Talk about stupid:

ISIS 'claims responsibility' after two gunmen 'carrying explosives' killed in attack on anti-Islam art contest near Dallas: Suspects are shot by cops and security guard is wounded at 'draw Muhammad' event that offered $10,000 prize | Daily Mail Onli

With the influx of these guys coming across our open, stop nobody, no enforcement border, there we can expect more of the less spectacular attempts
at trying to kill Americans, but just as deadly.

Let's just hope that ISIS does not have represntatives for Muslims like SOME blacks hold Sharpton. Or the Muslims take to the streets to protest the shootings.

Yes, talk about stupid. Stupid for such an inflammatory gathering was allowed to occur. "Freedom of Speech" does not mean you can yell FIRE in a crowded theater. That is basically the same as having a contest for drawing cartoons of Muhammed and having a rabid anti-Muslim speaker basically calling them all terrorists. Same goes for that wacko minister in Gainesville who tried public bonfires of Korans.

Things like that invite other wackos to come in and shoot up the place.

This shooting had nothing to do with the Mexican border.

The shooter wackos were from Arizona.

Elton Simpson: Suspect Reportedly ID'd In Texas Muhammed Cartoon Attack


Does Elton Simpson of Arizona sound like an ISIS member who just came over the border from Mexico? Police are searching his apartment in AZ.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/05/us...?smid=tw-share


Elton Simpson had previously been labeled by the FBI as a jihadist terrorism suspect, according to this NY Times article.

Originally Posted by Guest

Yes, talk about stupid. Stupid for such an inflammatory gathering was allowed to occur. "Freedom of Speech" does not mean you can yell FIRE in a crowded theater. That is basically the same as having a contest for drawing cartoons of Muhammed and having a rabid anti-Muslim speaker basically calling them all terrorists. Same goes for that wacko minister in Gainesville who tried public bonfires of Korans.

Things like that invite other wackos to come in and shoot up the place.

This shooting had nothing to do with the Mexican border.

The shooter wackos were from Arizona.

This is a 1st amendment issue. I fully support this type of event, and I'll explain why. It’s more important that you might think at first blush, and the easy way out is to criticize as inflammatory, or to otherwise argue to suppress it as you do.

Islam has a long history, dating back to Muhammad himself, of following a conscious strategy of shutting down any criticism of Islam, and more especially of Muhammad. You need to study the history and biography of Muhammad to better understand it, but the gist of it was … he wanted no opposition to his new religion. He consciously killed, or had killed on his orders, what might be deemed “major media figures” of his day. (Poets in 7th century Arabia were especially influential and, as it turns out, Muhammad was a gifted poet which is why the Koran sound like poetry when you read it.)

For example, Muhammad had a wealthy Jewish merchant by the name of Kab Ashraf assassinated in public for publishing poems critical of him. The more famous murder was of a wife and mother named Asma. Muhammad had an assassin creep into her tent at night while she was sleeping. Her offense was composing a poem critical of the Yathrib (i.e. Mecca) tribes for not resisting Muhammad more strongly than they did. The assassin of Asma lifted a sleeping baby from Asma’s breast before plunging a sword thru her heart.

The point is … Muhammad knew that most people could be terrorized into ceasing their criticism by a periodic use of force. Guess what … it worked. Muhammad subdued Yathrib, renamed the town Medina, and after winning several battles against the Meccans, Islam expanded rapidly by the sword and terror.

Nothing much has changed with that strategy of silencing criticism over the past 1,400 years by terror. That is EXACTLY what is going on with the attempted attack on the event in Garland, and the Charlie Hebdo instance along with others. Islam seeks to silence its critics. It has worked in helping to silence, or at least subdue, you because you in effect said … hey, we can’t let this type of show go on. It is by no means shouting “fire” in a theater … you have it exactly backwards. If we don’t resist the urge to self-censor, over time, Islam will prevail in its objective, especially if and as the demographics work more in their favor.

By way of background, Muhammad suffered from epilepsy (inherited from his mother Aminah) and was basically a psychotic mass killer. Think of Charles Manson, except with a very large army. It has always been a violent religion starting from its founding. Most Muslims today are peaceful (cause they got tired of all the fighting ) but the best estimates I've seen is anywhere between 10-20% support the Radical strain of Islam in various ways .. .financially, emotionally, or in some cases the guys who actually fight and shoot.

I salute the people who sponsored the event in Garland, and salute the Garland police force for taking care of business.

No, you have this whole thing screwed up in your Tea B-g mind.

You think it is a good thing to purposely anger a religion that has a splinter group who wants to hurt you? Use common sense.

Do you agree it is a First Amendment right for the American Nazi Party to hold a mass rally in front of B'nai Brith headquarters or the KKK to hold a cross burning ceremony in the middle of Baltimore's inner city or The Communist Party USA to burn dozens of American flags at the American Legion HQ?

All of these events would have trouble at them. Freedom of speech or whatever has to be tempered with common sense.

Yes, everyone is glad that the only two people killed were the shooters.

Originally Posted by Guest

No, you have this whole thing screwed up in your Tea B-g mind.

You think it is a good thing to purposely anger a religion that has a splinter group who wants to hurt you? Use common sense.

