TX Shots fired at a free-speech "draw Muhammad " event in Garland TX

[EllieBee]

What I don't get is why being a target of Islamic extremism means your views are off limits for criticism. Yes, the people at the event are victims. But the particular views they're espousing are not somehow victims. This thread opened with praise for them being courageous defendants of free speech. All I want to say is that I condemn the attacks, but I also reject their take on the world and I'm not going to pretend it's all good because, hey, free speech and they were shot at. It seems like you can't condemn the attacks as well as their views without apologising for yourself.

No, I totally agree with your above statement.

I don't condone the attack, but I can see how such inflammatory actions might incite people who are already unstable.

I, too, can assert that I agree the attacks were heinous and illegal without having to laud the victims as "saints" "or warriors for justice".

I can disagree with their actions and still agree they were victims because their actions are protected.

I would feel the same about the KKK. I detest them. But they have a right to free speech as well. If they were attacked thusly, I would agree that it was criminal. But I wouldn't be weeping over it, because I believe they are a detestable group.

 

[Dogface]

I find it horrifying that in the name of asserting Freedom of Speech rights, police officers and others were put in danger and could have paid with their lives. It's horrifying that something like this happened, but it is also horrifying to think that they must have been concerned beforehand that something like this might happen (huge police presence being proof positive of this). I think sometimes people should take into consideration whether asserting their rights may infringe upon the safety of others, such as the police officers who had no choice in the matter, but had to be there to protect and serve. Which they did. God bless them.

I understand what you are saying but no one put these officers in harms way BUT the terrorists. And too many Americans have sacrificed their lives throughout the centuries for us to tuck tail and cower when it really counts.

 

[CuriousGuy]

I understand what you are saying but no one put these officers in harms way BUT the terrorists. And too many Americans have sacrificed their lives throughout the centuries for us to tuck tail and cower when it really counts.

Very well put. Lots of misplaced outrage. This is akin to blaming a rape victim for dressing provocatively.

 

[sonjay]

I can see his point. Terrorism by definition targets random people with the intent of terrorizing the masses for a political end.

In this case all of the intended targets were blasphemers in the mind of the shooters so it wasn't done to randomly terrorize the masses.

Actually, no, targeting random people is not part of the definition of terrorism. Here are a few definitions, pulled from googling "what is terrorism":

The deliberate commission of an act of violence to create an emotional response through the suffering of the victims in the furtherance of a political or social agenda.
Violence against civilians to achieve military or political objectives.

Terrorism is commonly defined as violent acts (or the threat of violent acts) intended to create fear (terror), perpetrated for an economic,[1] religious, political, or ideological goal, and which deliberately target or disregard the safety of non-combatants (e.g., neutral military personnel or civilians).

the use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims.

Terrorism is the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government or its citizens to further certain political or social objectives.

the unlawful use, or threatened use, of force or violence against persons, societies, cultures or governments in order to create a desired change. The change sought may be political, religious or social in nature.
​

This was terrorism.

 

[cady]

Sharia has been mentioned several times in these threads. I was asking a question of those who subscribe to Pamela Geller's beliefs. I perhaps mistakenly assumed that many here would be familiar with her and her blog. She is adamantly worried about Islamic forces taking over our country, and rants about Islamic culture. ad nauseum. She arranged the event in Texas and announced that holy war has arrived. She was probably a bit disappointed that the jihadis were a couple of wannabees. I'm just glad that none of the "art" patrons were injured in her holy war. JMO

 

[effervescent]

I understand what you are saying but no one put these officers in harms way BUT the terrorists. And too many Americans have sacrificed their lives throughout the centuries for us to tuck tail and cower when it really counts.

I think we disagree on this though... I think organizing an "artistic rally" to assert freedom of speech with the intent to offend put the officers and other law enforcement and citizens in danger first. Otherwise there wouldn't have been so many there providing security before the shooters opened fire. Yes, the shooters are terrorists, no question, but I can't help thinking it was incited and set up for that potential result. NOT in any way do I excuse what happened though and I don't intend to lay blame on anybody other than the terrorists in the end.
However, Ms. Geller seems pretty pleased with the outcome and I am not sure pleased is something anybody should be feeling about this.

"“I expected that people would come to realize how severely the freedom of speech is threatened today, and how much it needs to be defended,” she told The Post. “We were prepared for violence.” Indeed, her group’s Web site said “we know the risks” and that the “exhibit has to be staged.”" http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...organized-a-prophet-muhammad-cartoon-contest/

 

[Curious Guy]

Sharia has been mentioned several times in these threads. I was asking a question of those who subscribe to Pamela Geller's beliefs. I perhaps mistakenly assumed that many here would be familiar with her and her blog. She is adamantly worried about Islamic forces taking over our country, and rants about Islamic culture. ad nauseum. She arranged the event in Texas and announced that holy war has arrived. She was probably a bit disappointed that the jihadis were a couple of wannabees. I'm just glad that none of the "art" patrons were injured in her holy war. JMO

I'm not sure what Geller believes in nor do I see the relevance other than to isinuate she and her fellow patrons brought the terror attack on themselves.

 

[sonjay]

I find it horrifying that in the name of asserting Freedom of Speech rights, police officers and others were put in danger and could have paid with their lives. It's horrifying that something like this happened, but it is also horrifying to think that they must have been concerned beforehand that something like this might happen (huge police presence being proof positive of this). I think sometimes people should take into consideration whether asserting their rights may infringe upon the safety of others, such as the police officers who had no choice in the matter, but had to be there to protect and serve. Which they did. God bless them.

I find it horrifying that in the name of asserting Freedom of Speech rights Mohammed, police officers and others were put in danger attacked and could have paid with their lives.

