Two shot dead outside Muhammad Art Exhibit in Garland

[righteousmomma]

Gee whiz, what a conundrum What a choice - Mohammed or God.

 

The definition of blasphemy is "the act or offense of speaking sacrilegiously about God or sacred things;"

 

Mohammed is not a "thing", so was he God?

 

 

 

 

I don't think so.

[Chickadee]

@Valin, if I remember you are not a fan of Pam Geller. I think she did a very good job in her most recent CNN interview. What did you think? And what are your thoughts on her "efforts" to continue to aggravate Islam?

 

And PS @SrWoodchuck, the 'I am Bosch' article was stellar.

[righteousmomma]

Well,, well, ISIS just claimed responsibility for the Texas shooting. Says it is first of many planned.

 

We do live in a crazy upside down world. I think Pamela Geller made her points extremely well. Not that anyone asked my opinion.

[Valin]

@Valin, if I remember you are not a fan of Pam Geller. I think she did a very good job in her most recent CNN interview. What did you think? And what are your thoughts on her "efforts" to continue to aggravate Islam?

 

And PS @SrWoodchuck, the 'I am Bosch' article was stellar.

 

 

I'm not really...and yes she did. OTOH That CNN bimbette was an idiot. The problem is people like the CNN bimbette (and lo they are legion) don't know what they are talking about.

[SrWoodchuck]

Fawstin, Gellar & Spencer....at Garland Art Closing

 

 

 

Via iOTWReports

[SrWoodchuck]

[Valin]

Unless you agree with Pam Geller 100% You're A Very Very Bad Person And Probably A Globalist RINO Who never uses your turn signal.

[Geee]

Unless you agree with Pam Geller 100% You're A Very Very Bad Person And Probably A Globalist RINO Who never uses your turn signal.

And take long showers!!!!

[Geee]

CNN's Chris Cuomo: Hate speech 'excluded from protection' in Constitution

 

CNN anchor Chris Cuomo said on Wednesday that "hate speech" is not protected by the U.S. Constitution, an opinion unshared by many, if not most, constitutional lawyers.

 

Cuomo's declaration came in response to a Twitter user who said to Cuomo that "too many people are trying to say hate speech [does not equal] free speech."

 

"It doesn't," Cuomo said back in a Twitter message. "Hate speech is excluded from protection. Don't just say you love the Constitution. Read it."

 

Cuomo did not immediately respond to a request for comment from the Washington Examiner media desk. He did follow up in Twitter messages that he was referring to the Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire ruling, wherein the Supreme Court found that speech intended to incite public unrest is not protected.

 

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/cnns-chris-cuomo-hate-speech-excluded-from-protection-in-constitution/article/2564066

[SrWoodchuck]

Unless you agree with Pam Geller 100% You're A Very Very Bad Person And Probably A Globalist RINO Who never uses your turn signal.

 

@Valin

 

From your link:

Pamela Geller: This is the problem with the conservatives. This is why we can never nominate qualified, brave, true conservative candidates. The conservative movement has trimmed to accommodate the leftist media so much that they’ve trimmed themselves out of principle. They attack me because they’re desperately afraid that the leftist media will smear them by association with me. It is an act of sheer cowardice.

 

 

Rights & principles are never protected & maintained by silence or acquiescence to the dominant or popular politically correct rules of society.

 

They are kept safe by loud voices & even repugnant speech, that dares the elite masters of society to go one step further.

 

People that cherish their personal comfort; or who believe their own ego's are under dire threat, by these loud and aggressive statements, voices & people.....are willing to sacrifice their "unalienable rights" given by God (Our Constitutional Republican government guarantee) for the facade of normalcy & pseudo-"peace."

 

It's what progressives do, to achieve their ends. Incremental loss of liberty.

 

It is not enough to simply say, "No, I don't like that."

 

You must stand up & say, "Absolutely not! Over my dead body! I'm not moving an inch! You are, so step the hell back!"

