By now everybody knows how about the thwarted attempt to murder Pam Geller at her “Draw Mohammed” contest in Texas by two Islamic fanatics. What was most disturbing was how our “free” press mostly curled up into a fetal position and bravely begged to be killed last. As Mark Steyn summarized:
The Washington Post offered the celebrated headline “Event Organizer Offers No Apology After Thwarted Attack In Texas”, while the Associated Press went with “Pamela Geller says she has no regrets about Prophet Muhammad cartoon contest that ended in 2 deaths”. The media “narrative” of the last week is that some Zionist temptress was walking down the street in Garland in a too short skirt and hoisted it to reveal her Mohammed thong – oops, my apologies, her Prophet Mohammed thong (PBUH) – and thereby inflamed two otherwise law-abiding ISIS supporters peacefully minding their own business.
It’ll be a long time before you see “Washington Post Offers No Apology for Attacking Target of Thwarted Attack” or “AP Says It Has No Regrets After Blaming The Victim”. The respectable class in the American media share the same goal as the Islamic fanatics: They want to silence Pam Geller. To be sure, they have a mild disagreement about the means to that end – although even then you get the feeling, as with Garry Trudeau and those dozens of PEN novelists’ reaction to Charlie Hebdo, that the “narrative” wouldn’t change very much if the jihad boys had got luckier and Pam, Geert Wilders, Robert Spencer and a dozen others were all piled up in the Garland morgue.
If the American press were not so lazy and parochial, they would understand that this was the third Islamic attack on free speech this year – first, Charlie Hebdo in Paris; second, the Lars Vilks event in Copenhagen; and now Texas.
The mainstream left in the Washington Post and Associated press were hardly alone. Even the increasingly maddening Fox News joined the echo chamber, with Bill O’Reilly and Greta Van Sustren chiming in:
On her Tuesday show, Greta Van Susteren echoed O’Reilly’s take, saying that such events put police lives at risk.
“Everyone knew this event would unglue some who might become violent. And the police had no choice but to do their job and be there to protect against violence,” she said.
These apologists have come under fire for obvious reason, but it was NRO’s Jonah Goldberg who brought the point home (emphasis mine):
“While we have freedom of speech,” a New York Daily News columnist insisted, “we also have freedom of religion, which shouldn’t be impinged upon.” CNN’s Chris Cuomo, a law-school grad, tweeted that Geller’s “hate speech” isn’t protected by the Constitution. At first Cuomo suggested proof of this could be found in the Constitution itself. He then hastily clarified that it fails the “fighting words” doctrine of the Supreme Court. I’m dubious about that. But if he’s right, the lesson is clear: Violence pays. I doubt that’s what he intended to say. But what do I know? I think these people are nuts.
If we are to believe the members of the press and the rest of the Muslim apologists, at the end of the day the sole criteria for how we judge a group is how likely they are to hurt us. If conservatives truly want the left to start treating them fairly the simple answer is to kill a few of the more outspoken left wing entertainers and journalists and the rest will promptly fall in line. Before any lefties reading that last sentence start screeching obviously I am absolutely not serious about suggesting that. For that matter, it wouldn’t matter if I did – the reason Christians, Conservatives, Tea Partiers, etc. aren’t the violent lunatics that leftists fantasize about is because of the values associated with being Christian, a Conservative, or a Tea Partier. People on the right reading that last sentence are probably just nodding in agreement while lefties probably are probably shaking their heads or shouting at that statement that contradicts the beliefs they hold so dear. Bill Whittle said it well in one of his videos (I don’t recall which) when he basically said, “Yes, we could resort to violence to shut the left up, but that would mean completely giving up who we are.” The left freely exercises their anti-Christian bigotry because it’s safe to do so. And they coddle or ignore Islamic offenses out of their own cowardice. Or as I like to summarize by paraphrasing Han Solo:
“Because Tea Partiers don’t rip people’s arms out of their sockets when you criticize them”
“I suggest a new strategy. Let the Muslim win.”
— brother bob (@Brother_Bob) January 12, 2015
Cross posted from Brother Bob’s Blog
I am confused.
A young girl ”provoked” Muslims who she KNEW would be incensed by her wanting an education by going to school anyway.
When Muslims shot her in the head the Left did NOT call down additional evil on her.
No.
SHE was rewarded with a Nobel Peace Prize!
