US shooting at Mohahammed Cartoon conference

sabat

Custardpi wrote: »

What are the chances of one of them picking up a gun & shooting people they disagree with?

Of the type of people who were attending that 'conference', I would guess the chances are quite high.

SterlingArcher

Palmach wrote: »

One of the most clueless posts since your other post on this thread. You can say what you like about God in Texas and I am pretty sure you won't be shot at. This event was bait for the headhackers and they took it hook,line and sinker as they always do.

Yay, I have a follower... My aren't I the popular one...You're right about the clueless part. I don't even recall having another post in this thread. whoops.

Custardpi

sabat wrote: »

Of the type of people who were attending that 'conference', I would guess the chances are quite high.

You're basing that on what exactly?

smurgen

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Its your fantasy buddy.
You play it out.

do you think their free speech would be imposed upon by locals.Yes or no?

kneemos

Custardpi wrote: »

How?

By not seeing the bigger picture of why was a competition allowed that ridicules any religion.
There's intolerance on both sides.

sabat

Custardpi wrote: »

You're basing that on what exactly?

Texas, right-wing, fundamentalist Christian, hating a minority enough to organise an event just to antagonise them.

Custardpi

kneemos wrote: »

By not seeing the bigger picture of why was a competition allowed that ridicules any religion.
There's intolerance on both sides.

It was allowed because free speech is protected under the US constitution. Just as a conference organised by Muslims to draw offensive cartoons of someone right wing Texans revered would be protected. Only one side attempted to silence the other with bullets. Only one side is to blame here, that of the two gunmen & anyone who supported them.

Custardpi

sabat wrote: »

Texas, right-wing, fundamentalist Christian, hating a minority enough to organise an event just to antagonise them.

Again, if supporters of any ideology, whether that be spiritual or secular in nature are so backward that a few silly drawings can drive them into homicidal rage then those people are idiots who deserve to be antagonised & ridiculed. How far are you prepared to go with that statement? Publication of The Satanic Verses (a far better piece of art) sparked an even wider violent response from religious fanatics. Should that have been banned just to avoid "antagonising" Islamic extremists?

smurgen

Custardpi wrote: »

Again, if supporters of any ideology, whether that be spiritual or secular in nature are so backward that a few silly drawings can drive them into homicidal rage then those people are idiots who deserve to be antagonised & ridiculed. How far are you prepared to go with that statement? Publication of The Satanic Verses (a far better piece of art) sparked an even wider violent response from religious fanatics. Should that have been banned just to avoid "antagonising" Islamic extremists?

how about the burning of the US flag?It's just a silly flag after all. Do you think it may be matched with violence with a few texans?

Custardpi

smurgen wrote: »

how about the burning of the US flag?It's just a silly flag after all. Do you think it may be matched with violence with a few texans?

As I've stated above burning a US flag, provided you own the flag yourself has been specifically stated to be constitutionally protected speech in the US, which includes Texas. Actually I'd be surprised if some Texans haven't burned the odd US flag themselves. There's a small but vocal minority of Texans who actually favour independence for the state. I think the "Republic of Texas" may even still have an "embassy" in London. A Republican politician there, Rick Perry has previously floated the idea of secession for the Lone Star State. In any case a conference in Texas where people brought their own US flags to burn would not face anything like the level of threat which the Mohammed cartoon event did.

kneemos

Custardpi wrote: »

It was allowed because free speech is protected under the US constitution. Just as a conference organised by Muslims to draw offensive cartoons of someone right wing Texans revered would be protected. Only one side attempted to silence the other with bullets. Only one side is to blame here, that of the two gunmen & anyone who supported them.

There's always limits to free speech .
This event was presumably run by intolerant Texans out to prove a point.It was ridiculous intolerant,ignorant and unnecessary,innocent people could have died for their folly.

the_monkey

kneemos wrote: »

The anti Muslim brigade around here appear just as intractable as the jihadists.

Get over yourself ffs...

SeanW

kneemos wrote: »

There's always limits to free speech .

Indeed. You can't shout fire in a crowded theatre. But people like Anjem Chourhury are free to spread their venom, as are all the madrassas teaching hate to "Western" schoolchildren, you don't seem to have a problem with that?

What was your opinion of the Satanic Verses?

Paulownia

Inquitus wrote: »

Kind of pointlessly provocative event mind, lets all have an event to display the controversial cartoons that have caused mayhem in the past and while we are at it we'll try and draw some more. Its right up there with the Westborough Baptists for most stupid application of the first amendment. I'd say the attendees were a lovely bunch.

there is no excuse for terrorist shootings but not justifying the attack there is a difference between free speech and incitement to hatred and that meeting was about the latter, we must not attempt to justify either action.
What comes out of this is that there are a lot of stupid people in the world with time on their hands

c_man

smurgen wrote: »

how about the burning of the US flag?It's just a silly flag after all. Do you think it may be matched with violence with a few texans?

