NPR hit piece on American Freedom Defense Initiative
This will surprise no one, but National Public Radio published a piece entitled “5 Things To Know About The Organizers Of Muhammad Cartoon Contest“. Why we need to know these things, I don’t know. Mostly, they base their article on quotes from the Southern Poverty Law Center, which is a losing endeavor right off the bat. The SPLC once called the American Legion a “hate group” because of the Legion’s stance against illegal immigration. So, you see, everyone with whom the SPLC disagrees politically is a “hate group”.
Now, a long time ago, Pam Geller, the force behind the American Freedom Defense Initiative helped this blog get off the ground, so I have a soft spot for her. We have since parted ways, slowly, but surely, but because our blogs went in different directions. I don’t necessarily agree with everything she says or with the tactics that she uses, but, unlike the author of the NPR piece, Eyder Peralta, I don’t think that she should pay for her politics with her life. Nor, do I think the American Freedom Defense Initiative was asking to be rape…er…shot at.
I’d say the same thing about a gathering of peaceful Muslims who were trampling on the US flag, if some rednecks blasted away at them.
The only people who deserve to be shot are criminals who are endangering lives and property, certainly not someone expressing an opinion, no matter how distasteful we might find that opinion.
One of the criminals shot yesterday in their attempt to have a mass-murder scenario was Elton Simpson and according to Fox News, he’s been the subject of a few Islamic terror-linked investigations in the past few years;
Although the suspects’ ties to a specific terrorist organization could not be immediately confirmed, Simpson was known to U.S. intelligence and had been part of a recent terror investigation for allegedly trying to travel to Africa, home of the Al Qaeda-linked militant group al-Shabaab, sources told Fox News.
Court documents show that a man named Elton Simpson was convicted in Phoenix of lying to the FBI in January 2010, about whether he’d discussed traveling to Somalia. According to trial testimony, Simpson is an American Muslim who became the subject of a criminal investigation in 2006 because of his association “with an individual whom the FBI believed was attempting to set up a terrorist cell in Arizona.”
Simpson was convicted, but a judge ruled that prosecutors hadn’t proven the false statement involved terrorism. Simpson was later sentenced to three years of probation.
Well, at least he waited until his probation time was served before he went nutzo.
The bottom line is that regardless of whether you agree with Ms. Geller or not, she, nor none of her acolytes, deserved to be shot for their opinions. But, it has been my personal experience that radical, not just extremist, Muslims don’t tolerate criticism well. You can search our archives here and find examples of Muslims physically attacking folks who don’t see things the same way. I’m guessing that it’s because their political and religious beliefs don’t survive scrutiny very well.
By the way, it was one Garland traffic cop who dealt justice to the two gun men yesterday. At least he didn’t hesitate and contemplate how shooting Simpson and his room mate would look in the media while they increased the body count.
Category: Terror War
I’m so sick and tired…. Of the left wing nut. Media trashing the right the center,, Christians anything that doesn’t fit into there way of birdbrain thinking. Then oh you shouldn’t make fun of that but it ok to trash Jesus. WTF. WTF.
They use PayPal as a source of branding the group a hate group? PAYPAL!!! That’s (if possible) an even less authoritative source than the SPLC.
The same lefties that put a crucifix in a jar of urine and calls it art think it’s perfectly legit for Islamic fascists to off a few cartoonists.
To paraphrase Skippy – WTF?
OC
That “art” was supported by tax dollars
As were some exhibits featuring Mapplethorpe’s famous “bullwhip” photos.
Mapplethorpe offed himself, you know. He hated himself so much that he let everyone know it through the ‘art’ of self-abuse. There was NOTHING wonderful at all about him or what he created, and I have never understood his need to let the entire world know with his crappy junk just what a maladjusted idiot he was. But boy, did he milk that NEA grant money!
You sure about that, Ex-PH2? I thought he died of AIDS not terribly long after his famous photos made it big in the “artsy” community.
Yes, I am very sure about his self-hatred.
Not arguing that, Ex-PH2 – only questioning the individual’s cause of death. I believe Mapplethorpe died of AIDS vice suicide.
His Wikipedia page says complications from AIDS killed him. Considering it appears to be a result of his lifestyle then I can see it being seeing as causing his own death.
Yeah, and remember the rampage of Christian riots and bombings that followed said exhibition?
I’ve gotten to the point where I don’t really care what the hand wringers think or why they think it. Everybody line up and pick a side, because the chance to kick the ball is coming.
