Shooting at Muhammad cartoon conference in Dallas

[Yumyumsuppertime]

In America:
Freedom of Speech
Freedom of the Press
Freedom of religion
Freedom to bear arms.
Do you see the flaw here?

Since there's no freedom to murder, no, I don't.

[Greater Soviet Ukraine]

Conference is obvious flamebait by Islamophobes.

[Hentar]

In America:
Freedom of Speech
Freedom of the Press
Freedom of religion
Freedom to bear arms.
Do you see the flaw here?

Since there's no freedom to murder, no, I don't.

Well if everybody can express their own opinion while owning deadly weapons, that's just a recipe for disaster.

[Greater Soviet Ukraine]

Since there's no freedom to murder, no, I don't.

Well if everybody can express their own opinion while owning deadly weapons, that's just a recipe for disaster.

Yeah, but they are checked by other opinionated people owning deadly weapons.

[The Black Forrest]

Since there's no freedom to murder, no, I don't.

Well if everybody can express their own opinion while owning deadly weapons, that's just a recipe for disaster.

I have my granddads old Sten and a couple clips. Are you threatened?

[Yumyumsuppertime]

Since there's no freedom to murder, no, I don't.

Well if everybody can express their own opinion while owning deadly weapons, that's just a recipe for disaster.

It does tend to keep people on their toes. However, the vast majority of people manage to settle their differences without resorting to making giant holes in each other.

[Gold Harbor]

So you're intent on blaming the victim then.

No, I am not. There is literally nothing in that post that lays blame on the victim, who was the police officer wounded in the attack. As I've stated, from what I've seen, Geller is far more of a beneficiary of this attack than she is a victim.

Wow if it had been a liberal cause attacked by christians you would still count it as an attack on liberals even if it failed. What complete hypocrisy.

[Greater Soviet Ukraine]

Well if everybody can express their own opinion while owning deadly weapons, that's just a recipe for disaster.

It does tend to keep people on their toes. However, the vast majority of people manage to settle their differences without resorting to making giant holes in each other.

That flag

[The Black Forrest]

No, I am not. There is literally nothing in that post that lays blame on the victim, who was the police officer wounded in the attack. As I've stated, from what I've seen, Geller is far more of a beneficiary of this attack than she is a victim.

Wow if it had been a liberal cause attacked by christians you would still count it as an attack on liberals even if it failed. What complete hypocrisy.

What are you rambling about?

[Yumyumsuppertime]

It does tend to keep people on their toes. However, the vast majority of people manage to settle their differences without resorting to making giant holes in each other.

That flag

Yes, Johnny Cash, sitting in a bush, eating cake with his hands while high as a freaking satellite.

[The Black Forrest]

It does tend to keep people on their toes. However, the vast majority of people manage to settle their differences without resorting to making giant holes in each other.

That flag

That pole!

[Yumyumsuppertime]

That flag

That pole!

[The Black Forrest]

That pole!

I met him once.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

I met him once.

Neat!

You know, I know that we have to get back on topic, but I have to say that this was one of the most necessary off-topic breaks that I've seen.

[The Ostrich Empire]

Since there's no freedom to murder, no, I don't.

Well if everybody can express their own opinion while owning deadly weapons, that's just a recipe for disaster.

Then give guns to sane people, you moronic fool. Free country, so you have the freedom to bear arms. If you can't be mature enough to bear an arm, you should either not be eligible to live in the country or at the very least not be able to posses a weapon.

[Naushantiya]

I hate both of them, to me both of them are equally as bad, I don't like the views and ideas represented by both of them

Yes, expressing views you don't like is equivalent to murder.

Not the equivalence to any act just the people and their inferior ideologies are something I don't like. I don't like Islam nor do I like the west

[Farnhamia]

Well if everybody can express their own opinion while owning deadly weapons, that's just a recipe for disaster.

Then give guns to sane people, you moronic fool. Free country, so you have the freedom to bear arms. If you can't be mature enough to bear an arm, you should either not be eligible to live in the country or at the very least not be able to posses a weapon.

*** Warned for flaming ***

Please review the rules, conveniently posted at the top of this forum and of the Moderation forum.

