What is Digg?139 Comments
- Shirokun, on 10/11/2007, -0/+158BayIMG Rocks!
http://image.bayimg.com/caehbaabc.jpg
"In the cartoon, Felipe is talking about the Spanish Government's decision to pay €2500 ($3900) to the parents of every child born in the country in order to increase the birth rate.
“Just imagine if you end up pregnant,” Felipe says.
“This will be the closest thing to work I've ever done in my life.”"
Source: http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22109293-1702,00.html - apolloose, on 11/13/2007, -16/+46God Bless America - - can you believe they want the cartonists in JAIL???
- scabbers, on 10/11/2007, -4/+33I'd love to see a U.S magazine have Bush ***** one of the troops in the ass on the cover.
- Nougat, on 10/11/2007, -0/+22Wow, not just *in* the magazine, but REALLY BIG ON THE COVER.
Awesome. - frippertronic, on 10/11/2007, -3/+25sad day for the freedom :-(
- sorrillo, on 10/31/2007, -4/+26Let's talk about nipples ...
- AdriNavarro, on 10/31/2007, -4/+21http://oriol18.files.wordpress.com/2007/07/1573.png
Now, they suck. NOT TO CENSORING, now! We are Spanish, and we say NO to this censoring system. - CaptainNoPants, on 10/11/2007, -2/+19who are you to say God isn't made of spaghetti? blasphemer.
- Jugalator, on 10/31/2007, -1/+16They are often not allowed to be seen on TV because children are deemed by US government to not be ready to see nipples.
Government parenting... Mmmm...
See also: Word usage censorship by the FCC. - pintomp3, on 10/11/2007, -1/+15i'm listening.
- petpet, on 10/11/2007, -5/+18Do you remember when the Muslims complained for Allah's Danish cartoons?
A very similar case...
The following thing is the kings from Spain burning the editorial of El Jueves. - Urusai, on 10/11/2007, -1/+13Bush would never do that, because then he'd have to give the soldier a discharge.
Ow, that's bad. - WiseWeasel, on 10/31/2007, -1/+13Yeah, heaven forbid children should see a nipple... I mean it's not like they had their face glued to one for half their infancy. In Europe, you see nipples on billboards and shampoo commercials, and somehow civilization doesn't come to a grinding halt... We have messed up priorities in the US if explicit violence is A-OK but a nipple causes a controversy. We need to get over our crippling paranoia of the human body.
- inactive, on 10/19/2007, -0/+11thanks, very insightful, I especially loved the quadruple spacing so i had to roll my mouse wheel twenty seven times to get to the bottom. but I guess you won't understand this anyways...
- martinvives, on 10/11/2007, -5/+15Hey hey... Come on! A Judge said that, but I don't think anything will happen. And the Royal family spokesman has already said they have nothing to do with it. Worst things happen in the US every day, but you don't even realize it.
- krusher, on 10/11/2007, -5/+15¡Viva la república!
- moimart, on 10/11/2007, -1/+11The magazine was released and was selling as usual. The judge f*ckd up Spain's reputation about freedom of speech and now everybody is trying to buy as many magazines as they can before they remove them from the kiosks. But hey! The magazine itself wasn't censored.
- isaaccp, on 10/11/2007, -0/+9As a person I should say that my opinion is not reflected in the opinion of other people, and is especially not reflected in petpet's.
It's great how this silly judge has turned a simple joke into worldwide news. - xrisnothing, on 10/11/2007, -0/+9the judge in the ***** article
- williamhelmick, on 10/11/2007, -0/+9The answer to your question is, of course, yes. Magazines like that are sold at newsstands across the country every day - their covers are concealed with a black plastic wrapper. No judges order their recall and nobody gets threatened with jail time. There's a huge difference here, and for some reason you're refusing to acknowledge it. Might I ask why?
I do, however, agree that American culture in general has too much of a puritanical attitude toward sex and the nude human body. - hambend, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6If they hadn't banned it, I'd never have seen it. When will these people learn?
- ultralights, on 10/11/2007, -2/+8***** censorship!
- aditza121, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7Shame on them for what? So what if menéame is a copy? Unlike digg, it was created for the spanish community, and it's open source.
- zovres, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6oh I didn't care but now that they want it censored I want to see them
- Dustmuffins, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5The article you were supposed to read before posting.
- ohasan, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6whatever happened to free press. they most certainly went crazy over it when the Prophet Muhammad cartoons came out
- Aninhumer, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5Once they stopped chopping our heads off, we lost interest...
- antipax, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Lewinsky? wtf
- blackjack75, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5"a royal family should be treated respectfully"
Hum.. No. A royal family deserves no more respect that any other millionaire around. They are just the grand-children of the strongest man in the village a long time ago.
