BREAKING NEWS!!!!! A real shocker

[bripat9643]

You can support free speech without supporting the morons that abuse it.

Pamela had every right to draw despicable cartoons of another religions prophet. Doesn't make it a cause I have to support.

A right? Yes. But a college kid has the 'right' to stamp all over the US flag in front of a world war 2 vet on Memorial day.

Doesn't mean its even remotely reasonable. Pamela wanted the response she got. A security guard's life was too high a price to pay for it.

No one is saying people who stomp on the flag should be killed. That's the difference you don't seem to understand. Once again, you're saying people who draw Muhammad deserved to be killed.

I'm all too aware of the difference. The dead security guard's corpse is lying in it. And violence is exactly the kind of reaction Pamela was trying to provoke.

Its unreasonable and foolish to intentionally try and provoke folks to violence.

I agree with that 100%. She walked into that event knowing full well and with ample evidence to support a reasonable expectation that it would cause the irrational crazies to come out.

I fully support free speech, but she should be held culpable at least and maybe even legally liable for the results of her ignorance and intolerance. Sure, I have the right to walk through the streets of Oakland in blackface. Is there any doubt that someone wouldn't add a little blue and red to it? Maybe the real tragedy here is that a security guard caught a bullet that should have found Pamela - at least then she would have been held personally accountable for her insanity.

You're a 200 proof numskull.

 

[chikenwing]

You can support free speech without supporting the morons that abuse it.

Pamela had every right to draw despicable cartoons of another religions prophet. Doesn't make it a cause I have to support.

A right? Yes. But a college kid has the 'right' to stamp all over the US flag in front of a world war 2 vet on Memorial day.

Doesn't mean its even remotely reasonable. Pamela wanted the response she got. A security guard's life was too high a price to pay for it.

No one is saying people who stomp on the flag should be killed. That's the difference you don't seem to understand. Once again, you're saying people who draw Muhammad deserved to be killed.

I'm all too aware of the difference. The dead security guard's corpse is lying in it. And violence is exactly the kind of reaction Pamela was trying to provoke.

Its unreasonable and foolish to intentionally try and provoke folks to violence.

I agree with that 100%. She walked into that event knowing full well and with ample evidence to support a reasonable expectation that it would cause the irrational crazies to come out.

I fully support free speech, but she should be held culpable at least and maybe even legally liable for the results of her ignorance and intolerance. Sure, I have the right to walk through the streets of Oakland in blackface. Is there any doubt that someone wouldn't add a little blue and red to it? Maybe the real tragedy here is that a security guard caught a bullet that should have found Pamela - at least then she would have been held personally accountable for her insanity.

So you also think she should pay with her life??
Your right there with the real crazies,good job.

 

[PredFan]

You can support free speech without supporting the morons that abuse it.

Pamela had every right to draw despicable cartoons of another religions prophet. Doesn't make it a cause I have to support.

No one's asking you to support it, or at least no one should be. But you SHOULD stand up and defend their right to say it. We have to defend all speech, especially now.

Now and always. If you don't stand for the speech you hate, you stand for nothing at all.

Standing for the speech and supporting the person behind it are two different things

Of course, but you can't resort to blaming the speaker like the left does.

I don't. But I do consider her to be inconsiderate of others around her

How so?
Because she chooses to speak out? Because speaking out could cause terrorists to attempt to kill?
We cannot allow them to dictate our actions and speech. We do that and where does it stop?

 

[oldernwiser]

Actually not ridiculous in the least. Actions that may result in reactions are to be expected, and often illuminating. We can see early historical results of MLK's actions; the Geller actions are too recent.

In both cases they took actions to highlight injustices and real problems in our society.

Geller has illuminated nothing... Charlie Hebdo she is not.

she is a delusional attention whore much like manifold thinking he is some sort of hero for calling women ***** on the internet...

You are entitled to your opinion. Seems to me she's asking the right questions and putting out the correct predictions:

Pamela Geller A Response to My Critics This Is a War - TIME

Wow...

The questions she poses have nothing to do with reality. She's waging a war on her own and using innocents as a pawn in her ignorant game. At the same time, she seems to be blaming the media and "cultural elites" for exposing her as just another cross-burning clown in a white hood. If you jump into a tiger's cage, who gets the blame if he eats you?

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

You can support free speech without supporting the morons that abuse it.

Pamela had every right to draw despicable cartoons of another religions prophet. Doesn't make it a cause I have to support.

A right? Yes. But a college kid has the 'right' to stamp all over the US flag in front of a world war 2 vet on Memorial day.

Doesn't mean its even remotely reasonable. Pamela wanted the response she got. A security guard's life was too high a price to pay for it.

No one is saying people who stomp on the flag should be killed. That's the difference you don't seem to understand. Once again, you're saying people who draw Muhammad deserved to be killed.

