’ll see what happens tomorrow night. I’m sure Matt and Trey have something up their sleeve.

There’s a reason why guys like Bill Maher will mock Christianity all day long, but when it comes to Muslims…not so much.

I am not a South Park team fan but I must say something is here. I am sure Anderson will keep them honest. I look forward to an interesting show.Thanks for sharing this concept here…
r4 sdhc

Drew Griffin did a report on AC360 about these same nuts on November 10, 2009 when they said the same types of things about Obama and all Americans. I am not so sure why Anderson is so outraged about these particular threats unless these guys are friends of his.

“We live in a country which prides itself on its freedom of speech, in which we can say whatever is in our hearts, in our minds, as long as it’s not threatening to someone else– as long as it’s not calling for violence against somebody else.”

I was surprised to hear Anderson say this because he doesn’t seem to believe that the “Tea Party” protestors deserve the same freedom of speech he thinks the creators of South Park are entitled to.

I have enjoyed watching South Park on occasion and I’mNotBlue is right, they do get “EVERYONE”, but I must say I was a bit disappointed that they were forced to depict Muhammad in a bear suit, they should have shown more courage.

I have a picture too. http://prophetmuhammadsuckcock.blogspot.com

HA!
Democrats & their lapdogs in the Mainstream Media employ this same strategy when they routinely PLAY THE RACE CARD!!!
- gotta love the irony!!!

libra blue says:
April 21, 2010 at 1:36 am

I have enjoyed watching South Park on occasion and I’mNotBlue is right, they do get “EVERYONE”, but I must say I was a bit disappointed that they were forced to depict Muhammad in a bear suit, they should have shown more courage.

You didn’t watch the episode, did you? That’s okay… I can understand why you got that impression.

The gist of the episode was that Tom Cruise is upset that the kids of South Park said something about him he didn’t like. Deciding to fight back, Cruise gathers all the celebrities that the kids of South Park have mocked in the previous 200 episodes (from Barbara Streisand to Kanye West), and attempt to sue them. Knowing the town can’t afford a lawsuit, they try to find a compromise. Cruise says that the only way he’ll drop the lawsuit is if they bring in Muhammad, knowing that he’s the “only figure South Park won’t mock.” The town agrees, but also knows they can’t show Muhammad, so they are forced to “disguise” him… hence the bear suit.

They make a very big deal out of the fact that Comedy Central won’t allow them to show Muhammad (even though he once appeared on an earlier episode), occasionally showing him out of “costume,” but behind a “CENSORED” bar. This isn’t the first time they’ve made a similar point. In the multi-part series, “Cartoon Wars,” they had planned to show Muhammad, but Comedy Central wouldn’t allow it. Instead, they had a black screen, and a message to the audience in its place.

Anyway… as I said earlier, this is a two part episode, so they might show Muhammad by the end of tomorrows new episode. They’re making a big statement in these episodes, and it’s good that it’s getting some attention. This is an important issue that many seem content to ignore.

(PS- I’m sure you can watch the episode on their website, southparstudios.com, and catch up before the new one)

Writer said: “There’s a reason why guys like Bill Maher will mock Christianity all day long, but when it comes to Muslims…not so much.”

That’s actually not really true as far as Maher goes. He’s pretty much on record as saying that all religions are crocks of $#!t in his opinion, and he’s taken on Islam before, including in “Religulous” among other places. In fact, there’s a stand-up piece from a few years ago where he basically says that Islam is a more dangerous and destructive religion than the others:

There’s a reason why guys like Bill Maher will mock Christianity all day long, but when it comes to Muslims…not so much.

Of course, that’s not to say that it isn’t a taboo to most comedians, which is why I’m glad “South Park” is fighting the good fight. In the “Cartoon Wars” episode from a few years ago, they tried to show Muhammed and Comedy Central wouldn’t let them, despite that they had shown him before in 2001.

I just realized I didn’t post the Maher bit somehow. Here it is:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EgPeiv9r-KM

Sure it’s ‘chilling’, but so is the gun wielding, “take OUR country back” rhetoric of the tea baggers. Those are vieled threats as far as I’m concerned, but I haven’t seen Cooper getting all worked up over THAT yet. Not to mention the nasty business going on in Arizona with the racial profiling of Hispanics and other people of color. Will AC360 be making statements denigrating that soon?

writer says:
April 21, 2010 at 12:28 am

There’s a reason why guys like Bill Maher will mock Christianity all day long, but when it comes to Muslims…not so much.
Oh yeah, Christians are so prosecuted!!! whaaa! whaaaa!!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EgPeiv9r-KM

Hardly a “rare” break for Cooper; it makes me laugh when I read that people say he is a straight down the middle journalist.

And where is Anderson’s compassion for the tea partiers, who are smeared as racist, bigots, etc. (by his own network) for speaking their minds.

Cooper can try, but he will fail, if he doesn’t straighten up and report both sides of a story.

@TfT

Yes the tea party are smeared unfairly by some; however some members of the tea parties also use language that is at the edge of extreme. Like it or not those few who do the smearing on both sides of the issue become the face of the sides, as the media loves to antagonize.

However, equating the smears being done on the Tea Party with the threat of death of the South Park writers is just absurd. I have seen many decent articles in the papers and segments on TV that paint the Tea Parties in a pretty decent light. But then again, if you are just looking for articles and segments that you can disagree with–then it makes it a little bit harder to see those that aren’t smears.