 

This is what Fawstin, Ayan Hirsi Ali, Brigitte Gabriel, Gellar & Spencer do....and what threatens the comfort of would-be elitist, misogynist masters & their fawning quislings.

[Valin]

@SrWoodchuck

 

Breitbart News: Even some conservative columnists and a potential presidential candidate (Donald Trump) have resorted to personal attacks against you as a preface before arguing in defense of free speech. Why do you feel that so many have come to attack the messenger?

What I am talking about....Rich Lowery Attacked Pam?

 

1. People have the right to hold meetings like this

2. Large numbers of Muslims are in dire need of A Life!

3. (dealing with your post) At the end of the day what did this stunt (and that is what this was) accomplish? Just because you can, does not mean you should.

[Geee]

@SrWoodchuck

 

Breitbart News: Even some conservative columnists and a potential presidential candidate (Donald Trump) have resorted to personal attacks against you as a preface before arguing in defense of free speech. Why do you feel that so many have come to attack the messenger?

What I am talking about....Rich Lowery Attacked Pam?

 

1. People have the right to hold meetings like this

2. Large numbers of Muslims are in dire need of A Life!

3. (dealing with your post) At the end of the day what did this stunt (and that is what this was) accomplish? Just because you can, does not mean you should.

Hmmm. I really am going back and forth on this - but I do know that I did not see as much uproar, nor did anyone get shot when there was a cross in a jar of pee and other such displays - and not just in some small little meeting - but in the NY 'Art' Museum.

[Chickadee]

 

@SrWoodchuck

 

Breitbart News: Even some conservative columnists and a potential presidential candidate (Donald Trump) have resorted to personal attacks against you as a preface before arguing in defense of free speech. Why do you feel that so many have come to attack the messenger?

What I am talking about....Rich Lowery Attacked Pam?

 

1. People have the right to hold meetings like this

2. Large numbers of Muslims are in dire need of A Life!

3. (dealing with your post) At the end of the day what did this stunt (and that is what this was) accomplish? Just because you can, does not mean you should.

Hmmm. I really am going back and forth on this - but I do know that I did not see as much uproar, nor did anyone get shot when there was a cross in a jar of pee and other such displays - and not just in some small little meeting - but in the NY 'Art' Museum.

 

 

I somewhat agree, @Geee, that I go back and forth. But I have decided I am more in favor of what Geller is trying to accomplish than I am with the pandering people who say, Oh, we need to avoid all violence no matter what. As far as I am concerned, any form of conforming to such evil as is ISIS-Islam means we are justifying it. I do not wish to justify any part of it. I do not accept the notion that all nations must submit to sharia law and accommodate their dictated beliefs. Freedom and liberty for me--especially in my choice of religion. The muslim world needs to be called out, and I believe Geller is trying to do that.

 

Ah! I just found a quote which says it much better:

 

"Their mission is to awaken us to the challenge of Islamic supremacists — not just the violent jihadists but also the powerful Islamist forces behind the jihad. Islamists are attempting to coerce us into abandoning our commitment to free expression. They are pressuring us to accommodate their totalitarian system rather than accepting assimilation into our liberty culture.

 

You may not like the provocateurs’ methods. Personally, I am not a fan of gratuitous insult, which can antagonize pro-Western Muslims we want on our side. But let’s not make too much of that. Muslims who really are pro-Western already know, as Americans overwhelmingly know, that being offended is a small price to pay to live in a free society. We can bristle at an offense and still grasp that we do not want the offense criminalized.

 

It would be easy, in our preening gentility, to look down our noses at a Mohammed cartoon contest. But we’d better understand the scope of the threat the contest was meant to raise our attention to — a threat triggered by ideology, not cartoons. There is in our midst an Islamist movement that wants to suppress not only insults to Islam but all critical examination of Islam. That movement is delighted to leverage the atmosphere of intimidation created by violent jihadists, and it counts the current United States government among its allies." — Andrew C. McCarthy (National Review)

[Geee]

 

 

@SrWoodchuck

 

Breitbart News: Even some conservative columnists and a potential presidential candidate (Donald Trump) have resorted to personal attacks against you as a preface before arguing in defense of free speech. Why do you feel that so many have come to attack the messenger?

