And here’s a piece on whether or not he could have been ignored by the media:

Could the media have ignored Terry Jones and his Koran-burning plan?

The media have been criticized for giving Terry Jones and his Koran-burning scheme publicity. But the Web has changed the media landscape. Ignoring the event wasn’t an option, media experts say.

By Gloria Goodale, Staff writer
posted September 10, 2010 at 9:12 am EDT

For the moment, Pastor Terry Jones and the Islamic world appear to have reached a truce. The Florida pastor on Thursday called off plans to burn 200 Korans, saying he would instead travel to New York Saturday to talk with the imam of the mosque near ground zero about moving the Islamic center elsewhere.

But as news of the Koran burning circled the globe during the past week, so did questions about the role of the media in fanning the controversy.

US Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton this week rapped the media for giving the Rev. Mr. Jones attention and suggested the media “ignore” his actions on Sept. 11. Deepak Chopra, author of the forthcoming book “Muhammad,” says in an e-mail: “The media has a responsibility to not contribute to rage and possible violence by not making a global phenomenon of what could have been a nonevent by an unimportant pastor.”

But can a pastor, no matter how inconsequential, burn the sacred scriptures of another faith without notice in today’s interconnected world?

The Associated Press, at least, appeared to take the criticism to heart. Before the event was called off, AP had announced that it was not going to distribute images or audio that specifically showed Korans being burned.

But the pre-Internet days of a single news outlet guiding media coverage are gone, says Kevin Lerner of Marist College in Poughkeepsie, N.Y, who has studied the history of journalism. Journalism is in a new, democratized era of information-gathering, he says. If a single religious “crackpot” anywhere in the depths of America’s backwoods decides to burn a Koran, and even one person is there with a cellphone to upload the image, then it enters the larger flow of content that travels everywhere, he notes.

“This takes us back to the days before the mass media, when a village could talk its own news without the ‘mediation’ of a newspaper,” he says.

The difference in scale, however, places a new and evolving burden on journalism enterprises. “Their role is changing from one of strictly delivering the news to a waiting audience to one more of curation or helping to guide the discussion that is taking place across the vast digisphere,” Mr. Lerner says.

The real question should be not do we cover Pastor Jones but how, says Stephen Burgard, author of “Faith, Politics and Press in Our Perilous Times.”

With religious issues at the heart of so many hot-button topics – particularly during an election cycle – media coverage of religious issues is critical, he says. The real question is: Are the editors who make these decisions about what to cover learning more about the context, perspective, and history that will lead to a better understanding of what is behind stories like Jones?

“Far from avoiding these stories, we should learn about how to be better about how we do cover them,” he adds.

Context and perspective are not new to journalism, points out Hank Klibanoff, a journalism professor at Emory University in Atlanta and a Pulitzer Prize-winning author. But given the speed and breadth of information today, the media in all its old and new forms must make concentrated efforts to achieve what he calls “proportionality.” Journalism by its nature focuses on the extreme, the unusual, and the interesting without necessarily painting in the background context.

Now, he adds, the burden is on all those in the news-gathering business to place a person like Jones in proper perspective. The vast resources of digital information actually enable the kind of contextualizing that used to be much more difficult in a print newspaper, he adds.

“The digital media can provide all sorts of extra information,” he says.

In this case, that would mean links to worldwide reaction from religious and political leaders so Jones’s inflammatory behavior can immediately be seen in context.

I think the point has now become liberty. Does the idiot bow down to intimidation and fear over burning a few books, or does he go ahead and practice freedom of expression on his own private property.

Would the media be treating others the same way if they were burning a bible, or a flag? I think not.

So in other words (I didn’t watch the clip), they had him on to lecture to him? Gosh – how stupid.

Was it Brian or George who made this a national issue by asking POTUS about it in the first place?

Sorry, the only whore in this instance is Morning Joe.

More Liberty said:
I think the point has now become liberty. Does the idiot bow down to intimidation and fear over burning a few books, or does he go ahead and practice freedom of expression on his own private property.

Would the media be treating others the same way if they were burning a bible, or a flag? I think not.

I think this guy is a poor stand in for an argument about liberty. Doesn’t this whole thing strike you as a stunt?

“I understand why you guys don’t want to give him a platform, I mean seeing his face is disgusting enough,” said Deutsch.

Nice, Donny. Those kinds of attacks, plus the threats from the Muslim world of more violence, I think will only make people flip and support the pastor.

The threats from the Muslim world are repulsive. The Pastor is a dork, but we (our freedoms) are being held hostage.

This has gone beyond the right of some dork to burn a book to the rights of American citizens being blackmailed or threatened or held hostage or something….

Our freedoms are being held hostage? A little hyperbolic this morning?

Wow!

One sided journalism from libs. Who would of thought!!!

DD calls Jones “scum”- Wow, another hate-filled lib. Who would of thought!

notsofast said:
Wow!

One sided journalism from libs. Who would of thought!!!

DD calls Jones “scum”- Wow, another hate-filled lib. Who would of thought!

You think Jones is a stand up guy?

paulmdoro said:
In this case, that would mean links to worldwide reaction from religious and political leaders so Jones’s inflammatory behavior can immediately be seen in context.