I'm all too aware of the difference. The dead security guard's corpse is lying in it. And violence is exactly the kind of reaction Pamela was trying to provoke.

Its unreasonable and foolish to intentionally try and provoke folks to violence.

I agree with that 100%. She walked into that event knowing full well and with ample evidence to support a reasonable expectation that it would cause the irrational crazies to come out.

I fully support free speech, but she should be held culpable at least and maybe even legally liable for the results of her ignorance and intolerance. Sure, I have the right to walk through the streets of Oakland in blackface. Is there any doubt that someone wouldn't add a little blue and red to it? Maybe the real tragedy here is that a security guard caught a bullet that should have found Pamela - at least then she would have been held personally accountable for her insanity.

You're a 200 proof numskull.

And you've been left empty handed

 

[bripat9643]

Grampa doesn't think they should be allowed to have so security so any Muslim savage who wants to can walk right in and kill them all.

No, what Grampa believes is you are terrible at reading other people's minds

Mind reading isn't required.

You're still stomping your feet cause I made you look stupid last week. Your poor,poor ego can't take another blow can it?

Blow me ya hyperpartisan troll

You made me look stupid? When?

When you got pissed off and decided to change my words around to suit your agenda just like you just did to skyler.....hack

When did I do that?

I quoted skylar exactly

 

[Valerie]

You are entitled to your opinion. Seems to me she's asking the right questions and putting out the correct predictions:

Pamela Geller A Response to My Critics This Is a War - TIME

my opinion is that she is being foolish.


good to see you around though, Annie..we need more posters who can post without resorting to e-violence.

 

[PredFan]

You can support free speech without supporting the morons that abuse it.

Pamela had every right to draw despicable cartoons of another religions prophet. Doesn't make it a cause I have to support.

A right? Yes. But a college kid has the 'right' to stamp all over the US flag in front of a world war 2 vet on Memorial day.

Doesn't mean its even remotely reasonable. Pamela wanted the response she got. A security guard's life was too high a price to pay for it.

No one is saying people who stomp on the flag should be killed. That's the difference you don't seem to understand. Once again, you're saying people who draw Muhammad deserved to be killed.

I'm all too aware of the difference. The dead security guard's corpse is lying in it. And violence is exactly the kind of reaction Pamela was trying to provoke.

Its unreasonable and foolish to intentionally try and provoke folks to violence.

I agree with that 100%. She walked into that event knowing full well and with ample evidence to support a reasonable expectation that it would cause the irrational crazies to come out.

I fully support free speech, but she should be held culpable at least and maybe even legally liable for the results of her ignorance and intolerance. Sure, I have the right to walk through the streets of Oakland in blackface. Is there any doubt that someone wouldn't add a little blue and red to it? Maybe the real tragedy here is that a security guard caught a bullet that should have found Pamela - at least then she would have been held personally accountable for her insanity.

Complete and utter bull shit. If free speech is curtailed for any reason then we don't have free speech. If I walk down the street in black face, NO ONE has the right to lay a finger on me.

If I decide to draw a picture of Mohammed giving blow jobs to pigs the n I gave that right and no one has a right to shoot me. Nor should they receive sympathy from freedom loving people.

 

[chikenwing]

Muslims don't need Geller to kill Americans. Muslims hate everything not Muslim. Ask the 3000 that died on 9/11 why they died? It wasn't Geller, it wasn't Westbrough Baptist, it was Muslims hate of America and hate of all non-muslims.

Its moronic responses like the above that make anyone who debates the issue to SEEM llike they're defending terrorism......

Nonetheless, Muslims did not wake up one day and decided they hated Americans...that is a STUPID and inane "conclusion."

No mention of our troops in Saudi Arabia....No mention of our one-sided support of Israel...No mention of our overthrow of a legitimate government in Iran because we wanted their oil cheaper.....

It is the idiotic lack of perspective and knowledge of history that actually EMBOLDENS others to hate us.

You also are conveniently leaving out pertain details,Islam calls for all non believers to convert or die.They demand that any one shaming their God to be killed,and they are doing just that.
Are you trying to be this Obtuse,or does it just come naturally for you.

 

[chikenwing]

You can support free speech without supporting the morons that abuse it.

Pamela had every right to draw despicable cartoons of another religions prophet. Doesn't make it a cause I have to support.

A right? Yes. But a college kid has the 'right' to stamp all over the US flag in front of a world war 2 vet on Memorial day.

Doesn't mean its even remotely reasonable. Pamela wanted the response she got. A security guard's life was too high a price to pay for it.

No one is saying people who stomp on the flag should be killed. That's the difference you don't seem to understand. Once again, you're saying people who draw Muhammad deserved to be killed.

I'm all too aware of the difference. The dead security guard's corpse is lying in it. And violence is exactly the kind of reaction Pamela was trying to provoke.

