Cartoon event in Texas - gunmen killed!
 

Two gunmen have been killed at a Mohammed Cartoon Art Exhibition in Texas. So weit so gut! (German proverb.)

But sometimes I ask myself where the threshold is turning free speech into sheer provocation. The incident happened just after a speech of Gert Wilders, who is the naziest Dutch the Netherlands currently have to offer.

He and Pamela Geller, our own lunatic extraordinaire, were behind this event.

This lady is absolutely new to me.

I really prefer this lady:

She's a raving lunatic and a heroine of the far right. Little wonder she chose to have this "contest" in Texas.

I don't give a shit in Goebbel's hat if Pamela Geller is a nazi. Pamela Geller is an asshole, but Pamela Geller isn't gunning down people who offend her.

Free speech is free speech. If it's provocative it's too fucking bad. "Piss Christ" was free speech. Fred Phelps practices free speech. George Lincoln Rockwell and Malcolm X were practicing their right to free speech and were murdered for it.

American flag "desecration" is free speech. What those who would limit flag burning or any other free speech constantly forget is that more than anything, the US Flag stands for the right to walk on, piss on, and/or burn down the US Flag. Tough shit if it's "provocative", get the fuck over it. This is the USA, Germany, The Netherlands, Belgium, France... not Gaza City for christ's sake.

Stupid redneck bigots.

Absolutely. Stupid redneck bigots with rights. And on the continuum of bigots, not as far down the bigot list as bigots who give themselves the right to gun down anybody who "offends" them.

I agree with Ike's post #6 completely.

I respect your comment and partly agree.

Anyway I rather vote for deescalation, I cannot accept religious provocations because in my opinion at last they are counter-productive. I think that attitudes like efforts to understanding and reconciliation amongst the believers of Judaism, Christianity and Islam make much more sense.

If they come after Calvin and Hobbes I will man the barricades.

The choice of venue was an attempt at "wicked irony". A while back, the same hall had been used for a "Stand With The Prophet" rally to combat Islamophobia.

It seems that you think that condemning Geller as a racist provocateur is the same as condoning the attempted massacre. Isn't it possible that both are despicable acts and that neither can be used as an excuse for the other?

You always were a haughty one Cats, trying to impress everyone with your name dropping.

What you haven't realized yet, is that on this forum you are way out of your league.

The point, I would assume, was to be provocative, "free speech" aside. Did it provoke a hostile response? Apparently so.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

Hosanna!!! May wonders never cease.

How's about Ike's #8?

That was the one I meant.

I messed up, my bad.

We either support free speech, or we don't. Outside of threats or "shouting fire in a theater" type dangerous speech, when we start suggesting that somebody, anybody, can start qualifying what speech isn't protected, us "liberals" will hate it as much as anybody. And the whole concept will be in trouble.

Back in the 90's there was a student exhibit at the Art Institute of Chicago. One of the kids had this display where the only way into it was through a narrow passage with an American flag on the floor you had to walk on to get in. It was quite a kerfuffle. Some idiots were screaming that the entire Art Institute should be shut down. A local art critic's response was, "Look, if you don't like it, don't go. But this is the United States of America, not the United States of Good Taste."

The thing about free speech is that it's a thing that the government must not prevent. This is far from the same thing as protecting it from public protest. No, I don't think the actions of the two shooters in Texas is legitimate protest. That doesn't mean that someone exercising their right to free speech is absolved from any responsibility for whatever they say.

In the light of recent events like the Charlie Hebdo and Boston Marathon massacres, Geller must have anticipated that the reaction to this infantile "contest" could be violent in the extreme. The police presence at the event should be ample proof of that. It's even likely that she viewed an attack on the event as a desirable outcome.

In my opinion, Geller bears an equal share of the blame to that borne by the dead shooters. Thank God it's only they who are dead. It could have been a lot worse.

I'd say the chances of that are better than average.

Killers as a part of PR? How sick is that? This person seems to be evil from the fucking bottom of her heart.

Nor apparently and repeatedly proven, the United States of common sense or common courtesy.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

Bull fucking hockey. There's no shared responsibility for the sick behavior of religious fanatic homicidal maniacs.

As with everything it depends on the situation and the often poor excuse for human beings involved.

Mercy!
You guys are pretty harmless - although if was working for Uncle Sam I'd prob. keep tabs on you, just so I know when one of you are about to try to earn your "I am somebody" merit badge by hopping over the white house fence wearing your "F*&K (cause of the week)" T - shirt while carrying a life size inflatable Gumby and a copy of Das Kapital.

Explain why.

If you wave a red flag at a bull and the bull charges you and gores you, are you in any way responsible for the outcome? If the bull charges and gores the person standing next to you, are you in any way responsible for that person's injury?

Well, land's sakes alive, Magnolia! Are y'all capable of any little bitty thing 'sides ad hominem attacks and the ridiculous Southern Belle persona you adopt 'round here?

Oh, please. Do I really have to say it? Pot, kettle, etc.

You can say anything you like.

Which implies, of course, that he does not have to say anything.

Which might be the best option.

Go order your offspring around.

You are the bull goose looney of false equivalencies.

You are both dear to my heart.

Explain why.

If I may, it of course wasn't an order. In context that's ridiculous, since as you note he has no authority over you.

It suggests a way you could strengthen your argument, but of course you aren't actually out to make strong arguments, which is why you AFFECT to take the thing as an order....


You are the leaping lemur of logical irrelevance.

http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/...n_1797821i.jpg

I think they should have the Muhammad cartoon contest every week in a different city if it continues to get these kind of results. Set up snipers and let 'em come.

^^^ Conservative death wish example.

Conservatives think killing people is a great solution to anything, and just cool for it's own sake.

Of course you do.

Because you're an asshole.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZz2qlKeAJk

But, but, but.... that's offensive!
Whiney... whiney.. whine.. whine!!
I'm gonna tell Daddy you said something mean! You're getting reported for hurting my wittle feewings!