Yep.
Yup! its official in my household no donations for NPR and it will only be listened to during Car Talk and Wait Wait Don’t Tell Me.
Car Talk is still on? I thought those guys died off like a decade ago
Repeats
Gotcha. I have fond memories of riding in the car with my dad listening to car talk or the Prarie Home Companion
NPR lost my attention a long time ago when I realized most of them a ovegrown deadbeat hippies whose whine is ‘complain, complain, complain’. They are SO 1970s and never grew out of it, other than changing nouns occasionally.
I keep wondering how those aging hippie chicks will like wearing burkas.
I’ve often wondered the same thing. What will they do? On the one hand it will cover up all their wrinkles and sagging body parts, but by then there will be the national police to monitor their complaints and lop off a head or two when they complain.
On the other hand, warts.
In our house they’re often called National Palestinian Radio. Every so often mi esposa calls from her commute home, all agitated because she turned on the truck radio and caught an earful of ‘Democracy Now’. Some of the worst, twisted propaganda since Pravda and Izvestia.
What’s really sad, is they actually have some good reporting, too. But, as noted, I won’t donate to them. Just can’t do it. Not when they broadcast outright propaganda every day.
In Russian Pravda translates into “Truth” and Izvestia into “News.” The Russian people had a saying, “There is no truth in news, and no news in truth.”
Sounds a lot like NPR!
You donate to them every time you pay your taxes. In fact, if you knew half of what your tax dollars support, you’ll throw yourself off a cliff.
**I meant to write “you’d throw yourself off a cliff.” And I also meant to mark it as sarcasm. I am in no way encouraging you to do such a thing.**
Oh man, I was hoping Lars would show up and take your advice to throw himself off a cliff.
Dammit.
Is NPR still getting gubmint money, as in taxpayer money?
My problem with journalists and the media in general, is that they are all activists and do not care about publishing lies, as long as those lies further their agenda.
For the liberals, the end justifies the means, not matter what the means are.
I’ll be a contrary point of view. It goes without saying that in America, everyone has the right to free speech, so Gellar and company were free to hold their racist carton drawing exercise.
But I’m really uninterested in giving these folks any credit or view them as doing anything of value here. They loudly and widely broadcast their intention to engage in the provocative cartoon drawing in a clear and deliberate attempt to provoke exactly the response that they got. That’s pretty damn irresponsible in my book. This action’s SOLE PURPOSE was to provoke this sort of response for the propaganda of being able to denounce Muslims. They are NOT helpless or innocent victims. They sought this result and they are quite gleeful to have gotten it.
So, they deliberately put their lives and lives of other people in danger by doing their level best to invite someone to target them. They are simply lucky that they were not targeted by a much more proficient and intelligent set of nut jobs than the ones they drew.
The French newspaper guys at least could say they turned their low brow satire on other targets besides Muslims. But this bunch set out to push that specific button so they could then say, “see, we told you” and in effect, slam an entire group of people for the actions of just two very clearly stupid wannabe jihadis who would likely be regarded as useful idiots by real terrorists.
I don’t find anything about what they did laudable or defensible in any way. They wanted this result and talking them up as though they are really victims here simply makes us willing marks for their propaganda con.
” … so Gellar and company were free to hold their racist carton(sic) drawing exercise.”
Really?
Ah, well. Like beauty, bigotry is in the eyes of the beholder, I suppose.
They were and they did. Nobody stopped them. But this whole event was put on specifically to provoke a reaction of the sort they got. That was an intended result. We should not buy into it and talk about it as if that was not what they were trying to do. They are not victims. They intentionally invited this.
“They intentionally invited this.”
Sorry, I’m just not seeing the downside in this.
You are free to see it however you wish.
I suspect you might see a downside if their attackers had happened to be from the A squad rather than the D squad and carried off a much more effective attack.
Then you suspect wrong.
With the list of failures of mooslummer terrorists always being caught by FBI informants I would say that they really don’t have an “A” squad.
Besides, that cop did a great job dispatching them to the great virgin goat farm in the sky.
Myself, I think it was a great bait and switch.
From the sounds of your writings though it would appear that you wish to continue to enable them in their evil doings instead of taking an opportunity to off a few more of them.
All you do by saying that we should temper our speech to suit mooslummers is to enable the evil that they do across the world.
You sound just like the guy that feeds the crocodile in Reagan’s story.
Eat you he will, sooner or later, he will get around to you.