What I am talking about....Rich Lowery Attacked Pam?

 

1. People have the right to hold meetings like this

2. Large numbers of Muslims are in dire need of A Life!

3. (dealing with your post) At the end of the day what did this stunt (and that is what this was) accomplish? Just because you can, does not mean you should.

Hmmm. I really am going back and forth on this - but I do know that I did not see as much uproar, nor did anyone get shot when there was a cross in a jar of pee and other such displays - and not just in some small little meeting - but in the NY 'Art' Museum.

 

 

I somewhat agree, @Geee, that I go back and forth. But I have decided I am more in favor of what Geller is trying to accomplish than I am with the pandering people who say, Oh, we need to avoid all violence no matter what. As far as I am concerned, any form of conforming to such evil as is ISIS-Islam means we are justifying it. I do not wish to justify any part of it. I do not accept the notion that all nations must submit to sharia law and accommodate their dictated beliefs. Freedom and liberty for me--especially in my choice of religion. The muslim world needs to be called out, and I believe Geller is trying to do that.

 

Ah! I just found a quote which says it much better:

 

"Their mission is to awaken us to the challenge of Islamic supremacists — not just the violent jihadists but also the powerful Islamist forces behind the jihad. Islamists are attempting to coerce us into abandoning our commitment to free expression. They are pressuring us to accommodate their totalitarian system rather than accepting assimilation into our liberty culture.

 

You may not like the provocateurs’ methods. Personally, I am not a fan of gratuitous insult, which can antagonize pro-Western Muslims we want on our side. But let’s not make too much of that. Muslims who really are pro-Western already know, as Americans overwhelmingly know, that being offended is a small price to pay to live in a free society. We can bristle at an offense and still grasp that we do not want the offense criminalized.

 

It would be easy, in our preening gentility, to look down our noses at a Mohammed cartoon contest. But we’d better understand the scope of the threat the contest was meant to raise our attention to — a threat triggered by ideology, not cartoons. There is in our midst an Islamist movement that wants to suppress not only insults to Islam but all critical examination of Islam. That movement is delighted to leverage the atmosphere of intimidation created by violent jihadists, and it counts the current United States government among its allies." — Andrew C. McCarthy (National Review)

 

In other words " I may not agree with what you say, but I will fight to death for your right to say it". I guess that does not hold in many peoples minds any more.

[SrWoodchuck]

 

 

 

@SrWoodchuck

 

Breitbart News: Even some conservative columnists and a potential presidential candidate (Donald Trump) have resorted to personal attacks against you as a preface before arguing in defense of free speech. Why do you feel that so many have come to attack the messenger?

What I am talking about....Rich Lowery Attacked Pam?

 

1. People have the right to hold meetings like this

2. Large numbers of Muslims are in dire need of A Life!

3. (dealing with your post) At the end of the day what did this stunt (and that is what this was) accomplish? Just because you can, does not mean you should.

Hmmm. I really am going back and forth on this - but I do know that I did not see as much uproar, nor did anyone get shot when there was a cross in a jar of pee and other such displays - and not just in some small little meeting - but in the NY 'Art' Museum.

 

 

I somewhat agree, @Geee, that I go back and forth. But I have decided I am more in favor of what Geller is trying to accomplish than I am with the pandering people who say, Oh, we need to avoid all violence no matter what. As far as I am concerned, any form of conforming to such evil as is ISIS-Islam means we are justifying it. I do not wish to justify any part of it. I do not accept the notion that all nations must submit to sharia law and accommodate their dictated beliefs. Freedom and liberty for me--especially in my choice of religion. The muslim world needs to be called out, and I believe Geller is trying to do that.

 

Ah! I just found a quote which says it much better:

 

"Their mission is to awaken us to the challenge of Islamic supremacists — not just the violent jihadists but also the powerful Islamist forces behind the jihad. Islamists are attempting to coerce us into abandoning our commitment to free expression. They are pressuring us to accommodate their totalitarian system rather than accepting assimilation into our liberty culture.

