It is definitely that turn the other cheek thing. People that think mocking Christians is fun (or at least acceptable) and get all uptight against mocking islam are hypocrites and cowards... and bullies in a way.
Shooting Reported At Anti-Islam Group's Cartoon Contest In Texas
- Thread starter B00Mer
- Start date
It is definitely that turn the other cheek thing. People that think mocking Christians is fun (or at least acceptable) and get all uptight against mocking islam are hypocrites and cowards... and bullies in a way.
Twila in a nice way is saying that people who don't flip out and act irrationally are confident.
People who do (cough) are insecure.
That is my take on what she is saying.
(the cough was not towards you)
I do not address that to you T.
It is towards the folks that think it is perfectly OK to rip Christians and reprehensible to rip Muslims.
Sometimes I think our primary impulse concerning certain things is more often than not reactionary. Fly off the handle before thinking things through. Knee jerk reactions . Maybe that's how most of us are. The secondary response is usually the better one I think. Which is just maybe to keep the trap shut.
Fox News’s Greta Van Susteren scolds Pamela Geller
By Erik Wemple May 6
Before embarking on a television career, Fox News host Greta Van Susteren worked as a highly successful trial attorney. She graduated from Georgetown Law, represented clients in federal and state venues and picked up her share of accolades along the way.
And last night she ditched her legal-eagle sophistication in a monologue criticizing activist Pamela Geller for putting the lives of police officers on the line at an event Sunday in Garland, Texas. “Everyone knew this event would unglue some who might become violent,” said Van Susteren.
In a story that has resurrected a fierce debate on the First Amendment, two gunmen on Sunday were killed by police after they descended on the Geller-organized event showcasing cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad. The Islamic State terror group has claimed responsibility for the attack and U.S. officials are investigating any possible link. Geller is president of the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI), a group that bills itself as a protector of U.S. constitutional freedoms but that the Southern Poverty Law Center calls an “active anti-Muslim group.” Muslims consider depictions of the prophet offensive. In January, terrorists carried out a massacre at the Paris offices of Charlie Hebdo magazine, which had repeatedly satirized Muhammad.
So Van Susteren scolded Geller for holding the cartoon contest. “My message is simple — protect our police. Do not recklessly lure them into danger and that is what happened in Garland, Texas at the Mohammed cartoon contest,” she said. “Yes, of course, there’s a First Amendment right and it’s very important, but the exercise of that right includes using good judgment.”
In other words, watch what you say, or draw.
The Fox News host continued: “It’s one thing for someone to stand up for the First Amendment and put his own you-know-what on the line, but here, those insisting they were defending the First Amendment were knowingly putting officers’ lives on the line — the police,” said Van Susteren, who went on to say that the “police had no choice but to do their job.”
Fox News’s Greta Van Susteren scolds Pamela Geller - The Washington Post
Right-wing heads are exploding all over the U.S. And a few in Canada.
By Erik Wemple May 6
Before embarking on a television career, Fox News host Greta Van Susteren worked as a highly successful trial attorney. She graduated from Georgetown Law, represented clients in federal and state venues and picked up her share of accolades along the way.
And last night she ditched her legal-eagle sophistication in a monologue criticizing activist Pamela Geller for putting the lives of police officers on the line at an event Sunday in Garland, Texas. “Everyone knew this event would unglue some who might become violent,” said Van Susteren.
In a story that has resurrected a fierce debate on the First Amendment, two gunmen on Sunday were killed by police after they descended on the Geller-organized event showcasing cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad. The Islamic State terror group has claimed responsibility for the attack and U.S. officials are investigating any possible link. Geller is president of the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI), a group that bills itself as a protector of U.S. constitutional freedoms but that the Southern Poverty Law Center calls an “active anti-Muslim group.” Muslims consider depictions of the prophet offensive. In January, terrorists carried out a massacre at the Paris offices of Charlie Hebdo magazine, which had repeatedly satirized Muhammad.
So Van Susteren scolded Geller for holding the cartoon contest. “My message is simple — protect our police. Do not recklessly lure them into danger and that is what happened in Garland, Texas at the Mohammed cartoon contest,” she said. “Yes, of course, there’s a First Amendment right and it’s very important, but the exercise of that right includes using good judgment.”
In other words, watch what you say, or draw.
The Fox News host continued: “It’s one thing for someone to stand up for the First Amendment and put his own you-know-what on the line, but here, those insisting they were defending the First Amendment were knowingly putting officers’ lives on the line — the police,” said Van Susteren, who went on to say that the “police had no choice but to do their job.”
Fox News’s Greta Van Susteren scolds Pamela Geller - The Washington Post
Right-wing heads are exploding all over the U.S. And a few in Canada.
Then before holding a peaceful demonstration which is also an exercise of the first amendment, one would have to make sure that there is no chance that it will invite any hot heads for fear of endangering the police whose job it is to keep the peace...
"Yes there is a First Amendment right and it is very important, BUT the exercise of that right includes using good judgement."
First of all, I don't remember the limitation of "good judgement" in the Bill of Rights. I love it when people talk about how much they love free speech, BUT (followed by a bunch of crap on how they shouldn't have said something)
Secondly, as the Bill of Rights is a limitation on gov't power, this has nothing to do with constitutional free speech in the first place. I don't think the terrorists were representing the Obama administration.....BUT I could be wrong.
Third, using the excuse that Geller was endangering police is disingenuous at best. Geller was not endangering the police, she was not slinging a Kalishnikov, she was simply having an art competition. The people endangering police were the guys in the beards. It is like accusing a corner store owner in a rough neighbourhood of endangering police by trying to carry on his business.