“Dammitall, dressin’ like that, she deserved to get raped and strangled”.
The constitutionally protected right of free speech means that you can justifiably be offended by the message. However, it does not give the offended the right to justifiably kill the messenger.
of course it doesn’t. But if their purpose wasn’t really free speech, but intentional provocation to engineer a confrontation like this, I would think that would make a difference to people who are interested in protection of free speech. Intentional provocation to violence under the guise of free speech is really just conning people while hiding behind your rights. Its possible to misuse a constitutional right and I would suggest that this bunch is guilty of exactly that. I’m not going to cry over the wannabe jihadi’s that self darwinated in this attack, but Gellar’s group sought that out and we should all be happy that an innocent didn’t buy it at their event because they want to play fast and loose with constitutional freedoms.
They didn’t have to draw attention to themselves, just like I don’t have to own a gun, or practice my religion freely. I just do those things because I’m an American and it’s our right. If you’d rather hide in a closet and try to avoid confrontations so your enemies will kill you last, then by all means, do so, because it’s also your right to cower instead of fight.
I think you miss the point. They were intentionally attempting to provoke a violent response and cloaking that intention in free speech trappings. That being the case, while they are within their rights to do it, no one should feel compelled to regard them as victims or patriots for obtaining the result they desired.
Good, for crying out loud.
Nice shooting too.
“no one should feel compelled to regard them as victims or patriots for obtaining the result they desired.” Whew. I thought we were all being forced to support the sponsors and organizers of the event. Thanks for that information. I figured that they wanted violence and, more than that, they wanted people dead. This explains why the lone guard, the one who was wounded in the ankle, was unarmed. Golly. It all makes sense now. Thanks! Wait. Does this mean that the prosecutor will charge the sponsors and organizers with crimes related to the Muslims’ deaths? Hmmm.
Taste this, PS,
“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude
better than the animating contest of freedom,go home from us in peace.
We ask not your counsels or your arms.
Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you.
May your chains set lightly upon you,
and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”
Samuel Adams
So P.S., help me make sure I understand. They knew ahead of time that drawing cartoons would provoke them. So by your logic they shouldn’t do it. Check.
So…. Next year, if women wear short shorts and spaghetti strap shirts, while walking past the mosque, carrying a bag of half priced pork loin on their way home from the store…. are they provoking the Muslims? Should they “not” do that because the Muslims have emphatically said that they don’t approve? So now it’s provocation!?
Your logic enables the decision making which they used to justify attacking the cartoon contest.
You damn boot licking accommodating jackass!
OldManchu, I wish there was a like button for this post. I wish there was a like button shaped like an A-10 mowing down the two scumbags we are talking about in this discussion. I would hit it approximately ten thousand times while eating bacon and swilling Jim Beam straight from the bottle.
Yanno what would be nice? Some genuine data supporting your claim that they were specifically encouraging a violent response.
Do you have any?
Do you really think we are so stupid as to believe that all adherents of Islam are jihadists? And are you so stupid as to think that a cartoon contest is really the problem here?
This is not the place to come and try to get people to cringe away from your ‘racist’ epithet. You will find you’ll get your change back with interest.
I’ve no need or desire to make anyone cringe and I didn’t assert that anyone believed anything about adherents of Islam. What I said and maintain is that if you talk about Gellar’s event as though it was truly a free speech activity, rather than a deliberate propaganda event intended to provoke a violent response which they could exploit to further their political views, then I think you’re indulging in the same naivete and lack of critical discernment the post accuses NPR of.
They broadcast to the world their intent to engage in this activity. They were screaming from the rooftops, come on, attack us and they got the attack they wanted. That is actually a very realistic, pragmatic and clear eyed assessment of what happened here.
And while we should rightfully decry the violence of Islamists, we ought also to call out and decry the cynical misuse of freedom of speech to encourage unnecessary violence, which was their intent.
If there is anybody in the world who will flaunt a freedom, it’s us. That’s why we still have them. I agree with you, that the cartoon contest was held to deliberately provoke a response. I disagree with your thought that it shouldn’t have been done. Many of the adherents of Islam who move here mistakenly believe that everyone should place Islam on a pedestal, and adhere to it, even if they aren’t believers. WRONG. ANSWER. They have to learn that being American means developing mental and emotional filters that allow for all kinds of belief systems, making space for your neighbors to follow their beliefs while still having room for your own. We all have to make allowances and give them time to learn it, but because of the violent nature of some of the adherents of Islam, we also have to set up circumstances where they get to practice THEIR new-found tolerance. You don’t develop calluses by avoiding labor, and you don’t develop those mental and emotional filters I mentioned by never being challenged. In other words…if we keep handling Muslims with kid gloves, and walk on eggs shells to keep from ‘offending’ them, they will never be anything but an ostracized and dangerous, marginalized faction that will never learn to participate in American society, and non-Muslims will continue to misunderstand, hate, and fear them.
