Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

samsingh

(17,571 posts)
158. at least one of the would be killers was known to be in contact with terrorists
Thu May 7, 2015, 12:27 PM
May 2015

i would think that he was going to attack some type of event at some time to kill innocent people.

killing him here probably saved innocent lives.

She has a right to say whatever Aerows May 2015 #1
That should be a universal message. AngryDem001 May 2015 #19
As a species, we have got to start Aerows May 2015 #36
Actually There are Exceptions itcfish May 2015 #143
agreed samsingh May 2015 #27
Exactly..nt Jesus Malverde May 2015 #41
The more attention people like her get Aerows May 2015 #54
That's correct. The Constitution gives people the right The Velveteen Ocelot May 2015 #2
someone decides that you can't wear the color green and will become violent if you do. samsingh May 2015 #28
what if youd never worn green before elehhhhna May 2015 #48
A better analogy might be: Chemisse May 2015 #71
beheading and shooting people is far more cruel than anything you've described samsingh May 2015 #73
So now you are equating Islam with terrorism. Chemisse May 2015 #121
these scarce few are killing thousands? what is being done to stop them? samsingh May 2015 #135
I disagree with you. bvar22 May 2015 #138
yes that is bad. but the drones emerged after the attack on us. samsingh May 2015 #139
children being crippled or worse is horrible samsingh May 2015 #140
Wearing green isn't "speech" unless it symbolizes something. The Velveteen Ocelot May 2015 #99
I must (respectfully) disagree Telcontar May 2015 #122
That's true. Thank you for the correction. The Velveteen Ocelot May 2015 #137
+1000. The 1st and 2nd amendments are the problem here 951-Riverside May 2015 #3
Abolish free speech? SickOfTheOnePct May 2015 #5
Progressive nations like Britain are doing just fine without those amendments n/t 951-Riverside May 2015 #47
Yay for Britain SickOfTheOnePct May 2015 #51
Last time I looked, we weren't in Britain, GGJohn May 2015 #68
This message was self-deleted by its author Jake Stern May 2015 #102
Ditto on the 'right to keep and bear arms' as well. VScott May 2015 #57
I'm personally not in favor SickOfTheOnePct May 2015 #58
That's a slippery slope. The Velveteen Ocelot May 2015 #6
951 fancies himself to be the arbiter of what's allowed... cherokeeprogressive May 2015 #69
You attitude scares me as much as the fundamentalists. Throd May 2015 #10
Any constitutional convention that was even remotely representative... Lizzie Poppet May 2015 #11
The one thing in our Constitution that scares the shit out of me is... Lochloosa May 2015 #15
You can have your own version of sharia law to yourself seveneyes May 2015 #16
after this incident, i respect Pam Geller samsingh May 2015 #29
You respect her? gollygee May 2015 #88
good point. i respect the bravery in free speech - i don't respect samsingh May 2015 #90
That makes more sense gollygee May 2015 #93
at least one of the would be killers was known to be in contact with terrorists samsingh May 2015 #158
I respect her willingness to say anything JustAnotherGen May 2015 #155
Lulz always so provocative. Jesus Malverde May 2015 #44
Yakno, Some day we will be able to ARREST people for saying stuff we don't like! Warren DeMontague May 2015 #157
Fuck. No. Adrahil May 2015 #152
What about hate speech against hate groups? Matrosov May 2015 #154
At the very least this incident should put her 'Freedom Defense Initiative' in a high risk category tanyev May 2015 #4
well, I have to look at it this way, if she wants to hollysmom May 2015 #7
i think the terrorists are the bad people samsingh May 2015 #31
I think if they'd taken out Gellar with themselves I would not give a rip elehhhhna May 2015 #55
she hasn't or threatened to kill anyone. how is she in the same league as those disgusting samsingh May 2015 #61
she provoked them and got exactly what she hoped for. elehhhhna May 2015 #145
again blame the victim mentality. sickening. samsingh May 2015 #148
so there are terrorists and the only question is what they will attack? samsingh May 2015 #32
