Texas cartoon contest organizer known for inflammatory rhetoric

[MAJIC]

Yeah, a 'Draw a cartoon Muhammad' is just a normal event in Texas.

A pathetic attempt by bigots to provoke and does absolutely nothing to address the problem of Muslim extremism.

But first it must be decided who has to address what? in the west this is pretty obvious!

[simple1]

Some supporters of Geller's actions accuse members of this forum who disagree with her actions of being 'apologists' for Islamic terrorism, even so far to claim those who disagree within this forum would applaud her murder; IMO these posts are themselves attempts to stifle free speech.

Geller has often articulated far right ideology & when highlighted she has removed some of her extremist & sometimes classical racist commentary, then denying ever posting such content. Her methodology has been exposed by the use of web based technology, yet she is only gently chided by some. Personally I fail to comprehend what constructive value the far right - fascist dictators if they ever gained power - bring to the debate on Islamic extremism.

Edited May 6, 2015 by simple1

[JDGRUEN]

For those who think Geller is so great do you also think the nut job minister who burns Korans is also great?

Sent from my Lenovo S820_ROW using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

That minister fellow is a bit of a strange dude .... but his actions are perfectly in accordance with the 1st Amendment -- Free Speech via a symbolic act. People burn the American flag around the world ... The America flag is near scared to me and millions of other Americans like me... I see no one in the liberal mindset world much worried about it.

I find his actions to be very low on the level of offense when compared to the level of outrage when members of the Muslim Brotherhood burned Coptic Christian Churches in Egypt - sometimes with the Coptics in them. And find the minister's actions to be a gnat's breath when compared to the cyclone of ISIS kidnapping and raping Christian Girls and wantonly killing 22 Christian Coptic Men who were in Libya desperately trying to find work. Not to mention the series of men - mostly totally innocent men - who were beheaded by ISIS in very recent times ... It is easy to lose track of the numerous Islamic Radical outrages.

The gulf of magnitude difference in these actions is staggering. The silence of 1.5 Muslims to these outrages is bewildering and speaks to a great extent of their acceptance and even support of the heinous acts.... And all the while we have Liberal people all over the Western World being critical of Geller and the Liberal Western News media condemning her while obviously being fearful of radical Islamist as they tiptoe gingerly around the reporting of the savage brutality of ISIS ... misplaced wrong headed collective madness and nothing else.

In this regard, the greater majority of American public is supposed to become concerned or upset that Geller puts on a Mohammad cartoon event? Not going to happening.

There is a certain aspect called PERSPECTIVE.

[stander]

This event has been very effective in smoking out the fairweather friends of free speech.

[Linky]

For those who think Geller is so great do you also think the nut job minister who burns Korans is also great?

Sent from my Lenovo S820_ROW using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

That minister fellow is a bit of a strange dude .... but his actions are perfectly in accordance with the 1st Amendment -- Free Speech via a symbolic act. People burn the American flag around the world ... The America flag is near scared to me and millions of other Americans like me... I see no one in the liberal mindset world much worried about it.

I find his actions to be very low on the level of offense when compared to the level of outrage when members of the Muslim Brotherhood burned Coptic Christian Churches in Egypt - sometimes with the Coptics in them. And find the minister's actions to be a gnat's breath when compared to the cyclone of ISIS kidnapping and raping Christian Girls and wantonly killing 22 Christian Coptic Men who were in Libya desperately trying to find work. Not to mention the series of men - mostly totally innocent men - who were beheaded by ISIS in very recent times ... It is easy to lose track of the numerous Islamic Radical outrages.

The gulf of magnitude difference in these actions is staggering. The silence of 1.5 Muslims to these outrages is bewildering and speaks to a great extent of their acceptance and even support of the heinous acts.... And all the while we have Liberal people all over the Western World being critical of Geller and the Liberal Western News media condemning her while obviously being fearful of radical Islamist as they tiptoe gingerly around the reporting of the savage brutality of ISIS ... misplaced wrong headed collective madness and nothing else.

In this regard, the greater majority of American public is supposed to become concerned or upset that Geller puts on a Mohammad cartoon event? Not going to happening.

There is a certain aspect called PERSPECTIVE.

He burns the Koran and you find it low level. An American flag is near sacred to you so you take offence at its burning.

Do you see the problem with your statement?

By the way, the muslim community is not silent on terrorist attacks, they are quite vocal against the attacks.

Geller was just trying to find trouble, nothing more or less.

If the men from mars say not to eat dog crap then why would I eat dog crap but simply to antagonise them. It surely isnt because i want to eat it.

Do people really think they are being hard done by because they are asked not to draw an image? In Australia it is against Aboriginal culture to show images of a deceased Aboriginal. I dont see Australians jumping up and down about it and having dead Aboriginal cartoon drawing conventions.