Actually the Westboro Baptist Church (of “God Hates Fags” placards and protests at military funerals) burned a Koran in a public display in 2008.

The video is still on their website.

The event garnered no media attention and thus no corresponding warning from govt and military officials, and there are no reports if it sparked any corresponding violence from Muslims.

Imagine that…

Cecelia said:
Actually the Westboro Baptist Church (of “God Hates Fags” placards and protests at military funerals) burned a Koran in a public display in 2008.

The video is still on their website.

The event garnered no media attention and thus no corresponding warning from govt and military officials, and there are no reports if it sparked any corresponding violence from Muslims.

Imagine that…

Ignoring them worked. Imagine that…

paulmdoro said:
I think this guy is a poor stand in for an argument about liberty. Doesn’t this whole thing strike you as a stunt?

In the beginning yes, but now, at least to me, the media and others are pressuring him because of possible fears. But his dumb acts are a form of free expression and speech. Even the Mosque Imam is saying that if the mosque is moved that it then becomes a national security issue. Why are we allowing fear to dictate our liberties?

Should a free individual on his/her own property be able to express themselves, or should they curtail their own liberty out of threats and fear? We can not allow organizations, either domestic or foreign, to intimidate an individual for simply expressing themselves.

paulmdoro said:
You think Jones is a stand up guy?

He is an American hero, don’t ya think?

More Liberty said:
In the beginning yes, but now, at least to me, the media and others are pressuring him because of possible fears. But his dumb acts are a form of free expression and speech. Even the Mosque Imam is saying that if the mosque is moved that it then becomes a national security issue. Why are we allowing fear to dictate our liberties?

Should a free individual on his/her own property be able to express themselves, or should they curtail their own liberty out of threats and fear? We can not allow organizations, either domestic or foreign, to intimidate an individual for simply expressing themselves.

We should not succumb to fear, I agree. Why was he denied a permit to hold the burning in the first place? Was their an official reason given?

paulmdoro said:
Ignoring them worked. Imagine that…

And no one had to provide “context”…

notsofast said:
He is an American hero, don’t ya think?

Based on accusations against him that eventually caused him to be kicked out of his church prior to fleeing Germany, no, definitely not.

paulmdoro said:
You think Jones is a stand up guy?

Hey, paul, Jones has started a movement!!

SPRINGFIELD, Tenn. – Springfield Pastor Bob Old said his decision to burn the Islamic holy book on September 11 has nothing to do with the agenda of the pastor in Florida or the controversy surrounding the mosque in New York..

Westboro Baptist Church to burn Qurans if Dove doesn’t

By Chad Smith
Staff writer

Published: Thursday, September 9, 2010 at 2:42 p.m.
Last Modified: Thursday, September 9, 2010 at 5:20 p.m.

Westboro Baptist Church, the small Topeka, Kan., church that pickets funerals of American soldiers to spread its message that God is punishing the country for being tolerant of homosexuals, has vowed to hold a Quran burning if Gainesville’s Dove World Outreach Center calls its off.

Protester plans to burn Quran on Capitol steps

By Becky Orr
borr@wyomingnews.com

CHEYENNE — The founder of the Wyoming Tyranny Response Team plans to burn a copy of the Quran on the steps of the State Capitol on Saturday.

Thank you liberal media for starting this movement!

Suckers!

More Liberty said:
I think the point has now become liberty. Does the idiot bow down to intimidation and fear over burning a few books, or does he go ahead and practice freedom of expression on his own private property.

You just indicated that he has a choice. That’s liberty. He has the liberty to chose to do it. He also has the liberty to chose not to. Regardless of the pressure, it is his choice. Liberty exists on both sides of this issue, like it does many others.

Apparently burning books is against a city ordinance.

What a joke. Of course TV news networks could have ignored this guy. The Left now is embarrassed by the mess they’ve created here. So now they are scrambling with nonsensical justifications. “Well, since it was on the Internet, we had to put it on TV.”. Like that makes any sense at all.

That darn “the left.” Dealing in absolutes and generalizations is so fun.

notsofast said:
Thank you liberal media for starting this movement!

Suckers!

The Westboro Church has done this before in ’08. It garnered no coverage.

Jones’ protest dovetailed nicely with the media narrative of rampant U.S. Islamophobia and fit into a slow news cycle…

Lucky us…

Cecelia said:
The Westboro Church has done this before in ‘08. It garnered no coverage.

Jones’ protest dovetailed nicely with the media narrative of rampant U.S. Islamophobia and fit into a slow news cycle…

Lucky us…

The media’s hysteria regarding Jones doesn’t mean there isn’t Islamophobia. And the media hasn’t exactly ignored the Westboro Church either.

Cecelia said:
The Westboro Church has done this before in ‘08. It garnered no coverage.

Jones’ protest dovetailed nicely with the media narrative of rampant U.S. Islamophobia and fit into a slow news cycle…

Lucky us…

Hey, they “made” this guy a national story, now let ‘em have him!

paulmdoro said:
Our freedoms are being held hostage? A little hyperbolic this morning?

