Islam is worthy of our hate. Don't see a problem there.

A cult of death. Don't know why anyone would hold it in anything other than contempt.

(05-04-2015 12:52 AM)Paul M Wrote:  Islam is worthy of our hate. Don't see a problem there.

A cult of death. Don't know why anyone would hold it in anything other than contempt.

You mean besides the fact there are millions of muslims living in the United states, and only 2 showed up here? Stop acting like Islam is some massive, intrinsically cohesive religion when it's just like any other. Certain sects and interpretations can be very violent, others aren't.

(05-04-2015 12:24 AM)GoodOwl Wrote:  

(05-04-2015 12:04 AM)I45owl Wrote:  

(05-03-2015 11:34 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  ...while I agree with everything you said about Geller, but you're wrong about the blame. She didn't provoke anyone to violence, she simply provoked them. They chose to turn to violence, and while her actions are purposefully offensive, in no way, shape, or form can you blame art, words, or speech for violent actions. It's just not how it works, and you're going to far with your attempt to blame her for this.

When someone's position of violence is pretty clear on the response to certain acts, it should be clear that she was provoking them to violence.

If not for Pamela Geller's actions, this would not have happened. If this were not a predictable outcome, Garland police would not have been on site in numbers.

She had her "I hate Islam" event. No-one worth a **** died. I feel sorry for the police officer that has to suffer for her idiocy. I suppose she is happy with herself, and others appear to be happy with her as well. I am not.

You are equating drawing a cartoon picture with shooting a gun at someone. The two are just not even in the same category.

I have done no such thing. Among the things that are more dangerous than either what Geller did or the assailants have done, manufacturing a set of dogmatic beliefs is by far the most dangerous of any of those actions.

I have said that Geller is stupid, the assailants are evil. How is that equating one with the other?

I do blame Geller for inciting this incident, with predictable results. I understand UCF08's objections and difference in opinion. Regardless of semantics, I resent her actions.

(05-04-2015 12:24 AM)GoodOwl Wrote:  Those are all rational and acceptable responses. Irrational responses are shooting or threats to shoot. Those have no place and zero defensibility in our country, and in much of the civilized world.

Of course it's not acceptable to you or I or anyone else on this forum, but it is reality. Are you suggesting that the two guys on a suicide mission give a crap whether you find their behavior acceptable? God tells you to do something that is fundamentally immoral and you then do it. Is that a rational response? Or is that evidence that you are rational, but following a conception of god that is evil? I suggest the latter.

(05-04-2015 12:24 AM)GoodOwl Wrote:  The very fact that a few cartoon drawings, done on American soil in an American State, are seen by you as "predictably provoking violent response" is the part I take issue with, as it clearly demonstrates that these crazy people are not capable of respecting the kind of law and order our and most other civilized societies are founded upon. We are not talking about Syria, as you suggested in earlier posts. We are talking about the United States of America, which has laws and rules to govern this that were willfully ignored by the cultist shooters. That's the problem, not a few drawings by some artists, no matter who funded them or set them up.

You should take issue with it. I don't suggest that you respond by going to an "I hate Islam" event with a placard of Mohammed. I may not agree with you at times, but I don't want you or any other poster to die like that.

The fact is that there are people in Atlanta that would have shown up with weapons if an event like this happened there. There are probably people in every major American city that would. There is a systematic influence here in North Texas that guarantees this would happen, just as there would be in NYC, Minneapolis, Detroit, or Patterson, New Jersey, to name a few.

Whether the person set of people that will react like that are present in Raqqa, Dallas, or elsewhere is immaterial. The same people with the same philosophy will react the same. They will not stand idly by just because ... what? Why do you think they would react differently in Raqqa than in Garland?

(05-04-2015 12:24 AM)GoodOwl Wrote:  I don't think it was predictable at all, not in The United States in Texas. I think it is a sad state of the truth of this crazy cult, their irrational dogma and worthless, hollow idols.

I could have predicted it. Thankfully, the Garland Police predicted it, otherwise, people could have died who should not have, regardless whether or not they were a bunch of idiots.

As a note, dogma is by definition irrational. That is the nature of dogma.

(05-04-2015 12:41 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(05-04-2015 12:34 AM)I45owl Wrote:  

(05-04-2015 12:19 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  

Quote:When someone's position of violence is pretty clear on the response to certain acts, it should be clear that she was provoking them to violence.