If they want respect they have to earn it. The king deserves some because he stood up in 1981 against the military to defend democracy at a time where it was strongly needed. His children? They deserve nothing in my eyes. They are not Gods, not masters. They are nothing.
What they deserve is to be drawn naked in teenager's magazines. Y que se jodan. - Kikinou, on 10/11/2007, -4/+8Not quite. I highly doubt that there will be any violent protests anywhere, no effigies or flags will be burnt, no fatwas will be issued, and the cartoonist will not have to go into hiding fearing for his life.
- blackjack75, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4The full magazine as a download:
http://rapidshare.com/files/44075436/El_Jueves__1573_-_by_Drow_male.rar
Not that I would have read it on other occasions, but still. - diegocg, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5"don't think anything will happen"? Police has retired the magazine from the kiosks.
- rejoined, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5In other news, a sex cartoon, depicting Prince Charles, got buried.
- UsernameTaken, on 10/19/2007, -0/+4Next time you should write your post in Catalan, and make it even more irrelevant for all of us.
- tech42er, on 10/11/2007, -3/+6No. He'll be in jail. Nice free country you got there, Spain.
- swrostmore, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5There is a law in the Qoran that says you may not depict Muhammad. In both cases some people find the law to be illegitimate. Also I'm pretty sure someone had that cartoon idea before you did - http://michellemalkin.com/2005/05/31/special-report-a-closer-look-at-anti-bush-art/
- UsernameTaken, on 10/31/2007, -1/+4Are you Spanish? If so, please explain to me why a modern society like yours, and many others in Europe, still tolerate monarchy? Doesn't it seem at the very least anachronistic and backwards to you?
I know about the separation between the royal family and government, but it still doesn't make a lot of sense to me. - madroneDorf, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3if most digg users could be considered from the west (which i'd guess, they are from western countries) spain is getting ridiculed for for this by the west as well.
ultimately though, until people start burning effigies and embassies as well as killing people its not quite on the same level - PaulOwen, on 10/19/2007, -0/+3Well I'm sure they didn't expect the Spanish Inquisition ...
- tech42er, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3That's authoritarianism, not Communism. Communism is an economic system.
- deadA1ias, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Oh boy, didn't see THAT comment coming. Yawn.
- mapryan, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3What's with all this sad business. This is a good day for freedom. Laws like this exist on the statute book in countries around the world and the general public often isn't aware of them. It takes a case like this to highlight the situation and make normal people stand up and question why a particular group of people should be protected from ridicule. If Spanish society decides it is acceptable for their monarchy to be protected from ridicule, then good for them - it's democracy at work. If not, then another archaic law ends up in the bin.
- teornr, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2sad but true :-/
- Ghazi, on 10/11/2007, -5/+7The West's hypocrisy at its finest. A few months ago, Muslims were ridiculed for getting upset over not 1 but 12 cartoons that depicted their holy prophet as a terrorist. Back then they called it freedom of speech.
- Jugalator, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2It depends a lot on how *fast* the diggs come too.
- blackjack75, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2No *****. The police is actually going to kiosks to seize the magazine in question. If you can read their website, the guys are appalled.
http://www.eljueves.es/
I am going to burn my spanish passport. Ok, maybe not. But still, *****'em. - sid007i, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Misses Felipe is freaking hot! More links and pics of her .. that's headline digg news!!!!!!! ;)
- robdiggity, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Hahah! It's funny because they are having sex!
- Gwyddyon, on 10/11/2007, -3/+5It's really amusing to watch all the Americans ranting about backwards monarchies and third-world countries, as though they know a fracking thing about Spanish politics or history before or after the 1490's. Spain is, in fact, technically speaking a first world country, and the monarchy has extremely limited power. What's more, the power they have has been far from abused - you have only to look at the foiled military coup back in the 80's.
So they don't want a cartoon of the royals having sex. So what? We have the same sorts of laws in the US. Look at the Seal of the President of the United States. As heraldica.org points out, "The manufacture and sale of such likenesses [of the seal] is likewise prohibited except under circumstances defined by executive orders of the President. ( 18 USC 713)." That's only one of many pieces of legislation prohibiting the free use of a SYMBOL of the President, not even his own image. At least Spanish magazines can freely display a pair of breasts without the censors shutting them down (unless, of course, they are the Queen's or Infanta's I suppose). As an aside though, I really dislike some of these arguments of "But look at Bush!" Technically, Juan Carlos and Felipe do not have nearly the political power that Bush does - they are sovereigns, not presidents or prime ministers, and since people are already so uneducated, theh comparisons might just make that situation worse. Bush's equivalent is Zapatero. - UsernameTaken, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2***** mindset, my friend.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 135 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 
