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

[Trident]

Give it time.

The Gellers and Bachmans will make sure their view is the only one allowed. It won't be much longer before we are living under puritanical laws.

Just awful.

LOL. Those two are all FOR freedom of speech, for everyone. That was the cause of this whole mess. I respect their stand very much and I thank them.

 

[EllieBee]

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Other+than+that,+how+was+the+play,+Mrs.+Lincoln?

A sarcastic phrase meant to downplay the complaint or misfortune of another person, similar to playing the world's tiniest violin with one's fingers.

It is a reference to the assassination of President Lincoln. Can be substituted with any phrase referring to a tragic event, such as, "Other than that, how was the flight, Sullie?"
"I just found out I have to work this weekend."
"Other than that, how was the play, Mrs. Lincoln?"

 

[sonjay]

Good article at the Daily Beast about this:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/05/04/je-suis-pamela-geller.html

I hope nobody shoots anyone at the D.B. over their article.

 

[Nova]

I can't find my post on the subject, but a common variation is, "Other than that, Mrs. Kennedy, how did you like Dallas?"

The humor (dark as it is) lies in the incongruity of horror or misfortune appearing suddenly in the middle of an otherwise pleasant activity.

 

[sonjay]

Give it time.

The Gellers and Bachmans will make sure their view is the only one allowed. It won't be much longer before we are living under puritanical laws.

Just awful.

I don't see them shooting people they disagree with. I see them engaging in the time-honored traditions of words, speech, peaceful protest, satire, and other peaceful means of showing their disagreement.

If you don't wholeheartedly support their right to express their views in a peaceful manner, then you don't support free speech.

 

[krimekat]

The theater is on fire because Geller laid out the kerosene and the matches and then basically called out a bunch of unstable, crazier than her, loons to "do what you will".

But what she did is protected by law and so is what I say about her. It's a wash.

wow

I support our Constitutional right of peaceful assembly even if it's a cartoon drawing contest

And I do not think Americans who support our Constitutional Rights are "unstable" or "loons" -- so glad there was extra security (but there is that EVERYWHERE today)

 

[Sulamith]

Give it time.

The Gellers and Bachmans will make sure their view is the only one allowed. It won't be much longer before we are living under puritanical laws.

Just awful.

Christian domination is their agenda. IMO They are giving good Christian people a bad name. IMO

 

[krimekat]

Give it time.

The Gellers and Bachmans will make sure their view is the only one allowed. It won't be much longer before we are living under puritanical laws.

Just awful.

Actually, Geller is attempting to ensure that puritanical laws, such as Sharia, are NOT allowed in America . . . wow! I learned so much today ! Her old blog is so tell & her new site is full of information

 

[IzzyBlanche]

I wouldn't exactly put Wilders up as a hero for freedom of speech.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1559877/Ban-Koran-like-Mein-Kampf-says-Dutch-MP.html

I get the strangest feeling that if Geller's event had been a competition to draw disrespectful cartoons of Jesus, she would have far less support for her actions in the name of freedom of speech.

I'm cynical that way though.

 

[Trident]

I wouldn't exactly put Wilders up as a hero for freedom of speech.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1559877/Ban-Koran-like-Mein-Kampf-says-Dutch-MP.html

I get the strangest feeling that if Geller's event had been a competition to draw disrespectful cartoons of Jesus, she would have far less support for her actions in the name of freedom of speech.

I'm cynical that way though.

Can't say as I blame you for being a cynic. I'm sure there were a lot of protests about some Jesus bashing "art". However, as much as I may have thought it disgusting, I respected their right to do it. And if I recall correctly, tell me if I'm wrong, no one got murdered over it, did they?

 

[sonjay]

Christian domination is their agenda. IMO They are giving good Christian people a bad name. IMO

Pam Geller is Jewish.

 

[BayouBelle_LA]

The theater is on fire because Geller laid out the kerosene and the matches and then basically called out a bunch of unstable, crazier than her, loons to "do what you will". But what she did is protected by law and so is what I say about her. It's a wash.

RBBM Let's not call out radical Islam for fear of offending. We can bury our heads in the sand and hope they go away. Believe that if you want to.

 

[sonjay]

Can't say as I blame you for being a cynic. I'm sure there were a lot of protests about some Jesus bashing "art". However, as much as I may have thought it disgusting, I respected their right to do it. And if I recall correctly, tell me if I'm wrong, no one got murdered over it, did they?

Over in France, the famous photo by Andres Serrano was destroyed.
http://boingboing.net/2011/04/18/christian-protesters.html

I think that wasn't even the first time.

