As you might recall, a few months ago The New York Times announced that they would not publish any of Charlie Hebdo‘s cartoons of Muhammad, even after Islamist terrorists massacred the French satire paper’s staff.  “Under Times standards, we do not normally publish images or other material deliberately intended to offend religious sensibilities,” they said in a statement. “After careful consideration, Times editors decided that describing the cartoons in question would give readers sufficient information to understand today’s story.”

… If I had hundreds of people depending on me for their safety… I don’t know what I’d do. Could I really risk the death of other human beings just to make a political statement?

But instead of being forward with their readers, the Times sanctimoniously acted like they were taking the high road. “Oh, we’re not scared of terrorists,” they tutted. “We’re just so above such coarse and rude depictions, not like those other outlets.” But in reality, coarse and rude depictions are perfectly okay at the Times when directed at religions that– lets face it– aren’t all that popular at Manhattan cocktail parties. …

Read the article “After Censoring Muhammad Cartoons, New York Times Publishes Offensive Image of Pope Benedict XVI” on mediaite.com.