Not really when you think of the violence unleashed when there were reports a koran was flushed, when someone drew a cartoon, when South Park aired a cartoon, when the Pope mentioned something about Muslims, when we are told if we don’t allow the mosque, there will be violence, when were are told there will be world wide violence if one guy exercises his freedom of expression. And now we have the POTUS and others saying that someone exercising their freedoms will endanger our troops.

All the while being told that Muslims are peaceful, and we shouldn’t live in fear…. (Obama just said that) So, which is it? Can we have our freedoms, or do we have to give into threats of violence (which they follow through on – Obama just said that, too)?

Are we supposed to allow Muslims from around the world dictate how we (whether in the US, France, Italy, or wherever) live and whether we can abide and live by our own laws and freedoms?

Stephen Hogan said:
You just indicated that he has a choice. That’s liberty. He has the liberty to chose to do it. He also has the liberty to chose not to. Regardless of the pressure, it is his choice. Liberty exists on both sides of this issue, like it does many others.

Is it a free choice when people tell you that if you do it there will be violence, and that that violence is your fault. Do people not have free will that it is their choice to commit or not commit some form of violence.

Should we not be asking those that threat-in violence why they are not tolerant. It is clear from this circus who the tolerant ones are, and are not. Just his threat to burn 3 Qurans has resulted in flags being burned, bibles being burned and chants of “Death to America.” You tell me, who is the tolerant ones and who are not. I don’t see moderates out there asking the intolerant ones to respect free expression and free speech.

sarainitaly said:
Not really when you think of the violence unleashed when there were reports a koran was flushed, when someone drew a cartoon, when South Park aired a cartoon, when the Pope mentioned something about Muslims, when we are told if we don’t allow the mosque, there will be violence, when were are told there will be world wide violence if one guy exercises his freedom of expression. And now we have the POTUS and others saying that someone exercising their freedoms will endanger our troops.

All the while being told that Muslims are peaceful, and we shouldn’t live in fear…. (Obama just said that) So, which is it? Can we have our freedoms, or do we have to give into threats of violence (which they follow through on – Obama just said that, too)?

Are we supposed to allow Muslims from around the world dictate how we (whether in the US, France, Italy, or wherever) live and whether we can abide and live by our own laws and freedoms?

Reminds me of previous election years when certain people said voting for the opposition was the same as voting for terrorists. Fear in politics is nothing new and neither side has clean hands.

sarainitaly said:
“I understand why you guys don’t want to give him a platform, I mean seeing his face is disgusting enough,” said Deutsch.

Nice, Donny. Those kinds of attacks, plus the threats from the Muslim world of more violence, I think will only make people flip and support the pastor.

It is impossible to not wonder that had Jones been a cartoonist or a writer who had inflamed the Muslim world because of an anti-Islam perspective, would Donny Deutsch have reacted to him as he did.

Jones not only fits into the current media narrative about conservative Islamophobia, he fits into their class and religious biases too.

sarainitaly said:
All the while being told that Muslims are peaceful, and we shouldn’t live in fear…. (Obama just said that) So, which is it? Can we have our freedoms, or do we have to give into threats of violence (which they follow through on – Obama just said that, too)?

Bingo. Where are the call to the Muslims world to be tolerant?

I don’t have a problem with the Mosque in lower Manhattan. An individual should be able to do what he/she wants with their private property. But now the Imam is claiming that it is a matter of National Security, an obvious vailed threat, that the Mosque is not moved.

Why are we allowing the threat of violence to dictate our liberties?

paulmdoro said:
The media’s hysteria regarding Jones doesn’t mean there isn’t Islamophobia. And the media hasn’t exactly ignored the Westboro Church either.

More relevantly, the media certainly ignored them when they publicly burned the Koran in ’08.

More Liberty said:

Why are we allowing the threat of violence to dictate our liberties?

Were you saying this in 2004 when the right said voting for Democrats was like voting for terrorists?

paulmdoro said:
Fear in politics is nothing new and neither side has clean hands.

Well, what has that to do with any point she made?

paulmdoro said:
Reminds me of previous election years when certain people said voting for the opposition was the same as voting for terrorists. Fear in politics is nothing new and neither side has clean hands.

This isn’t about Repugnantcans or Dumb-ass-crats, it’s about liberty and freedom of speech.

Who is going to win? Liberty or Fear?

Cecelia said:
More relevantly, the media certainly ignored them when they publicly burned the Koran in ‘08.

I guess Koran burning wasn’t cool then.

More Liberty said:
This isn’t about Repugnantcans or Dumb-ass-crats, it’s about liberty and freedom of speech.

Who is going to win? Liberty or Fear?

I’ll tune in to find out.

paulmdoro said:
Were you saying this in 2004 when the right said voting for Democrats was like voting for terrorists?

Yes I was. But I could give a rats ass about Dumb-ass-crats or Repugnantcans. This is about individuals and their liberty, not some corrupt political party and their lies.

More Liberty said:
Is it a free choice when people tell you that if you do it there will be violence, and that that violence is your fault.

Yes, it is. Free choice does not protect you from the negative consequences of your choice, regardless of what those consequences may be.

More Liberty said:
Should we not be asking those that threat-in violence why they are not tolerant.