 

You may not like the provocateurs’ methods. Personally, I am not a fan of gratuitous insult, which can antagonize pro-Western Muslims we want on our side. But let’s not make too much of that. Muslims who really are pro-Western already know, as Americans overwhelmingly know, that being offended is a small price to pay to live in a free society. We can bristle at an offense and still grasp that we do not want the offense criminalized.

 

It would be easy, in our preening gentility, to look down our noses at a Mohammed cartoon contest. But we’d better understand the scope of the threat the contest was meant to raise our attention to — a threat triggered by ideology, not cartoons. There is in our midst an Islamist movement that wants to suppress not only insults to Islam but all critical examination of Islam. That movement is delighted to leverage the atmosphere of intimidation created by violent jihadists, and it counts the current United States government among its allies." — Andrew C. McCarthy (National Review)

 

In other words " I may not agree with what you say, but I will fight to death for your right to say it". I guess that does not hold in many peoples minds any more.

 

 

Sweet @Chickadee, Sweet @Geee, Spunky @Valin

 

No less an authority than Rich Lowery attacked Pam? Great. He's one of the cultural apologists that needs a cosmic bonk. He's no William F. Buckley for sure....and thank the Lord he's not a Grover Norquist, either.....yet.

 

3. (dealing with your post) At the end of the day what did this stunt (and that is what this was) accomplish? Just because you can, does not mean you should.

 

 

The real issue is....should we be willing to trade our 1st Amendment rights, for being politically correct?

 

We are not Europe....yet....even though a "democratic socialism" is what is planned for us, at the very least....by elite people who know better than we do....how we should act, speak and do.

 

You, @Valin...would prefer to finesse & debate away with people that think that Sharia law is better for everyone...even if it isn't....and that are willing to travel a thousand miles to convince you, with an AK-47.

 

So....there's that.

 

This worthless stunt proved that there are people living here in the US already that can't let you exercise your rights as a citizen....if it involves hurt feelings about their religion.

 

We have to identify them & remove them....from this country, or from this existence. They can go somewhere else & like it or not.

 

They are not US citizens with the same rights, as long as our death is the cost for disagreement with them.

 

Sorry, but you're pretty damned ignorant if you think you can outsmart a 7th Century jihadi standing in front of you with an AK.

 

You don't argue with evil.....you eradicate it.

 

Was it right that Mohammad executed 600-900 Jews in his day? No.....but jihadi Muslims believe it still is today, and they're doing a real good job of it in the area they control.

 

Getting to the last of your sentence: You are so wrong, it ain't funny. We do need to make a stand with "stunts" like Garland. It establishes a clear difference between Jihad (savages) & free citizens of our Constitutional Republic. The fact that Muslim ghetto's like 'Dearbornistan' exist, is an aberration.

 

The other side of our freedom of religion, is also freedom from religion, that others would impose upon us...even if Islam is the elitist, boutique, defacto state religion of the US at the present time.

 

Their right to practice their religion ends at my body......and if they'd rather not assimilate...they can STFU...or leave.

[SrWoodchuck]

 

Via FaceBook

[SrWoodchuck]

America Is Already Being Ruled By Sharia Law - #IStandWithPamelaGeller

http://www.conservativehq.com/node/20240

 

In the wake of the Garland, Texas jihadi attack one thing has become perfectly clear – America, and especially its establishment media – is already being ruled by Muslim Sharia law and its prohibition against criticizing Islam and depicting or criticizing its prophet Mohammed.

 

Consider that in the aftermath of the Garland, Texas attack, and a subsequent “fatwa” or Muslim religious order pronouncing a death sentence against Pamela Geller, an organizer of the Garland event, America’s major media have spent the past week trying to establish moral equivalence between telling the truth about Islam, and its political ideology Islamism, and so-called “hate speech.”

