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

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
asac said:
Sure, you can go ahead and fall back on the First Amendment to justify provocative behavior.

It's still not particularly intelligent or adult behavior.

But hey, people have the right to that too.
Click to expand...

What does fall back mean? Just glad the two scum bags were killed to save the great state of Texas the money of a trial. Way to go Texas. jmo idk
 
Ok, I fell asleep reading social media on this and now have read some more and Im beyond upset with some of my fellow Americans.. I cannot believe the number of people who are saying this event should have "expected" this. Ugh, really? In America a group of people saying ANYTHING should expect to be murdered/shot at? I don't care if she was poking the proverbial bear, no one has shot up WBC to my knowledge, and I think they are some of the worst, as they directly target events of people, this group simply held an event you had to buy tickets to come to, so if it wasn't your cup of tea you didn't have to see it.

This blaming the victim behavior wouldn't be tolerated in any other context, why support it here? Saying this event was provoking is like saying a rape victim shouldn't have worn a certain outfit. It's disgusting and it is wrong. This is America. We have the right to say and draw what we please. Sorry, but your right to not be offended doesn't exist here.
 
Brightbird said:
Gee, after reading this, plus her blog and Geert Wilder's speech today I'd almost think they hide their hatred behind a defense of 'free speech'. But surely not ... :facepalm:
Click to expand...

I thought this was a victim-friendly site. Is it okay to attack the target of violence if you disagree with their political views?

From Wilders' speech:

"We will not be picking up swords and axes and breaking into people's homes. But we will not remain silent either."

and

"Muhammad fought and terrorized people with the sword.
We fight Muhammad and his followers with the pen.
And the pen will prove mightier than the sword."

Taking guns and grenades to shoot at and blow up innocent people is NEVER an appropriate or justified response to speech that you disagree with. NEVER.

I hope I never see attempts to justify such violence on the grounds that their speech is offensive to someone.
 
Brightbird said:
Gee, after reading this, plus her blog and Geert Wilder's speech today I'd almost think they hide their hatred behind a defense of 'free speech'. But surely not ... :facepalm:
Click to expand...

They are not hiding anything they are merely polite/civilized.
 
Sonya610 said:
They are not hiding anything they are merely polite/civilized.
Click to expand...

Lol, well at least we agree on that. Then why do people keep defending them as though they are merely champions of free speech? And accusing any one who disagrees with them as being anti free speech or worse?
 
Brightbird said:
Lol, well at least we agree on that. Then why do people keep defending them as though they are merely champions of free speech? And accusing any one who disagrees with them as being anti free speech or worse?
Click to expand...

I spoke up for them because I share most of their views and ALSO because they DO have the right to express their thoughts and opinions.

I do not personally have a problem with Islam as a religion so on that topic my views differ (then again if I lived in some parts of Europe I might feel differently) however I do agree with them on most other issues and yes I realize they are considered somewhat "extreme" which in my mind is good.
 
Brightbird said:
Lol, well at least we agree on that. Then why do people keep defending them as though they are merely champions of free speech? And accusing any one who disagrees with them as being anti free speech or worse?
Click to expand...

Why is anyone pushing the notion that they're hate-mongerers when their event was the target of actual violence? The people who brought the guns and the grenades to a peaceful event, and who started shooting at innocent people, and who presumably intended to use the grenades as well.... those people are the haters. Those people are the hate mongerers. Those people are the ones who should be roundly condemned.

I certainly hope no one thinks that the gunmen were justified in attempting to murder innocent people because they disagree with the points of view expressed at this event.
 
KEVINinTO said:
CNN is already trying to place the blame on the intended targets of this terrorist attack.

Just now CNN "security analyst" Bob Baer just said "as long as you have *elements* in this country who want to *push* first amendment rights violence is inevitable.
Click to expand...
Well that's a shocker. Although it happened quicker than I imagined.
 
Brightbird said:
Lol, well at least we agree on that. Then why do people keep defending them as though they are merely champions of free speech? And accusing any one who disagrees with them as being anti free speech or worse?
Click to expand...

Because even the worst of free speech is protected. You don't have to agree with what she says, but thankfully, she has the right to say it. And while I don't agree with everything she says, she is a champion of free speech because she is saying what she wishes despite how unpopular it might be or what danger it may put her in. The fact it puts her in danger is the problem, not whether we like what she says.
 
Elley Mae said:
What does fall back mean? Just glad the two scum bags were killed to save the great state of Texas the money of a trial. Way to go Texas. jmo idk
Click to expand...
It means what it usually means by many. Free speech unless we don't like your message. Then it's acceptable to blow you up.
 
sonjay said:
I thought this was a victim-friendly site. Is it okay to attack the target of violence if you disagree with their political views?

From Wilders' speech:

"We will not be picking up swords and axes and breaking into people's homes. But we will not remain silent either."

and

"Muhammad fought and terrorized people with the sword.
We fight Muhammad and his followers with the pen.
And the pen will prove mightier than the sword."

Taking guns and grenades to shoot at and blow up innocent people is NEVER an appropriate or justified response to speech that you disagree with. NEVER.

I hope I never see attempts to justify such violence on the grounds that their speech is offensive to someone.
Click to expand...
Victim free for some. Others not so much. Many of the posts I'm reading here would be deleted and the author warned in , oh say, the Freddie Gray thread.
 
Can we take a moment to celebrate with some levity that surely this had to be the shortest lived, least successful jihad of all time?
 
sonjay said:
Why is anyone pushing the notion that they're hate-mongerers when their event was the target of actual violence? The people who brought the guns and the grenades to a peaceful event, and who started shooting at innocent people, and who presumably intended to use the grenades as well.... those people are the haters. Those people are the hate mongerers. Those people are the ones who should be roundly condemned.

I certainly hope no one thinks that the gunmen were justified in attempting to murder innocent people because they disagree with the points of view expressed at this event.
Click to expand...

They can be "hate mongerers" and victims, no? I definitely don't defend the gunmen.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

... and 135 more.
Total: 622 (members: 136, guests: 486)

Online statistics

Members online
136
Guests online
486
Total visitors
622
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
627,020
Messages
18,536,689
Members
241,167
Latest member
Applae
Back
Top