We should.

More Liberty said:
You tell me, who is the tolerant ones and who are not. I don’t see moderates out there asking the intolerant ones to respect free expression and free speech.

We should only expect tolerance from ourselves.

More Liberty said:
Yes I was. But I could give a rats ass about Dumb-ass-crats or Repugnantcans. This is about individuals and their liberty, not some corrupt political party and their lies.

Unfortunately it also highlights selective outrage.

paulmdoro said:
Were you saying this in 2004 when the right said voting for Democrats was like voting for terrorists?

So you’re making a comparison between some nebulous “right” and warnings by the Secretary of State, the president, the commander of armed forces in Afghanistan, and media entities who argued that the pastor should be forcibly stopped as a matter of practicality?

More Liberty said:
Is it a free choice when people tell you that if you do it there will be violence, and that that violence is your fault.

At the same time, is it not the right of those that oppose his actions to express their concern?

Cecelia said:
So you’re making a comparison between some nebulous “right” and warnings by the Secretary of State, the president, the commander of armed forces in Afghanistan, and media entities who argued that the pastor should be forcibly stopped as a matter of practicality?

Well the nebulous “left” makes appearances every other minute around here, so someone has to return the favor every once in a while for symmetry.

Cecelia said:
Well, what has that to do with any point she made?

If you figure it out, let me know. hehe

More Liberty said:
Why are we allowing the threat of violence to dictate our liberties?

Exactly! I was against the burning, but now it is a different matter. (I am still against it, I am against burning books. I love books.)

Cecelia said:
It is impossible to not wonder that had Jones been a cartoonist or a writer who had inflamed the Muslim world because of an anti-Islam perspective, would Donny Deutsch have reacted to him as he did.

I’m going to go look and see if he ever said anything about South Park…

paulmdoro said:
I guess Koran burning wasn’t cool then.

Is that the essence of what you just termed as “selective outrage”…

sarainitaly said:
If you figure it out, let me know. hehe

Reading comprehension hard. Make brain hurt.

Stephen Hogan said:
Yes, it is. Free choice does not protect you from the negative consequences of your choice, regardless of what those consequences may be.

It is? Negative consequences to a free individual burning 3 books on private property is the possibility of getting a small burn. He is not responsible for some fanatics that decide to kill or bomb because they didn’t have any tolerance.

The left hates this character more than they hate the radical muslims who don’t want to burn books but people.

Where were all the Left-Wing Democrats condemning the NY Times, when they routinely threatened our troops by disseminating classified information and pics of Abu Ghraib?

Where were they when militant homosexuals in Frisco burned the Bible?

SELECTIVE INDIGNATION! – Yet another telltale sign of DEMOCRATIC Credibility in SHAMBLES!

A Vote for ANY DEMOCRAT is a Vote for Lying, Ruling-Class Despots!

Cecelia said:
Is that the essence of what you just termed as “selective outrage”…

Selective outrage doesn’t discriminate.

paulmdoro said:
Well the nebulous “left” makes appearances every other minute around here, so someone has to return the favor every once in a while for symmetry.

Yet another straw man.

Stephen Hogan said:
At the same time, is it not the right of those that oppose his actions to express their concern?

Yes, everyone has expressed their opinions. Opinions are one thing – threatening to exterminate America is another.

Cecelia said:
Yet another straw man.

Sorry if the truth hurts Cecelia.

paulmdoro said:
Selective outrage doesn’t discriminate.

Yeah, but it sure has differing consequences depending upon whose it is.

It’s THAT difference that seems to be beyond your perspective.

paulmdoro said:
Sorry if the truth hurts Cecelia.

A straw man doesn’t represent “truth” it merely represents a desire to deflect.

Stephen Hogan said:
At the same time, is it not the right of those that oppose his actions to express their concern?

They completely have the right to protest this guys action, and I support that. But peaceful protests, and the fear of actual violence are two different things. I support the right of the Mosque to be in Lower Manhattan, and I support peaceful protest. But I would not support those mosque protestors if they threatened violence, just as I don’t support people who threaten violence against the crazy pastor.

paulmdoro said:
Well the nebulous “left”

Nebulous?

Hardly:

Here are some of ‘em:

NY Times, LA Times, Washington Post, NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, Salon, Slate, Time, Newsweek, Mother Jones, Rolling Stone, The View, HP, Vanity Fair, Village Voice, The Nation, The Atlantic,the Boston Globe,Chicago Sun-Times,The New Republic,The Seattle Times, Daily Kos, Huffington Post, Media Matters, The New Yorker.

paulmdoro said:
Reading comprehension hard. Make brain hurt.

Take an aspirin.

The damage has already been done. It really matters not anymore whether the community center stays or not, the koran burns or not. Sometimes you can’t fix stupid.

Really poor grandstanding Joe. I wouldn’t have expected much more from you, actually. It usually is all about you. And the point on having the pastor on? Not letting him speak? Ok, so most of us think he is a kook, but invite someone to your show and then not allow him to speak? Don’t want to give him airtime? Then pass on the whole thing or allow him his right to speak. DD, there was/is no reason to bring this mans physical attributes/ or lack of into the conversation. Right there, you disqualified yourself, IMO, with anything else you had to say.

paulmdoro said:
Reading comprehension hard. Make brain hurt.

