Want to show intolerance?...Act like Pamela Geller

[mudwhistle]

And she needs to be killed for being so intolerant

the expected moronic "conclusion" of a clueless and biased right winger.

In other words...pure logic.

Rather than agreeing with your irrational statement I simply pointed out reality. If she wants to smear shit on the Koran she has every right to. Nobody has the right to murder her for it.

Oh.....and

 

[bodecea]

I think Pamela Geller is a Hoot!

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Absolutely - just like any bigot, racist or hatemonger - she should be marginalized and ignored.

But you are a moderator, Coyote, so I don't think we can put you on ignore just because you are so full of hatred against all the same targets the Islamists hate.

 

[theHawk]

Ms. Geller is a media whore....There's no other way to describe the "why" an event is sponsored to simply irk Islamists, and then go on every media outlet that would have you to be incensed that such an event is controversial.

We all know that for Muslims the depiction of the prophet Mohammed is an anathema...that stated, why would anyone want to show that they can openly insult another faith and then demand impunity? Do the Gellers of the world simply wish to show that they can be as intolerant as anyone within an open society?

There's no other way to condone such behavior, except to wish that your ugly face and moronic reasoning be plastered all over the media for personal and selfish gain.

People have the right to be intolerant. Should the world had been more tolerant towards Nazis in the 1940's?

People should have the right to speak the truth about Islam, about its violent history, about its batshit crazy inventor the pedophile. We should be able to talk about a truly hateful ideology that teaches its followers that they have the right to enslave, rape, and murder non-believers.

It's quite funny listening to progressives complain about intolerance, yet defend the most intolerant ideology on the planet.

If Muslims can't handle freedom of speech, including mocking their sacred pedophile, maybe they should all stay in the Middle East and tune out the Western media. They've proven they cannot function in modern society, they belong in the Stone Age.

 

[martybegan]

actually assault weapons are fully automatic, not semi-automatic rifles like the AR-15, and thus require a special permit, that those marchers probably don't have.

and equating cartoons with 1000 armed marchers from a group known for violent acts is stretching it, not a bit, a lot.

Your side always say Christians should grow a spine and shut up, I guess you can't say the same to Islamists because 1) You are afraid of them and 2) most of them are brown people, and your progressive hard wiring
doesn't allow you to go after brown people.

First, I find it humorous that among right wingers the opportunity to show off their knowledge of guns is very hard to pass up.....I suppose it is this penis extension syndrome.

Secondly, Geller's stunt was PRECISELY aimed at provoking violence ......and much to her pleasure, she got it... ....My example of the 1000 armed marchers was also to show how violence can be easily provoked, free speech or not.

if you are going to reference something, get it right. Evidently facts are hard to grasp for leftists.

Provoking violence has to involve direct confrontation, not having an event you don't have to attend if you are offended by it. Or are you saying the proper response to something you don't agree with is to threaten it with violence?

 

[Dogmaphobe]

People have the right to be intolerant. Should the world had been more tolerant towards Nazis in the 1940's?

People should have the right to speak the truth about Islam, about its violent history, about its batshit crazy inventor the pedophile. We should be able to talk about a truly hateful ideology that teaches its followers that they have the right to enslave, rape, and murder non-believers.

It's quite funny listening to progressives complain about intolerance, yet defend the most intolerant ideology on the planet.

If Muslims can't handle freedom of speech, including mocking their sacred pedophile, maybe they should all stay in the Middle East and tune out the Western media. They've proven they cannot function in modern society, they belong in the Stone Age.

The authoritarian leftists all lining up to show their intolerance for any speech critical of this totalitarian ideology are hardly the bastions of tolerance they claim to be, now, are they? They not only defend the least tolerant political ideology on the planet, here, but the "progress" they claim as the basis for their supposed ideology would actually take humankind back 1500 years. .

 

[Dogmaphobe]

if you are going to reference something, get it right. Evidently facts are hard to grasp for leftists.

Provoking violence has to involve direct confrontation, not having an event you don't have to attend if you are offended by it. Or are you saying the proper response to something you don't agree with is to threaten it with violence?