No, I won't, for I don't accept your hair-splitting. WinkyDink May 2015 #8
Especially if it's paid for speech. Re: Faux Noise, et al. n/t freshwest May 2015 #9
Hate speech maligns persons as a group or class. Yo_Mama May 2015 #12
I call bullshit. delrem May 2015 #14
Yes she is a hater but her anti-Muslim crusade is not racist. totodeinhere May 2015 #20
Oh, cut the bullshit semantics. delrem May 2015 #21
How can being anti-Muslim be racist when Islam is a religion, not a race? totodeinhere May 2015 #24
http://pamelageller.com/ delrem May 2015 #38
alright - she's very disgusting too. atlas shrugs - ewwwwwww. samsingh May 2015 #64
yes. she is. delrem May 2015 #67
anyone who support atlas shrugged is sick and twisted in my opinion samsingh May 2015 #85
Then stop it. delrem May 2015 #98
because in the United States and Europe, "Islam" is heavily racialized, particularly by islamophobes Scootaloo May 2015 #43
thanks for that. delrem May 2015 #49
islamists have beheaded thousands of people in the middle east. i don't have any support for that samsingh May 2015 #72
You're supporting Pamela Geller. delrem May 2015 #78
don't try to say i'm supporting geller. i hate atlas. your name calling is interesting and samsingh May 2015 #82
You have been channelling Geller like nobody's business, samsingh. delrem May 2015 #87
both are evil samsingh May 2015 #91
Which has nothing to do with what I just explained to you Scootaloo May 2015 #96
You have your facts wrong. In the United States for instance 30% of Muslims are whites. totodeinhere May 2015 #104
You knowthat 30% is not "most" by any measure, correct? Scootaloo May 2015 #105
I didn't say "most," I said a plurality. totodeinhere May 2015 #106
I said most are not white. And they are not. Scootaloo May 2015 #108
I have to go to bed. But my definition of "impute" is... totodeinhere May 2015 #110
Because it nearly always goes hand in hand with prejudice against scary evil brown people. nomorenomore08 May 2015 #109
Fuck the bullshit and semantics seveneyes May 2015 #35
http://pamelageller.com/ delrem May 2015 #37
You made the claim seveneyes May 2015 #39
http://pamelageller.com/ delrem May 2015 #42
i call bullshit but not against Geller. samsingh May 2015 #34
http://pamelageller.com/ delrem May 2015 #40
should we link to islamist fundamentalist sites and isis? i would feel very dirty samsingh May 2015 #50
http://pamelageller.com/ delrem May 2015 #53
i would feel dirtier on the other sites. but then beheading tens of thousands samsingh May 2015 #62
Well, it's you that makes a choice in favor of exonerating Pamela Geller. delrem May 2015 #75
i think the constant terrorist attacks are worse than geller samsingh May 2015 #84
Isn't religion a protected class in the US? gollygee May 2015 #94
protected from your right to free speech? Warren Stupidity May 2015 #125
That's not what I'm responding to gollygee May 2015 #129
there are no laws against hate speech. Warren Stupidity May 2015 #133
I specifically said that gollygee May 2015 #134
There is no law against hate speech nor should there be. Warren Stupidity May 2015 #124
Let us say instead: "Pam Geller has limited free speech." Binkie The Clown May 2015 #13
Oh really. delrem May 2015 #17
shooting people up in the name of a religion may prove the 'those' comments to have some truth samsingh May 2015 #26
Only to a racist who impugns an entire people for the acts of a few. delrem May 2015 #52
what's a few? is isis only a few? samsingh May 2015 #66
ISIS is the current US enemy in the war on terror. delrem May 2015 #70
house of saud i not good guys. that's the disgusting joke samsingh May 2015 #79
Your broadbrush. delrem May 2015 #81
you forgot to post your link samsingh May 2015 #83
I responded directly to your post. delrem May 2015 #86
btw-you have posted alot of geller - i understand - she's pathetic samsingh May 2015 #92
The two nutcases are dead. Geller is thriving. Thanks to people like you. delrem May 2015 #97
you must have issues - i didn't even know about her until today samsingh May 2015 #113