This isn't acceptable in our society, and has no basis morally or legally. That someone, or a group, has reacted violently to previous legal expressions of free speech does not somehow make an expression of free speech a provocation of violence. It doesn't matter if it's an intentionally offensive painting of muhammed or civil rights protesters in Birmingham in the 60's, claiming a provocation of violence by nonviolent acts just cannot be accepted.

Of course it's not acceptable and has no moral or legal basis. It does have a religious and dogmatic basis.

Your analogy to Birmingham is terrible... in fact, I can't think any analogy that would be appropriate here outside of some obscure, insignificant, cult that holds dogma that inspires murderous acts (and adherents that view that dogma as valid). It just happens that there is a prominent dogmatic belief system that does hold such beliefs.

The analogy was fine, you just think this is somehow different for some reason.

It is fundamentally different. There was no difference in religion on two sides in Birmingham in the 1960s. There was no claim to religious dogma that indicated that one side must kill the other, whereas religious dogma is why violence is an issue in the other. In one case, the protesters were standing up for fundamental human rights that they were denied in the context of society at that time, in the other they were using the guise of a civil right (having previously failed to deny that right to their adversaries) to provoke and incite their adversary. Just because you create a flawed analogy where both instances have two adversarial sides does not make it a good analogy.

(05-04-2015 12:19 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  claiming a provocation of violence by nonviolent acts just cannot be accepted.

Hmm... you should write a letter to dictionary.com...or whoever wrote the laws regarding provocation.

Provocation | Define Provocation at Dictionary.com

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/provocation Wrote:Criminal Law. words or conduct leading to killing in hot passion and without deliberation

This case, does not strictly meet that legal definition because I'm sure that deliberation was pretty significant here, but you're wrong about the concept I've quoted from you.

(05-04-2015 12:52 AM)Paul M Wrote:  Islam is worthy of our hate. Don't see a problem there.

A cult of death. Don't know why anyone would hold it in anything other than contempt.

I see nothing to disagree with here. I have tremendous respect for most, if not all, Muslims that I know. I respect people, but I owe no such respect to religions, philosophies, nor any other specific idea.

(05-04-2015 12:56 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(05-04-2015 12:52 AM)Paul M Wrote:  Islam is worthy of our hate. Don't see a problem there.

A cult of death. Don't know why anyone would hold it in anything other than contempt.

You mean besides the fact there are millions of muslims living in the United states, and only 2 showed up here? Stop acting like Islam is some massive, intrinsically cohesive religion when it's just like any other. Certain sects and interpretations can be very violent, others aren't.

Damn. And you were doing so well.

I said nothing about Muslims. Islam is violent. Islam is evil. Islam is hate. Not all Muslims are good followers of Islam. Not all Muslims are aware of what Islam teaches. Mohammad was a violent murdering butcher who commands that of his followers. Personally I'm glad many of them are ignorant.

Quote:It is fundamentally different. There was no difference in religion on two sides in Birmingham in the 1960s. There was no claim to religious dogma that indicated that one side must kill the other, whereas religious dogma is why violence is an issue in the other. In one case, the protesters were standing up for fundamental human rights that they were denied in the context of society at that time, in the other they were using the guise of a civil right (having previously failed to deny that right to their adversaries) to provoke and incite their adversary. Just because you create a flawed analogy where both instances have two adversarial sides does not make it a good analogy.

You seem to be stuck on giving the views of radical muslims separate weight because it status as religious dogma; that's nonsense and wholly irrelevant to the factual basis of this analogy. In both cases people knew what they were doing would result in a violent response, and while the civil rights protesters motives were far more genuine and admirable, that really doesn't matter to whether or not those acting violently in response were wholly and entirely to blame for their negative actions. They both were.

Quote:Hmm... you should write a letter to dictionary.com...or whoever wrote the laws regarding provocation.

Provocation | Define Provocation at Dictionary.com

This case, does not strictly meet that legal definition because I'm sure that deliberation was pretty significant here, but you're wrong about the concept I've quoted from you.

Did I really need to state that you can of course be provoked with credible, and immediate threats to harm and the like? I thought we would have understood that to be the case, and the legal definition of provocation really only bolsters my argument.

(05-04-2015 01:36 AM)Paul M Wrote:  

(05-04-2015 12:56 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(05-04-2015 12:52 AM)Paul M Wrote:  Islam is worthy of our hate. Don't see a problem there.

A cult of death. Don't know why anyone would hold it in anything other than contempt.