It's horrifying, to me, that anyone would kill over differing religious or political views.

Protecting the fundamental right of freedom of speech is one of the core functions of government. There are few things more important than that. IMO, it's one of the highest and best public services that our law enforcement officers could possibly do.

 

[time]

Very well put. Lots of misplaced outrage. This is akin to blaming a rape victim for dressing provocatively.

Uh, no, it is not the same thing at all. This woman spreads hate, that is not the same as a short dress :facepalm:

The founder of the organization that sponsored the Mohammad cartoon contest in Garland, TX, has long been in the news as an incendiary spokeswoman for anti-Islamic causes.Pamela Geller is the founder of the American Freedom Defense Initiative, an organization also known as Stop Islamization of America, which was formed in 2009 to oppose the building of a mosque and community center near the site of the Sept. 11 terror attacks. That controversy propelled Geller into the national spotlight.

AFDI has been classified as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center. Geller, who is Jewish, has been denounced by the Jewish Anti-Defamation League as “rousing public fears about a vast Islamic conspiracy to destroy American values.”

Though she is has voiced support for Republican presidential candidate Ted Cruz, her strident rhetoric and sweeping accusations have caused many conservatives to distance themselves from her.

She accused two prominent conservatives of being sympathetic to the jihadist cause, which she believes led to her exclusion from the Conservative Political Action Conference in 2011. She said that Grover Norquist and Suhail Kahn were puppets of the Islamic Brotherhood, and they used their influence to bar her from CPAC.

On her blog, AtlasShrugs, she called Norquist a “dangerous Islamic infiltrator" and said Kahn, a Republican consultant and former Bush White House official, was worse than Anwar al-Awlawki, a terrorist killed by a U.S. drone strike in Yemen.

Geller insists she is a defender of freedom of speech against jihadists and a shadowy group attempting to impose Sharia law on the United States. “The U.S. Constitution is under attack from fundamentalist Islam and Shariah," is the mission statement of the SIOA.

http://www.kltv.com/story/28973338/...izer-has-been-called-islamophobic-hate-monger

And, the answer about how this is related to fear of Sharia Law is above.

None of this excuses the two guys who showed up to shoot people.

 

[Sonya610]

I think sometimes people should take into consideration whether asserting their rights may infringe upon the safety of others, such as the police officers who had no choice in the matter, but had to be there to protect and serve. Which they did. God bless them.

Huh? Most of the police were hired OFF DUTY so it was their choice!

 

[BayouBelle_LA]

Reading through this thread reminds me of a phrase -

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"-- Evelyn Beatrice Hall - The Friends of Voltaire (1906)

 

[effervescent]

Huh? Most of the police were hired OFF DUTY so it was their choice!

Really? Were the SWAT teams and the bomb squad off duty? I wasn't aware they did contract work. What about all the people called in during and after the fact to secure the scene?

 

[Sonya610]

Uh, no, it is not the same thing at all. This woman spreads hate, that is not the same as a short dress :facepalm:

Hate is in the eyes of the beholder. There are plenty of violent protests going on all over this country where a LOT of inflammatory statements are made. Some see that has hate while others see it as folks showing a "love of their own".

 

[Dogface]

The only problem I see with the event is that they felt the need to hire professional protection. That is sad to me. I think this proved a point Geller makes, but I doubt she wanted this to happen. But I think it does give validity to the concern that freedom of speech is under attack. However, we should never buckle on our rights to freedom of speech due to fear of offending or fear of violence. I am an equal opportunity offender and respect others rights to offend, just long as it's not targetted harassment of an individual or encouraging vuolence.

 

[Sonya610]

Really? Were the SWAT teams and the bomb squad off duty? I wasn't aware they did contract work. What about all the people called in during and after the fact to secure the scene?

The criminals were dead by that point.

Upholding the law is what law enforcement is PAID to do. Are you saying only some people's rights should be protected? And others should not receive equal protection under the law???

 

[Dogface]

Really? Were the SWAT teams and the bomb squad off duty? I wasn't aware they did contract work. What about all the people called in during and after the fact to secure the scene?

That is their job. To protect and serve us, they know the dangers when they sign up, and bless their hearts for their sacrifices to keep America free and orderly!

 

[CoolJ]

Hate is in the eyes of the beholder. There are plenty of violent protests going on all over this country where a LOT of inflammatory statements are made. Some see that has hate while others see it as "love of their own".

No. Hate is hate. if you dont like people just because they are different than you. That is hate.
If you think that certain populations of people are inherently inferior. That is hate. And ignorance.

 

[effervescent]

The criminals were dead by that point.

Upholding the law is what law enforcement is PAID to do. Are you saying only some people's rights should be protected? And others should not receive equal protection under the law???

Good thing they were dead, but they don't know what exactly they are going into in situations like that. There could have been others. Thankfully there was not.

As for your questions, no that it not what I am saying at all. I have said what I mean and nothing I posted is anywhere near what you apparently are getting out of it or insinuating.

 

[Curious Guy]

No. Hate is hate. if you dont like people just because they are different than you. That is hate.
If you think that certain populations of people are inherently inferior. That is hate. And ignorance.

Why do you keep bringing up this inferior carp? Has anyone said that? I see lots of hate in this thread but it's not Ms. Geller espousing it.

 

[Dogface]

I just want to make it clear, the only people I find inferior are those who seek to harm others for whatever reason. In accordance to the laws of the land where I reside in the US, we have the right to speak as we please, and it should be without fear of violent repercussions. If you don't like what someone is saying, ignore them, boycott them, mock them back, but do not commit violence again them and appreciate the fact that we have the chance to speak what we wish.