But it's true that no one was killed over it.

The people that destroyed Serrano's photo are clearly people who don't support free speech.
The people who attempt to kill others over photos, cartoons or speech are evil.

 

[Ausgirl]

Here's how I look at this cartoons/free speech vs hate speech thing:

Over here, many Aboriginal (first nation) people object to photographs of dead relatives being shown, due to their religious beliefs. This is pretty much respected in our media, TV stations even give warnings of possible offense to the aboriginal community when a news story or doco shows people who have since died. It's just respectful, so that's how it is.

Now imagine if I saw this as a vast point of angst against freedom of expression/speech, and set up a tent in the middle of Arnhem land (or any other large aboriginal community) plastered with photos of people who have passed away, just to make a point.

What kind of reaction could I expect? What kind of reaction would I be -seeking- by doing such a deeply offensive thing?

The irony is, many of the same people who'd fry me for pulling that stunt, would cheer me if I did what these racist idiots were doing over there in the USA.

I am NOT saying anyone deserves to be attacked for voicing their opinions. I am questioning where the line between "free speech" and "hate speech" is drawn, both in the law and the minds of the public. Especially where it's clearly set up to incite anger.

 

[krimekat]

I wouldn't exactly put Wilders up as a hero for freedom of speech.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1559877/Ban-Koran-like-Mein-Kampf-says-Dutch-MP.html

I get the strangest feeling that if Geller's event had been a competition to draw disrespectful cartoons of Jesus, she would have far less support for her actions in the name of freedom of speech.

I'm cynical that way though.

BBM above: and the probability of the event being bombed by "terrorists" is close to zero

I'm analytical that way, though

IMHO as long as it's peaceful assembly, freedom of speech is far reaching in America

 

[IzzyBlanche]

Can't say as I blame you for being a cynic. I'm sure there were a lot of protests about some Jesus bashing "art". However, as much as I may have thought it disgusting, I respected their right to do it. And if I recall correctly, tell me if I'm wrong, no one got murdered over it, did they?

Not that I know of.

I'm also not aware of any event in which the sole purpose was for participants to create images guaranteed to be viewed by Christians as blasphemous and offensive.

 

[sonjay]

Here's how I look at this cartoons/free speech vs hate speech thing:

Over here, many Aboriginal (first nation) people object to photographs of dead relatives being shown, due to their religious beliefs. This is pretty much respected in our media, TV stations even give warnings of possible offense to the aboriginal community when a news story or doco shows people who have since died. It's just respectful, so that's how it is.

Now imagine if I saw this as a vast point of angst against freedom of expression/speech, and set up a tent in the middle of Arnhem land (or any other large aboriginal community) plastered with photos of people who have passed away, just to make a point.

What kind of reaction could I expect? What kind of reaction would I be -seeking- by doing such a deeply offensive thing?

The irony is, many of the same people who'd fry me for pulling that stunt, would cheer me if I did what these racist idiots were doing over there in the USA.

I am NOT saying anyone deserves to be attacked for voicing their opinions. I am questioning where the line between "free speech" and "hate speech" is drawn, both in the law and the minds of the public. Especially where it's clearly set up to incite anger.

So, being in Australia and all, I won't hold it against you that you're not familiar with the famous Nazi Skokie case.

We have long-settled case law here in the U.S. that yes, setting up a tent plastered with photos of dead people in the middle of a large aboriginal community is exactly the kind of free speech that enjoys the Constitutionally enumerated protection of "freedom of speech."

 

[Ausgirl]

We have long-settled case law here in the U.S. that yes, setting up a tent plastered with photos of dead people in the middle of a large aboriginal community is exactly the kind of free speech that enjoys the Constitutionally enumerated protection of "freedom of speech."

Does that make it a right, moral and responsible thing to do? Idk.. I just know a racist idiot hate group when I see one. No matter what culture they're from.

 

[IzzyBlanche]

BBM above: and the probability of the event being bombed by "terrorists" is close to zero

I'm analytical that way, though

IMHO as long as it's peaceful assembly, freedom of speech is far reaching in America

Agreed. The probability would most likely be somewhere in the same neighborhood of the probability of the Olympics being bombed by a radical Christian as a protest against abortion, I'd wager.

 

[sonjay]

Does that make it a right, moral and responsible thing to do? Idk.. I just know a racist idiot hate group when I see one. No matter what culture they're from.

If it's wrong, immoral, and irresponsible, does that make it okay to shoot them? Idk. I just know anti-free-speech views when I see them.