I'm sure this young boy has no idea he just conveyed the notion that Muslims are inherently violent and intolerant.

By assuming the natural Islamic response to the drawing of a cartoon is a violent one, he just made Geller's case for her.

 

[LogikAndReazon]

If we only understood muslims better, and opened up a more honest dialogue... Lol

 

[martybegan]

if you are going to reference something, get it right. Evidently facts are hard to grasp for leftists.

Provoking violence has to involve direct confrontation, not having an event you don't have to attend if you are offended by it. Or are you saying the proper response to something you don't agree with is to threaten it with violence?

I'm sure this young boy has no idea he just conveyed the notion that Muslims are inherently violent and intolerant.

By assuming the natural Islamic response to the drawing of a cartoon is a violent one, he just made Geller's case for her.

The underlying root is that they are afraid. They know Christians as a whole will not resort to violence, so they can go after them as much as they want. But they can't admit it, so they spin around as much as they can and try to come up with some justification for it.

The ironic thing is most of the people will real anti-islamist feelings are anti islam, and anti-religion in general, as Charlie Hedbo was.

 

[GHook93]

Ms. Geller is a media whore....There's no other way to describe the "why" an event is sponsored to simply irk Islamists, and then go on every media outlet that would have you to be incensed that such an event is controversial.

We all know that for Muslims the depiction of the prophet Mohammed is an anathema...that stated, why would anyone want to show that they can openly insult another faith and then demand impunity? Do the Gellers of the world simply wish to show that they can be as intolerant as anyone within an open society?

There's no other way to condone such behavior, except to wish that your ugly face and moronic reasoning be plastered all over the media for personal and selfish gain.

No she is a brave, honorable and courage women who is trying to show the West (not just America) the dangers Islam poses to the West.

 

[ogibillm]

Go back and read...not what he said

are these the quotes in question

Reacting to the term, "Islamic terrorism," Erdoğan stated,



Such a definition saddens not only the Muslims, but also those who believe in other religions. No religion permits terrorism. Therefore, it is very ugly to put the word Islam before terrorism. You may say religious terrorist but you can't say Islamic terrorist.

Reacting to the term, "moderate Islam," Erdoğan stated,

Turkey is not a country where moderate Islam prevails. This expression is wrong. The word Islam is uninflected, it is only Islam. If you say moderate Islam, then an alternative is created, and that is immoderate Islam. As a Muslim, I can't accept such a concept. Islam rejects extreme concepts. I am not an extreme Muslim. We are Muslims who have found a middle road.

oh how awful. he rejected terrorism and said those committing it weren't islamic. what an awful man.

you've been duped by the pundits that have taken that quote out of its very reasonable, very agreeable context.

 

[Darkwind]

Ms. Geller is a media whore....There's no other way to describe the "why" an event is sponsored to simply irk Islamists, and then go on every media outlet that would have you to be incensed that such an event is controversial.

We all know that for Muslims the depiction of the prophet Mohammed is an anathema...that stated, why would anyone want to show that they can openly insult another faith and then demand impunity? Do the Gellers of the world simply wish to show that they can be as intolerant as anyone within an open society?

There's no other way to condone such behavior, except to wish that your ugly face and moronic reasoning be plastered all over the media for personal and selfish gain.

It is quite simple. There will never be a need to protect popular, accepted, or agreeable speech. It is expression that is not accepted or people disagree with that MUST be protected, at all costs.

Disagreeable speech opens the door for dialog and discussion.

You had an opportunity to do that, but decided to go with unpopular speech to vent your spleen. It is your right to do so. I'll leave you to it.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Free speech is free speech - even at it's most intolerant - Pamela Geller, the Westboro Baptists, the KKK....however loathsome, that is no excuse for murder. Extremists and fanatics however, don't like free speech.

I LOVE free speech....yet not a big fan of vulgarity, blasphemy and self-aggrandizing stances.