There is no point in doing it only to inflame and provoke.

[chuckd]

All of this talk of provocation brings me back to a moment in history when provoking the Islamic beast was considered the thing to do, and it was also using the First Amendment as its vehicle.

Does anybody remember the NY Times publishing the photos from Abu Ghraib?

I was in Saudi then, along with thousands of US military, and nobody worried very much about the provocation involved with the photos or the impact that might be felt by Americans overseas . It was all about freedom of the press which, for the benefit of the non-Americans, is also covered under the First Amendment.

The Times was applauded for their courage, yet the provocation was there as well.

All of this current moral outrage over angering perpetually angry people is really rather silly.

Islamic radicals are not happy with anything that goes on in the West and. whether most of you will admit it or not, the radical Islamists are the ones driving this train.

Moderate Muslims can denounce the radicals all day and night and it will have as much impact on the world's political scene as this thread.

In other words...none at all.

[chuckd]

Some supporters of Geller's actions accuse members of this forum who disagree with her actions of being 'apologists' for Islamic terrorism, even so far to claim those who disagree within this forum would applaud her murder; IMO these posts are themselves attempts to stifle free speech.

Geller has often articulated far right ideology & when highlighted she has removed some of her extremist & sometimes classical racist commentary, then denying ever posting such content. Her methodology has been exposed by the use of web based technology, yet she is only gently chided by some. Personally I fail to comprehend what constructive value the far right - fascist dictators if they ever gained power - bring to the debate on Islamic extremism.

"even so far to claim those who disagree within this forum would applaud her murder;"

You obviously missed all that venom on this forum directed at Margaret Thatcher when she passed away.

I remember it well and found it despicable.

I stand by my prediction.

[Linky]

All of this talk of provocation brings me back to a moment in history when provoking the Islamic beast was considered the thing to do, and it was also using the First Amendment as its vehicle.

Does anybody remember the NY Times publishing the photos from Abu Ghraib?

I was in Saudi then, along with thousands of US military, and nobody worried very much about the provocation involved with the photos or the impact that might be felt by Americans overseas . It was all about freedom of the press which, for the benefit of the non-Americans, is also covered under the First Amendment.

The Times was applauded for their courage, yet the provocation was there as well.

All of this current moral outrage over angering perpetually angry people is really rather silly.

Islamic radicals are not happy with anything that goes on in the West and. whether most of you will admit it or not, the radical Islamists are the ones driving this train.

Moderate Muslims can denounce the radicals all day and night and it will have as much impact on the world's political scene as this thread.

In other words...none at all.

Agreed, radical muslim terrorists need to get their just desserts. Its the labelling of all or most muslims being that way that is patently wrong.

I am certainly not going to lose sleep over the 2 wannabe terrorists being killed.

[stander]

One thing which is clear, in the response from the main stream media, both left and right leaning, is that they fear that even muted criticism of Islam can bring on violent physical reprisals.

[stander]

Islamists feed on the same rulebook, the Quran as other Muslims. The peaceful majority are irrelevant.

All of this talk of provocation brings me back to a moment in history when provoking the Islamic beast was considered the thing to do, and it was also using the First Amendment as its vehicle.

Does anybody remember the NY Times publishing the photos from Abu Ghraib?

I was in Saudi then, along with thousands of US military, and nobody worried very much about the provocation involved with the photos or the impact that might be felt by Americans overseas . It was all about freedom of the press which, for the benefit of the non-Americans, is also covered under the First Amendment.

The Times was applauded for their courage, yet the provocation was there as well.

All of this current moral outrage over angering perpetually angry people is really rather silly.

Islamic radicals are not happy with anything that goes on in the West and. whether most of you will admit it or not, the radical Islamists are the ones driving this train.

Moderate Muslims can denounce the radicals all day and night and it will have as much impact on the world's political scene as this thread.

In other words...none at all.

[stander]

All of this talk of provocation brings me back to a moment in history when provoking the Islamic beast was considered the thing to do, and it was also using the First Amendment as its vehicle.

Does anybody remember the NY Times publishing the photos from Abu Ghraib?

I was in Saudi then, along with thousands of US military, and nobody worried very much about the provocation involved with the photos or the impact that might be felt by Americans overseas . It was all about freedom of the press which, for the benefit of the non-Americans, is also covered under the First Amendment.

The Times was applauded for their courage, yet the provocation was there as well.

All of this current moral outrage over angering perpetually angry people is really rather silly.

Islamic radicals are not happy with anything that goes on in the West and. whether most of you will admit it or not, the radical Islamists are the ones driving this train.

Moderate Muslims can denounce the radicals all day and night and it will have as much impact on the world's political scene as this thread.

In other words...none at all.

