General Discussion

notadmblnd

(23,720 posts)

89. I agree and right now she is not bearing any responsibility for those she put in danger

Tue May 12, 2015, 10:22 PM

May 2015

nor those she manipulated into committing violent acts and probably never will. The two shooters were held responsible for their acts, they are dead. And here you are still defending her despite her admission that she had an objective other then exercising her 1st amendment right.

I have never condoned any violence towards her or her group and would challenge you to find anywhere on this thread or DU for that matter where I or anyone else here has- if that is what you are trying to imply.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

226 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

So it looks as though Pam Geller really did want to provoke a violent response to her little event [View all] Tommy_Carcetti May 2015 OP

When you erect a lightning rod, lightning will eventually strike. KittyWampus May 2015 #1

Pretty much so. Tommy_Carcetti May 2015 #2

Not if the sky is blue Yorktown May 2015 #114

"By poking at the hornet's nest moondust May 2015 #3

It's the most poisonous sort of vigilanteism - create a situation that's ripe for mass murder leveymg May 2015 #4

at the very least. notadmblnd May 2015 #8

She gave a can of gasoline to a pyromaniac. Tommy_Carcetti May 2015 #13

Your analogy would be more apt criticizing someone who built a home... trotsky May 2015 #138

Um, no. Geller's behavior went far beyond that. Tommy_Carcetti May 2015 #144

well, duh notadmblnd May 2015 #5

You would think so kcr May 2015 #6

she's an ugly hateful person notadmblnd May 2015 #10

The penalty for ugly bigotry isn't death. Nevernose May 2015 #34

I don't recall saying that she deserved to die, so why are you addressing me with that remark? notadmblnd May 2015 #35

Because you seem to think she bears responsibility Nevernose May 2015 #37

She absolutely should bear some responsibility for inciting violence. notadmblnd May 2015 #39

She absolutely is a terrible human being Nevernose May 2015 #56

If they held the convention in a Mosque and advocated and inspired notadmblnd May 2015 #126

Seriously? NobodyHere May 2015 #69

What she did wasn't about free speech and I don't appreciate her hiding behind the 1st Amendment notadmblnd May 2015 #71

How does one 'hide' behind an inalienable right? Oktober May 2015 #74

By claiming that 1A was her motive for having her "drawing contest" notadmblnd May 2015 #77

Why does that matter? Oktober May 2015 #80

Do you understand that the SCOTUS has defined limitations to that inalienable right? stevenleser May 2015 #123

Please explain how she went beyond the protections of the 1st.. Oktober May 2015 #125

I don't think she did. But that wasn't the initial question you asked. nt stevenleser May 2015 #127

Well played sir! JustAnotherGen May 2015 #203

They killed no one. One security guard was shot in the ankle which did not kill him notadmblnd May 2015 #179

I never said they killed anyone. NobodyHere May 2015 #183

She got What She Wanted itcfish May 2015 #174

precisely. notadmblnd May 2015 #176

Her intentions are pure, alright. 3catwoman3 May 2015 #85

Some people insisted she was only doing it for "free speech". nt Tommy_Carcetti May 2015 #7

I know, I saw them here notadmblnd May 2015 #9

She probably didn't do it for free speech Yorktown May 2015 #115

Creating the grounds for violence is not a good way to start such a discussion. nt Tommy_Carcetti May 2015 #199

You put your cart in front of the oxen Yorktown May 2015 #218

Like I've said, what she did is not a Free Speech issue, its a Felony 951-Riverside May 2015 #11

So if some violent Mormon extremists threaten to bomb "The Book of Mormon" show on Broadway, Nye Bevan May 2015 #12

A better analogy would be burning a cross on a black family's lawn. jobycom May 2015 #130

So anytime someone draws Muhammed, the police should investigate them Nye Bevan May 2015 #134

Fascism, it's what's for dinner Telcontar May 2015 #116

Do you feel that anti-war protesters have the power to oppress in this country? jobycom May 2015 #133

The terrorist shooters still get 100 percent of the blame seveneyes May 2015 #14

No one's saying they aren't to blame. Of course they are to blame. Tommy_Carcetti May 2015 #15

Only one party to blame in this case seveneyes May 2015 #18

Far from it. Tommy_Carcetti May 2015 #20

what an idiot, she was lucky this time....her ignorance is profound Demonaut May 2015 #16

What Pam Geller wanted was irrelevant. Coventina May 2015 #17

But if you read her statement, the whole "draw them out" comment.... Tommy_Carcetti May 2015 #19

The quote doesn't make clear if that was her goal ahead of time. Coventina May 2015 #22