Then you don't love free speech. You love speech you approve of...how very leftist of you

Do you "love" all free speech? How about leftist free speech? How about Neo-Nazi free speech?

You can support the right of free speech - even the most contemptable - without being a fan of it.

Of course, that's a leftist concept you might not understand

I support all free speech, I may not agree with it but I'll defend someone's right to say it and I certainly won't try to kill someone over it.

 

[ogibillm]

Free speech is free speech - even at it's most intolerant - Pamela Geller, the Westboro Baptists, the KKK....however loathsome, that is no excuse for murder. Extremists and fanatics however, don't like free speech.

I LOVE free speech....yet not a big fan of vulgarity, blasphemy and self-aggrandizing stances.

Then you don't love free speech. You love speech you approve of...how very leftist of you

Do you "love" all free speech? How about leftist free speech? How about Neo-Nazi free speech?

You can support the right of free speech - even the most contemptable - without being a fan of it.

Of course, that's a leftist concept you might not understand

I support all free speech, I may not agree with it but I'll defend someone's right to say it and I certainly won't try to kill someone over it.

so you do understand the concept, and yet when nat4900 expressed the concept you told him he didn't love free speech.

can you explain why that is?

 

[Manonthestreet]

Go back and read...not what he said

are these the quotes in question

Reacting to the term, "Islamic terrorism," Erdoğan stated,



Such a definition saddens not only the Muslims, but also those who believe in other religions. No religion permits terrorism. Therefore, it is very ugly to put the word Islam before terrorism. You may say religious terrorist but you can't say Islamic terrorist.

Reacting to the term, "moderate Islam," Erdoğan stated,

Turkey is not a country where moderate Islam prevails. This expression is wrong. The word Islam is uninflected, it is only Islam. If you say moderate Islam, then an alternative is created, and that is immoderate Islam. As a Muslim, I can't accept such a concept. Islam rejects extreme concepts. I am not an extreme Muslim. We are Muslims who have found a middle road.

oh how awful. he rejected terrorism and said those committing it weren't islamic. what an awful man.

you've been duped by the pundits that have taken that quote out of its very reasonable, very agreeable context.

No... He rejected the moderates....

 

[ogibillm]

Go back and read...not what he said

are these the quotes in question

Reacting to the term, "Islamic terrorism," Erdoğan stated,



Such a definition saddens not only the Muslims, but also those who believe in other religions. No religion permits terrorism. Therefore, it is very ugly to put the word Islam before terrorism. You may say religious terrorist but you can't say Islamic terrorist.

Reacting to the term, "moderate Islam," Erdoğan stated,

Turkey is not a country where moderate Islam prevails. This expression is wrong. The word Islam is uninflected, it is only Islam. If you say moderate Islam, then an alternative is created, and that is immoderate Islam. As a Muslim, I can't accept such a concept. Islam rejects extreme concepts. I am not an extreme Muslim. We are Muslims who have found a middle road.

oh how awful. he rejected terrorism and said those committing it weren't islamic. what an awful man.

you've been duped by the pundits that have taken that quote out of its very reasonable, very agreeable context.

No... He rejected the moderates....

i can't do better than show you the exact quotes where he does nothing of the sort. the rejection wasn't of moderates. as he says, Islam rejects extreme concepts. but if you want to hang on to your delusions, that's fine, you're just showcasing your inability to comprehend anything that isn't spewed by an am radio host.

maybe you're just confused. he rejected the term 'moderate islam' because by default it means there is immoderate islam.

can you tell me where your disconnect is? why can't you understand the very simple concept he put forth?

 

[Manonthestreet]

Everyone understood the quote but you. BTW his actions support the majority position, not yours

 

[ogibillm]

Everyone understood the quote but you. BTW his actions support the majority position, not yours

he rejects terrorism as un-islamic. he rejects the label of 'moderate islam' because that would mean that there is extreme islam, and as he puts it islam rejects extremes.

so what part of that is bad in your mind? what part is a rejection of the people you would call 'the moderates?'

 

[Manonthestreet]

His actions don't support your words

 

[Manonthestreet]