Posted on 03/15/2016 8:11:01 AM PDT by raptor22
Donald Trump, who denies that his provocative and sometimes profane rhetoric (particularly against Muslims_ has anything to do with violence and protests at his University of Illinois-Chicago rally, once blamed conservative activist Pamela Geller for provoking an attempted armed assault by – wait for it – unnecessarily provoking Muslims.
As Gideon Resnick noted last December in the Daily Beast, pre-candidate Trump was not as passionately concerned with Pamela Geller’s First Amendment free speech rights as he now is about his own:
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
In other words, Pamela Geller has core values. Trump not so much.
That was Trump? He changed that much in a year?
Do you remember Charley Hebdo? And what happened there? Is it then incorrect to presume that she did not know this when she proceed with the contest daring them to do this in America? That is in-your-face in my book. I did not say I did not agree, or disagree, just that it is daring.
ummm... My pleasure, I guess???
I agree that was idiotic of Trump.
Pamela Geller is a hero.
I wonder if he has changed his tune on that.
Trump said Ms Geller was taunting....and he’s right. Like he said, “Why the hell do it?”
You have been more than careful. You have made a fair point. Geller's comments were far more daring and dangerous than Trump's, no doubt about that.
But I still put sets of comments in the same category in that both deserved the absolute backing of 1A supporters everywhere. Because the danger Geller faced came not from her own actions (she wasn't building a bomb), but from those who hated what she had to say.
Geller certainly knew that ahead of time, but that doesn't matter to me in the least. "Provocative" speech is exactly the kind of speech that needs to be protected, as long as it doesn't openly advocate violence.
As an example, awhile back I read about some lib who wanted to make it illegal for someone to make fun of Obama, because the mocking might provoke an attempt on the president's life.
(Sorry for the long-winded response!)
Ans it was only last fall when he said that we have to let the Syrian refugees in.
Several days later he turned on a dime.
See post 77
Maybe he has the core value of not staging a religious provocation to incite an extremist reaction or staging a public sacrilege to make a pont
Maybe there are better more respectful ways to deal with intolerance
Christians will welcome a president with this core value
“Comment taken out of context.”
Really? Here’s the comment:
On May 4 of this year, Trump tweeted: “The U.S. has enough problems without publicity seekers going out and openly mocking religion in order to provoke attacks and death. BE SMART.”
So what is “out of context?”
——————————————————————————————What is wrong with that comment? Free speech. He didn’t go disrupt Ms Geller’s show, did he?
“If that argument is accepted, think how easy it would be for other things to be classified as “inflammatory”.”
Yes, pro-abortion people think that showing photos of aborted fetuses is inflammatory, etc. If we don’t protect inflammatory speech and denounce those that use violence to suppress it, then we aren’t actually protecting speech at all. Nobody cares about “non-inflammatory” speech.
The man’s a sham but his supporters are so snake-fascinated with his bullsh!t they can’t think straight.
Do you remember Charley Hebdo? And what happened there? Is it then incorrect to presume that she did not know this when she proceed with the contest daring them to do this in America? That is in-your-face in my book. I did not say I did not agree, or disagree, just that it is daring
I wasn’t really disagreeing with you. At least I didn’t think so. I was trying to advance what you were saying.
I think they both had every right to do what they did AND That they both felt they had no choice to do what they did because nobody else would do it and it had to be done.
What Pam Gellar was trying to accomplish was to show that we will stand up for our First Amendment no matter if we are faced with violence. Nobody has guts to stand up to those terrorists anymore and so she did. Somebody had to.
As far as Trump, again I say, he’s the only one with the guts to stand up to the NWO and take them out and restore a government of the people, for the people, and by the people.
Trump probably regrets now what he said about Gellar. He often says someon the heat of the moment that needs weather next day. But I don’t have a problem with that because that’s what real people who aren’t bought and paid for politicians do.
I think that revolutions and protests and on and on are legitimate and I admire Pamela Geller for her courage. However, along with courage must go prudence and in my opinion, that virtue was lacking in Ms. Geller’s cartoon contest.
She knows the Muslim mind about their Prophet and she should have known that violence was the most likely response from one of them. It was akin to the blasphemies against Christ.
Why ask for it? There were a million other ways, perhaps more effective to make her point. I agree with Trump.
Why does that matter? Free speech is free speech.
Suppose I published a very ugly and provocative book entitled "Most Methodists are Going to Hell". Would there be any 1A supporter who believes I shouldn't be able to publish that book?
I hope not. The only difference between me and Geller is that no Methodist would come gunning for me.
The problem therefore lies with the Muslims who are so easily offended, not with Geller!
I disagree with Trump’s statement on Geller, but I don’t get from it that Trump wanted to shut it down, he was just expressing his personal opinion on whether or not it was a good idea.
She did it because of Charlie Hegel, to show Muslims that we will not bow to sharia here. I attended the event for the same reason. I also did a news interview and told them I attended the contest because this is the United States and that we have the freedom to say or draw anything, and no one has a right not to be insulted nor to stop my speech nor to threaten violence.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.