It does not depend on how you look at it (customized), and the man says he is an atheist, making fun of all religions Abrahimic, and proud to be an atheist, etc., so he is an atheist.
usb flash drive

@I’mNotBlue, ” In the multi-part series, “Cartoon Wars,” they had planned to show Muhammad, but Comedy Central wouldn’t allow it. Instead, they had a black screen, and a message to the audience in its place”

Sorry, I should have made myself clearer, this was really the episode that I was referring to. These “new” episodes seem to be built on the fact that Comedy Central prohibited them from showing Muhammed in the first place.

@TfT, “And where is Anderson’s compassion for the tea partiers, who are smeared as racist, bigots, etc. (by his own network) for speaking their minds.”

Sometimes he doesn’t do it directly, but he allows guests like Roland Martin, John Avlon, and Mark Potok to run their fear mongering mouths without even being challenged.

@marcus lewis, “Yes the tea party are smeared unfairly by some; however some members of the tea parties also use language that is at the edge of extreme.”

It is just as absurd to paint all the “Tea Party” members with a broad brush like CNN, MSNBC, and Mark Potok and the SPLC have done. Using what some may consider as “extreme language” is a far cry from breaking the law by making direct threats. BTW, both sides have used “extreme language” to make their points.

You are just noticing that now, Anderson?

You bash Christians and you get on TV, you bash Muslims and you’ll get your throat slit.

@TfT, “Cooper can try, but he will fail, if he doesn’t straighten up and report both sides of a story.”

I wonder when he will criticize the left wing hate speech of people like Jason Levin and Geico spokesperson Lance Baxter?

Well it is chilling.

No? Really? I think you have to admit that *you* find these organizations are frightening. And they really are frightening to people in general.

You don’t feel “chilled?” Ask yourself if you would feel that your life was safe if you drew even flattering drawings of some guy and labeled it “Mohamed the Profit” and placed them up on public bulletin boards. No? Then how can you not find these threats “chilling.” They really do ice things up a bit don’t they?

The reason is because the illegal acts — murders of specific named individuals — are actually called for by the heads of large organizations. Don’t think of this as inherently Muslim. This is also not general “hate speech” it is specific people calling for the murder of other specific people.

I assume that we all understand the difference between a) the acts of some lone overwrought loon, breaking in to a cartoonist’s house, knife in hand and b) the head of a religious telling his followers that it is their duty to kill specific people and naming those specific people.

Any sane person understands the difference between a) and b).

Do we understand the problem of conflating that particular leader and *his* particular organization with the broader religion he claims to subscribe to? I hope so! Most Muslims are wonderful people.

The fact is that no organization has the right to go call for person’s murders. Some people are getting confused because these organizations claim to be Islamic. No self-proclaimed identity puts one above the law. Who can state that organizations that call for specific person’s murders are… that their inherent character is Islamic? That would be ignorant.

Then there should be no problem if governments declare that particular sect to be illegal. That should not reflect upon the religion in general. Lawmakers should be free to make certain organizations illegal *without* those lawmakers (or their governments) being called anti-*something* Because stopping organizations who — at the top — promote illegal activity, is perfectly legal and it is in fact the responsibility of lawmakers to do so.

should read… b) the head of a specific religious organization

And maybe the oath “Christ on a crutch!” will be replaced someday by “Mohamed in a Bear Suit!” ;-)

What is noteworthy here is that an unease about Islamic radicalism is reaching even to CNN and Anderson Cooper. They have a very long way to go in order to understand the source of the threat, but this is a small positive sign. By the way, CNN was the major news network that followed the story of the Saudi death sentence for sorcery. Kudos.

In order to explain the Moslem violence in response to cartoons of Mohammad, Francel Martel says “that it is prohibited in Islam to render physical depictions of the Prophet Muhammad.” This is a typical misunderstanding. The threats of violence from Moslems about the cartoons, have nothing to do with mere “physical depictions of the Prophet Muhammad.” They have everything to do with making fun of Muhammad which is blasphemy, not idolatry. It is blasphemy that is punishable by death according to Islamic law.

And, why does the reporter use the title “the Prophet Muhammad”??? This is what a religious Moslem would say. For a non-Moslem, Muhammad is NOT “the Prophet”. The reporter should have said “the Muslim prophet Muhammad” or something like that.

m, as a far leftie, of course your knee jerk reaction is to attack any defense of Christianity. But that wasn’t what I was doing. Just saying other comedians don’t have the stones of the South Park guys. So m, be an atheist or a warlock or whatever you want. Couldn’t care less. And Jeremy, Maher still bashes Christians much more often than Muslims.

“And Jeremy, Maher still bashes Christians much more often than Muslims.”

Yes, but Christianity rules the roost in America; who else should he be making fun of, honestly? It’s almost an unwritten rule that you have to be Christian to be president. The country is most predominantly Christian. Obviously, if he’s going to attack religion, he’s going to go after the one with the largest market share and the greatest power the most.

He’s still on record as saying that the religions are (mostly) equally bad, and has specifically singled out Islam as being worse than the others. He’s hardly towing anyone’s Christian-hating line, at least not in favor of the other religions.

In Maher’s case, if it’s not cowardice, it’s at least cherry picking. Rev. Wright is a ‘Christian’. Louis Farrakhan is a Muslim. Don’t hear Maher making jokes about them. I guess, despite the title of his old show, Maher’s trying to stay politically correct. Don’t mock the left wing ‘religious’ people.

Reverend Wright is not really a significant religious figure. And he has basically called both of their religions stupid and dangerous. I don’t see him being inconsistent. He doesn’t have to address every single religious figure out there.

Also, “Religulous” contained a fairly mocking interview with Democratic Senator Mark Pryor, who is deeply religious.

Assemblage trusties, astagfiruLlah…