What broadbrush? Implying that Muslims, as a group, are responsible for these atrocities. nomorenomore08 May 2015 #112
So instead of blaming Germans for WWII Binkie The Clown May 2015 #107
So the other 80-85% should be lumped in with the terrorists and radicals, and treated accordingly? nomorenomore08 May 2015 #114
That's NOT what I'm saying. Binkie The Clown May 2015 #116
For one thing, speaking out against extremism is punishable by death in some places. nomorenomore08 May 2015 #118
The poster mentioned women's voting. Either it's allowed in Muslim countries or it is not. Facts WinkyDink May 2015 #126
Since the first amendment uses the phrase "freedom of speech" muriel_volestrangler May 2015 #18
Re-read the OP. nt delrem May 2015 #22
It's wrong. If appears to not understand what the word 'freedom' means, and what 'free speech' muriel_volestrangler May 2015 #23
The OP provides context for a distinction. delrem May 2015 #45
she is exercising free speech and the attack by the two jihidists samsingh May 2015 #25
And further, her right to it is not in question Scootaloo May 2015 #30
"her right to it is not in question"? Not if you've been reading DU! WinkyDink May 2015 #128
Whatever gets you through the night. DefenseLawyer May 2015 #33
Somebody always has to clean up Aerows May 2015 #46
I'm sorry but, no, Keefer May 2015 #56
That security guard PAID for her speech. Blue State Bandit May 2015 #59
I can't stand Geller. But drawing Mohammed is not hate speech. boston bean May 2015 #60
did you read who the actual organizers / speakers at this event were? Skittles May 2015 #80
I think it gets a pass. delrem May 2015 #100
THAT is not illegal in the United States. WinkyDink May 2015 #130
NO ONE SAID IT WAS ILLEGAL Skittles May 2015 #144
so what if it was? Our right to free speech is not limited to "non hate speech". Warren Stupidity May 2015 #127
No, we should educate those that say she does not have free speech seveneyes May 2015 #63
That's what the founders of the nation called it Depaysement May 2015 #65
This OP has got its facts upside down Yorktown May 2015 #74
I don't consider most such depictions "hate speech" either. nomorenomore08 May 2015 #115
Well, you nailed the snag about Islam. Yorktown May 2015 #117
Much the same can be said of the Christian Bible. People were executed for "blasphemy" and "sodomy" nomorenomore08 May 2015 #119
No, there is one big difference: the assumed writer. Yorktown May 2015 #120
I think you underestimate the number of Christians who still take the Bible literally (or claim to). nomorenomore08 May 2015 #151
You are right in practical terms, not in theoretical terms. Yorktown May 2015 #153
I always feel bad when I hurt someone's feelings fadedrose May 2015 #76
I'm fairly certain that what the Founders were after was a protection from a tyrannical government. Erich Bloodaxe BSN May 2015 #132
that this has to be explained on DU is pitiful Skittles May 2015 #77
Actually, depicting any living person or animal is forbidden. alphafemale May 2015 #89
R#21 & K n/t UTUSN May 2015 #95
She is a demagogue. Hissyspit May 2015 #101
That's the nicest thing a person could say about her, and still be true. nt delrem May 2015 #103
She wishes to ASPIRE to being a demagogue! WinkyDink May 2015 #131
No CBGLuthier May 2015 #111
no. Freedom of speech - aka "free speech" is the exact language used to describe this right. Warren Stupidity May 2015 #123
+1 nomorenomore08 May 2015 #149
Pam Geller Has Free Speech GOLGO 13 May 2015 #136
how did the Boston marathon insult the boston bombers? samsingh May 2015 #141
In case any body is curious, this was the winning cartoon: (warning-depiction of Mohammed) EX500rider May 2015 #142
Hatespeech is absolutely constitutionally protected,and I'm gonna engage in hate speech in this post Shoulders of Giants May 2015 #146
Am I free to disagree? lumberjack_jeff May 2015 #147
I don't have a problem with her use of the Constitution, I have a problem with her and her kind. Rex May 2015 #150
Sorry, I'll blaspheme all I want. Thanks. Warren DeMontague May 2015 #156
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Can We Stop Saying "...»Reply #158