Heck, I’m still trying to figure out how he got “racist” out of this! Islam is a so-called religion, not an ethnicity. But using his ignorant definition of racism, Islamists are the biggest racists on the planet.
That was the cause of my original comment.
The “racist” thing got a big,”Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaat!?” – hence, my comment.
Live bait works best for predator hunting.
OF Course you’re the first to speak out whenever some insensitive person makes a crack against Christians, am I right?
And do please note: Islam is NOT a race.
“I’ll be a contrary point of view. It goes without saying that in America, everyone has the right to free speech, so Gellar and company were free to hold their racist carton drawing exercise.”
Muslim isn’t a race, cakeboy. It’s an ideology, and demands acceptance on its own terms, or else it gets violent. The only ones putting people at risk here were these two idiots, who seemed to have mistaken Paris, Texas for Paris, France. With a completely predictable and satisfactory outcome.
Ed, I think you just became one of my heroes. Note to self, add AW1Ed to list.
I’m honored. Just a retired Navy E-6, who spoke his mind. Which most likely is why I retired an E-6!
😉
Well, if we are going to get all particular about definitions, you might want to proof the corrections you issue. Muslim isn’t a noun, its an adjective which means an adherent of the religion of Islam. Islam is a religion, and if you want to call it an ideology, that’s accurate, but the definition applies equally to Christianity (of which I am an adherent).
As I said before, this wasn’t a free speech event, it was an intentional provocation posing as free speech, which they undertook hoping for precisely this result. In my book, its a cynical, twisted exercise of our freedom of speech and says to me they have little respect for that freedom or the cost paid to secure it. The jihadi dimwits got what was coming to them, but nothing about what Gellar’s group did is honorable. Touting them as somehow standing up to the Islamic enemy for God and country is just being the willing mark for their propaganda op. Its fascinating that people who can see through all the hypocrisy and foolishness of the left on any given Sunday can’t in a clear eyed way, suss out the motivations behind AFD’s event.
Lars, is that you in another incarnation or are you really as dumb as he was.
All you are doing is rationalizing bad behavior from the mooslummers.
If you like them so much, please feel free to join them>Like Reagan said, we will stand on the shore and wave a fond goodbye to you as you sail to your promised nirvana.
Well, bye.
“Muslim isn’t a noun, its an adjective which means an adherent of the religion of Islam.” P.Season
Really? So you use a noun (adherent) to define an adjective and don’t notice a problem? Hell, man, even the Islamic dictionary has Muslim as a noun, as do the OED, Webster’s, and every other bona fide dictionary. I hope you’re seated for this bit of truth but some words…no, I had better not. I wouldn’t want your head to explode. Somebody would have to clean that mess up.
Political Season: the logic – or, more precisely, the lack of logic – in your statement above is breathtaking.
By the same logic that you use above, any woman who’s dressed provocatively invites being sexually assaulted. That argument is bullsh!t, and you know it’s bullsh!t. So do we.
And don’t pretend that “this situation is different” – because it’s not. Both are textbook examples of “blaming the victim” to excuse those who are actually guilty. And both arguments are pure bullsh!t.
Sheesh. And you sound like you are relatively well-educated, too.
Or maybe I should say, “Well-indoctrinated.” Because you’re obviously not capable of thinking for yourself – or thinking things through to a logical conclusion.
Adding an star next to Hondo on my list.
The logic is only the same at the very shallow level you stop and start your analysis at.
The situations are different. A woman dressed provocatively (whatever that means: you could have an entire debate about the construction of that idea alone) isn’t in any way shape or form inviting a sexual assault. Point blank.
AFD’s event was conducted with a fervent desire to provoke a violent response from some jihadi nimrod and they got exactly what they wanted. The attack was a hoped for, sought after outcome. It was a feature not a bug.
They wanted to be attacked because it serves their political purposes to be attacked.