You mean besides the fact there are millions of muslims living in the United states, and only 2 showed up here? Stop acting like Islam is some massive, intrinsically cohesive religion when it's just like any other. Certain sects and interpretations can be very violent, others aren't.

Damn. And you were doing so well.

I said nothing about Muslims. Islam is violent. Islam is evil. Islam is hate. Not all Muslims are good followers of Islam. Not all Muslims are aware of what Islam teaches. Mohammad was a violent murdering butcher who commands that of his followers. Personally I'm glad many of them are ignorant.

Islam is nothing but words on a paper, stop being silly as if what you said there has any true meaning.

Moving on...


Yeah, I think not.

What exactly did I say that had no meaning?

(05-04-2015 01:38 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  

Quote:Hmm... you should write a letter to dictionary.com...or whoever wrote the laws regarding provocation.

Provocation | Define Provocation at Dictionary.com

This case, does not strictly meet that legal definition because I'm sure that deliberation was pretty significant here, but you're wrong about the concept I've quoted from you.

Did I really need to state that you can of course be provoked with credible, and immediate threats to harm and the like? I thought we would have understood that to be the case, and the legal definition of provocation really only bolsters my argument.

Did the words "words or conduct" not make it all the way through the electrical storm that is the internet? Because if they did, it appears you didn't think they were important, but they are.

(05-03-2015 11:40 PM)I45owl Wrote:  

(05-03-2015 11:20 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(05-03-2015 11:10 PM)I45owl Wrote:  

(05-03-2015 10:55 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  She's a U.S. citizen, right? Has a right to be there? Conduct an art exhibit?!?

Yes. Yes. Yes, if she wishes to do so, but that's not why she was here. Let's not pretend this is about art... It's about provocation and an expression of hatred. What she is doing is more similar to KKK or Nazi activity than it is to art.

Of course, she's still an idiot, but that has nothing to do with whether she has those rights. She does.

Of course it wasn't about art. But she's exposed these terrorists for who they are and now......they gon'!. So good on her, she drew them out before many more were injured or killed by these a-holes.

Oh, and pro-tip- When you go to KKK and Nazi's it's probably well past time to give this one up. Just a friendly.

By exposed, you mean "provoked people to bring a stockpile of weapons with intent to kill", thereby putting a lot of people at risk. It was an accident that there were not a lot of people trying to raise funds for cancer research in the immediate area at an all night event the night before this incident.

But, hey, she did something inconsequential in the long run - thankfully only one person who was incident suffered any harm. So, let's celebrate idiocy.

So you'd rather they were left unexposed and able to do further harm in some future endeavor with their "stockpile of weapons". Gotcha. Cause, well, by your own description these terrorists were gonna pop off at some point. So logistically? Yea, I'd say she save lives and pulled off a pretty solid W.

Me? Nah. Piss 'em off. Rattle the hornets nest when it's cold out and early. Get 'em when they are most susceptible to catching a bullet in the chest or gut.

Again, a solid W in the good guys column, the cops.

Let's check the tale of the tape, shall we sportsfans?:

One ankle beat up, two dickheads done, rotting, and fertilizing, cache of weapons discovered, confiscated and probably handed out to the Sheriffs kids and friends.

Win- Win- Win. Is there a problem here?

And Damn, 45. I left a while ago cause you were going to bed(?)...

JMU, encouraging the provocation of any religion only leads to more radicalization. Just because this woman, or you and I, have a right to draw whatever the f*ck we want to on a piece of paper, it doesn't mean we should be so blatantly disrespectful for no reason. The people who did this are dead, who exactly are we showing off to? Those muslims who *didn't* attack us?

(05-04-2015 12:04 AM)I45owl Wrote:  

(05-03-2015 11:34 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  I made no such comparison,

Apologies for the misattribution.

(05-03-2015 11:34 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  ...while I agree with everything you said about Geller, but you're wrong about the blame. She didn't provoke anyone to violence, she simply provoked them. They chose to turn to violence, and while her actions are purposefully offensive, in no way, shape, or form can you blame art, words, or speech for violent actions. It's just not how it works, and you're going to far with your attempt to blame her for this.

When someone's position of violence is pretty clear on the response to certain acts, it should be clear that she was provoking them to violence.

If not for Pamela Geller's actions, this would not have happened. If this were not a predictable outcome, Garland police would not have been on site in numbers.