[Otokodate]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-32579396

Just breaking. Two suspects shot and killed, one officer injured, this is all I know so far.

As for discussion: do you think conferences like this should be allowed to proceed, does the possibility of violence change your view?

Yes, potentially offensive and inflammatory material is protected speech. No, the possibility of violent over reactions to a pictorial of a religious prophet does not change my views.

[Aryavartha]

all these direct and implied arguments of 'provocation', 'they were dicks', 'did this on purpose, knowing what would happen' etc...one would think that some people shot at the two and they shot back in self defense..

by saying all these things, you are basically agreeing with that organiser lady's anti-islamic views - that islam is a violent religion and muslims are violent people, that they respond to ideas and words with weapons and violence.

[Aryavartha]

apparently the pakistani origin dude studied at the international school in pakistan. looks like he was "ok" there and turned "radical" here..

http://www.isoi.edu.pk/

http://tribune.com.pk/story/881404/texa ... led-in-us/

TEXAS:
Nadir Soofi, a gunman shot dead after opening fire at a Texas exhibit of caricatures of the Prophet Mohammad (pbuh), was a popular schoolboy in Pakistan but struggled to adjust to the United States after moving there as a teen, friends said on Tuesday.

Soofi’s story appeared to trace a familiar arc for some Western extremists – disappointment, alienation, and a search for belonging that ended with the embrace of militancy.

..
Friends in Pakistan, who studied with Soofi at the elite International School of Islamabad, were stunned to discover that police had identified him as was one of the attackers.

“When he was in Islamabad, he had a great life. His mom was an American who taught art at the school, he was in plays, popular with girls,” said one of Soofi’s best friends at school.

“His nickname was Goofy” because of his sense of humor, said the man, who declined to be identified to preserve his privacy.

Another classmate said Soofi played the lead in the school’s production of the play “Bye Bye Birdie”.

“He was a popular kid, the opposite of a radical extremist,” she said.

Soofi’s parents divorced around the time he was in tenth grade, the friend said, and he moved to Utah with his mother.

Over the years, Soofi told his old friends he did not fit in and had many disappointments.

He went to dental school, but said he had to drop out because of financial problems, the male friend said.

He tried and failed at various ventures including a dry cleaning store, he said.

He told friends he had a child with a Bosnian woman but the relationship did not work out.

“He said ‘life is really tough here’,” the male friend said. “Alienation, an identity crisis, whatever you want to call it, he was kind of alone.”

“I guess the one thing he could identify with was religion.”

In the past few years, Soofi grew a beard and only posted pictures of himself wearing sunglasses on Facebook, the friend said. Old friends teased him for that but also began to worry, the friend said.

Gradually they lost contact.

“I looked at his pictures, and I didn’t recognize him,” the friend said. “I don’t know what happened to him in America.”

[Aryavartha]

martyrs

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/funer ... fi-n354066

A local cleric, Pir Mohammad Chishti, head ‎of a madrassa in Peshawar, organized the funeral in absentia. He and other men, through loudspeakers installed on vehicles, called for people to come out of their homes and pay respects to the men, Elton Simpson and Nadir Soofi, whom he called "martyrs of Islam."

"Come forward and prove your love and loyalty with Islam and our beloved Prophet Mohammad," the cleric told people.

By noon, ‎150 to 200 people had gathered.

Chishti said he was proud of the bravery of the two‎ men. "The two martyrs proved their love and loyalty with Islam. They are the real heroes of Islam, and we must be proud on their courage," the cleric told attendees.

After the funeral, he led a walk and chanted slogans against the U.S. and other Western countries for what he said was "desecrating Islam and Islamic heroes."

The cleric said that the United States and other countries "provoke the Muslims on violence" by organizing events where Islam is made fun of.

The same cleric held a similar funeral in absentia in January for the brothers who gunned down 12 people at the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo. The cleric also called those brothers "heroes of Islam."

[Yumyumsuppertime]

all these direct and implied arguments of 'provocation', 'they were dicks', 'did this on purpose, knowing what would happen' etc...one would think that some people shot at the two and they shot back in self defense..

by saying all these things, you are basically agreeing with that organiser lady's anti-islamic views - that islam is a violent religion and muslims are violent people, that they respond to ideas and words with weapons and violence.