I know, honey. When you get stuck, just ask. We’re here to help.

sarainitaly said:
Yes, everyone has expressed their opinions. Opinions are one thing – threatening to exterminate America is another.

I know. I was speaking in regards to the Americans criticizing the pastor’s plan, not extremists.

More Liberty said:
It is? Negative consequences to a free individual burning 3 books on private property is the possibility of getting a small burn. He is not responsible for some fanatics that decide to kill or bomb because they didn’t have any tolerance.

You may not feel responsible and, in many ways, I agree with you. However, many people will claim that he is responsible and that will be something he has to deal with as a result of his decision.

Stephen Hogan said:
You may not feel responsible and, in many ways, I agree with you. However, many people will claim that he is responsible and that will be something he has to deal with as a result of his decision.

Sorry, “You may not feel like he’s responsible”.

Left out the ‘he’s’.

paulmdoro said:
Were you saying this in 2004 when the right said voting for Democrats was like voting for terrorists?

“The Right” said that? Really?

I find it funny that people from a country who abuse human rights ( Abu Ghraib, Gitmo…) talk about freedom and radicalism!

http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc4/hs615.snc4/59521_113194682070044_100001385377156_94757_669557_n.jpg

Another stupid stunt for tomorrow!

Burning the Torah, let the indignation begin!

Stephen Hogan said:
You may not feel responsible and, in many ways, I agree with you. However, many people will claim that he is responsible and that will be something he has to deal with as a result of his decision.

You may be correct, but it is not right.

I think the crazy old uncle in the media’s attic is that they all know that had MoJoe interviewed an irate fundamentalist Muslim ranting about infidels, Donny Deutsch would have never insulted that person’s looks, let alone have called them a “terrorist”…

LeptisMagna said:
Burning the Torah, let the indignation begin!

Don’t hold your breath. It won’t make talk radio, let alone Anderson Cooper….

I can’t stand Mika. She has to be cable news’ biggest social climber, ever. Receiving text messages from the White House, and having Arianna Huffington throw a party in her honor, to promote her book, always gets her gushing, like a Valley Girl airhead. Without her daddy’s influence, she’d probably be NBC’s chief Siberian reporter.

When we became engaged more actively with the world in a whole, we became enlightened to the fact that Radical Islamic Terrorist have hijacked the Islamic Religion, known as the Muslims faith. Together, in honesty and trust, we can make that right,
problems are of a magnitude that can not be corrected easily without more help form segments of the Muslims living in America. They need to be more open in America, as to demounting every radical atrocity committed by their brothers, be it in this or any other country. I believe Muslims in America are either scared to speak out openly more often or are faking it to stall the length of time non-Muslim citizen believe and trust them.
If Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf near ground zero is honest with us in regards to his feeling about freedom of religion for all, plus his acceptance of American values, and his Pledge of Allegiance to the United States of American, then he can not serve the laws of two different Countries any more than he can serve two different Gods. Someone needs to first understand this and then tell him this. Someone with authority. This would be like being married to two different women. This is not legal in America and will not be tolerated in the name of keeping peace and living here without peace is not an option.
If Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf is faking his interest and friendship with Americans and thinks his friends in the Iranian hierarchy and enforce what he thinks is his right her in American, he is being bamboozled by his own imagination.

What if Islamics started burning Bibles, as a Youtube stunt? Would that be offensive to Christians? It shouldn’t be.

valkyrie101 said:
What if Islamics started burning Bibles, as a Youtube stunt? Would that be offensive to Christians? It shouldn’t be.

Been there…done that….

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/285123/christians_in_gaza_fear_for_their_lives.html?cat=9

Don’t you people have jobs?

valkyrie101 said:
What if Islamics started burning Bibles, as a Youtube stunt? Would that be offensive to Christians? It shouldn’t be.

I wouldn’t like it, and I’d protest, but I would not threaten abject violence. I’ve served my country, and I’ve watched people burn our flag, but did I scream at their actions, threaten violence and demand that they stop? No, we watch and usually just shake our heads at the disrespect since we are tolerant and stand behind people freedom of expression.

Founders_were_Liberal said:
Don’t you people have jobs?

No.

Now get back to work!

sarainitaly said:
You may be correct, but it is not right.

It may not be right, but that’s how it is.

Stephen Hogan said:
You may not feel responsible and, in many ways, I agree with you. However, many people will claim that he is responsible and that will be something he has to deal with as a result of his decision.

Of course they will say that. Many people won’t hold the Islamic extremists responsible for their own actions. They will blame everything under the sun…just not them.

Stephen Hogan said:
It may not be right, but that’s how it is.

So, if i don’t like something you said on your own property, and I smack you…..well then it’s your fault?

Obama said this would inflame the passions of over a billion Muslims. I blame the inflamed Muslims. Get a fucking grip, people.

