Religion

guillaumeb

(42,649 posts)

230. Try rereading what I said.

Tue May 5, 2015, 05:07 PM

May 2015

And here it is:
And what he oversaw during his tenure at Charlie Hebdo was hate journalism and incitement at its worst. Charbonnier claimed to be a fearless attacker of bigotry and hatred but a large amount of his anger was directed at the Muslim community in France. His so-called cutting edge satire was merely the Gallic form of KKK style bigotry directed at the mainly Algerian Muslims in France. That community is discriminated against in much the same way that blacks are in the US.

The shooters were not freedom fighters, they were killers. But Pamela Geller was the match that lit the fuse.

And I will add, in response to your post:
I blame him for his deliberate provocation that was INTENDED to provoke. I do not blame him for being killed. I blame the killers. Charbonnier's provocation does not justify his killing.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

276 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Up to Speed: Who Is Muhammad Cartoon Contest Organizer Pamela Geller? [View all] cbayer May 2015 OP

Really, cb? trotsky May 2015 #1

Of course. No larger conclusion can be drawn from this incident.Nothing else to see here.Move along. GoneFishin May 2015 #2

Is that what trotsky said? Act_of_Reparation May 2015 #4

You should probably stick with fishin'. n/t trotsky May 2015 #17

LOL.. whathehell May 2015 #101

What's a "First Amendment Absolutist"? beam me up scottie May 2015 #117

One who believes there should be no abridgement of speech anywhere for any reason whathehell May 2015 #119

Do you believe Gellar had no right to hold a contest for cartoons of Mohammed? beam me up scottie May 2015 #131

Do you believe rights come with responsibilities? whathehell May 2015 #133

I don't believe people should be shot because they pissed off the wrong people. beam me up scottie May 2015 #136

I don't think so either, but one should consider the law of probabilities whathehell May 2015 #139

So you are a "First Amendment Absolutist" then. beam me up scottie May 2015 #142

Um, no..We don't have absolute First Amendment rights.. whathehell May 2015 #146

So people who get shot at are only victims if you sympathize with them. beam me up scottie May 2015 #149

They are "victims" if they are hurt/killed -- Idiot Gellar took a chance and KNEW she was doing so. whathehell May 2015 #151

So they have to be physically harmed and/or murdered to be the victim of an attack. beam me up scottie May 2015 #152

Do you consider those killed while willingly playing Russian Roulette "victims"? whathehell May 2015 #153

People who offend muslims are playing Russian Roulette? beam me up scottie May 2015 #157

Answer the question. whathehell May 2015 #159

Nope, not interested in discussing why you think muslims are like loaded guns. beam me up scottie May 2015 #162

I knew you couldn't answer, LOL whathehell May 2015 #173

Are you comparing muslims to a mindless random chance at a empty or full chamber in a gun? AtheistCrusader May 2015 #163

Some do, some don't skepticscott May 2015 #169

Too bad she wasn't killed, huh? Goblinmonger May 2015 #3

Clearly she must have deserved it, because of her opinions. n/t trotsky May 2015 #26

She's a randie, a fan of Gert Wilders, okasha May 2015 #5

She's effective. When someone like her can get people on the left to cheer for her, cbayer May 2015 #6

Who on the left is cheering for her? Who is "embracing" her? skepticscott May 2015 #7

And there you go demonstrating exactly the point cbayer was making. GoneFishin May 2015 #9

Show me where I'm "cheering" for her skepticscott May 2015 #11

No doubt that she is laughing her ass off at everyone who she fooled with the "free speech" ruse. GoneFishin May 2015 #10

Go ahead and explain why skepticscott May 2015 #12

Why would I explain either of those things when I agree with neither of your two assertions? GoneFishin May 2015 #15

Then you have no basis for your assertion skepticscott May 2015 #24

I made no such assertion. I assert that she would not have the least interest in such drawings, and GoneFishin May 2015 #25

Her motivation was to make a political point skepticscott May 2015 #44

I made no such assertion. You try again. GoneFishin May 2015 #46

You asserted that her primary motivation skepticscott May 2015 #49

She's not about free speech. Do you stand with Pamela Geller? cbayer May 2015 #28

Do you stand with those that wanted to kill her? Goblinmonger May 2015 #40

Sorry, I misread your post as sarcasm and now understand that it is not. cbayer May 2015 #42

