Actual First Amendment Contest or Racist Invitation for Violence

[TSwizzle]

The US has pissed off so many Muslims with it's non-stop killing of Muslims for over a decade.

A bit off topic but how many muslims died today at the hands of other muslims compared to those killed by the US ? Or the last week or month ?

 

[untermensche]

The US has pissed off so many Muslims with it's non-stop killing of Muslims for over a decade.

A bit off topic but how many muslims died today at the hands of other muslims compared to those killed by the US ? Or the last week or month ?

You mean by forces US aggression set in motion?

Just because it is Muslims killing Muslims doesn't mean that it isn't a consequence of massive US violence to the degree it destroyed an entire nation.

The US has been killing Muslims and torturing Muslims and putting Muslims in secret prisons for over a decade.

It created chaos.

If the US were to leave the region and stop it's violence, eventually I would blame Muslims if chaos existed.

As Colin Powell said, "You break it, you own it."

The US broke an entire nation. It owns the consequences of doing that.

 

[TSwizzle]

Approximate numbers are acceptable.

 

[untermensche]

Approximate numbers are acceptable.

Fine. I'll take them.

How many killed in the chaos created by the US?

Give the approximate numbers.

 

[TSwizzle]

Is this shouting fire in a crowded theatre?

Not quite. Completely unnecessary and achieves nothing.

 

[TSwizzle]

[
Fine. {snip}.

Jog on sunshine, you're wasting my bandwidth.

 

[untermensche]

[
Fine. {snip}.

Jog on sunshine, you're wasting my bandwidth.

Oh I see, just another boring asshole that has no interest in defending idiotic nonsense.

 

[TSwizzle]

[
Oh I see, just another boring asshole that has no interest in defending idiotic nonsense.

*yawn* Tedious gobshite running off at the mouth. Put up or jog on, you're wasting bandwidth.

 

[Nexus]

If insulting Muslums is like shouting fire in a theater then you're conceding that Muslums are inherently dangerous like fire.

 

[TSwizzle]

However, this kind of bullshit helps push Muslim youth toward radicalism. It makes it more likely they feel alienated from their own society, like they don't belong, and therefore will personally identify much more strongly as a Muslim and not as an American. That makes them much more fertile for a charismatic radical recruiter.

muslim yoof receive plenty encouragement for "radicalization" from within their own creed. This little stunt will pass without notice.

 

[untermensche]

If insulting Muslums is like shouting fire in a theater then you're conceding that Muslums are inherently dangerous like fire.

We're conceding that at the present moment some are. A tiny minority out of a billion are.

The question is, how do you move these people from their radical positions?

By having known bigots that don't care about religious rights, like the right to have a Mosque wherever you want one, provoke them?

Or by engaging them as if they are human beings?

 

[Nexus]

Or by engaging them as if they are human beings?

People that will turn to violence over cartoons of their idol can't be reasoned with as human beings. Its best to riducule them into a frenzy like Anonymous did to Scientology.

 

[untermensche]

Or by engaging them as if they are human beings?

People that will turn to violence over cartoons of their idol can't be reasoned with as human beings. Its best to riducule them into a frenzy like Anonymous did to Scientology.

This is not a problem that will be solved from Texas.

It is a problem.

But it is a Muslim problem that will be solved or it won't be solved in nations made up mostly of Muslims.

From Texas the choice is either to support known bigots playing with fire or trying to persuade people because you care about THEM, not yourself.

 

[Ford]

Or by engaging them as if they are human beings?

People that will turn to violence over cartoons of their idol can't be reasoned with as human beings.

Except that in this case, the "people that will turn to violence" were not involved.

Nobody from the mosque showed up armed. Nobody from the mosque showed up looking for a fight. In fact because of the public display of stupidity outside their building, not many people from the mosque showed up at all. The entire affair was made up of right wing jack wagons, counter protestors, police, media, and spectators.

If these people were so violent and inhuman that they can't be reasoned with, then why wasn't the frontage road off I-17 and Glendale Avenue littered with the bodies of infidels? Why wasn't the "protest" hit by a suicide bomber?

This gathering of assholes was intended to provoke a violent response from the people you clearly think are sub-human, yet the response was not violent whatsoever. The few Muslims who did show up went in, prayed, and went home.


Fucking unreasonable bastards.

 

[Arctish]

"People are also encouraged to utilize (their) second amendment right at this event just (in case) our first amendment comes under the much anticipated attack," the event's Facebook page says.

I remember when people marched from Selma to Montgomery in support of Voting Rights. They made a point of being unarmed and peaceful. So did the Freedom Riders and the people desegregating the schools. Lately I've tried imagining what would have happened if they had decided to "utilize their second amendment right" at those events just in case their 1st, 14th, and 19th amendment rights "comes under much anticipated attack". I don't see any way that it would have improved matters, and many ways it would have made things worse.

The same goes for the anti-war demonstrations, the Women's Movement protests, and the Stonewall riots. Bringing weapons to those events increased the inherent danger and hardened public resistance to those causes. So now I'm wondering why the yahoos who staged the cartoon contest are getting a pass on encouraging their people to show up armed.

Standing up in defiance of violent censorship is laudable. But telling the activists to come to the demonstration armed and ready to commit violence is not the sort of activity that enhances our civil liberties. That sort of thing is more in keeping with what Bull Connor's side did at the Edmund Pettus Bridge. So while I support the cause of free expression, I do not support Jon Ritzheimer or the rally he organized. I think he wanted to provoke bloodshed. Fortunately, he did not succeed.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

A bit off topic but how many muslims died today at the hands of other muslims compared to those killed by the US ? Or the last week or month ?

You mean by forces US aggression set in motion?

Just because it is Muslims killing Muslims doesn't mean that it isn't a consequence of massive US violence to the degree it destroyed an entire nation.

The US has been killing Muslims and torturing Muslims and putting Muslims in secret prisons for over a decade.

It created chaos.

If the US were to leave the region and stop it's violence, eventually I would blame Muslims if chaos existed.

As Colin Powell said, "You break it, you own it."

The US broke an entire nation. It owns the consequences of doing that.

Muslims have been fighting Muslims for vastly more than a decade.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

If insulting Muslums is like shouting fire in a theater then you're conceding that Muslums are inherently dangerous like fire.

His position fundamentally comes down to Muslims not being responsible for their own behavior. That makes them animals. Strangely enough he's never replied when I pointed out where his argument lead.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

If insulting Muslums is like shouting fire in a theater then you're conceding that Muslums are inherently dangerous like fire.

We're conceding that at the present moment some are. A tiny minority out of a billion are.

The question is, how do you move these people from their radical positions?

By having known bigots that don't care about religious rights, like the right to have a Mosque wherever you want one, provoke them?

Or by engaging them as if they are human beings?

Yup, the standard leftist approach to anything. Appeasement, appeasement, appeasement.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

We're conceding that at the present moment some are. A tiny minority out of a billion are.

The question is, how do you move these people from their radical positions?

By having known bigots that don't care about religious rights, like the right to have a Mosque wherever you want one, provoke them?

Or by engaging them as if they are human beings?

Yup, the standard leftist approach to anything. Appeasement, appeasement, appeasement.

What and who are appeasing? Please let us know.

 

[Axulus]

If insulting Muslums is like shouting fire in a theater then you're conceding that Muslums are inherently dangerous like fire.

His position fundamentally comes down to Muslims not being responsible for their own behavior. That makes them animals. Strangely enough he's never replied when I pointed out where his argument lead.

Actually his position has been that there is a small handful of animals/psychopaths within the Muslim population that will respond with violence when provoked by things like cartoons. He has explicitly stated this multiple times.