No, we are saying that there are radical elements within Islam, and that they could be provoked by such a thing. Whether or not such a provocation is worth it to make the statement that they were making aside, the fact itself seems obvious.

[Cannot think of a name]

I'm going to do that annoying thing where I weigh in 30 pages deep as if the conversation hasn't evolved and probably repeat things that people feel that they've already covered and refuted, etc. So, you know. Maybe skip this post and fight on.


There are separate and unequal issues at play. People should not be dicks. They just shouldn't. This really should have been covered in kindergarten so it seems weird to have to say outloud, but people shouldn't be dicks. Furthermore, I don't believe you get poke someone with a stick over and over again until they get mad and then go, "Look how angry they are! Shameful." It's kind of transparent and stupid. These are kindergarten lessons. They should have been taught shortly after you stopped pooping your pants and should be treated like an adult who just poops their pants because they don't want to stop playing Nintendo.

That's issue one.

Just because someone is a dick to you is not carte blanche to do whatever the hell you want. People are going to be dicks and they should be called out for being dicks, but it's still not a shooting offense. This is not a kindergarten thing, this is a civil fucking society thing. This one has clearly defined parameters and laws and everything. It's not even something you should be taught, that's just a thing.

That's issue two.

I do believe that for the most part we have the ability to manage complex ideas and understanding of events without them being exclusive or contradictory. Nor do I think it takes away from one thing to acknowledge the other. There's no 'but'. I don't like the idea of goading someone because you have a hair up your ass about them. I don't like the idea of shooting anyone really for any reason. Yes, I said any reason. This is that whole 'being a person capable of holding a complex understanding of things' again, even if it's self defense like completely legit clear cut black and white Hitler trying to beat to death a handicapped person by using a baby as a cudgel, it's still an unpleasant idea and I don't like that this completely made up scenario came to that. But more than simply not liking it, in this case it's just 'not done'. No pass for the fact that the other party was being a dick to illicit a response.

I reject the simplistic idea that a greater wrong erases any ability to critique the wronged. It's kind of an abuse of the notion of victim blaming to assert that. By making the comparison you're actually validating the popular notion of victim blaming, that completely innocuous things a person does (be a pretty lady and alone) are in fact bad things but we ignore them because someone did a worse thing. That's not what that is supposed to be calling out. It's supposed to be that there isn't anything wrong with being a pretty lady and alone and the person who perpetrated the wrong cut that shit out of whole cloth on their own.

They are separate things that are related only in so much as one was used as an excuse of the other.

I may be over explaining just so the post is long enough that even the die hards bailed. Only my hairdresser knows for sure.

[Aryavartha]

No, we are saying that there are radical elements within Islam, and that they could be provoked by such a thing. Whether or not such a provocation is worth it to make the statement that they were making aside, the fact itself seems obvious.

define radical.

a day ago, these two guys would have been thought to be very pious religious muslims.

now, they are radicals?

why? this is exactly what islam calls for. to use force to stop people offending islam (blasphemy etc). in muslim majority countries, laws are passed and these things are institutionalized and non-muslims are intimidated enough to not even think about doing anything like this.

in significant muslim minority countries - this would have caused riots and much more deaths.

in miniscule minority country like USA where muslims are under constant survival and general intimidation by police - only two turned up to attack the blasphemers.

muslims need to understand that they cannot counter words and ideas with violence.

just because an anti islamic bigot is making this point, does not lessen the point.

if a feminist walked about in skimpy clothes and got raped and blamed male mentality - NONE of you would be saying 'she is doing this to make a statement'.

[Dyakovo]

all these direct and implied arguments of 'provocation', 'they were dicks', 'did this on purpose, knowing what would happen' etc...one would think that some people shot at the two and they shot back in self defense..

by saying all these things, you are basically agreeing with that organiser lady's anti-islamic views - that islam is a violent religion and muslims are violent people, that they respond to ideas and words with weapons and violence.

Not really. It's acknowledging that there are fuckwads out there who will react violently to having their religion mocked.