Jump to content

So What, If Any Protection Should Be Afforded To Pamela Geller?


Recommended Posts

Point being they get death threats, even ones directed at their kids, and no one's calling for their defense, much hunting down those responsible for making each and every threat, because they're putting a target on their backs and profiting from the outrage that they created. That's exactly what Geller did with this contest, and the death threat from ISIS is almost certainly what she wanted.

Honestly, I see your point (here's the but), but isn't that the whole point of our freedom? Does a homosexual who bashes Christian teaching as hateful and backwards not put himself out there as a target to a numbskull who eithers hates homosexuals or perverts Christian teachings to the point of believing that person deserves death.

Now if a Foreign Christian army with a history of beheading homosexuals and invading countries while committing all manner of atrocities upon the conquered, and had just sent (or had, according to which report you believe) two operatives to a gay rights parade targeting that one particular leader, and after their failure put out a decree that they would still kill this person and they had dozens more operatives already within his country and within striking distance, you really wouldn't want that person protected? I would.

I began rambling in that scenario, but I had already typed too much to cut it off in the middle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 192
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Honestly, I see your point (here's the but), but isn't that the whole point of our freedom? Does a homosexual who bashes Christian teaching as hateful and backwards not put himself out there as a target to a numbskull who eithers hates homosexuals or perverts Christian teachings to the point of believing that person deserves death.

Now if a Foreign Christian army with a history of beheading homosexuals and invading countries while committing all manner of atrocities upon the conquered, and had just sent (or had, according to which report you believe) two operatives to a gay rights parade targeting that one particular leader, and after their failure put out a decree that they would still kill this person and they had dozens more operatives already within his country and within striking distance, you really wouldn't want that person protected? I would.

I began rambling in that scenario, but I had already typed too much to cut it off in the middle.

She's made a blog-career out of directing hate speech at Muslims, not ISIS, that's just what's got her name in the headlines in 2015 and got her her most recent spot on Fox News. She's also complaining about Obama not providing her with protection while at the same time blaming him for starting the whole thing, when she had previously accused him of being a Muslim trying to take down America from the White House. What separates her from the WBC isn't bigotry or apparent insanity, it's that her life's work is making Muslims look bad instead of Christians.

To answer your question, it'd be a comparable scenario if the homosexual in the comparison spent their adult life accusing Christians and Christian-sympathizers of condoning sexual abuse towards women and children, and organized an event in which people competed for a cash prize by coming up with the most creative way to defame an image of Jesus. And they probably would have done so because they viewed a death threat by a foreign Christian terrorist organization as validation, and they'd probably already be planning an even bigger event while going on MSNBC forwarding the idea that the American taxpayer should be footing the bill for its security. I'm not in favor of enabling idiots, much less idiots that think themselves so important to national discourse that they have the right to extort tax dollars and man hours out of the FBI or Homeland Security in order to spew their message without fear of reprisal.

Edited by Serge
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, taunting from behind someone's skirt seems just as badazz on a messageboard as it would on a playground.

Get your one more shot in, then put me on ignore. I'll extend the same courtesy.

LOL @ taunting. No one is taunting you or hiding behind anyone. If I was going to taunt or take shots at you, then I would have. As I said earlier, good posters have made comebacks after being attacked and got banned, while the original offender got off and I did not want to end up on that list today. If you want to put me on ignore, then you are more than welcome to do so, but does not diminish the validity of my stance against putting our troops back on the ground because of some loon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why go to war with these people? Us hanging out over there is what got these guys started. Sure, we could go throw out military over there, occupy that region for a decade, spend trillions of dollars, and expend thousands of American lives... but then we'd have to deal with ISIS 2.0, which is actually Al-Qaeda 3.0, which is actually MAK 4.0.

You can't drop the hammer on these types.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

¯\_(ツ)_/¯The only pathetic response is the person telling others to blow them, because they are upset by someone's response to their call to war, which they get to sit out of. Doing your "time" does not give you the right to start crying for war. ISIS is not our problem. We are not the world police.

When they start attacking our interests abroad, and our people at home, I totally disagree with you. It's absolutely our problem. And when they recruit our citizens, Yep, that's our problem too.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What we need to do is invade again, but this time stay 20 years. We go ahead and force three whole election cycles on them, only letting them vote for guys that'll say and do what works best for us, and most important, have our military train their military for those 20 years so a whole generation won't be able to associate the Iraqi army with anything other than U.S. subservience. It almost worked last time, obviously if we just stay longer, eventually they'll figure out that we're the good guys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When they start attacking our interests abroad, and our people at home, I totally disagree with you. It's absolutely our problem. And when they recruit our citizens, Yep, that's our problem too.

A full scale war does not solve any of those problems. I thought we learned that the first time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And your fine with your tax dollars going to provide personal security to this idiot?

I've seen my taxes dollars spent on worse- a $250,000, one toilet restroom at a public park. I'm sure everyone here can give an example of the government wasting our tax dollars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's your solution to stopping terrorism? No one seems to have an answer while in the meantime it grows.

Maybe ask former members of these terrorist groups why they joined and figure out a way to prevent that from happening in the future. Once you stop radicalization, then the terrorist groups no longer have followers. Lets not forget that a lot of people(Some who were not born muslim) from western countries join ISIS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe ask former members of these terrorist groups why they joined and figure out a way to prevent that from happening in the future. Once you stop radicalization, then the terrorist groups no longer have followers. Lets not forget that a lot of people(Some who were not born muslim) from western countries join ISIS.

Answer: Quit ******* around in the Middle East and crawl out of Israel's *******.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey, at least we can agree that terrorists in Iraq have something to do with our current argument over another war with Iraq. Maybe if we invade them a couple more times we can breed the terrorists that actually pose a nuclear threat to the U.S. and/or Israel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

... So how do you think we should solve the problems you brought up, since you do not agree with war?

ramped up intelligence. More airstrikes. Automatic life sentences for people convicted of trying to join identified terror groups.

And of course, finally try the ****nuts in Guantanamo Bay, then place them into general population of our prison system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah sure. More NSA spying and more drone strikes. Let's make sure that we create three more Islamic radicals for each one that we kill.

Perpetual war is freakin' awesome.

So do you think the best course of action is to sit idly by while they kidnap and murder people, American citizens included?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...