It doesn’t make the jihadi dummies right and I’m not bothered at all that they got deaded. They were very stupid. But I’m also not going to be taken in by the obvious political manipulations of AFD. It’s a con, cloaked in free speech. There is no reason to celebrate them as champions of free speech. Real free speech champions are a damn sight more authentic than this transparent BS instigated by AFD.
As an aside, relax with all the well indoctrinated blah blah blah. It’s my opinion, you don’t have to agree with it. Its got as rational a basis as yours and I can argue it without having to call you a moron or something. Can you simply straightforwardly debate the point of disagreement sans the insults, or is that too much for you?
An insult was merited as part of a reply to that ignorant argument. I was actually rather mild in my reply. Tell us: you know AFDI’s intent how, precisely? I’m guessing you haven’t talked to or interviewed AFDI’s leadership. If you haven’t, that means you don’t have a clue as to their intent – which in turn means you’re blowing smoke above. Your argument here is nothing more than a variant of the “blame the victim” argument. It’s a restatement of the argument a low-life makes after being arrested for sexual assault: “She was dressed in short, tight shorts and was wearing no bra – she must have wanted it!” As I said previously: that argument is bullsh!t, and you know it. Quit p!ssing on our leg and telling us it’s raining. Let me spell it out for you. Both arguments in question are of the following form: 1. Party A did action X. Action X is lawful. 2. Action X is known to provoke an inappropriate response in some members of group F. 3. Therefore, Party A’s intent must have been to intentionally provoke group F. 4. Party A is thus responsible for the resulting misconduct of the members of group F who misbehaved. That form of argument is false in either case we’ve discussed – legally, factually, and morally. It’s in effect equivalent to saying that neither men in general nor Muslims in particular are capable of obeying the law when aroused (either sexually or via anger). Perhaps you actually believe that. If so, you have my sympathy. In short: your argument is flawed, is morally bankrupt, and makes no logical sense. It is the argument of either a brainwashed true believer or a fool. Or perhaps someone who’s afraid to defend their own freedom of speech. (PS: don’t even bother to bring up the “inciting a riot” or “fighting words” canards as a counterargument. A privately-sponsored contest is hardly a mob scene, and two people driving some 900+ miles to intentionally target a private event for violence in no way shape or form constitutes a “riot”. The… Read more »
Mohammed’s followers have turned an unambiguously good act on his part into an excuse for oppression and murder, and we are to just submit to their perversion? Really?
Nobody can draw Mohammed. Nobody knows what Mohammed looked like. That is because Mohammed refused to sit for his portrait. He refused to sit for his portrait to make the point that he was a man, not a god, and he did not want his picture to become an object of worship. He refused to let his picture become an occasion of sin for Muslims.
So, the perverted followers of Mohammed have made the drawing of a person and labeling it Mohammed an occasion of sin by Muslims, by claiming that they are so offended they have to murder cartoonists. Poor Mohammed. He has the worst followers, ever.
🙁
There. I drew Mohammed. I’m going to go sit on my front porch and wait for the hoards to arrive.
That’s a terrible likeness.
For the win!!!
I don’t know, I think the likeness is striking! Any bush rustling going on in your AO nbcguy54ACTUAL? Any Muslim hordes appearing in the distance yet? You need any ammo? An extra rifle to sit with you? Please let me know!
All quiet in Slammintonio.
Come on over and maybe we can have a “hold my beer and watch this” moment as we draw up some range cards.
Oh c’mon. Are you arguing that AFD invited people to come in an draw pictures of Mohammend, something that the majority of pious and peaceful Muslims regard as blasphemous, as a way of helping Muslims? Having a guffaw moment here.
Its simply not a radical point of view to suggest that AFD intentionally engaged in this highly offensive to Muslims behavior in the hopes that it would provoke a response that they could then use to advance their political point of view that Islamists are coming to get us. It’s simply not radical to suggest that they are happy about the result (especially since only the jihadis got killed) and are now gleefully using it to say “see, I told you”! It’s just not.
Thats a stone cold, clear eyed, adult way of interpreting what they are doing.
As an aside, if we are now at the place in America where we think its enlightened free speech to intentionally profane sacred images of people’s religion to make a point, we’ve become some pathetic patriots. It’s pretty pathetic that we regard people as patriots because they are willing to defame the religious beliefs of good people in the very communities they live in who never did squat to them. This is what we think our free speech is about now? This is how we use that awesome freedom? Pretty pathetic.
