Well, Pam Geller did what she planned all along. She provided a catalyst for violence and argument. By sponsoring an anti-Islam blasphemy party, she guaranteed that there would be outrage, blame and conflict. In the end, all she did was pour more cement over everyone's opinions.
Just like Charlie Hebdo's trash publications, there was nothing substantive to her event. She was simply out to hurt people. It wasn't a positive evangelism, it was the equivalent of a schizophrenic screaming obscenities at passers-by. In the end, people died and the country was divided yet again.
The progressives and Islamic fundamentalists Pam sought to provoke learned nothing at all from the exercise. The Islamic faithful now have one more reason to feel besieged and pay a little more attention to the voices in their midst telling them how awful the West is. The progressives now have one more reason to sneer at conservatives for being knuckle-dragging, hateful morons.
You can shout "FIRST AMMENDMENT!" all you want and no one's mind is going to change. If I'm wrong, point it out. Twitter has been intolerable with hate since the Pam Geller event. Convincing people of the need for freedom of speech is a sales job and you don't make sales by publicly defiling your prospects' most treasured icons.
If you want to move public opinion and affect the way people vote, political leaders talk and the direction laws take, you're not going to do it through deliberate acts of angry blasphemy. It was a total waste of time, money and effort, cloaked in self-righteousness.
The sooner the whole thing fades away, the better.
14 comments:
In a better world (by my lights, anyway), a local event like that wouldn't have made the news. But, given the media...
And the Islamists never fail to dredge up a glory-seeking sucker or two.
Fortunately, given the way it played out, the event was in Texas and nobody got hurt but the two fanatics convinced that Allah wants revenge and that they are the holy instruments of that revenge. Both should be nominated for the Darwin Award.
You're wrong: and in this circumstance, that means that you're part of the problem. You can say, "a pox on both their houses" all you want. You're still dancing to the "progressive's" tune.
I'm still waiting to find out what we gained from this exercise.
I told you that you're part of the problem, and you keep digging.
I think this opinion is off base.
Freedom of speech is precisely valuable for exactly this type of agitation.
Whether it works to wake up the sleeping American giant to the threat from progressives and from Islam is secondary. The task is hard and we all need to keep at it.
ISIS is now threatening Pam Geller. ISIS also revealed how many trained agents the Obama Administration let into the country, a boon for both Republicans and national security.
The liberal media is blaming everyone except the terrorists. Revealing what we already know... they are buffoons.
Kudos to Pam.
To be frank, one of the reasons I have been blogging less...
Some of the stuff I have now uncovered is so shocking that it could only be addressed in a tirade. It is incredibly sensitive and affects national security. Let me just say that our current "top secret" policy is so fundamentally flawed and bad that only a complete idiot would find it plausible. It is far more likely a path to arm and embolden Islam. It is a threat to all Western Civilization. It is a crime against humanity and a danger to human freedom.
This is why I support Pam Geller. The only hope we have is to wake up America, as America is the hope of humanities freedom.
"I'm still waiting to find out what we gained from this exercise."
What did we (sincere Christians) gain from our 40+ years of opposition to abortion? Now that the secularists are even closer to their goal of using government violence to *compel* Christians to directly fund abortions, or to participate in them if they are doctors and nurses, should we *stop* opposing abortion because the servants of the Enemy accuse us of being "extremists"?
What are we (sincere Christians) gaining from our opposition to the lie that marriage can be redefined contrary to God's definition? Should the US supreme Court rule as everyone expects it will, should we just roll over and go with the flow, lest the servants of the Enemy accuse us of being "extremists"?
What about in 5 or 10 years, should my prediction come to pass that the only way to "prove" that one is not "homophobic" (especially if one is an attractive younger man) is to perform fellatio on demand? If, God forbid, things get that bad, what will we gain by refusing?
Apropos to this last -- I turned on the TV in my hotel room last night. Flipping through the dial, I briefly landed on Conon O'Brien's show. He and his side-kick (both of them) were miming and joking about giving a "hand job" to someone else. That didn't just happen, of course: it was scripted. That was their marching-orders for that evening's "entertainment". How soon do you think it will be before "entertainers" are miming "giving head" on the talk shows?
Guys, I agree with everything you say. I just think that picking a freedom of speech battle on this particular ground was obviously doomed to failure.
Why not hold a series of lectures on the Islamic threat? Why not rent a movie theater and play radical imam excerpts coupled with analysis? There were all kinds of things she could have done.
"Why not hold a series of lectures on the Islamic threat?"
Which just happens to be exactly what they were doing.
As your are, you're still believing what you are told by the leftists?
that was supposed to be "Old as you are ..."
Guys, when you've lost the Fox News crowd, you've lost the battle decisively.
On the plus side, Pam Geller got a lot of great publicity, so there's that.
Maybe that was the point of the whole thing.
"Guys, when you've lost the Fox News crowd, you've lost the battle decisively."
Everyone who is paying attention knows that "the Fox News crowd" will not honestly talk about Islam and the threat that Moslems pose to any society they infiltrate.
Al-Waleed bin Talal -- "Waleed is also ... the second-largest voting shareholder in 21st Century Fox ..."
I hate auto correct on my phone.
Thus, I am full of hate.
This is a war, but our government won't fight it, so it is left to us. As I noted elsewhere, Sun Tzu says that in war, if your opponent has a choleric termper, you should provoke him.
On their side, Mohammed Atta, one of the 9/11 hijackers, told the passengers on the AA Flight 11: "Just stay quiet and you'll be OK."
We aren't going to be quiet. I will stop insulting Mohammed when they stop threatening to kill us for it. Deal?
The reason Pam Gellar is right is that the radical Islamists have declared the entire world to be subject to Sharia. The prohibition against drawing Mohammed is meant for Muslims, and it is actually a recent interpretation. Applying Sharia to the entire world to prove their mettle is the goal of those at war with us. It's as if the Pope had declared war on anyone who ate meat on Fridays during Lent.
Just as the U.S. sends warships to periodically circumnavigate the Black Sea to void Russian claims to that body of water; Geller, by her actions is voiding the claim of Muslims to impose Sharia on the rest of us. This is an important concept in common and international law. We need to all support her cause to spread the risk that she should not be carrying alone.
Post a Comment