Didn’t she know she was just provoking individual Muslims?
Why was she rewarded when others who insist on their rights are demonized and punished?
@Nanny G: Are you comparing the actions of Pam Geller to those of Malala Yousafzai? Are you serious?
@Nanny: The left has one simple criteria for judging anything: “Was this done by somebody I Iike or somebody I don’t like?” That alone is how they define right from wrong
…And as I was writing my last comment Richard Wheeler posted one that made my point
If Richard were more aware of the things that incense Muslims he’d realize there is NO pleasing them.
Spain is back in the hands of non-Muslims now, and has been for hundreds of years, yet Osama bin Laden used its loss out of Islam’s Dar al Islam as one reason he attacked the West on 9-11-01.
Al Qaeda forced all girls out of school under their form of Islamic sharia.
Little Malala Yousafzai knew that yet still went to class and encouraged other girls to do the same.
In the ISIS’ version of Islam’s sharia even turning down a man’s TEMPORARY marriage proposal is grounds for having acid thrown in a girl or woman’s face!
I have read of little girls, just 9 years old having a ”pill” of blood stuck up inside them to mimic virginity so they can be temporarily married to ISIS fighters in one town after another and be seemingly virginal. If a girl is NOT a virgin (or passing for one) she might be ”honor” murdered after sex by the ”jilted” warrior.
I put it this way: you cannot paint yourself into a tiny enough corner to please all Muslims your entire normal life.
All you can do is hope they kill you last.
And Rich thinks that’s good enough.
@Nanny and B.B.: What are you talking about? A courageous young girl, virtually unprotected seeking an education in her home country,
A publicity seeking woman surrounded by cops and securoty in Texas.
@rich wheeler: Gelareh Bagherzadeh was an American-Iranian who courageously and virtually unprotected sought to express her 1st Amendment right to CHANGE her RELIGION in Texas in 2012.
So, who would stop her from enjoying that right?
Her best friend’s father.
Ali Awad Mahmoud Irsan murdered her on the night of January 16th, 2012, in an alley near the Galleria section of Houston.
Ali Awad Mahmoud Irsan’s daughter Nadia spoke to witnesses of the Christian man, Coty Beavers, who married her older sister, saying, ”I can not wait until my dad puts a bullet between your eyes.” In Nov 2012 her dad killed Coty Beavers in his own home as well.
In other words, we had a MASS MURDERER in Texas in 2012.
His own words for WHY….
“No one insults my honor as a Muslim and gets away with it.”
Can you really expect everybody to paint themselves into the tiny corner of existence that doesn’t offend the ”honor” of every Muslim around them?
Would YOU do that?
It would involve giving up alcohol, tobacco, dating, music, sports, and much more.
It would be up to you to know just what all of that ”much more” entailed.
Otherwise, you’ll be dead.
@Rich Wheeler: So if Geller had been unguarded and murdered in her attempt to exercise he right to free speech would she have met your criteria for martyrdom?
@Brother Bob: If your aunt had balls she’d be your uncle.
Geller is a promoter who knows exactly what she ‘s doing. I compared her to Sharpton which of course brought on the ire .of FA’ers. lol
@Brother Bob:
Eureka! I seen the light, and the solution is so simple. If we are to treat the Muslim religion equally, (i.e. how Rich’s pals on the left and Obama tell us). Then we should try to consider things from their perspective. Is that not what they tell us? So, the next time one of their radicals make a “free speech” statement against Christians, or Jews, disrespects a church, temple, sect, priest, rabbi, nun, holy item, bible, Torah, ritual, practice etc. or a gay comes into our shops and demands that we participate in their wedding. Perhaps we should stop, step back, and ask ourselves: “What would Mohammad do?” And then act appropriately. That way Rich and his friends will welcome us equally and treat us with the same respect they show Muslims.
Yes, Ditto a solution would be to treat them as they treat us. However to keep with- in the rule of law, why not have Congress declare war on ISIS; if so I wonder if Obama would sign the declaration?.
Then such seditious actions by Muslims and their allies in the US would be criminal since being an enemy would trump the 1st Amendment. I have yet to hear a politician or pundit raise this for a national discussion. This is not the first time I have expressed this in a forum.
My rep in congress ignored my question in a letter on this six months ago. When I get back from my foreign assignment, he will get the same question up front and personal from me; he does know me personally, so it should be interesting.