True, but holding it in Garland.... Tommy_Carcetti May 2015 #24

You aren't going to get me to defend her actions. I think she's vile and loathsome. Coventina May 2015 #25

The shooters weren't from Garland or even Texas. tammywammy May 2015 #49

That's actually a notable point. Tommy_Carcetti May 2015 #195

It doesn't matter... Oktober May 2015 #75

No one actually did lay a finger on her. Tommy_Carcetti May 2015 #196

We've had this conversation at least three times... Oktober May 2015 #202

And you've refused to listen to the facts at least three times. Tommy_Carcetti May 2015 #206

Geller acted in much the same way as Sarah Palin. guillaumeb May 2015 #78

She set up a bunch of dumb right wingers ... JoePhilly May 2015 #27

Maybe they should sue for part of her book royalties. Coventina May 2015 #30

They aren't bright enough to think of that. JoePhilly May 2015 #120

Let's not forget that in this case they were all "our crazies." Coventina May 2015 #131

Its an overlapping venn diagram. JoePhilly May 2015 #139

But the saddest part is that it's the same god!! That's part of what drives me crazy about the Coventina May 2015 #140

They like different parts of the trilogy. JoePhilly May 2015 #145

But a civil case is here, I think. She knew this could happen, she admits it was her goal randys1 May 2015 #28

Kudos to them if they can make it happen. Coventina May 2015 #31

The civil lawsuit would fail hardluck May 2015 #91

it is when it's your goal notadmblnd May 2015 #38

Nope. If I ask you to kill me, and you do, you are still a murderer. The law is not going to care Coventina May 2015 #40

yes I would be notadmblnd May 2015 #41

Aren't you saying that she was basically asking for an attack? Coventina May 2015 #43

she was begging for it! notadmblnd May 2015 #45

Asking/begging doesn't matter. It's the person who takes ACTION that bears the responsibility for Coventina May 2015 #47

I did not say they were not responsible. I said she bears responsibility too notadmblnd May 2015 #50

Not at all comparable scenarios. As the parent, you are legally responsible for your child. Coventina May 2015 #51

How are they not comparable? notadmblnd May 2015 #54

If the driver was following the rules of the road and did not see the child s/he would not be Coventina May 2015 #129

I never said they wer not responsible. However, Ms Geller is responsible for baiting them even notadmblnd May 2015 #148

Was Salman Rushdie baiting the Islamic world when he wrote "The Satanic Verses"? Coventina May 2015 #167

did Mr Rusdie advocate for violence against the Islamic world? notadmblnd May 2015 #169

Did any of the cartoons advocate for violence against the Islamic world? Coventina May 2015 #170

Ms Geller and her guest do. She inspires people to commit atrocities against Muslims notadmblnd May 2015 #224

Which atrocities has she inspired? Coventina May 2015 #225

Pamela Geller waving the bloody shirt. backscatter712 May 2015 #21

This message was self-deleted by its author Tommy_Carcetti May 2015 #23

how someone like her can fool ANYONE is DISTURBING Skittles May 2015 #26

So what Kalidurga May 2015 #29

And every Muslim in the US did not attack Geller's hate-fest either. notadmblnd May 2015 #44

You want to draw them out, Pam? Then you go set up an easel and start drawing your own cartoons. tanyev May 2015 #32

Was there ever any doubt? cbayer May 2015 #33

She was not a victim because someone else took the trash out before they could shoot her seveneyes May 2015 #59

She was not a victim because she made sure someone would get them before they got in cbayer May 2015 #119

Duck Dynasty Thinking n2doc May 2015 #36

And this is one reason why the British won't let her visit. Ilsa May 2015 #42

stir up violent shit? seveneyes May 2015 #46

I agree with your point, but I must point out that Muhammad is fairly recent, and well documented. Coventina May 2015 #48

If they believe her intention is to purposefully antagonize Ilsa May 2015 #52

I guess it's their prerogative to define stirring violent shit seveneyes May 2015 #53

really? you think what she does is about about drawing cartoons? notadmblnd May 2015 #57

Education. This person did nothing to warrant anyone to start shooting seveneyes May 2015 #58

there are none so blind as those who refuse to see notadmblnd May 2015 #61

Logic trumps misdirected reasoning seveneyes May 2015 #62

Well, you know what they say about opinions ....everybody has one notadmblnd May 2015 #63

