Officer: Shooting at Muhammad cartoon contest in Texas

[Pimay1]

So, we have people on this forum with thought processes that agree with terrorists.

Why am I not surprised?

Perceptions are everything - and nothing. It is not possible to determine people's bias or motivations from postings in a forum, Many act as the devil's advocate in order to stir up discussion, some take an opposing view out of intellectual curiosity.

You may be correct if there is only one or two posts. But repeated post by the same individual proclaiming the same opinion is quite discernable. If it walks like a duck......

[55Jay]

Depicting images with the sole intent to upset followers of a religion rather than make a stand for freedom of speech.....

It's the other way around.

[lemonjelly]

If islam asks not to depict Mohammed, is it so difficult to go along with that? Do we need to depict him? Don't get me wrong, i detest the violence committed by the muslims because of this fiasco, but it seems that certain people enjoy provoking others under the guise of "free speech"

I don't feel that this scenario playing out before us now is comparable to freedom of speech but rather freedom to insult.

[chuckd]

If islam asks not to depict Mohammed, is it so difficult to go along with that? Do we need to depict him? Don't get me wrong, i detest the violence committed by the muslims because of this fiasco, but it seems that certain people enjoy provoking others under the guise of "free speech"

I don't feel that this scenario playing out before us now is comparable to freedom of speech but rather freedom to insult.

Your opinion is duly noted.

Now let me ask if you think it acceptable for those that have problems with the cartoons to pick up weapons and go to the event intent on killing the participants?

PS: Islam does not "ask" anything. Islam mandates their likes and dislikes and woe betide anybody that dare disagree.

[Publicus]

*Deleted posts edited out*

Frankly and directly speaking, and as documented in a number of free speech posts to the thread, we know a hellovalot more about free speech and civil liberties than others who claim special knowledge do while they speak outside the script and the spirit of the US Constitution.

The California state judge acquitted the two men based on the state police violating the men's rights under the First Amendment, the Fourth Amendment and the Fourteenth Amendment of the US Constitution and for violating the of the California State Constitution Liberty Clause which is not religion specific but is general in its nature.

The judge dismissed the state's criminal charges without the defense even presenting its case based on the prosecution having failed to present a supportable case and for false imprisonment of the two men in the county jail. The judge threw the book at the California state police.

Judge Acquits Men Arrested for Reading Bible Aloud

http://patch.com/california/murrieta/men-arrested-for-reading-bible-at-dmv-acquitted

I don't care at all or whatsoever to hear this stuff but the speakers have the right to say what they believe. I would note no one got shot or physically injured in this marginal incident. The speakers weren't even criticizing anyone in particular or in general. They were reading their religious scripture, period.

The fault in the instance of the dead Muslims in Texas and concerning Islam in general is its failure to recognize or even to conceive of a separation of church and state. This is yet another great failure of Muslim civilization.

People who consider free speech provocative in its nature --indeed often insulting-- are correct, so now they need to deal with this fact and to accept the maturity and the reality of it.

People who may harbor contempt of the Constitution of the United States have the right to express their particular deprivation, but they should also recognize a concomitant responsibility to know its script and its spirit, to include its history and the albeit imperfect but positive record of civil liberties in America.

Edited May 4, 2015 by Scott

[lemonjelly]

If islam asks not to depict Mohammed, is it so difficult to go along with that? Do we need to depict him? Don't get me wrong, i detest the violence committed by the muslims because of this fiasco, but it seems that certain people enjoy provoking others under the guise of "free speech"

I don't feel that this scenario playing out before us now is comparable to freedom of speech but rather freedom to insult.

Your opinion is duly noted.

Now let me ask if you think it acceptable for those that have problems with the cartoons to pick up weapons and go to the event intent on killing the participants?

PS: Islam does not "ask" anything. Islam mandates their likes and dislikes and woe betide anybody that dare disagree.

read my post.... 'I detest the violence committed by the muslims'

[blowin]

If you ask me all organized religions ( all are cults) should be banned. They all have caused wars and death and all about fooling members to give them their money. As for the topic here muslims mostly seem to be the most vilest of the lot in the modern world. In Europe they demand freedom to practice their cult and spread its evil message but dare you speak against them and you are deemed a racist. Sorry mods. maybe off topic delete if needs be, lest I got my rant off my chest .

[wooloomooloo]

The artists who depict religious symbols with contempt and disdain don't believe that art is morally neutral. They are making a point with their work under the guise of free speech.

Pamela Geller should understand the outrage. How would Jews feel if the Star of David was submerged in urine [Andres Serrano], or the Western Wall covered in pig dung [Chris Ofili], or the Torah splattered with blood?

No pig dung, urine or blood was used.

The most dangerous it got was a handful of crayons and the attendees vivid imaginations. Blimey.

[Pete Beale]

Presumably there will be another set of competitions to depict Jesus as offensively as possible.

Probably not best to do that in the Bible Belt, though.