"nothing to do with free speech" trotsky May 2015 #48

You mistake principle for cheering. LiberalAndProud May 2015 #14

I don't mistake principles for cheering. cbayer May 2015 #30

Wow. Really cheering, huh? LiberalAndProud May 2015 #32

Doubt it, but make the effort to look around before you do. cbayer May 2015 #35

Support for the principle of free speech, yes. trotsky May 2015 #36

Damned right I support her right to organize controversial events. LiberalAndProud May 2015 #67

I also support her right to organize any controversial events she wants and cbayer May 2015 #71

Show me one post celebrating what she did. LiberalAndProud May 2015 #73

There are many posts and threads right now championing her 1st amendment rights. cbayer May 2015 #76

So. I'm cheering. Thanks for clearing that up for me. LiberalAndProud May 2015 #79

Your welcome, I guess. cbayer May 2015 #81

If "championing her 1st amendment rights" is "cheering" then I'm guilty too. beam me up scottie May 2015 #82

Welcome to the squad, bmus. LiberalAndProud May 2015 #84

Lol! rug May 2015 #102

Championing someone's 1st amendment rights is not 'cheering' or 'celebrating' those people muriel_volestrangler May 2015 #126

I explained as best I could what I meant. cbayer May 2015 #129

I've been reading a lot of the threads on this, and haven't seen anyone cheering for the organizers muriel_volestrangler May 2015 #132

There has been a process as the day has gone on. cbayer May 2015 #137

I've read several threads by cali, and they don't reply to anything anyone has written muriel_volestrangler May 2015 #141

You know, I hate to indulge this kind of "find me a actual post, I will wait" bullshit, but this one cbayer May 2015 #210

Why is needing some actual examples 'bullshit'? muriel_volestrangler May 2015 #213

Great sigline, m_v. n/t trotsky May 2015 #217

Why are we arguing about this? cbayer May 2015 #174

"Ok, no one was in any way showing support for Geller at any point today." trotsky May 2015 #216

If you're championing Pam Geller's First Amendment rights skepticscott May 2015 #145

Many lawyers who worked at the ACLU actually left it because of that decision whathehell May 2015 #135

Oh, for cripes sake...are you serious? skepticscott May 2015 #83

I am totally for people's right to express their opinions and totally against people being shot for Warren Stupidity May 2015 #103

Clearly you don't. LiberalAndProud May 2015 #255

Clearly I don't what? cbayer May 2015 #270

"It's possible to defend people who want to draw pictures and still condemn this hate monger" trotsky May 2015 #34

It seems like the guys out to commit brutal murder skepticscott May 2015 #8

Sympathizer? No. Fan of free speech? Yes. Goblinmonger May 2015 #20

That is a dishonest and digusting smear, and you should be ashamed of yourself. trotsky May 2015 #27

Horrors! rug May 2015 #104

I think the last count for personal attacks on cbayer okasha May 2015 #172

Yep. whathehell May 2015 #147

I'm just a glad I'm up to speed... MellowDem May 2015 #13

Which victim is that? Pam Geller? cbayer May 2015 #31

Her, and everyone targeted that night... MellowDem May 2015 #41

I'm not defending them in any way whatsoever. cbayer May 2015 #43

Sorry, but trying to shift blame onto others skepticscott May 2015 #45

She IS a victim... MellowDem May 2015 #51

Sorry, I'm not going to defend this despicable person. cbayer May 2015 #53

You don't have to defend her views... MellowDem May 2015 #54

I will defend her and anyone else's right to free speech and have not said cbayer May 2015 #55

And what is that role, that you keep claiming skepticscott May 2015 #60

What is her role in this? MellowDem May 2015 #66

She orchestrated this entire event. She is not a victim. cbayer May 2015 #69

Just like I'm not a victim if I'm raped "because" I wore a short skirt? beam me up scottie May 2015 #74

Are you asctually comparing short skirts to hate speech? rug May 2015 #106

No, and you know full well. AtheistCrusader May 2015 #110

It's an obnoxious, demeaning and repulsive analogy. rug May 2015 #118

No, it's not. It's devastatingly accurate. AtheistCrusader May 2015 #121

"devastatingly accurate"? rug May 2015 #122

I was the victim of a violent attack because I "provoked" a man by wearing a short skirt. beam me up scottie May 2015 #125

A rape victim is not comparable to Geller. rug May 2015 #127

No, but the people who say we deserved it are comparable. beam me up scottie May 2015 #130