Holy Trash seveneyes May 2015 #64

What is the "faith of ignorance"? notadmblnd May 2015 #66

faith of ignorance seveneyes May 2015 #67

You've been taking dancing lessons I see notadmblnd May 2015 #70

Faith is singular in a logical world seveneyes May 2015 #81

your response has nothing to do with what I asked. notadmblnd May 2015 #84

That files that under "No Shit, Sherlock". 99Forever May 2015 #55

You would think so. Tommy_Carcetti May 2015 #197

I hear you there. 99Forever May 2015 #213

Geller:Now that we are all assembled here ashling May 2015 #60

Ahh, let's compare people to thoughtless insects! X_Digger May 2015 #92

I'm not dehumanizing anyone ashling May 2015 #103

Poster does not understand a metaphor. nt Tommy_Carcetti May 2015 #200

So what are you saying about whacking a hornet's nest? Humanist_Activist May 2015 #209

Yes, you are. You're relieving them of agency (and responsibility.) n/t X_Digger May 2015 #217

I'd like the record to show 2 people WERE killed justiceischeap May 2015 #65

Those defending Ms Geller don't care.. They don't see the dead men as human beings notadmblnd May 2015 #68

I see precisely the opposite, its the criticizers who seem to not expect at least... Humanist_Activist May 2015 #79

The criticizers of who? Ms. Geller? notadmblnd May 2015 #83

Not her, the shooters, having Geller "share the blame" while using inaccurate... Humanist_Activist May 2015 #86

I disagree. she is every bit as radicalized as they were notadmblnd May 2015 #87

And that's irrelevant to the discussion, people either bear responsibility for their actions... Humanist_Activist May 2015 #88

I agree and right now she is not bearing any responsibility for those she put in danger notadmblnd May 2015 #89

"manipulated into committing violent acts", Uhm, how? Blasphemy, committing idolatry... Humanist_Activist May 2015 #90

you don't think that people who are radicalized by religion or idealology have diminished capacity? notadmblnd May 2015 #93

Only if brainwashed or heavily manipulated by that ideology/religion... Humanist_Activist May 2015 #95

You don't think she's brainwashed or heavily manipulated by her ideology? notadmblnd May 2015 #96

Does she go out and shoot people? How would she be held accountable at this time? Humanist_Activist May 2015 #97

No. notadmblnd May 2015 #98

Yes, because he committed an overt act, hiring someone to kill someone else... Humanist_Activist May 2015 #100

My mother would slap you herself. notadmblnd May 2015 #101

So you demonstrate that your mother is willing to use violence in response to insults? Humanist_Activist May 2015 #105

Yes I was. I had a horrible childhood and I reject how my parents behaved notadmblnd May 2015 #124

if a violent death results, yes both the inspired and the one who inspired the violence bear blame notadmblnd May 2015 #102

So basically all victims of violence brought it on themselves? Humanist_Activist May 2015 #106

She is not s victim. She is an instigator. she has admitted this in the article in the OP notadmblnd May 2015 #122

It doesn't fucking matter, I don't care how many insults are made or in what context... Humanist_Activist May 2015 #151

It's a rediculous question and has nothing to do with what Ms. Geller did. notadmblnd May 2015 #154

Of course it has to do with what Geller did... Humanist_Activist May 2015 #190

your comment below has nothing to do with Ms. Geller notadmblnd May 2015 #193

Who is an innocent victim? Define them, please. Humanist_Activist May 2015 #205

I'm not familiar with those people and you provided no context notadmblnd May 2015 #207

I do acknowledge it, and I dismiss it as irrelevant. Humanist_Activist May 2015 #208

No, if you are too lazy to provide context in your posts, notadmblnd May 2015 #211

OK, under what context would it be acceptable to attack someone physically? Humanist_Activist May 2015 #212

I never ever said t was ok to attack anyone pysically notadmblnd May 2015 #214

No if she were as radicalized as them she would go out and murder people. CBGLuthier May 2015 #108

She is every bit as radicalized notadmblnd May 2015 #121

that is what I believe too Skittles May 2015 #107

I still have yet to see anyone defend Pam Geller. trotsky May 2015 #136

I think that If she decides to do it in the middle of an Islamic enclave notadmblnd May 2015 #146

Wait, Garland TX is an "Islamic enclave"? trotsky May 2015 #147

yes, Garland Texas is home to one of the largest Muslim populations in the US notadmblnd May 2015 #160

"one of the largest" - how big? What percentage? trotsky May 2015 #164

It's not the official US census, but I think the source is reliable notadmblnd May 2015 #168

The article doesn't seem to support your assertion. trotsky May 2015 #171

Oh c'mon Garland is a suburb of the Dallas Fort worth area, notadmblnd May 2015 #173

then do yoour homework and prove my assertion wrong. notadmblnd May 2015 #175

That's not how the burden of proof works. trotsky May 2015 #181

Last I checked, DU was not a court of law notadmblnd May 2015 #186

Ms Geller was not exercising her 1st amendment rights notadmblnd May 2015 #149

So what? trotsky May 2015 #150

If those organizing the event was advocating, inciting and inspiring violence- yes, they should be notadmblnd May 2015 #153