Agreed, radical muslim terrorists need to get their just desserts. Its the labelling of all or most muslims being that way that is patently wrong.

I am certainly not going to lose sleep over the 2 wannabe terrorists being killed.

Islamists feed on the same rulebook, the Quran as other Muslims. The peaceful majority are irrelevant.

[Linky]

All of this talk of provocation brings me back to a moment in history when provoking the Islamic beast was considered the thing to do, and it was also using the First Amendment as its vehicle.

Does anybody remember the NY Times publishing the photos from Abu Ghraib?

I was in Saudi then, along with thousands of US military, and nobody worried very much about the provocation involved with the photos or the impact that might be felt by Americans overseas . It was all about freedom of the press which, for the benefit of the non-Americans, is also covered under the First Amendment.

The Times was applauded for their courage, yet the provocation was there as well.

All of this current moral outrage over angering perpetually angry people is really rather silly.

Islamic radicals are not happy with anything that goes on in the West and. whether most of you will admit it or not, the radical Islamists are the ones driving this train.

Moderate Muslims can denounce the radicals all day and night and it will have as much impact on the world's political scene as this thread.

In other words...none at all.

Agreed, radical muslim terrorists need to get their just desserts. Its the labelling of all or most muslims being that way that is patently wrong.

I am certainly not going to lose sleep over the 2 wannabe terrorists being killed.

Islamists feed on the same rulebook, the Quran as other Muslims. The peaceful majority are irrelevant.

Rubbish, its the peaceful majority that can hold sway

[stander]

All of this talk of provocation brings me back to a moment in history when provoking the Islamic beast was considered the thing to do, and it was also using the First Amendment as its vehicle.

Does anybody remember the NY Times publishing the photos from Abu Ghraib?

I was in Saudi then, along with thousands of US military, and nobody worried very much about the provocation involved with the photos or the impact that might be felt by Americans overseas . It was all about freedom of the press which, for the benefit of the non-Americans, is also covered under the First Amendment.

The Times was applauded for their courage, yet the provocation was there as well.

All of this current moral outrage over angering perpetually angry people is really rather silly.

Islamic radicals are not happy with anything that goes on in the West and. whether most of you will admit it or not, the radical Islamists are the ones driving this train.

Moderate Muslims can denounce the radicals all day and night and it will have as much impact on the world's political scene as this thread.

In other words...none at all.

Agreed, radical muslim terrorists need to get their just desserts. Its the labelling of all or most muslims being that way that is patently wrong.

I am certainly not going to lose sleep over the 2 wannabe terrorists being killed.

Islamists feed on the same rulebook, the Quran as other Muslims. The peaceful majority are irrelevant.

Rubbish, its the peaceful majority that can hold sway

Will the peaceful majority step up, will they stop hiding behind the argument that there will always be extremists as an excuse for failing to confront the problem.

Unlikely.

[Linky]

All of this talk of provocation brings me back to a moment in history when provoking the Islamic beast was considered the thing to do, and it was also using the First Amendment as its vehicle.

Does anybody remember the NY Times publishing the photos from Abu Ghraib?

I was in Saudi then, along with thousands of US military, and nobody worried very much about the provocation involved with the photos or the impact that might be felt by Americans overseas . It was all about freedom of the press which, for the benefit of the non-Americans, is also covered under the First Amendment.

The Times was applauded for their courage, yet the provocation was there as well.

All of this current moral outrage over angering perpetually angry people is really rather silly.

Islamic radicals are not happy with anything that goes on in the West and. whether most of you will admit it or not, the radical Islamists are the ones driving this train.

Moderate Muslims can denounce the radicals all day and night and it will have as much impact on the world's political scene as this thread.

In other words...none at all.

Agreed, radical muslim terrorists need to get their just desserts. Its the labelling of all or most muslims being that way that is patently wrong.

I am certainly not going to lose sleep over the 2 wannabe terrorists being killed.

Islamists feed on the same rulebook, the Quran as other Muslims. The peaceful majority are irrelevant.

Rubbish, its the peaceful majority that can hold sway

Will the peaceful majority step up, will they stop hiding behind the argument that there will always be extremists as an excuse for failing to confront the problem.

Unlikely.

Yes they will step up, they are already doing so. The huge majority of muslims are just as sick of extremists as everyone else.

[NeverSure]

Islamists feed on the same rulebook, the Quran as other Muslims. The peaceful majority are irrelevant.

Rubbish, its the peaceful majority that can hold sway

"Hold sway." Do you mean like influence the deadly ones get peaceful? Or do you mean sway in a hammock while all over the world Muslims are bombing, beheading, raping, kidnapping, etc. non-violent people?

I'm ready to watch the "peaceful majority" "hold sway" but I'll have a very long wait.