Its unreasonable and foolish to intentionally try and provoke folks to violence.

I agree with that 100%. She walked into that event knowing full well and with ample evidence to support a reasonable expectation that it would cause the irrational crazies to come out.

I fully support free speech, but she should be held culpable at least and maybe even legally liable for the results of her ignorance and intolerance. Sure, I have the right to walk through the streets of Oakland in blackface. Is there any doubt that someone wouldn't add a little blue and red to it? Maybe the real tragedy here is that a security guard caught a bullet that should have found Pamela - at least then she would have been held personally accountable for her insanity.

Complete and utter bull shit. If free speech is curtailed for any reason then we don't have free speech. If I walk down the street in black face, NO ONE has the right to lay a finger on me.

Condoning violence because someone got their feeler hurt,is moronic.

 

[BlackSand]

A right? Yes. But a college kid has the 'right' to stamp all over the US flag in front of a world war 2 vet on Memorial day.

Doesn't mean its even remotely reasonable. Pamela wanted the response she got. A security guard's life was too high a price to pay for it.

The security guard was not killed and didn't lose his life.
Now the two idiots who thought it would be a good idea to shoot the place up were wiped out pretty quick.

.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

No, what Grampa believes is you are terrible at reading other people's minds

Mind reading isn't required.

You're still stomping your feet cause I made you look stupid last week. Your poor,poor ego can't take another blow can it?

Blow me ya hyperpartisan troll

You made me look stupid? When?

When you got pissed off and decided to change my words around to suit your agenda just like you just did to skyler.....hack

When did I do that?

I quoted skylar exactly

If you have to resort to nothing but personal insults in your entire post to me.....YOU'VE LOST THE DEBATE

 

[chikenwing]

Actually not ridiculous in the least. Actions that may result in reactions are to be expected, and often illuminating. We can see early historical results of MLK's actions; the Geller actions are too recent.

In both cases they took actions to highlight injustices and real problems in our society.

Geller has illuminated nothing... Charlie Hebdo she is not.

she is a delusional attention whore much like manifold thinking he is some sort of hero for calling women ***** on the internet...

You are entitled to your opinion. Seems to me she's asking the right questions and putting out the correct predictions:

Pamela Geller A Response to My Critics This Is a War - TIME

Wow...

The questions she poses have nothing to do with reality. She's waging a war on her own and using innocents as a pawn in her ignorant game. At the same time, she seems to be blaming the media and "cultural elites" for exposing her as just another cross-burning clown in a white hood. If you jump into a tiger's cage, who gets the blame if he eats you?

Your analogy is all wet,she hasn't jumped into a tiger cage,she lives in the USA,we have free speech so far,but people like yourself,seem all to willing to make excuses why we shouldn't.
She has a bigger set of balls then you do apparently.

 

[oldernwiser]

You can support free speech without supporting the morons that abuse it.

Pamela had every right to draw despicable cartoons of another religions prophet. Doesn't make it a cause I have to support.

A right? Yes. But a college kid has the 'right' to stamp all over the US flag in front of a world war 2 vet on Memorial day.

Doesn't mean its even remotely reasonable. Pamela wanted the response she got. A security guard's life was too high a price to pay for it.

No one is saying people who stomp on the flag should be killed. That's the difference you don't seem to understand. Once again, you're saying people who draw Muhammad deserved to be killed.

I'm all too aware of the difference. The dead security guard's corpse is lying in it. And violence is exactly the kind of reaction Pamela was trying to provoke.

Its unreasonable and foolish to intentionally try and provoke folks to violence.

I agree with that 100%. She walked into that event knowing full well and with ample evidence to support a reasonable expectation that it would cause the irrational crazies to come out.

I fully support free speech, but she should be held culpable at least and maybe even legally liable for the results of her ignorance and intolerance. Sure, I have the right to walk through the streets of Oakland in blackface. Is there any doubt that someone wouldn't add a little blue and red to it? Maybe the real tragedy here is that a security guard caught a bullet that should have found Pamela - at least then she would have been held personally accountable for her insanity.

So you also think she should pay with her life??
Your right there with the real crazies,good job.

That's not exactly my meaning. It's just that a man nobly lost his life to protect an ignoble cause. And the argument resulting from that action seemingly defends an intolerant bigot who would willingly and unjustifiably put other innocent people in front her right to wear blackface in Harlem and escape the direct consequences.

 

[ScienceRocks]

You can support free speech without supporting the morons that abuse it.

Pamela had every right to draw despicable cartoons of another religions prophet. Doesn't make it a cause I have to support.

Part of what makes this a free nation is the reality that insulting speech is protected. Not very many places you can do this in the world.

This is important to me and the islamis had no right to attack.

 

[Ravi]

You can support free speech without supporting the morons that abuse it.