But how can one be responsible for all possible reactions? trotsky May 2015 #158

yes, I do think the gallery bears responsibility notadmblnd May 2015 #162

Wow, that's incredible. trotsky May 2015 #165

I haven't proposed any sort of society. notadmblnd May 2015 #172

Well thanks I guess. trotsky May 2015 #180

have a nice afternoon. notadmblnd May 2015 #187

America's sweetheart GeorgeGist May 2015 #72

What she wanted is irrelevant to whether free speech is at issue. Warren DeMontague May 2015 #73

Free speech wasn't at issue in Geller's case. Tommy_Carcetti May 2015 #198

I dont get the feeling she gives a shit about "criticism". Criticism is attention. Im sure she loves Warren DeMontague May 2015 #201

I'm shocked. Shocked, I tell you. nt scarletwoman May 2015 #76

Doesn't matter, she doesn't deserve death for what she did. n/t Humanist_Activist May 2015 #82

What she wanted has exactly fuck-all to do with whether or not the event was protected speech. X_Digger May 2015 #94

Free speech is but an ancillary issue to Geller's behavior. Tommy_Carcetti May 2015 #194

It's speech regardless of motive or intent. X_Digger May 2015 #220

Didn't she get the security guard killed? n/t. Ken Burch May 2015 #99

No oberliner May 2015 #117

Am I alone in never thinking this was anything but provocation? haikugal May 2015 #104

She was askin' for it... Oktober May 2015 #111

Huh? She wanted something to happen that would prove her point.. haikugal May 2015 #112

Hey, I'm just going with what you said... Oktober May 2015 #113

You need to read what I said... haikugal May 2015 #142

so why not react the way LGBT do to the Phelps Trash ? JI7 May 2015 #109

That's been my point, too. Mocking and ridicule have made Westboro a giant joke. Warren DeMontague May 2015 #110

I'll come back later to see if the OP manages to respond to that very relevant question. Bluenorthwest May 2015 #141

I'm not saying they shouldn't have. That's not the point here. Tommy_Carcetti May 2015 #155

Drawing a cartoon should not be a situation that creates violence oberliner May 2015 #118

Absolutely. But that's besides the point. Tommy_Carcetti May 2015 #157

Would you support something like what Molly Norris did? oberliner May 2015 #189

Norris did not create a centralized physical event. Tommy_Carcetti May 2015 #191

Actually, this is exactly how the FBI creates fake terror-attacks. DetlefK May 2015 #128

The anti-Muslim bigotry on this thread is repulsive. trotsky May 2015 #132

Yep. Those who refer to "poking the hornet's nest" are comparing Muslims to angry insects (nt) Nye Bevan May 2015 #135

On other threads I've seen them compared to "sharks" and even "bears." trotsky May 2015 #137

You completely miss the point of a metaphor. Tommy_Carcetti May 2015 #143

I understand perfectly well what the underlying theme is. trotsky May 2015 #159

You see, I don't think you really do. Tommy_Carcetti May 2015 #163

Nope, I get the point. trotsky May 2015 #166

Danger = a shooting or violent event. Danger =/= a religion or entire group of people. Tommy_Carcetti May 2015 #178

Oh, so it could have been anyone that might be provoked to violence... trotsky May 2015 #182

Again, you missed the point of the metaphors. Tommy_Carcetti May 2015 #184

Sorry man, guess I'm just really, really stupid. trotsky May 2015 #185

But... Dr. Strange May 2015 #216

Not necessarily. randome May 2015 #156

It's comparing a group of human beings to thoughtless animals. trotsky May 2015 #161

Yes. Dr. Strange May 2015 #215

Of course she did. She incited violence. The fact that she technically is allowed to be coy about it GoneFishin May 2015 #152

That's exactly what I said when she claimed victimhood. Free speech my rosy roseola. Hekate May 2015 #177

So what? What she did was still protected free speech. Goblinmonger May 2015 #188

And that's a secondary, incidential issue. Tommy_Carcetti May 2015 #192

If what she did is all that is needed to provoke violence, then the ideology... Humanist_Activist May 2015 #210

She held a draw the prophet cartoon contest. Goblinmonger May 2015 #221

Point to a post in this thread that states it would deny her right to exercise 1A rights notadmblnd May 2015 #219

Um, the OP Goblinmonger May 2015 #222

her agenda was not about exercising her 1st amendment right notadmblnd May 2015 #223

Her agenda was to do take part in speech that is protected Goblinmonger May 2015 #226

doubt she will ever be able to draw a crowd of families and kids again to her next hatefest. Sunlei May 2015 #204