[NeverSure]

Yes they will step up, they are already doing so. The huge majority of muslims are just as sick of extremists as everyone else.

Right. Exactly. They are leading the charge against it for sure. (That claim and excuse is getting completely threadbare considering the inactivity which accompanies it.)

Edited May 7, 2015 by NeverSure

[stander]

One thing to remember is that all terrorists and jihadists were at some point "moderate Muslims" Its just a matter of pressing the right buttons.

Edited May 7, 2015 by stander

[BKKBobby]

Jon Stewart showing the hypocracy:

http://m.liveleak.com/view?i=625_1317506480

[stander]

"A duty to mock":

http://www.scottishreview.net/ManfrediLaManna2a.html

[Berkshire]

Jon Stewart showing the hypocracy:

http://m.liveleak.com/view?i=625_1317506480

Good one. Jon Stewart is the best. Wish he wasn't gone.

[Scott]

Off-topic, inflammatory remarks removed. Continued remarks directed at other members will result in suspensions.

[Linky]

One thing to remember is that all terrorists and jihadists were at some point "moderate Muslims" Its just a matter of pressing the right buttons.

I dont believe Timothy McVeigh was muslim, nor Hitler etc etc

[Linky]

Yes they will step up, they are already doing so. The huge majority of muslims are just as sick of extremists as everyone else.

Right. Exactly. They are leading the charge against it for sure. (That claim and excuse is getting completely threadbare considering the inactivity which accompanies it.)

Isis: Ten Arab Nations Join US-Led Coalition against Islamic State

www.ibtimes.co.uk/isis-ten-arab-nations-join-us-led-coalition-against-isis-1...

Edited May 7, 2015 by Linky

[stander]

One thing to remember is that all terrorists and jihadists were at some point "moderate Muslims" Its just a matter of pressing the right buttons.

I dont believe Timothy McVeigh was muslim, nor Hitler etc etc

Simple truth: All Muslims are not terrorists. Most terrorists are Muslims.

[NeverSure]

Yes they will step up, they are already doing so. The huge majority of muslims are just as sick of extremists as everyone else.

Right. Exactly. They are leading the charge against it for sure. (That claim and excuse is getting completely threadbare considering the inactivity which accompanies it.)

Isis: Ten Arab Nations Join US-Led Coalition against Islamic State

www.ibtimes.co.uk/isis-ten-arab-nations-join-us-led-coalition-against-isis-1...

This is Muslim sect against Muslim sect. They have warred against each other forever. They just don't want ISIS to get the upper hand over them as ISIS has done or verged on doing in some countries already.

Next.

[stander]

Yes they will step up, they are already doing so. The huge majority of muslims are just as sick of extremists as everyone else.

Right. Exactly. They are leading the charge against it for sure. (That claim and excuse is getting completely threadbare considering the inactivity which accompanies it.)

Isis: Ten Arab Nations Join US-Led Coalition against Islamic State

www.ibtimes.co.uk/isis-ten-arab-nations-join-us-led-coalition-against-isis-1...

This is Muslim sect against Muslim sect. They have warred against each other forever. They just don't want ISIS to get the upper hand over them as ISIS has done or verged on doing in some countries already.

Next.

Correct:-

Islam isn't compatible with Islam.Sunni like nothing more than killing Shia and vice versa

[Linky]

Yes they will step up, they are already doing so. The huge majority of muslims are just as sick of extremists as everyone else.

Right. Exactly. They are leading the charge against it for sure. (That claim and excuse is getting completely threadbare considering the inactivity which accompanies it.)

Isis: Ten Arab Nations Join US-Led Coalition against Islamic State

www.ibtimes.co.uk/isis-ten-arab-nations-join-us-led-coalition-against-isis-1...

This is Muslim sect against Muslim sect. They have warred against each other forever. They just don't want ISIS to get the upper hand over them as ISIS has done or verged on doing in some countries already.

Next.

Just a simple apology for being proved wrong would suffice.

[stander]

The downside of appeasing savages is they simply thirst for more.

[BKKBobby]

It’s not just a clash of civilization, it’s a clash of two species that have an entirely different level of mental development

"If you are not prepared to use force to defend civilization, then be prepared to accept barbarism."

Thomas Sowell

Making a difference between people like that is dangerous. In my home country theres neo-racists that pretend that they are siding with jews/Israel, the biggest opponent that comes with the most critique are the jews, they know its just BS from a party that tries to sanitize racism.

[Chicog]

One thing to remember is that all terrorists and jihadists were at some point "moderate Muslims" Its just a matter of pressing the right buttons.

I dont believe Timothy McVeigh was muslim, nor Hitler etc etc

Simple truth: All Muslims are not terrorists. Most terrorists are Muslims.

If All Muslims are not terrorists, then how can any of them be?