Donny Deutsch is 100% correct. Freedom of speech does not trump National Security.

this was in poor taste to do this, they didn’t even consider whether or not this would piss him off and embolden him to go through with the burning. I’m suprisedto hear Buchanan advocate stopping him physically by the government. Though his reason are the troops. Donny Douche’s problem with it is more of the lefties embracing Islam after they see a few conservatives be against the ‘gz mosque’.

It’s cool lefties, pick and choose where when and which rights people are allowed to use. Here’s a cap and trade for you, people can buy Constitutional credits and allot them for monies.

If it wasn’t for the near-gz community center/mosque/swimming pool, this would barely get a mention in the news. It didn’t take long for some self-depricating lefties to connect this guy to someone you hate, right Matthews?

I might credit the Morning Joe crew with this “brilliant” idea for handling the lunatic pastor, if it weren’t for the fact that they treat all guests with whom they disagree pretty much the same way!

How To Marginalize A Media Whore? Doesn’t Media Whore describe everyone on the Morning Joe?

Stephen Hogan said:
It may not be right, but that’s how it is.

that might be how it is, but it sucks.
;O)
haha

More Liberty said:
So, if i don’t like something you said on your own property, and I smack you…..well then it’s your fault?

good one!

Founders_were_Liberal said:
Don’t you people have jobs?

Nope. Jealous?

Founders_were_Liberal said:
Don’t you people have jobs?

Don’t be silly…only the little people have jobs…..sheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeesh….everybody knows that.

glenn113 said:
Donny Deutsch is 100% correct. Freedom of speech does not trump National Security.

Tyrants for years have used “National Security” to violate liberties all the time. FDR used it, Lincoln used it, Bush used it and now Obama’s using it.

I don’t care what anybody thinks about Fox News, good or bad… what Fox and Morning Joe did here took balls.

glenn113 said:
Donny Deutsch is 100% correct. Freedom of speech does not trump National Security.

If the security of this country is dependent on what some loon in Florida says, we are in a lot more trouble than I realized…because I live in Florida…and we are all a bit loony here. Perfect example is the old lady driving in front of me right now with her turn signal still on…she’s swerving on the interstate, as I try to type this into my Blackberry and stay on the road myself ….without hitting someone……

ummmmmmmm…never mind…

valkyrie101 said:
What if Islamics started burning Bibles, as a Youtube stunt? Would that be offensive to Christians? It shouldn’t be.

I don’t think I’ve found anyone who actually supports his decision to burn the books, but it is his right. And people have the right to be offended. And they have a right to voice their opposition. But they don’t have the right (well, they probably think they do, actually) to threaten violence and intimidate an entire country…

Should people be offended if someone burns a book? No. Can they think he’s an idiot? Yea. Can they disagree? Yea. Should they take it personally, or fear they are losing a little corner of their religious beliefs? No.

Should Muslims protest the burning of something they hold sacred by burning our flag, bibles and effigys of POTUS, screaming Death to Christians, Death to America? Doesn’t seem smart, but apparently they can cuz they are a peaceful people. (like Obama said: peaceful people who follow through on their threats )

valkyrie101 said:
What if Islamics started burning Bibles, as a Youtube stunt? Would that be offensive to Christians? It shouldn’t be.

Val, there are dozens of bible burning videos on YouTube. Do a search, and watch as many as you want. Just don’t expect to see that kind of book burning covered in the mainstream media.

This is a free country, and people can burn anything they want. The reason the Koran burning is different is because the mainstream media turned it into their big story of the month, thus creating a foreign policy fiasco and putting our troops in harm’s way.

glenn113 said:
Donny Deutsch is 100% correct. Freedom of speech does not trump National Security.

Burning books does not threaten national security.

notsofast said:
Wow!

One sided journalism from libs. Who would of thought!!!

DD calls Jones “scum”- Wow, another hate-filled lib. Who would of thought!

Ignorance of basic grammar from a “Conservative”… Who would have thought!

More Liberty said:
Of course they will say that. Many people won’t hold the Islamic extremists responsible for their own actions. They will blame everything under the sun…just not them.

That’s an obscene over-simplification.

The concept of blame and fault are largely subjective. There are many people who blame the US government for the Oklahoma City bombings because the government’s actions in Waco inspired McVeigh. And, to a degree, they may have a point. It is the same as those that argue that we bear some responsibility for 9/11 because of our actions overseas.

Your notion of responsibility as you’ve implied would only truly work if people lived in a vacuum. That’s not the case. In reality, people’s actions inspire and effect others, leading them to react.

Look at it this way: you see a hornet’s nest and decide to do something that you know will piss them off, like whacking it with a stick. As a result, you get stung multiple times. Is it the fault of the hornets that you got stung? The direct action of stinging, sure, but what about the action that gave them the intent. Without you having hit the nest with a stick, the hornets would not have attacked.

Now, I am aware of the cognitive differences between hornet and human, but the point remains the same. Jones knew that burning the Koran would piss a lot of people off. That was his intention. Sure, there is a proclivity among extremists to throw threats out every where, but had Jones not planned and publicized this, there would be one less thing for them to make threats about. Thus, if violence occurs, Jones would not be responsible for the violence, rather he would be responsible for providing the inspiration for the act of violence.

More Liberty said:
So, if i don’t like something you said on your own property, and I smack you…..well then it’s your fault?