Do you agree it is a First Amendment right for the American Nazi Party to hold a mass rally in front of B'nai Brith headquarters or the KKK to hold a cross burning ceremony in the middle of Baltimore's inner city or The Communist Party USA to burn dozens of American flags at the American Legion HQ?

All of these events would have trouble at them. Freedom of speech or whatever has to be tempered with common sense.

Yes, everyone is glad that the only two people killed were the shooters.

Try to control yourself by focusing on the substance of a response vs an immediate descent into name calling please

Originally Posted by Guest

No, you have this whole thing screwed up in your Tea B-g mind.

You think it is a good thing to purposely anger a religion that has a splinter group who wants to hurt you? Use common sense.

Do you agree it is a First Amendment right for the American Nazi Party to hold a mass rally in front of B'nai Brith headquarters or the KKK to hold a cross burning ceremony in the middle of Baltimore's inner city or The Communist Party USA to burn dozens of American flags at the American Legion HQ?

All of these events would have trouble at them. Freedom of speech or whatever has to be tempered with common sense.

Yes, everyone is glad that the only two people killed were the shooters.

Ok let's put your recommendation for restrictions on free speech into effect on this forum. Henceforth the hateful epithet Tea B***er" is banned from use as inciteful. You ok with that?

Originally Posted by Guest

Ok let's put your recommendation for restrictions on free speech into effect on this forum. Henceforth the hateful epithet Tea B***er" is banned from use as inciteful. You ok with that?

Please list the hateful epithets that you and all who think along the same side (conservative) would stop using when referring to liberals in general or liberals by name (Pres. Obama, Sec. Clinton, Mayor DiBlasio, etc).

If you can extract a guarantee that there will be NO MORE hateful or disgraceful references to all I have listed - I will not refer to the Tea Party members by the term you dislike.

You think it is a good thing to purposely anger a religion that has a splinter group who wants to hurt you?

Do you agree it is a First Amendment right for the American Nazi Party to hold a mass rally in front of B'nai Brith headquarters or the KKK to hold a cross burning ceremony in the middle of Baltimore's inner city or The Communist Party USA to burn dozens of American flags at the American Legion HQ?

All of these events would have trouble at them. Freedom of speech or whatever has to be tempered with common sense.
---------------------

Now that the name calling has been removed, would you like to answer the question with your comments. Thank you.

Originally Posted by Guest

You think it is a good thing to purposely anger a religion that has a splinter group who wants to hurt you?

Do you agree it is a First Amendment right for the American Nazi Party to hold a mass rally in front of B'nai Brith headquarters or the KKK to hold a cross burning ceremony in the middle of Baltimore's inner city or The Communist Party USA to burn dozens of American flags at the American Legion HQ?

All of these events would have trouble at them. Freedom of speech or whatever has to be tempered with common sense.
---------------------

Now that the name calling has been removed, would you like to answer the question with your comments. Thank you.

First of all, Islam is always angry or upset ... that's because they don't like to be criticized, and they have a long history of killing or terrorizing to dissuade it.

Second, they are waging a war against the West in various way, one of which is against free speech. Do you disagree with that assertion?

Originally Posted by Guest

First of all, Islam is always angry or upset ... that's because they don't like to be criticized, and they have a long history of killing or terrorizing to dissuade it.

Second, they are waging a war against the West in various way, one of which is against free speech. Do you disagree with that assertion?

No, I do not agree that ISIS is trying to wage war by curbing free speech. In countries they control, free speech is curbed but in some of our ally countries, it is also curbed such as Saudi Arabia.

I was specifically asking about if you agree it is a First Amendment right for the American Nazi Party to hold a mass rally in front of B'nai Brith headquarters or the KKK to hold a cross burning ceremony in the middle of Baltimore's inner city or The Communist Party USA to burn dozens of American flags at the American Legion HQ?

All of these events would have trouble at them. Is a a First Amendment right for those groups to hold their ceremonies or rallies as I described - and would it be allowed?

Originally Posted by Guest

No, I do not agree that ISIS is trying to wage war by curbing free speech. In countries they control, free speech is curbed but in some of our ally countries, it is also curbed such as Saudi Arabia.

I was specifically asking about if you agree it is a First Amendment right for the American Nazi Party to hold a mass rally in front of B'nai Brith headquarters or the KKK to hold a cross burning ceremony in the middle of Baltimore's inner city or The Communist Party USA to burn dozens of American flags at the American Legion HQ?

All of these events would have trouble at them. Is a a First Amendment right for those groups to hold their ceremonies or rallies as I described - and would it be allowed?

One more example to add to your list; how about Hillary Clinton having a rally at Lake Sumter Landing?

Originally Posted by Guest

Nothing much has changed with that strategy of silencing criticism over the past 1,400 years by terror. That is EXACTLY what is going on with the attempted attack on the event in Garland, and the Charlie Hebdo instance along with others. Islam seeks to silence its critics. It has worked in helping to silence, or at least subdue, you because you in effect said … hey, we can’t let this type of show go on. It is by no means shouting “fire” in a theater … you have it exactly backwards. If we don’t resist the urge to self-censor, over time, Islam will prevail in its objective, especially if and as the demographics work more in their favor.

Originally Posted by Guest

One more example to add to your list; how about Hillary Clinton having a rally at Lake Sumter Landing?

The KKK cross burning in Baltimore's inner-city would probably be safer!