Pamela had every right to draw despicable cartoons of another religions prophet. Doesn't make it a cause I have to support.

No one's asking you to support it, or at least no one should be. But you SHOULD stand up and defend their right to say it. We have to defend all speech, especially now.

What does especially now mean? No one denied their right to be assholes so there is no free speech issue involved.

Especially now means that we have Muslims demanding that we give up our free speech.

Where?

 

[bripat9643]

Mind reading isn't required.

You're still stomping your feet cause I made you look stupid last week. Your poor,poor ego can't take another blow can it?

Blow me ya hyperpartisan troll

You made me look stupid? When?

When you got pissed off and decided to change my words around to suit your agenda just like you just did to skyler.....hack

When did I do that?

I quoted skylar exactly

If you have to resort to nothing but personal insults in your entire post to me.....YOU'VE LOST THE DEBATE

Logic and facts are wasted on turds like you. You're immune to them.

 

[chikenwing]

A right? Yes. But a college kid has the 'right' to stamp all over the US flag in front of a world war 2 vet on Memorial day.

Doesn't mean its even remotely reasonable. Pamela wanted the response she got. A security guard's life was too high a price to pay for it.

No one is saying people who stomp on the flag should be killed. That's the difference you don't seem to understand. Once again, you're saying people who draw Muhammad deserved to be killed.

I'm all too aware of the difference. The dead security guard's corpse is lying in it. And violence is exactly the kind of reaction Pamela was trying to provoke.

Its unreasonable and foolish to intentionally try and provoke folks to violence.

I agree with that 100%. She walked into that event knowing full well and with ample evidence to support a reasonable expectation that it would cause the irrational crazies to come out.

I fully support free speech, but she should be held culpable at least and maybe even legally liable for the results of her ignorance and intolerance. Sure, I have the right to walk through the streets of Oakland in blackface. Is there any doubt that someone wouldn't add a little blue and red to it? Maybe the real tragedy here is that a security guard caught a bullet that should have found Pamela - at least then she would have been held personally accountable for her insanity.

So you also think she should pay with her life??
Your right there with the real crazies,good job.

That's not exactly my meaning. It's just that a man nobly lost his life to protect an ignoble cause. And the argument resulting from that action seemingly defends an intolerant bigot who would willingly and unjustifiably put other innocent people in front her right to wear blackface in Harlem and escape the direct consequences.

Free speech is not an ignoble cause,ever!!

 

[bripat9643]

A right? Yes. But a college kid has the 'right' to stamp all over the US flag in front of a world war 2 vet on Memorial day.

Doesn't mean its even remotely reasonable. Pamela wanted the response she got. A security guard's life was too high a price to pay for it.

No one is saying people who stomp on the flag should be killed. That's the difference you don't seem to understand. Once again, you're saying people who draw Muhammad deserved to be killed.

I'm all too aware of the difference. The dead security guard's corpse is lying in it. And violence is exactly the kind of reaction Pamela was trying to provoke.

Its unreasonable and foolish to intentionally try and provoke folks to violence.

I agree with that 100%. She walked into that event knowing full well and with ample evidence to support a reasonable expectation that it would cause the irrational crazies to come out.

I fully support free speech, but she should be held culpable at least and maybe even legally liable for the results of her ignorance and intolerance. Sure, I have the right to walk through the streets of Oakland in blackface. Is there any doubt that someone wouldn't add a little blue and red to it? Maybe the real tragedy here is that a security guard caught a bullet that should have found Pamela - at least then she would have been held personally accountable for her insanity.

So you also think she should pay with her life??
Your right there with the real crazies,good job.

That's not exactly my meaning. It's just that a man nobly lost his life to protect an ignoble cause. And the argument resulting from that action seemingly defends an intolerant bigot who would willingly and unjustifiably put other innocent people in front her right to wear blackface in Harlem and escape the direct consequences.

Freedom of speech is not an ignoble cause. No one lost his life defending it. Two muzzie savages who deserved it were killed. It's all good in my book.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Actually not ridiculous in the least. Actions that may result in reactions are to be expected, and often illuminating. We can see early historical results of MLK's actions; the Geller actions are too recent.

In both cases they took actions to highlight injustices and real problems in our society.

Geller has illuminated nothing... Charlie Hebdo she is not.

she is a delusional attention whore much like manifold thinking he is some sort of hero for calling women ***** on the internet...

You are entitled to your opinion. Seems to me she's asking the right questions and putting out the correct predictions:

Pamela Geller A Response to My Critics This Is a War - TIME

Wow...

The questions she poses have nothing to do with reality. She's waging a war on her own and using innocents as a pawn in her ignorant game. At the same time, she seems to be blaming the media and "cultural elites" for exposing her as just another cross-burning clown in a white hood. If you jump into a tiger's cage, who gets the blame if he eats you?

Does she have the right to do it or not?