You'll find depictions of Jesus all over the bible belt, every church and most homes. The problem the muslims have is not just of people making depictions of muhammed that show him in a disrepectful manner, it's people making any depiction of him however respectfully done it is. Michelangelo could of painted him beautifully and the muslims would of wanted his head for it.

[Your Thainess]

Gee, more idiotic bigots from Texas. Well done.

[Steely Dan]

Good shooting chaps! Now let's have many more cartoon drawing events attended by sharpshooters on commission for the number of bearded fascists they take out.

[balo]

All I can say is that they asked for it. Free speech or not, we do not need more wars in this world, everyone knows that making fun of Mohammed is not very popular among muslims. But please go ahead, make them more angry , lets have more terror and killings.

Edited May 4, 2015 by balo

[Dimebag]

Sounds like they were prepared (expecting) such a attack or maybe even baiting for it

[Steely Dan]

If islam asks not to depict Mohammed, is it so difficult to go along with that? Do we need to depict him? Don't get me wrong, i detest the violence committed by the muslims because of this fiasco, but it seems that certain people enjoy provoking others under the guise of "free speech"

I don't feel that this scenario playing out before us now is comparable to freedom of speech but rather freedom to insult.

Your opinion is duly noted.

Now let me ask if you think it acceptable for those that have problems with the cartoons to pick up weapons and go to the event intent on killing the participants?

PS: Islam does not "ask" anything. Islam mandates their likes and dislikes and woe betide anybody that dare disagree.

read my post.... 'I detest the violence committed by the muslims'

The whole point is if you give in to threats and intimidation backed up,with violence then the very process of giving in leads to yet more demands for the majority to change their behavior in deference to a vociferous minority, this is the principle of creeping Sharia, the fruits of which are far more visible in many European Countries which lack the constitutional right to freedom of speech.

[Publicus]

If you ask me all organized religions ( all are cults) should be banned. They all have caused wars and death and all about fooling members to give them their money. As for the topic here muslims mostly seem to be the most vilest of the lot in the modern world. In Europe they demand freedom to practice their cult and spread its evil message but dare you speak against them and you are deemed a racist. Sorry mods. maybe off topic delete if needs be, lest I got my rant off my chest .

To which one can add

"No kingdom has known more wars than the Kingdom of God." ----Montesquieu

.

The Middle East remains the most violent region of the world with no moderation or end of it in sight. Islam in particular has learned nothing during its reign

The conservatives in Texas held a legal civic and civil event whereas the two dead Muslim fanatics went hunting under arms with a mortal intent against others. They did indeed choose the wrong state and wrongly chose yet another country that acts swiftly and decisively in its self defense on its own soil. Conversely, no one in Garland TX had tried to assassinate the other two Islamists who spoke in the same building a few months before the exhibit and competition.

Here's an account of the two Muslims who had spoken at the center in January, as provided then by Western Journalism

Western Journalism reports, “at least two of the presenters scheduled to speak at the event in suburban Dallas next weekend have a checkered past. It has been documented that Brooklyn-based Imam Siraj Wahhaj, who was an unindicted co-conspirator of the 1993 WTC bombing, has preached in favor of Sharia: “Islam is better than democracy. Allah will cause his deen [islam as a complete way of life], Islam to prevail over every kind of system, and you know what? It will happen.”

http://allenbwest.com/2015/01/right-texas-islamic-conference-features-speaker-implicated-wtc-bombing/

No it won't.

[wooloomooloo]

All I can say is that they asked for it. Free speech or not, we do not need more wars in this world, everyone knows that making fun of Mohammed is not very popular among muslims. But please go ahead, make them more angry , lets have more terror and killings.

You've nailed it, balo. If anyone is offended by a caricature of the supposed head of a dubious religion [all religions being dubious to me], who probably only existed/exists in the minds of some fanatical religious nut job types, there's plenty of countries to relocate where your every sensibility is pandered to.

Anyway, the assailants were successfully dispatched and those that asked for it don't seem to be fazed by the experience.

[chuckd]

All I can say is that they asked for it. Free speech or not, we do not need more wars in this world, everyone knows that making fun of Mohammed is not very popular among muslims. But please go ahead, make them more angry , lets have more terror and killings.

Everything makes them angry!

Girls wearing sleeveless dresses make them angry.

When are some of you folks going to take off those rose colored glasses and wake up to the fact that Islam is not in the business of "making peace"?

They want war and they need it to dominate the world. That's what Islamic radicalism is all about.

[ALLSEEINGEYE]

the only way to stop a bad muslim with a gun is by a good muslim with a gun!!!

Arm all muslims!!!

[Scott]

A great number of off-topic, inflammatory, troll posts and replies have been removed.

[wooloomooloo]

Everything makes them angry!

As long as you don't get them started on subjects such as gays, alcohol, smoking, vice, Christianity, blasphemy, Jews, improper dress, the infidel, caricatures of Mo and a few other explosive topics, they're usually quite reasonable.