And fourth, and finally, this gem: “Everyone knew this event would unglue some who might become violent,” Excuse me? These guys were already unglued. One was on the FBI radar, as he tried to get to Syria. Do you think he was delivering flowers? They drove 1,000 miles armed to the teeth, intent on mass murder.........because someone might draw a picture. They were already unglued.
I am shocked and appalled at the attacks on Geller, I expect this kind of crap from Trump, who is an idiot, and CNN, who really don't know any better, but Greta Van Susteren always struck me as rational and informed.
Geller is a provocateur. Long may they live. They help keep us free. Despite the fact they are occasionally irritating.
Just like Ezra Levant.
Look... don't say BOO to that guy because he's likely to punch you in the mouth........ let's pick on the guy that won't do anything.
You are. Please re-read the sentence you quoted. She's talking about the right of free speech, not the Bill of Rights. In the sentence, "First Amendment" is an adjectival phrase modifying "right.""Yes there is a First Amendment right and it is very important, BUT the exercise of that right includes using good judgement."
First of all, I don't remember the limitation of "good judgement" in the Bill of Rights. I love it when people talk about how much they love free speech, BUT (followed by a bunch of crap on how they shouldn't have said something)
Secondly, as the Bill of Rights is a limitation on gov't power, this has nothing to do with constitutional free speech in the first place. I don't think the terrorists were representing the Obama administration.....BUT I could be wrong.
So what you are arguing is that the right to keep and bear arms (Second Amendment) negates the duty to practice good gun safety practices, because the Second Amendment is a limitation on government power and has nothing to do with the right to keep and bear arms in the first place.
See how much fun this is?
So are people who leave loaded guns around children. Long may they live. Just not the kids.
Charlie Hebdo Editor Rejects Pamela Geller Comparisons
Sunday night's shooting at the art show in Garland, Texas, restarted many of the same debates about free speech and the dangers of cross-cultural provocations that took place in the wake of the Charlie Hebdo massacre in January. But in a discussion today, the French satirical magazine's editor-in-chief Gérard Biard and its film critic Jean-Baptiste Thoret distanced themselves from the cartoon exhibit and its organizer, Pamela Geller.
Speaking with Suzanne Nossel, the executive director of PEN American Center, the Charlie Hebdo pair stressed that their job was to start a global debate while those hosting the Garland show simply aimed to provoke.
"Comparing this Pamela Geller thing and Charlie Hebdo is nonsense," Thoret said. "It's an anti-Islamic movement, and she said it's an anti-Islamic movement, fighting against what she called the Islamization of the U.S. Maybe there is just one thing in common: You can't mess with Texas, you can't mess with Charlie Hebdo."
The Charlie Hebdo team, Biard said, simply aims to "comment on the news."
"The difference between us and these people is that these people are organizing contests, anti-Islamist contests," he continued. "It's an obsession ... We are not obsessed. We are just obsessed by the news, and by how the world is going on. The difference with Pamela Geller, she is obsessed by Islam. She waits every morning and thinks, What can I do today to defy these people?"
more
Charlie Hebdo Rejects Pamela Geller Comparisons -- NYMag
Sunday night's shooting at the art show in Garland, Texas, restarted many of the same debates about free speech and the dangers of cross-cultural provocations that took place in the wake of the Charlie Hebdo massacre in January. But in a discussion today, the French satirical magazine's editor-in-chief Gérard Biard and its film critic Jean-Baptiste Thoret distanced themselves from the cartoon exhibit and its organizer, Pamela Geller.
Speaking with Suzanne Nossel, the executive director of PEN American Center, the Charlie Hebdo pair stressed that their job was to start a global debate while those hosting the Garland show simply aimed to provoke.
"Comparing this Pamela Geller thing and Charlie Hebdo is nonsense," Thoret said. "It's an anti-Islamic movement, and she said it's an anti-Islamic movement, fighting against what she called the Islamization of the U.S. Maybe there is just one thing in common: You can't mess with Texas, you can't mess with Charlie Hebdo."
The Charlie Hebdo team, Biard said, simply aims to "comment on the news."
"The difference between us and these people is that these people are organizing contests, anti-Islamist contests," he continued. "It's an obsession ... We are not obsessed. We are just obsessed by the news, and by how the world is going on. The difference with Pamela Geller, she is obsessed by Islam. She waits every morning and thinks, What can I do today to defy these people?"
more
Charlie Hebdo Rejects Pamela Geller Comparisons -- NYMag
"They are completely different, despite the surface appearance that they are identical" he went on. "We utterly reject everything about Texas, except for the belligerent slogans." The central difference, Thoret explained, is that "We are Francais. They are filthy cow-f*ckers. Therefore, everything we do is clever and wonderful, and when they do the exact same things, they are filthy and cow-f*cking."
Charlie being Charlie I guess.
But don't worry Charlie... Texans won't be shooting up your offices.
But don't worry Charlie... Texans won't be shooting up your offices.
If owners of businesses have to pay for abortion procedures as part of their health insurance given to their employees even if the employer disagrees with it on religious grounds shouldn't Muzzie Jihadists be made to pay for Mohammed cartoon contests.
And, yes, the title of the thread is all wrong, the attacked group is a pro free speech group not an anti-Islam group.
And, yes, the title of the thread is all wrong, the attacked group is a pro free speech group not an anti-Islam group.
Yep, it's all about abortion, Walter.
You had your sense of humor surgically removed, or just not coffeed up yet?