Remember That Late Wannabe “Cop Beheader”?
Jonn wrote the other day about the terrorist idiot in Boston who decided he’d behead a cop and instead ended up doing the eternal dirtnap. Turns out that cops weren’t his original target.
His original target? That appears to have been Pam Geller. Yes, the same Pam Geller whose organization was attacked by Islamic extremists when it sponsored a “Draw Mohammed” contest in the Dallas area recently.
The dead terrorist reportedly expressed an interest in beheading her prior to attacking Boston police. He apparently decided to attack Boston police only after he got “impatient”.
Draw your own conclusions as to whether such attacks are “revenge” for perceived “blasphemy” – or a calculated attempt by terrorists to undermine our freedoms of speech and religion.
Category: Terror War
These guys aren’t MESNA are they?
No, they’re not. But they are persistent. And even a blind squirrel finds an acorn once in a while.
And cops are probably under more pressure than ever because @ssholes in the media hyped the shootings in Ferguson and other cities.
Leopards being as dangerous as they are, the nice thing about them is that they never change their spots.
Thankfully he decided to target the only individuals in Boston who are armed; the police.
No big surprise hearing this. That why I believe in the right to carry concealed
Am I missing something here? I think Gellar is a bit of a drama queen with her cartoon contest, but we all have the right to a) disagree with her; b) ignore her; c) make fun of her.
Am I supposed to run and hide in fear because some broad did something that pissed off some squalid halfwits who CLAIM to be part of a group run by control freaks?
Ain’t gonna happen.
I think most of us here probably agree that it’s a bit foolhardy for Pam Geller to taunt these morons the way she does. But there is one benefit to what she’s doing and that is that it’s provoking the stupid cockroaches to come out into the light where they can be stepped on.
Pam can now put three small turban decals with black lines through them in the rear window of her car.
And I’ll bet she gets more.
Dangerous, and perhaps risky? Yes. But I don’t know that I can agree with “foolhardy”.
The First Amendment protects speech that may be found by some to be objectionable. That same Amendment also protects one’s right to exercise freedom of religion.
That doesn’t mean “if the majority approves” or “if it doesn’t offend anyone” – for either free speech or religious practice. It takes far more than that to allow the limitation of a fundamental right guaranteed by the Constitution.
It seems to me that the situation here is similar to the stifling of free speech on college campuses in the name of “political correctness”. Except here, it’s not the college administration trying to abrogate that freedom of speech through fiat declaration or a student “code of conduct”, or by declaring ideas with which they don’t agree to be “hate speech”. Here, it’s a vocal minority trying to stifle freedom of speech through violence calculated to intimidate.
Far too many people have died protecting our Constitutional rights for me to call the exercise of those rights “foolhardy”. I also have no desire to see that free exercise of those rights limited simply because freedom of speech or religion might offend an intolerant, small minority.
In short: while it’s not the way I’d act, Ms. Geller is merely exercising her Constitutional rights. The quote often erroneously attributed to Voltaire (actually penned by his biographer as a summary of his thoughts on freedom of speech) perhaps says it best: “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”
IMO freedom really is that important.
^^^ THIS ^^^
I agree that it’s not foolhardy, but for a different reason. I think it’s a calculated move in the same vein as the WBC or the Nazis.
Her motivation isn’t the exercise of free speech for the sake of free speech. It’s no difference than the WBC picketing funerals, they aren’t doing it for the sake of exercising their free speech rights they are doing it for the sake of antagonizing people into a reaction for their own purposes.
While they certainly have the right to be complete assholes and antagonize anyone they want with their 1st amendment rights it hardly makes them true first amendment crusaders.
I agree that I too will defend to the death her right be an asshole in how she exercises her rights even while I am not fooled into believing she’s some Bill of Rights purist with a noble heart.
She is like the American Nazi Party, the WBC, and just about any other group that exercises 1st amendment rights for the sole purpose of creating an antagonistic controversy. They all have the right and they all use those rights but their motives are quite different from yours and mine.