I would not be responsible for the smack, but I would be responsible for inciting you to smack me. If the police were called, they might arrest you, but I’d be far from innocent. They may say something like ‘well, he asked for it’, or ‘he had it coming’.

More Liberty said:
I wouldn’t like it, and I’d protest, but I would not threaten abject violence. I’ve served my country, and I’ve watched people burn our flag, but did I scream at their actions, threaten violence and demand that they stop? No, we watch and usually just shake our heads at the disrespect since we are tolerant and stand behind people freedom of expression.

Another way to look at it is that the burning involves pulp and ink going up in flames. So what?

felixw said:
Val, there are dozens of bible burning videos on YouTube. Do a search, and watch as many as you want. Just don’t expect to see that kind of book burning covered in the mainstream media. This is a free country, and people can burn anything they want. The reason the Koran burning is different is because the mainstream media turned it into their big story of the month, thus creating a foreign policy fiasco and putting our troops in harm’s way.

You could be right.

Among many other things, Joe is just another Repug born-again fundamentalist freak. A valuable crutch for the hatred, ignorance, & raw stupidity those folks forever spread. Another moral & intellectual renegade with thoroughly empty “patriotism.” Yuk.

Burn Pastor Jones and his congregation in their won church. Send them to their God, Satan.

I blame the media for this whole contraversy. For several days Mika the miserable have been trying to excuse the MSM for their role in all this by saying since General Petreus and the President commented on it, they have to cover the story. But the General and the President never would have commented if the media hadn’t been covering this in the first place.

Norman Murphy said:
Burn Pastor Jones and his congregation in their won church. Send them to their God, Satan.

I’d rather see you burn.

Muslims burn the American flag and bibles. Can you imagine Mika having one of them on and not letting them speak? She’d have them on and would have listened earnestly to their reasons for hating the US and Christianity, head nodding in agreement. By the way, Morning Joe obviously had to lie to get this guy on. I’m fairly sure he wouldn’t have agreed to, ‘hey, were going to have you on to lecture you and then cut your mike before you say anything’. So, MJoe lied to a guest for the purposes of ratings and hype and then cut his mike without letting him talk. Great journalism, Mika!

‘Burn Pastor Jones and his congregation in their won church. Send them to their God, Satan’

You’re advocating murder. Mediaite should delete this comment.

‘I’d rather see you burn’

Wow, another murder wish. Come on, Mediaite, clean this up. There’s freedom of speech but no constitutional right to post death wish messages on a private site. Does Mediaite have no standards? I guess you’re cool with calls for murder. Come on, Mediaite.

When many posters here seemingly take positions to the right of Fox News by arguing against attacks on Pastor “Yosemite Sam” and his liberty/freedom it reinforces the notion that extremism is indeed alive and well.

When did a call for common sense consideration for the impact on American troops become “intimidation and fear”?

This is the very arrogance that feeds anti-American sentiment and undermines efforts to reach out to those who exhibit the same intolerance and xenophobia that we do.

Michael_T said:
When many posters here seemingly take positions to the right of Fox News by arguing against attacks on Pastor “Yosemite Sam” and his liberty/freedom it reinforces the notion that extremism is indeed alive and well. When did a call for common sense consideration for the impact on American troops become “intimidation and fear”? This is the very arrogance that feeds anti-American sentiment and undermines efforts to reach out to those who exhibit the same intolerance and xenophobia that we do.

Michael,

Your post shows a lot of common sense. Prepare to be attacked by the crazies.

The liberals are all over this guy supporting Islam, I can’t wait for their reaction next time they execute a homosexual.

kit9 said:
Wow, another murder wish. Come on, Mediaite, clean this up. There’s freedom of speech but no constitutional right to post death wish messages on a private site. Does Mediaite have no standards? I guess you’re cool with calls for murder. Come on, Mediaite.

Unfortunately there are some here like that. Nearly every post that Iris makes , wishes those on the right to hurry up and die . Bad form aside , it’s really rather monotonous.

kit9 said:
‘I’d rather see you burn’

Wow, another murder wish. Come on, Mediaite, clean this up. There’s freedom of speech but no constitutional right to post death wish messages on a private site. Does Mediaite have no standards? I guess you’re cool with calls for murder. Come on, Mediaite.

Freedom of speech only applies to the government. No privately owned forum (on the internet or in the physical world) is required by the Constitution to give you the freedom to say whatever you want. It is actually within THEIR rights to prevent you from saying anything they don’t want you to say in their forum whether that be related to just saying anything, criticism someone, expressing political views, using offensive language, or making threats against others.

BTW, the site could use a report button for more easily notifying moderators of things that are against their usage policies.

Another way to marginalize him would be to talk about stories that are actually news.

Am I missing something altogether? I think it’s wrong to put someone on-camera, and on standby without giving them an opportunity to speak or answer some tough questions.

As far as Jones goes, he is getting himself involved in how our troops engage in Afghanistan and I believe you only have one top general calling the shots. Jones is creating problems we don’t need. As much as I don’t like to, maybe we only need someone from the IRS to question Jones on his church’s tax status.