 

“Hate speech” is an extra-constitutional term that has been invented by the Left to silence anyone who defends Western Judeo-Christian values and culture and it has been used in the past to try to silence supporters of traditional marriage.

 

One of the chief enforcers of the Left’s “hate speech” system of censorship is the Southern Poverty Law Center or SPLC. The problem for the Left is, in our view the SPLC is, by its own definition, a “hate group,” and as our friend Rick Manning pointed out in an article for netrightdaily.com, it has been directly tied by federal authorities to the terrorist act committed by Floyd Lee Corkins, II, who attacked the Family Research Council because the SPLC listed that group as a “hate group” due to their traditional views on marriage and family.

 

But the SPLC’s terrorist connection did not stop CNN and other networks, and the New York Times, and various other Left-leaning establishment media outlets, such as Salon, from devoting hours of airtime and oceans of ink and pixels to the SPLC’s assessment that Pamela Geller and her organization, American Freedom Defense Initiative, are engaged in “hate speech” that should be prohibited, not in protected political discourse, when they tell the truth about Islamism or publish cartoons critical of Islam and its Sharia law system.

 

Fortunately, the First Amendment does not give self-appointed censors, such as the SPLC and CNN’s Chris Cuomo, the power to decided such matters.

 

But to borrow a phrase from our friend Diana West (author of the must read books, American Betrayal and The Death of the Grown-Up) “Now for the reality check.”

 

“When a group of people peacefully gathering for an afternoon to discuss or protest or otherwise exercise their lawful rights to free speech regarding Islam and its noxious prophet require thousands of dollars worth of security to protect their lives from jihad killers (and thank goodness, otherwise the slaughter would likely have far exceeded the death toll of the Charlie Hebdo/Jewish market attacks), freedom, in the Western sense of the word, no longer exists. The "public square" is a war zone,” says West.

 

To Diana West and to us, that means that “the liberty that is (was) the foundation of our republic is not "threatened," but rather has already been engulfed by the advance of Islam, its law, its culture, into our society. (Airport security is another tip-off.) Here -- not in the Middle East, not in the Turkish, Pakistani and other Islamic sectors of the EU -- it is now accepted that silence buys safety, that submission to sharia is the norm. By this process, Dar al Harb (House of War) becomes Dar al Islam (House of Islam/Submission), and without a fight.”

 

The fact that CNN’s Chris Cuomo, Jeff Zucker, president of CNN Worldwide, and the New York Times’ editorial board in particular, were quick to find moral equivalence between telling the truth about Islam and Islamism and “hate speech” tells us that Diana West is right and Islamism’s goal of imposing Sharia on America is well on its way to being accomplished.

 

Diana West calls this “The Islamization of the Mind,” and she’s right; it is here and it is spreading through the self-imposed Sharia compliance of the establishment media.

 

West says this is a low-ebb marker reflecting the extent to which their fellow-citizens in media and politics prefer to embrace "dhimmitude" (non-Muslim compliance with Sharia) rather than support the defenders of their own God-given liberties.

 

As I see it, Islam, and its bizarre medieval Sharia practices, such as sentencing homosexuals to death by slow hanging (Iran) or throwing them from roof tops (the Islamic State) and killing women who “dishonor” their families (the United States and Worldwide) cannot withstand scrutiny according to the western philosophical principles upon which our culture is based and are inimical to liberty under the Constitution of the United States.

 

To say that expressing that analysis is “hate speech” is likewise inimical to the Constitution and reflective of the weird cultural self-loathing that is the stock and trade of the kind of far-Left “hate America” crowd that just can’t seem to grasp that two of their most sacred secular tenets, feminism and legal protection for homosexuality, are among the most intense conflicts between Islam and their post-modern secularism.

 

Your God-given rights to freedom of religion, freedom of thought, freedom of speech and freedom of conscience are under grave threat, not just from Islamists seeking to impose their culture and way of life on you, but from the cowardice of America’s elite. Only the vigilance of America’s country class can prevent the further advance of Sharia compliance in America.

Via MyEmail