I got shot at by the Klan at an anti-Klan rally. rug May 2015 #134

And if you had been marching with the Klan and been shot at you'd still be a victim. beam me up scottie May 2015 #138

Tell me. If you were in the Weimar Repblic in 1931, what wold you do abot the Brown Shirts? rug May 2015 #140

People who are shot at *even if they're using hate speech* are still victims of a violent crime. beam me up scottie May 2015 #150

It depends on how close the hate speech is to a hate-motivated action. rug May 2015 #154

That's not what I'm arguing. beam me up scottie May 2015 #161

I'll go along with that. rug May 2015 #165

I don't imagine it's easy to prove that hate speech is an incitement to violence. beam me up scottie May 2015 #166

"She got what she wanted." okasha May 2015 #176

That doesn't mean I think she deserved to be attacked. beam me up scottie May 2015 #177

The people Geller endangered are victims. okasha May 2015 #180

The people at the show were participants just like Geller. beam me up scottie May 2015 #182

Geller set it up. She was far more than a "participant." okasha May 2015 #185

So she deserved to be attacked it because she set it up? beam me up scottie May 2015 #187

No. okasha May 2015 #192

Responsible to whom? beam me up scottie May 2015 #195

To those she endangered and might endanger in future. okasha May 2015 #199

But you're still insisting she's not the victim of a violent attack? beam me up scottie May 2015 #201

One more time, and we're done. okasha May 2015 #205

"A provocateur is not a victim" beam me up scottie May 2015 #207

On second thought-- okasha May 2015 #208

What you think the intent was doesn't matter. beam me up scottie May 2015 #209

"she asked for it" in a different context is obvious victim blaming. nt. Warren Stupidity May 2015 #220

Those people are scumbags Dorian Gray May 2015 #261

Thank you, Dorian Gray, even CAIR supported Geller's right to hold that contest: beam me up scottie May 2015 #271

But your free, non-hate speech, while admirable, also 'led' to a hateful, dangerous, violent action muriel_volestrangler May 2015 #143

Oh no, there was a lot of hate speech, all directed at the Klan. rug May 2015 #148

You had every right to participate in that rally free from harm or threat of harm. AtheistCrusader May 2015 #158

Analyzing hate speech through a lens of victimhood leads to very distorted conclusions. rug May 2015 #164

I am ignoring the nature of her content. AtheistCrusader May 2015 #167

I don't think it reached that level either. rug May 2015 #168

Walking down the street minding your own business is not the same as orchestrating a hatefest. AlbertCat May 2015 #235

. rug May 2015 #242

Yes I see that MY point... AlbertCat May 2015 #245

No, they aren't a provocation. That's the point. AtheistCrusader May 2015 #155

I know the precise legal meaning of provoke and incite. "Short skirt" ain't in it. rug May 2015 #156

Neither is protected speech. AtheistCrusader May 2015 #160

She provokes people Dorian Gray May 2015 #260

No, I'm comparing criminals who attack others because they're "provoked". beam me up scottie May 2015 #113

You're comparing a short skirt to deliberately provacativer hate speech. rug May 2015 #120

I'm responding to cbayer's victim blaming "She orchestrated this entire event. She is not a victim." beam me up scottie May 2015 #123

Neither cbayer nor anyone else is arguing Geller o ranyone else deserves to be shot. rug May 2015 #124

Thank you. beam me up scottie May 2015 #128

I have no problem understanding... MellowDem May 2015 #75

BTW, here is a nice image of your victim. cbayer May 2015 #57

Let's fucking kill her. Goblinmonger May 2015 #59

Which is relevant to her free speech rights... skepticscott May 2015 #61

Ad hominem isn't a point... MellowDem May 2015 #68

We agree. No one would be justified in murdering her. cbayer May 2015 #72

Defending the free speech rights of those you despise Goblinmonger May 2015 #56

Aw, poor Pammy and her widdle hate group whathehell May 2015 #144

Really? Goblinmonger May 2015 #170

But, but, but, she's a victim! Just like a rape victim at a frat party! cbayer May 2015 #175

Truth. okasha May 2015 #179

I've seen much of DU come around today, and that's been good. cbayer May 2015 #181

Oh, yeah. okasha May 2015 #191

You've got that right. cbayer May 2015 #193

Except you've claimed over and over that this is NOT about free speech skepticscott May 2015 #215