So, VOV – do you also feel that everyone who (after the Charlie Hebdo murders) posted a comment saying “Je suis Charlie” is being unduly provocative? Or who posted a photo of lady liberty giving the finger after 9/11 is likewise guilty of intentionally provoking Islam? Lenny Bruce was considered similarly provocative by many. Ditto many Civil Rights leaders and supporters – both black and white – during the 1950s and 1960s. Some consider Tea Party and 2nd Amendment advocates to be the same today. Do you likewise consider these groups and individuals to be of the same ilk as the ANP and WBC because of their exercise of free speech? Here, you’re ascribing motivation (as well as deeming moral equivalence) without any real evidence – the same motivation that our “fine, unbiased” media has ascribed to Ms. Geller and her organization. Indeed, on this issue it seems as if you’ve drunk their Kool-Aid. In theory, you could be correct. However, I’d like to see the proof before I buy that claim. You also seem to have neglected to consider an alternate theory that, frankly, IMO seems far more likely to be the case. IMO it’s far more likely that Ms. Geller and her organization is simply trying to do two things: (1) provide a clear demonstration that America will not cede its rights to freedom of speech and religion due to the threat of domestic violence by Islamic extremists, and (2) educate the American public to the real and present threat posed by same. Or, to put it more succinctly: to demonstrate to radical Islam and the American public in plain terms, “No – America will not voluntarily assume dhimmi status in our own land. We will not let you dictate what we shall and shall not say, or how we must act.” Why Geller and her organization? Because no one else will do it. It’s quite obvious that no one in the current Administration has any intent of doing that, even though it’s their job to do so. Ditto the media and most other organizations. Make no mistake… Read more »
We don’t hear much about these wannabe jihadis trying their shit in concealed carry Red States since that last one got ventilated in Texas, have we?
So far, Pam Geller 1 Wannabe terrorists, 0, go figger.
Should be Pam Geller 3, terrorists 0… Sheesh, fat fingers and no sleep don’t work well…
I don’t see Ms. Geller’s actions as “provocation,” I see them as a response to attacks upon our liberties and freedoms by islamists. Those individuals have come to our country, either legally or, in some cases, illegally, and rather than assimilate and become a productive part of our nation and adding to our culture, they have sought to impose their own culture and beliefs upon us. Witness what has happened in Dearborn for just a single example of this. Muslims there have established “no-go” areas for non muslims, have infiltrated the police department and sought to establish sharia courts rather than legally established courts. On a smaller scale, Somali and other muslims have sought to set up muslim-based communities in Lewiston and Portland, Maine. There were quite a few “fritions” between muslim cab drivers (they managed to set up and basically take over the taxi operations in both places) who were trying to refuse to take unaccompanied women in their cabs, or people with alcohol or dogs. My own daughter and I ran into a problem a few years back where ALL of the muslim cabbies in line at the transportation hub suddenly got out of their cabs, went over to a grassy area beside the building, and unrolled their prayer mats and started praying. People were left waiting for cabs for 15 minutes because the rules wouldn’t let other cabbies get out of line to pick up the people waiting. Fortunately, we all complained and got that practice stopped, but not before there was a real backlash by the muslims who were complaing we were all “racists” and “attempting to deny them their rights”, etc. Geller is simply responding, and in my opinion rightly so, to these attempts to limit our own rights in our own country by people, a large portion of whom are NOT citizens. Once the muslims find that the threat of violent action is sufficient to change things for their own good, then it will never stop. Never, until THEY control our culture and our rights are gone. Kipling got it right in his poem… Read more »
This is MY country. I was born here. We have the right to offend anyone we wish to offend. It’s a very valuble right to have.
If you want to come here, you do things the way we do them here. If you don’t like OUR way, then go back where you came from.
If you don’t like what someone says or does, you can say ‘I don’t like that’, but you DON’T have the right to kill him over it.
IMHO, the Westboro church idiots are a good example. They piss all of us off but no one has harmed them. Peaceful blocking of them ends their protest. Rev’s Jackson and Sharpton never get a call on the White Courtesy Phone.
Domestic enemies. If it wasn’t this excuse it would be another. Evil never needs a reason.
I have met the enemy, I have seen their way of life. I will not live under its rule. Islam is a deluded way of life. It is a weapon of mass destruction.
Fuck Muhammad and anyone the lives by his teachings.
As far as I can tell Pam Geller has 3 dead Tangos to her credit. That is pretty good for a civilian.