Texas police shot dead two gunmen who opened fire on Sunday outside an exhibit of caricatures of the Prophet Mohammad that was organized by a group described as anti-Islamic and billed as a free-speech event.
It’s Pamela Geller’s group; Geert Wilders was there. It was a far-right event as opposed to a secular-left event. Not helpful.
The exhibit was organized by Pamela Geller, president of the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI). Her organization, described by the Southern Poverty Law Center as a hate group, has sponsored anti-Islamic advertising campaigns in transit systems across the country.
Organizers of the “Muhammad Art Exhibit and Contest” said the event was to promote freedom of expression. They offered a $10,000 prize for the best artwork or cartoon depicting the Prophet, as well as a $2,500 “People’s Choice Award.”
…
The mayor said the city had permitted the event even though officials knew its inflammatory theme could provoke an attack.
“There was concern, which is why we had heightened security in the area, but we all swear to uphold the Constitution, free speech, free assembly and in this case perhaps, free religion,” Athas said. “So in this case they were free to use the building.”
God what a mess. This is bound to strengthen mistaken people in their opinion that Charlie Hebdo is the same kind of thing as Geller’s contest.
https://www.facebook.com/144310995587370/photos/a.271728576178944.71555.144310995587370/977219805629814/?l=c3084298fc
Hmmmokay, I’m not quite following you here, Ophelia. Let’s say there are two groups of people. Both groups sponsor an “Everyone Draw Mohammed” day event on the same day, and both get shot at by terrorists. They both say and do exactly the same things, but one is right wing and one is left wing. It almost sounds as if what you’re saying is that the left wing group are Brave Martyrs while the right wing group are Contributing to the Problem and Not Helpful.
So intent really is magic? I don’t think that’s what you mean to say, but it’s what’s coming across. Sure, there are differences in rhetoric between the two groups, but their ACTIONS are the same.
But rhetoric is action, Bruce.
Also – if one is right wing and one is left wing, then they won’t say exactly the same things. You might be able to truncate or edit or cherry-pick the speech of one so that it matches the other, but taken as a whole they won’t say or do the same things.
Bruce, what’s hard to follow? The media pushes that narrative that the only people who defy wahhabi muslim taboos are hate groups. A hate group will now get tons of attention for defying those taboos while also using violent and hateful rhetoric about muslims. The media is going to use this to yet again conflate the violation of taboos with bigoted rhetoric.
Geller has also won a preliminary judgement enabling her to post anti-Islamic ads on buses in New York.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/pamela-geller-bus-ads/
Geller, and her cohort Robert Spencer, are not critical of religion across the board. Geller has made public declarations about the cruelty of halal meat, apparently not knowing that kosher meat involves identical practices.
Spencer has culled through the writing of Ibn Warraq and others to point out the evil at the heart of Islam. BUT, he turns around and tries to exonerate Christianity and Judaism of violence.
Still, holding the event, in the same hall that a pro-massacre rally was held in January, is not to be dismissed as ‘provocation’ against the poor downtrodden Muslims. The threshold of outrage here is the same as for Charlie Hebdo: you don’t get to attempt murder because someone satirizes your ‘sincerely held’ beliefs.
Don’t care that Wilders and Geller are despicable people. Did they trespass so as to hold Draw Mohammad in a mosque? Did they target uninterested Muslims for Twitterbombing unsolicited live coverage of the output from Draw Mohammad? Were they soliciting seemingly benign pictures to run as ads in Middle Eastern newspapers, but once they’re printed publicly announce the Mad Magazine style instructions to fold this way and see a picture of Mohammad fellating a boar?
But if this was an event where the only “harassment” of Muslims was that the event was taking place at all, then to hell with this being “not helpful”. Flouting religious authoritarianism is always helpful. Of all the problems with Wilders and Gellers’ various campaigns, one problem that can’t be laid at their feet is the subset of leftists who can’t get past childish “enemy of my enemy” thinking.
@bruceegee1962
hey both say and do exactly the same things, but one is right wing and one is left wing.
Is this a Sam Harris thought experiment? They would not say the same thing and the point is that in both cases we would condemn the violence , in one case we would approve of the content. does Geert Wilders only talk about how he should be allowed to criticise religion and draw pictures of whichever religious figure he wants?
“It’s Pamela Geller’s group; Geert Wilders was there. It was a far-right event as opposed to a secular-left event. Not helpful.”
“Not helpful”? How? It’s a free speech issue, the fact that the event is ‘non-secular’ is immaterial. As to the contest being a ‘far right event’, what, like a Nazi rally?
Geller is a Zionist propagandist and Wilders is an “Islamophobe”, so what?
Let’s avoid the type of equivocation and rationalisation that occurred after the Charlie Hedbo atrocity.
It’s not equivocation. I’ve said all along that I would not have the same view of Charlie Hebdo if it really were racist or xenophobic. I’m not saying Geller & co deserved to be attacked or killed, I’m just saying I wish Geller would stay out of it.
To put it another way: for me it’s not just a free speech issue. It’s a free speech plus secularism plus religious freedom plus universal human rights issue.
One difference in their actions is the American Freedom Defense Initiative spent $10,000 on security for the 2-hour event that included security officers, uniformed officers, SWAT, FBI and ATF. That looks very different than a student-run college campus event, and more like bear baiting.