Apparently you can't distinguish either skepticscott May 2015 #214

Why did it endanger innocent people at face value? Goblinmonger May 2015 #218

Maher and many other critics of Islam have been frequently called "racists." trotsky May 2015 #219

You can say that again... MellowDem May 2015 #211

LOL! whathehell May 2015 #227

Unbelievable. cbayer May 2015 #231

Un-fucking-believable shit going down here. AlbertCat May 2015 #232

No one has defended any terrorists that I can see. cbayer May 2015 #233

In #144, to which you were replying, whathehell said they felt more sorry for the terrorists muriel_volestrangler May 2015 #234

I guess you could interpret that as defense, but that's not what she actually said. cbayer May 2015 #236

and not dissimilar to the actors in this horrible scenario. AlbertCat May 2015 #237

Ridding the world of any group that you are ideologically opposed to is the same thing. cbayer May 2015 #238

You are so full of shit, AlbertCat never said they wanted to get rid of religious people. beam me up scottie May 2015 #240

Pretty despicable sleight of hand you just pulled. AtheistCrusader May 2015 #241

that was incredibly vicious to say. AlbertCat May 2015 #246

It would be exactly the same thing as Pam Geller wanting to rid the world of muslims. AlbertCat May 2015 #243

Not nonsense at all. cbayer May 2015 #248

Why do you keep lying about what AlbertCat said, cbayer? beam me up scottie May 2015 #250

It IS nonsense AlbertCat May 2015 #251

Most of the stuff I post is nonsense? cbayer May 2015 #254

Most of the stuff I post is nonsense? AlbertCat May 2015 #256

Reasonable people were able to condemn both the gunmen and Geller, and that's a rational position AlbertCat May 2015 #244

She is as bad, imo, just in a different way. Evil is evil. Are you defending her? cbayer May 2015 #249

Are you defending her? AlbertCat May 2015 #252

Ok. I was just playing on your accusation of defense earlier in the sub-thread. cbayer May 2015 #253

I was just playing on your accusation..... AlbertCat May 2015 #258

Evil is not always just evil.....evil is subjective....and has degrees. AlbertCat May 2015 #257

Wow... MellowDem May 2015 #212

Wow... whathehell May 2015 #226

I said why... MellowDem May 2015 #229

Idiot Geller deserves no sympathy in my opinion whathehell May 2015 #239

I don't think she deserves sympathy either. MellowDem May 2015 #247

Well Dorian Gray May 2015 #262

Well whathehell May 2015 #269

I read the whole exchange Dorian Gray May 2015 #275

Okay. whathehell May 2015 #276

So if i think people edhopper May 2015 #16

Are you embracing Pam Geller and her organization? cbayer May 2015 #33

Are you now, or have you ever been.... Warren Stupidity May 2015 #37

Groups that have nothing to do with free speech?? skepticscott May 2015 #47

Just because the victim is an unpleasant person with vile speech doesn't make it ok to attack her AtheistCrusader May 2015 #52

No more than I embrace edhopper May 2015 #62

This isn't about civil rights. This is about Ms. Geller's war on american muslims cbayer May 2015 #63

Does she deserve to be killed, cbayer? trotsky May 2015 #65

Why do you keep harping on the fact skepticscott May 2015 #78

Oh sure, and I suppose you embrace the Klan, too! beam me up scottie May 2015 #64

I didn't know that was the equation edhopper May 2015 #70

Who? AtheistCrusader May 2015 #18

She is the asshole fundie that pissed off the even bigger asshole fundies that ended up dead snooper2 May 2015 #19

I've only heard one view of the attack/cause but it sounds like an attack on AtheistCrusader May 2015 #21

Are we allowed? Sure. trotsky May 2015 #22

I'm sure we'll be told by certain parties, just how much is too much on the AtheistCrusader May 2015 #23

You're always ALLOWED to say all sorts of stupid things. Erich Bloodaxe BSN May 2015 #29

I find life is too short to go through it worrying if my skirt is too short. AtheistCrusader May 2015 #38

That's your choice. Erich Bloodaxe BSN May 2015 #39

Hey, look at all these "anti-Muslim bigots" lining up to support Pam Geller! trotsky May 2015 #50

I'm sure some people are really irritated to find out skepticscott May 2015 #58

Ms. Geller has a right to speak freely. guillaumeb May 2015 #77

Interesting. I wonder if there will be any legal ramifications of this. cbayer May 2015 #80