She had her "I hate Islam" event. No-one worth a **** died. I feel sorry for the police officer that has to suffer for her idiocy. I suppose she is happy with herself, and others appear to be happy with her as well. I am not.

Oh, of course it would have. If not here, then in Frisco, or Dallas or somewhere else. If these terrorists were stockpiling guns, what would you expect the outcome? A "buy-back program" and Rajab and Abdul were just going to bring 'em on in?

C'mon man. This was a faaaar worse event, prevented. Give Mme. Geller her props as an American Hero.

She's not a hero for doing this, stop being stupid.

(05-04-2015 02:09 AM)JMUDunk Wrote:  Oh, of course it would have. If not here, then in Frisco, or Dallas or somewhere else. If these terrorists were stockpiling guns, what would you expect the outcome? A "buy-back program" and Rajab and Abdul were just going to bring 'em on in?

C'mon man. This was a faaaar worse event, prevented. Give Mme. Geller her props as an American Hero.

No, if there is something far worse that would've happened, it would involve someone else. If Geller were not here, the two assailants would've been across the highway at Chuck E Cheese. If they were a terrorist attach that were genuinely being planned here, it was not by these two. This kind of incitement really has no conceivable positive outcome.

But, I totally respect your right to express your opinion. To wit...

(05-03-2015 10:00 PM)I45owl Wrote:  I absolutely, unequivocally, believe in free speech, no matter how stupid it is. That's why I participate on this forum.

(05-04-2015 02:01 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  JMU, encouraging the provocation of any religion only leads to more radicalization. Just because this woman, or you and I, have a right to draw whatever the f*ck we want to on a piece of paper, it doesn't mean we should be so blatantly disrespectful for no reason. The people who did this are dead, who exactly are we showing off to? Those muslims who *didn't* attack us?

Who has said anything about anyone "showing off" other than you? Use your own words. I'll, if you'd kindly, use mine.

Weakness creates a vacuum. We've seen this worldwide now for years and millions upon millions of innocent people are paying the price for our, and others, deliberate weakness. Shall we now indulge that here? At home? To what end?

Do you honestly think if we're just "nicer" or more "accommodating" to these terrorists they wouldn't be stockpiling weapons or responding to the calls of some radical ******** in Yemen to kill as many Satans, their words, as they can?

C'mon.

No one is calling all anything, all anything. I've had dozens of Muslim friends growing up, roommates, adult drinking buddies or whatever and kids Ive coached. A LOT. *Hell, I've been invited to India a dozen times, need to take them up on that.*

We're talking about this set of asssholes. No one else. This "artshow" wasn't going to incite anyone but exactly who it did.

An again, good for them. It exposed a terrorist cell or some conspiracy and there are probably people alive because of it. Thankfully not these two jerkwads.
Enjoy your 72 virgins, A. Virgins don't usually have a clue what they're doing and complain a lot. B. I hope they're virgins for a reason- fat, dumb and ugly. Eff-U.

(05-04-2015 02:27 AM)I45owl Wrote:  

(05-04-2015 02:09 AM)JMUDunk Wrote:  Oh, of course it would have. If not here, then in Frisco, or Dallas or somewhere else. If these terrorists were stockpiling guns, what would you expect the outcome? A "buy-back program" and Rajab and Abdul were just going to bring 'em on in?

C'mon man. This was a faaaar worse event, prevented. Give Mme. Geller her props as an American Hero.

No, if there is something far worse that would've happened, it would involve someone else. If Geller were not here, the two assailants would've been across the highway at Chuck E Cheese. If they were a terrorist attach that were genuinely being planned here, it was not by these two. This kind of incitement really has no conceivable positive outcome.

But, I totally respect your right to express your opinion. To wit...

(05-03-2015 10:00 PM)I45owl Wrote:  I absolutely, unequivocally, believe in free speech, no matter how stupid it is. That's why I participate on this forum.

Then why were they stockpiling guns? Your words, I believe. (?)

(05-04-2015 02:30 AM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(05-04-2015 02:01 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  JMU, encouraging the provocation of any religion only leads to more radicalization. Just because this woman, or you and I, have a right to draw whatever the f*ck we want to on a piece of paper, it doesn't mean we should be so blatantly disrespectful for no reason. The people who did this are dead, who exactly are we showing off to? Those muslims who *didn't* attack us?

Who has said anything about anyone "showing off" other than you? Use your own words. I'll, if you'd kindly, use mine.