…Still no proof -from you- they deliberately & consciously provoked a violent response…
Until you come up with that you’re just making crap up.
So, P. Season, what you are really saying is that the sponsors should have known, and likely did, that Muslims are violent people who, when upset about something, will strike out with blind violence. Yeah, I can see that.
What you call irresponsible, I call EFFECTIVE. To bad we can’t come up with a cartoon contest that will draw in the militant pedophiles.
It’s like jihadi flypaper. They couldn’t help getting Darwined when they heard about the contest. When you can’t find the enemy, have them find you.
Yeah compare the cost of a Hellfire missile to a Big Chief tablet, a #2 pencil, and half a dozen bullets.
I think I just balanced the budget.
Lars? Good to see ya, buddy!
Do you ever apply the same rules to your own speech, PS? My guess would be that if you say it, you just don’t care who you offend when you share your wisdom with others. But that’s just one opinion, based only upon what you wrote. Perhaps you are not actually as special a little snowflake as you appear here to want us to believe.
Umm…. stop it with the tired old leftist memes. Just stop it. You’re embarrassing yourself and it’s so bad you don’t even seem to realize it.
To start with, islam is NOT a race. There’s no racism involved. The whole “racism” thing is a red herring thrown out by the muzzies and their enablers to try and gain sympathy. It shouldn’t. Not one drop.
But most importantly, and why I support all such actions as this cartoon contest, is because it is an absolute defense of the 1st amendment.
I don’t give a rat’s ass whether you or anyone else likes what I say or anyone else says. It’s all protected speech. No one has a right to not be offended. No one. The 1st amendment is there precisely to protect speech that many may find offensive or otherwise distasteful.
Once you allow this group or that group to start putting limits on any part of the Bill of Rights, you weaken their protections for all of us. ALL of us.
Attempts to restrict any of our rights is a double-edged sword, because when you deny any portion of them to any group, then you will no longer have that same protection for yourself.
It’s way past time that th good citizens of this nation stood up to the creeping sharia that the muzzies are trying to enforce upon our nation and our people. Way past time. They need to be made to understand that is they want to live here and be a part of our society, then they need to accept ALL of our laws and assimilate themselves to OUR culture.
Otherwise, they need to go to someplace they’ll find more accommodating. But no one, NO ONE who truly embraces our Constitution should ever put up for a minute with any attempts to silence or restrict any part of it.
My comment above was directed at political season.
Ok, let’s try another track.
Right out of the gate, you ascribe racism as a motivator to this event. IMO, that is a complete fabrication on your part. HOW is it racist?
Because you immediately imputed that, and there is NO WAY you could KNOW that without being involved in the leadership and planning of this event, it is a pretty clear indicator of your world view – somewhere Left of Center. Because I think Obama is not, and never was, Presidential mettle, does that make me a racist?
Now to address the Free Speech angle. Again IMO, if you are taking the position that this event was equivalent to shouting, “FIRE!” in a crowded theater, that is at least plausible. Perhaps, even likely.
Let us assume that is an accurate assessment. If so, then these folks are either nearly criminal in their irresponsibility, or there was another purpose.
So, we are left with the intent/motivation of the heart. Very murky territory.
Gotta go to work. L8TR.
You declared your credentials in your first paragraph. What race is being racist, and what race is being racisted against? To me, you already sound as if you are full of shit, and all the rest of your blather is falling on deaf ears.
I’m wondering why there’s no active investigation by the media on how these two acquired their firearms. Whenever a gunman bought their gun from a legitimate gun dealer, we know about it the same day as the offense. No word on how they slipped through the background checks this time though.
Probably because there’s no background checks in a dark parking lot at 1 AM. How can we close the parking lot loop hole?
I know! Make it illegal to sell guns to everyone!
Which, Jonn, is precisely what the gun control crowd wants: no legal private firearms ownership whatsoever. They just aren’t willing to admit that fact openly.
Molon Labe.
Which is why I support eliminating ALL gun laws across the board. The 2nd amendment ends with the phrase “shall not be infringed”. How the government can square that with the draconian laws already in place is beyond me.
Anyone should be able to carry any weapon they can afford, either openly or concealed. However, they should also be held responsible for the results of any misuses of those weapons.
We don’t need prophylactic laws that infringe upon the rights of our citizens. Rather, we need to rebuild our laws to reflect personal responsibility for one’s actions (or inaction)and the results of same.
Probably fast and furious guns.