I know you're playing imagination-land but it's worth reading on what actually happened when something like the above happened

Gregory Lee "Joey" Johnson, then a member of the Revolutionary Communist Youth Brigade, participated in a political demonstration during the 1984 Republican National Convention in Dallas, Texas. The demonstrators were protesting the policies of the Reagan Administration and of certain companies based in Dallas. They marched through the streets, shouted chants, and held signs outside the offices of several companies. At one point, another demonstrator handed Johnson an American flag stolen from a flagpole outside one of the targeted buildings.

When the demonstrators reached Dallas City Hall, Johnson poured kerosene on the flag and set it on fire. During the burning of the flag, demonstrators shouted such phrases as, "America, the red, white, and blue, we spit on you, you stand for plunder, you will go under," and, "Reagan, Mondale, which will it be? Either one means World War III." No one was hurt, but some witnesses to the flag burning said they were extremely offended.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_v._Johnson

So like most of the civilised world, it was dealt with through the law and courts.


Interesting to see all the victim blaming around here though.

Wang King

kneemos wrote: »

Never heard of a competition to the best cartoon.Pretty sure it would cause an uproar here too.

These people probably deserve each other in fairness .

Here's my effort

kneemos

SeanW wrote: »

Indeed. You can't shout fire in a crowded theatre. But people like Anjem Chourhury are free to spread their venom, as are all the madrassas teaching hate to "Western" schoolchildren, you don't seem to have a problem with that?

What was your opinion of the Satanic Verses?

Religious indoctrination goes on all over.Even here.

smurgen

c_man wrote: »

I know you're playing imagination-land but it's worth reading on what actually happened when something like the above happened



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_v._Johnson

So like most of the civilised world, it was dealt with through the law and courts.


Interesting to see all the victim blaming around here though.

I said by Muslim americans?

SeanW

kneemos wrote: »

Religious indoctrination goes on all over.Even here.

So you're OK with people calling for the murders of homosexuals, Jews, blasphemers, apostates, secularists, the subjugation of women, the imposition of Sharia law etc - and teaching these values to their children in religious schools - but you have a problem with people drawing cartoons?

How often do you read the Guardian?

kneemos

SeanW wrote: »

So you're OK with people calling for the murders of homosexuals, Jews, blasphemers, apostates, secularists, the subjugation of women, the imposition of Sharia law etc - and teaching these values to their children in religious schools - but you have a problem with people drawing cartoons?

How often do you read the Guardian?

You'll have to show me where I said all that.

RollieFingers

Ah sure they're probably chilling with their 72 virgins now

Dopes haha, no casualties apart from the gunmen? Excellent result!

Raging_Ninja

RollieFingers wrote: »

Ah sure they're probably chilling with their 72 virgins now

Dopes haha, no casualties apart from the gunmen? Excellent result!

An unarmed security guard was shot in the leg.

the_monkey

Raging_Ninja wrote: »

An unarmed security guard was shot in the leg.

And he should make a full recovery - he's an American hero.

c_man

smurgen wrote: »

I said by Muslim americans?

Sorry I don't have any real-world examples which match exactly your thought experiment. Though if you're going to argue that communist Americans in Regan's America were somehow held in higher regard than ordinary American Muslims now a days I'd love to hear it.

Nodin

kneemos wrote: »

You'll have to show me where I said all that.

In the world where I live, having a problem with Jihadis and the likes of Pamela Gellar are not mutually exclusive thoughts. Indeed, they tend to spring from the same world view.

bjork

They mostly call their sons mohammod>> Is this not defiling the prophet?

conorhal

kneemos wrote: »

There's always limits to free speech .
This event was presumably run by intolerant Texans out to prove a point.It was ridiculous intolerant,ignorant and unnecessary,innocent people could have died for their folly.

Well you guess whatever point they were trying to prove was quite definatively proved. Slow hand clap for Islam there.

Hitchens

Nodin wrote: »

In the world where I live, cloud cuckoo land

Fyp

galljga1

smurgen wrote: »

I said by Muslim americans?

Please point out where you said that.

kneemos

Nodin wrote: »

In the world where I live, having a problem with Jihadis and the likes of Pamela Gellar are not mutually exclusive thoughts. Indeed, they tend to spriing from the same world view.

Mrs Gellar is clearly a bigot.