[Chicog]

Presumably there will be another set of competitions to depict Jesus as offensively as possible.

I doubt it very much.

Free speech should be used wisely and justly.

In this case it's it's just Texans being a-holes.

Still, I'm not against plugging anyone who opens fire over it.

[rijb]

Sounds like they were prepared (expecting) such a attack or maybe even baiting for it

Who do you think did the baiting?

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/05/04/us/garland-mohammed-drawing-contest-shooting/

The center is owned by the school district and rented out for sporting events, concerts and other gatherings.

In January, it rented the facility for an event titled "Stand with the Prophet," which was meant to counter Islamophobia after the Charlie Hebdo attack. It drew several hundred attendees and about 200 protesters, and went off without incident.

The American Freedom Defense Initiative said it intentionally booked the venue because of the January event.

[rijb]

Presumably there will be another set of competitions to depict Jesus as offensively as possible.

I doubt it very much.

Free speech should be used wisely and justly.

In this case it's it's just Texans being a-holes.

Still, I'm not against plugging anyone who opens fire over it.

*Inflammatory remark edited out*

The keynote speaker at the event in Garland was right-wing Dutch politician Geert Wilders, who was placed on an al Qaeda hit list.

Edited May 4, 2015 by Scott

[HooHaa]

when does free speech become hate speech?

had the even been anti-Semitic rather than directed at Islam how do you think things would have turned out.

i believe all involved guilty, you dont poke the bear and act surprised when he bites.

[Chicog]

Presumably there will be another set of competitions to depict Jesus as offensively as possible.

I doubt it very much.

Free speech should be used wisely and justly.

In this case it's it's just Texans being a-holes.

Still, I'm not against plugging anyone who opens fire over it.

The keynote speaker at the event in Garland was right-wing Dutch politician Geert Wilders, who was placed on an al Qaeda hit list.

And Texas is about the perfect place for him to speak.

Your point?

Added: What's the betting Alex Jones pitched up!

Edited May 4, 2015 by Scott

[Chicog]

when does free speech become hate speech?

had the even been anti-Semitic rather than directed at Islam how do you think things would have turned out.

i believe all involved guilty, you dont poke the bear and act surprised when he bites.

In fairness it sounds like these were two incensed and brainwashed faithful rather than calculating, well-trained terrorists.

[Publicus]

If islam asks not to depict Mohammed, is it so difficult to go along with that? Do we need to depict him? Don't get me wrong, i detest the violence committed by the muslims because of this fiasco, but it seems that certain people enjoy provoking others under the guise of "free speech"

I don't feel that this scenario playing out before us now is comparable to freedom of speech but rather freedom to insult.

Your opinion is duly noted.

Now let me ask if you think it acceptable for those that have problems with the cartoons to pick up weapons and go to the event intent on killing the participants?

PS: Islam does not "ask" anything. Islam mandates their likes and dislikes and woe betide anybody that dare disagree.

read my post.... 'I detest the violence committed by the muslims'

i detest the violence committed by the muslims because of this fiasco, but

Did read the post and it has a conspicuous "but" in the wrong place as there is no "guise" of anything in the event in Garland TX.

The only question regarding free speech under the US Constitution is the rational regulating of it and the event assaulted in Garland was fully and completely legal, civil, acceptable by the standards of the Constitution and everyday life in the United States. Fanatics who stage an armed storm assault against such a civilian event in the US get the normal and expected response.

9/11 was also a rather harsh lesson you know.

The United States is not France or Denmark among other places that have experienced such terrible storm assaults. This fanatical Muslim blitzkrieg should come as no surprise to anyone, nor should the precautions against it taken by the citizen organizers of the event.

[EnglishJohn]

Presumably there will be another set of competitions to depict Jesus as offensively as possible.

So was the competition to draw Muhammad as offensively as possible, or did you add that bit yourself ?.

I wish they would interview every muslim in the Western world and ask if they think it is right to kill someone who draws the prophet. If they say yes, they should be immediately deported to tend goats somewhere in the medieval world in which they belong.

I note we didn't get to see the winning picture.

[Jingthing]

Of course the idea of the contest was provocative.

But in the U.S. there is freedom of speech.

Nazis are allowed to march in the U.S.

I find that provocative but I won't be shooting them for marching.

[55Jay]

If islam asks not to depict Mohammed, is it so difficult to go along with that? Do we need to depict him? Don't get me wrong, i detest the violence committed by the muslims because of this fiasco, but it seems that certain people enjoy provoking others under the guise of "free speech"

I don't feel that this scenario playing out before us now is comparable to freedom of speech but rather freedom to insult.

The folks within islam doing this aren't asking. The clue's in the name.

The expectation of compliance for the religious crime of (islamic) blasphemy is unofficially global now, so seems the prescribed sentence of death for anyone who dares disobey. The polite, peaceful pretense was dropped in Europe. It's quite clearly "Comply or Else" now.

Some people lay down and comply. Some stand up, poke the bear and confront nonsense.