Morgan said:
Am I missing something altogether? I think it’s wrong to put someone on-camera, and on standby without giving them an opportunity to speak or answer some tough questions.

As far as Jones goes, he is getting himself involved in how our troops engage in Afghanistan and I believe you only have one top general calling the shots. Jones is creating problems we don’t need. As much as I don’t like to, maybe we only need someone from the IRS to question Jones on his church’s tax status.

I agree. Either you cover this story or you don’t. Either you interview Jones or you don’t. But let’s face the facts: MSNBC is in total disarray on this story, and doesn’t know what to do. They pushed this story aggressively when they thought they could score points against Republicans. But once the leading Republicans all repudiated the book burning, MSNBC started feeling embarrassed at the high profile they had given this obscure unhinged preacher. Now they want to wash their hands of the mess, but it’s hard to just walk away when they have been hyping this story to the utmost for the last week. Hence the crazy spectacle of inviting Jones on TV, and then not letting him talk. But when you are obsessed by ideology, and let it trample on journalistic ethics, you end up with bizarre moments likes this one.

Through both of these issues, the so called “ground zero mosque” and the burning of the Quran. let’s not forget we have Muslim Americans in the military fighting for our freedoms. Of the 4,400 casualties of Iraq and the over 30,000 wounded soldiers, I wonder how many Muslims are in those numbers. What a way to honor them. You can’t pray here and we’re gonna burn your holy book. Shame on those that connected these two issues. Boehner, Palin and others. Politics at it’s worst.

I love Mika. She takes digs at Trump for the Ms. America pageant; meanwhile, if she undid one more button on that blouse, you’d be able to see her belly button. Don’t get me wrong. I think that’s precisely what she do. She’s the hottest woman on television, period. IMO.

felixw said:
I agree. Either you cover this story or you don’t. Either you interview Jones or you don’t. But let’s face the facts: MSNBC is in total disarray on this story, and doesn’t know what to do. They pushed this story aggressively when they thought they could score points against Republicans. But once the leading Republicans all repudiated the book burning, MSNBC started feeling embarrassed at the high profile they had given this obscure unhinged preacher. Now they want to wash their hands of the mess, but it’s hard to just walk away when they have been hyping this story to the utmost for the last week. Hence the crazy spectacle of inviting Jones on TV, and then not letting him talk. But when you are obsessed by ideology, and let it trample on journalistic ethics, you end up with bizarre moments likes this one.

That’s exactly what’s happened. MSNBC filed this story under: Get those tea-baggers!

Whoops!

Good for the morning Joe crew. They were actually much nicer to that parasite than he deserved.

Jones is a complete whackjob who should have been ignored, but you invite someone to your show, you either let him talk or at least say “Hey, how’d you like to come on to be browbeaten by a bunch of people who are even bigger self-righteous assholes than you are and not be allowed to respond?”

I cannot express how much I loathe those idiots for making me feel even a scintilla of sympathy for Jones. The way to deal with him is not to descend below Jones’s level, and it’s now my dream to be able to appear on that show to call Mika a stupid bitch to her face.

And where was this crew of self-righteous jerks when the media was various secret anti-terrorist programs? Those revelations certainly didn’t help the troops, but I don’t recall Morning Joe adopting an “F the First Amendment” attitude then.

How to Marginalize a Media Whore? Hmm. So are we talking about Mika? Or an Unknown Pastor of an Unknown Church, with a congregation of 50 People, who’s gonna flip a coin about whether or Not he starts burning Korans Real Soon, and that the MSM has tried to turn into an event that’s The Second Of Obama?

Oh and Btw,when does Mika’s Daddy get the same Sermon from Meacham, for His wanting us to shoot down Israeli Jets if They bomb Iran’s Nuclear facilities in the name of Self-Preservation? And will She Also end That “interview” with, “we don’t really need to hear anything else, so thanks – Daddy.”? I Doubt It. Because That F’king Vampire is a Big Reason Why we are, Where we are with the Islamic World Today!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VnV_pNe_BB0

Just thought you’d like to Know That, Mika. I mean, even the Fucking Saudis have given Israel the OK to use Their Airspace when they Attack Iran, but your Cold War Relic of a Daddy says, NO, mm.. mm..MM! We may need to Use the Mullahs and the Dinnerjacket Against Russia Later. Well Memo to ZBig: They “No Likey” Us Anymore. Too Much Vodka and Too Many CFR Think (Too MUCH) Tanks. Jagoff.

our website: http://www.fashionshoppong.us

BEST QUALITY GUARANTEE!!
SAFTY & HONESTY GUARANTEE!!
FAST & PROMPT DELIVERY GUARANTEE!!

“We’ve really been debating whether to do this,” said Mika Brzezinski to start the segment.

Clearly they did not debate long enough.

Look on the bright side: at least Meacham didn’t lecture on a subject he knows nothing about. Like, say, how to successfully run a news magazine.

“When did a call for common sense consideration for the impact on American troops become “intimidation and fear”?”

If we truly have to have a national debate and realistic concern about waves of violence over a book burning by a lone individual – then I say Islamophobia is justified thing to have.

Clearly the “bridge building” envisioned by Park 51 needs to happen within the Muslim community.