Weakness creates a vacuum. We've seen this worldwide now for years and millions upon millions of innocent people are paying the price for our, and others, deliberate weakness. Shall we now indulge that here? At home? To what end?

Do you honestly think if we're just "nicer" or more "accommodating" to these terrorists they wouldn't be stockpiling weapons or responding to the calls of some radical ******** in Yemen to kill as many Satans, their words, as they can?

C'mon.

No one is calling all anything, all anything. I've had dozens of Muslim friends growing up, roommates, adult drinking buddies or whatever and kids Ive coached. A LOT. *Hell, I've been invited to India a dozen times, need to take them up on that.*

We're talking about this set of asssholes. No one else. This "artshow" wasn't going to incite anyone but exactly who it did.

An again, good for them. It exposed a terrorist cell or some conspiracy and there are probably people alive because of it. Thankfully not these two jerkwads.
Enjoy your 72 virgins, A. Virgins don't usually have a clue what they're doing and complain a lot. B. I hope they're virgins for a reason- fat, dumb and ugly. Eff-U.

Do you think I'm worried about offending terrorists? I'm worried about radicalizing moderate muslims by explicitly trying to antagonize them. Unless you think all muslims are terrorists, you should be worried about this.

(05-04-2015 02:43 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(05-04-2015 02:30 AM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(05-04-2015 02:01 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  JMU, encouraging the provocation of any religion only leads to more radicalization. Just because this woman, or you and I, have a right to draw whatever the f*ck we want to on a piece of paper, it doesn't mean we should be so blatantly disrespectful for no reason. The people who did this are dead, who exactly are we showing off to? Those muslims who *didn't* attack us?

Who has said anything about anyone "showing off" other than you? Use your own words. I'll, if you'd kindly, use mine.

Weakness creates a vacuum. We've seen this worldwide now for years and millions upon millions of innocent people are paying the price for our, and others, deliberate weakness. Shall we now indulge that here? At home? To what end?

Do you honestly think if we're just "nicer" or more "accommodating" to these terrorists they wouldn't be stockpiling weapons or responding to the calls of some radical ******** in Yemen to kill as many Satans, their words, as they can?

C'mon.

No one is calling all anything, all anything. I've had dozens of Muslim friends growing up, roommates, adult drinking buddies or whatever and kids Ive coached. A LOT. *Hell, I've been invited to India a dozen times, need to take them up on that.*

We're talking about this set of asssholes. No one else. This "artshow" wasn't going to incite anyone but exactly who it did.

An again, good for them. It exposed a terrorist cell or some conspiracy and there are probably people alive because of it. Thankfully not these two jerkwads.
Enjoy your 72 virgins, A. Virgins don't usually have a clue what they're doing and complain a lot. B. I hope they're virgins for a reason- fat, dumb and ugly. Eff-U.

Do you think I'm worried about offending terrorists? I'm worried about radicalizing moderate muslims by explicitly trying to antagonize them. Unless you think all muslims are terrorists, you should be worried about this.

clearly you either can't read, or don't comprehend the written language.

Til the 'morrow, g'night.

(05-04-2015 02:32 AM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(05-04-2015 02:27 AM)I45owl Wrote:  

(05-04-2015 02:09 AM)JMUDunk Wrote:  Oh, of course it would have. If not here, then in Frisco, or Dallas or somewhere else. If these terrorists were stockpiling guns, what would you expect the outcome? A "buy-back program" and Rajab and Abdul were just going to bring 'em on in?

C'mon man. This was a faaaar worse event, prevented. Give Mme. Geller her props as an American Hero.

No, if there is something far worse that would've happened, it would involve someone else. If Geller were not here, the two assailants would've been across the highway at Chuck E Cheese. If they were a terrorist attach that were genuinely being planned here, it was not by these two. This kind of incitement really has no conceivable positive outcome.

But, I totally respect your right to express your opinion. To wit...

(05-03-2015 10:00 PM)I45owl Wrote:  I absolutely, unequivocally, believe in free speech, no matter how stupid it is. That's why I participate on this forum.

Then why were they stockpiling guns? Your words, I believe. (?)

That was in reference to my neighbors from several years ago. The assailants very well could be the same people, or it could be their pleasant children, all grown up.

But, is it your contention that everyone who is stockpiling guns is a terrorist in waiting? Do you work for Janet Napolitano or something?

The fact is that the same gun laws that benefit hunters, gun enthusiasts, wolverine wannabes, and survivalist nut-jobs also allow Muslims to buy guns. And, some do.