How should she be "stopped", cbayer? beam me up scottie May 2015 #85

Because we should expect Muslims to be violent. LiberalAndProud May 2015 #86

The member said nothing about expecting Muslims to be violent. cbayer May 2015 #87

"Pretty much anyone can be incited to violence if pushed far enough" beam me up scottie May 2015 #89

Yes, actually I do. LiberalAndProud May 2015 #90

You are not aware of acts of violence perpetrated by any religious groups but muslims? cbayer May 2015 #92

Reductio ad absurdum doesn't move me. LiberalAndProud May 2015 #97

Yes, LAP. I'm aware of what moves you. cbayer May 2015 #98

Wild Thing! Warren Stupidity May 2015 #223

Using your "premise" the cartoonists at Charlie Hebdo were inciting violence too. beam me up scottie May 2015 #88

Stephane Charbonnier was a provocateur. guillaumeb May 2015 #222

well at least you are consistent in your victim blaming. Warren Stupidity May 2015 #224

The people who were killed are victims. I do not blame them. guillaumeb May 2015 #225

Stephane Charbonnier - killed. Warren Stupidity May 2015 #228

Try rereading what I said. guillaumeb May 2015 #230

She didn't incite the gunmen to violence, though muriel_volestrangler May 2015 #221

I detest this woman but violence is wrong. hrmjustin May 2015 #91

Et tu, justin? LiberalAndProud May 2015 #93

oh? hrmjustin May 2015 #95

C'mon justin. Keep up! cbayer May 2015 #178

I always knew you were Satan Incarnate! hrmjustin May 2015 #183

I am the Satan Incarnate of all trolls. There is no one more satany or incarnate or trolly than I. cbayer May 2015 #186

I always love it with you cause trouble. hrmjustin May 2015 #189

I try to stay out of trouble, but it seems trouble always comes looking for me. cbayer May 2015 #190

Being from NYC I have no idea how to write a country song. hrmjustin May 2015 #194

Ok, we could do some club music then. cbayer May 2015 #196

Lol that could be fight song for the religion room. hrmjustin May 2015 #198

Chorus: okasha May 2015 #202

Holy shit that was so freaking funny! hrmjustin May 2015 #203

Love it. I think we're going to the grammys, girlfriend. cbayer May 2015 #204

We can do it! okasha May 2015 #206

LOL okasha May 2015 #197

I know! The paparazzi is (are?) driving me nuts! cbayer May 2015 #200

I feel nothing but contempt for Ms. Geller, but that doesn't mean I think she should cbayer May 2015 #94

Agreed. hrmjustin May 2015 #96

You just posted you wanted her "stopped" beam me up scottie May 2015 #99

At a red light, for example. Warren Stupidity May 2015 #109

I wish she'd make up her mind, either she's cheering for Gellar or not. beam me up scottie May 2015 #111

Uh oh! Dissention in the ranks! About Face! March! AtheistCrusader May 2015 #100

Welcome aboard CBayer. Warren Stupidity May 2015 #107

Well you are now officially in the Pam Geller fan club! Warren Stupidity May 2015 #105

I have met the woman and can tell you she is a despicable woman. hrmjustin May 2015 #108

^ That's what I'm saying. LiberalAndProud May 2015 #112

Thank you for explaining. hrmjustin May 2015 #114

Thank you. AtheistCrusader May 2015 #115

Thank you Justin. beam me up scottie May 2015 #116

I haven't met her but would have guessed that is the case Goblinmonger May 2015 #171

a dark haired ann coulter. DesertFlower May 2015 #184

Worse, imo. She's pretty effective and is looking for an all out war. cbayer May 2015 #188

The fact Pam Geller is a provocative firebrand is irrelevant. Yorktown May 2015 #259

Your support of Pam Geller and her agenda is really quite disturbing. cbayer May 2015 #263

The fact you share some views with violent believers disturbs me. Yorktown May 2015 #264

What views do I share with violent believers? cbayer May 2015 #265

You share their view religions should be shielded from mockery Yorktown May 2015 #266

Again, you have made that up. cbayer May 2015 #267

cbayer: "I agree with you about Ms. Geller and would like to see her stopped." beam me up scottie May 2015 #272

There is NOTHING in Yorktown's post indicating support of Geller or "her agenda." trotsky May 2015 #268

Well she said that "championing her 1st amendment rights" is "cheering" Geller. beam me up scottie May 2015 #273

Oh FFS. trotsky May 2015 #274