It is my fervent hope that one of these cartoon contest functions is held in every village, town, and city in this nation until all of these sick, twisted. muslem fanatics are smoked out and dealt with in a totally un-PC manner. I mean, sometimes you have to bait the bar out of his den. Smoke um out and light um up.
Concur.
If we ourselves do not defend our liberties and freedoms, then who will? Our government surely won’t. They’re too busy trying to impersonate Neville Chamberlain.
Either we defend our Constitution at every opportunity, or we consign it to the dustbin of history.
I’m surprised that the police officer wasn’t charged with hunting in a baited field.
Well, ISIS has now claimed responsiblity for this attack, which officially makes it ‘theirs’.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/is-claims-us-prophet-cartoon-attack/ar-BBjc49H
Also, the two gunmen were roomies!!!
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/gunmen-at-muhammad-cartoon-event-were-phoenix-roommates-sources-say/ar-BBjbxn4
Isn’t that just speshulll????
For the ignorant PoliticalSeason: Islam is not a race. It is a religious path followed by many different ethnic groups. It has nothing to do with race. And ‘muslim’ can be used as both noun and adjective.
You’re wrong about several things; those are just two of them. You’re entitled to your opinion, but if it clashes with those of people whose minds are not fettered by plausible deniability, you won’t get much support here.
Your statement that Ms. Geller invited that attack by holding the competition is ridiculous. She may have made herself a lightning rod of sorts, but most people will only attack her verbally.
It is only muslims who will attempt to kill anyone who says, portrays or sometimes even refers to Muhammad in any way at all, as in the case of Salman Rushdie.
For that mater, drawings or pictures are not forbidden by the Koran. As was pointed out above, it is forbidden to use them as an object of worship as that detracts and distracts from the worship of Allah. This whole ‘kill anyone who makes a drawing or cartoon’ is the product of crazed imams’ fatwahs and teachings. It is no more a core principle of Islam than the Westboro church’s rants are core tenets of Christianity. Or so I’ve read.
That may be true but the difference is the Westboro Baptist Church doesn’t have millions of followers who are willing to die for what its ‘ministers’ preach.
It’s interesting to read so much about how Ms. Geller invited or incited this…so what?
When I read that she incited this I have to ask a simple question, are these not adults? Are these not humans? These are not dogs trying to avoid taking a bite out of a steak left on a plate at the picnic table.
These are supposedly rational adults capable of making a conscious choice. They chose to believe in their fairy tale of a magical sky man who fills their lives with some sort of meaning and rules to live by, they choose to be offended by certain things that people who don’t share their belief in magic do or say.
Those who suggest Ms. Geller incited this are really saying that certain muslims lack the ability to control themselves and act responsible in a free society when their religion faces criticism or mocking.
Abortion offends the fairy tales of certain christians as well and they kill doctors over that offense, we hardly hold abortion clinics to account for offending or inciting christians because we expect the majority of christians to abide by the law as we expect the majority of muslims to abide by the law.
If your fairy tales tell you that killing someone is an acceptable course of action in defense of that fairy tale, perhaps it’s time to consider a different life vision. One that doesn’t require a belief in fairy tales that command you to murder others.
Ms. Geller’s right to insult islam is hers to pursue as often as she likes, islam has no right to respond with violence in the US. Those who can’t comprehend that fact need to spend some time with remedial comprehension courses on the right to hate people in the US. We can hate anyone we like, we just can’t kill them…not a hard concept to understand.
The minute that Christians riot or kill artists over “art” like Piss Christ or any other derogatory depictions of Christian religious icon’s, someone let me know. Until then, lets focus on the fact that radical Islam is filled with these nut jobs who need very little in the way of provocation to set them off.
What the AFDI was in no way, shape or form illegal, unlike the two (now dead) jihadi wannabe’s who drove from Arizona with what I am going to assume were illegal weapons in order to make some kind of idiot statement about not blaspheming their prophet.
You may disagree with the AFDI’s tactics, but they are not doing anything ILLEGAL. Last time I checked, attempting to shoot up a peaceful gathering IS illegal and THAT is what we should be focusing our attention on.
‘“I think the most disturbing thing is that both the organizers of the event and the perpetrators of the crime are outsiders,”’ Alia Salem, the executive director of the local chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), told the Guardian.” Well, there you go. Alia “Tex” Salem hath spoken. Of course, the Muslims who came to Garland, Tx to attend the “Stand with the Prophet” fundraiser were not outsiders. See how that works?