Garland TX - Shootout at Islamic Cartoon Contest

[mikegideon]

LOL. From louderwithcrowder.com...

 

 

Dear Fascist, Islamic, puke-satchels,

Okay, nobody was killed in the #GarlandShooting, thank God. Actually, thank God specifically for giving us Texas and the 2nd amendment. Good form!

The problem here is that because no innocent people were killed, the media will sweep the “incident” under the rug. If only the terrorists had taken aim at say, looting rioters, maybe it would’ve gotten more traction. The important issue here is that these incidents will never end. Ever. As long as Islam exists, these events will occur. And because of liberals kneeling before their gods of “tolerance,” they will occur with greater frequency.

To Muslims, we are told that we need to be tolerant. That we must respect your Islamic faith. That we can’t judge many by the actions of a few. Here’s the thing: these aren’t the actions of a few. Muslims know this. Drawing Muhammad in any shape or form is a punishable sin in Islam. All of Islam. Period. It is for this reason that the religion deserves no tolerance. Zero. Nada. Zilch.

No other religions demands the subversion of the First Amendment as Islam does.

You can draw Jesus, sure. Even create a play (like “Jesus Christ Superstar”) about him. You can sell statues of Bhudda or Vishnu. Heck, I’m pretty sure you can even purchase illustrated version L. Ron. Hubbard’s science fiction novels (before they became a religion and all). I’ve even got my Tom-Cruise engraved thetan-testing kit. Highly reccomended.

But the second anyone pencils a little picture of Muhammad, everyone’s sphincter puckers tighter than a starfish on a sun-dial. I’m not even talking about actual terrorism (you know, where thousands of people die at the hands of Islamist ever day). But ideological terrorism.

No other religion demands that we play by their rules in the way that Islam does. Rules that are unconstitutional. Rules that by design, are anti-freedom.

Liberals demand that Conservatives stay “out of their uterus” and “out of their bedroom.”How about demanding that Muslims (yes, ALL Muslims) stay out of our scrapbooks, our computer programs, and our pencil cases? Better yet, if you have a problem with our illustrations, how about staying out of our civilized countries? If I want to draw Muhammad, I’ll draw Muhammad.  If you don’t like it, go fornicate yourself.

Why? Because you don’t get to tell me what I can draw. I don’t care how much you bully, I don’t care how much you try and intimidate, and I certainly don’t care how angry your imaginary moon-god and his pedophile, war-mongering prophet get.

To those saying that I’m an intolerant jerk… hey, I’m not the one forbidding a damn picture. Intolerance, my ass.

Read more: http://louderwithcrowder.com/dear-muslims-why-am-i-drawing-muhammad-because-go-screw-yourselves/#ixzz3ZBvg414I

Edited May 4, 2015 by mikegideon

[Trekbike]

There should be zero consequences for speaking your mind.

 

I know you didn't mean that in literal terms, but that comment struck me as funny.     Yea, try that with your wife or girlfriend and see how that works for you..    :)

[suspiciousmind]

So if you stick to your position consistently, then you also blame the girl who was raped because she was dressed provocatively?

People have been doing controversial art for a long time. In fact, several art exhibits have expressly tried to be provocative towards other religions. I don't recall shootings and attempted bombings as part of the discourse.

I made the same comparison on Facebook earlier! :) Edited May 4, 2015 by suspiciousmind

[suspiciousmind]

I know you didn't mean that in literal terms, but that comment struck me as funny.     Yea, try that with your wife or girlfriend and see how that works for you..    :)

Haha, I am divorced for a reason!

[E4 No More]

That's heavy, man

[URL=http://s242.photobucket.com/user/SWJewellTN/media/d9f0efb0-715b-4f28-bb7c-c5d5daa68245_zpsd4noxc7m.jpg.html][/URL]

[Links2k]

So if you stick to your position consistently, then you also blame the girl who was raped because she was dressed provocatively?
 
People have been doing controversial art for a long time. In fact, several art exhibits have expressly tried to be provocative towards other religions. I don't recall shootings and attempted bombings as part of the discourse.

The only thing that I will do consistently is evaluate every situation individually and come to an opinion based upon the information that I have at the time. I'm not attempting to justify the actions of the terrorist. I'll stick to my guns that this was a calculated provocative action. Did the looneys have a right to have this contest? Yes! But no one should be surprised that whack jobs showed up to this event.

[Lumber_Jack]

The only thing that I will do consistently is evaluate every situation individually and come to an opinion based upon the information that I have at the time. I'm not attempting to justify the actions of the terrorist. I'll stick to my guns that this was a calculated provocative action. Did the looneys have a right to have this contest? Yes! But no one should be surprised that whack jobs showed up to this event.

I don't go to certain parts of town because the likelihood of catching a bullet is pretty high. I also don't attend terrorist provocating events because.....the likelihood of catching a bullet is high.

[Someotherguy]

The only thing that I will do consistently is evaluate every situation individually and come to an opinion based upon the information that I have at the time. I'm not attempting to justify the actions of the terrorist. I'll stick to my guns that this was a calculated provocative action. Did the looneys have a right to have this contest? Yes! But no one should be surprised that whack jobs showed up to this event.

 

 

I for one am glad they held this "contest"..I do believe it was held to flush the jihadists living here out into the open..I hope they hold another "contest" next week, and another, and another..................:)

[Dolomite_supafly]

Freedom of speech only guarantees that the government will not infringe upon your right. Non government entities can, and do, limit people's speech all the time and it is perfectly legal. Any private entity CAN legally dictate what you can, and cannot, say on their property. I can guarantee that the only reason anyone has a right to free speech on my property is because I let them have that right and because I am NOT a government entity they can either abide by MY rules or leave my property. The right of an individual does not outweigh the right of the property owner, period.

 

And as much as we hate it liberals CAN dictate what they will, and will not, allow on their property. We have no right to free speech or the right to keep and bear arms on THEIR property unless they allow us to have that right. And likewise they are not allowed to say what they want on our property.

 

Those putting on the show have NOT had their 1st amendment rights infringed. Even if those jihadists came in and forcibly made everyone shut up it was still not a violation of their 1st amendment rights, it takes a government agency to violate someone's 1st amendment rights and not some civilian with a gun. What the jihadists did do was violate law which is what is used for interactions between to private parties.

 

And yes there are consequences for everyone's speech, both good and bad, and there should be. One must weigh the consequences to determine if the reward outweighs the risks. For most people the risks are far too great to speak their mind. Everyone weighs those decisions every day and just because someone may have a right to say something does not mean they will not suffer the consequences for what they chose to say. If I were standing in front of a bunch of jihadists I can guarantee I will not say something that might result in my injury or death even though I am in the right and they are in the wrong. Just because someone has the right to say something does not mean they are exempt from the consequences and if those consequences break the law then they will have to deal with their own set of consequences for their actions. I can guarantee there is not a single person on this board who speaks their mind 100% of the time without weighing the consequences.

[Parrothead]

Freedom of speech only guarantees that the government will not infringe upon your right. Non government entities can, and do, limit people's speech all the time and it is perfectly legal. Any private entity CAN legally dictate what you can, and cannot, say on their property. I can guarantee that the only reason anyone has a right to free speech on my property is because I let them have that right and because I am NOT a government entity they can either abide by MY rules or leave my property. The right of an individual does not outweigh the right of the property owner, period.

 

And as much as we hate it liberals CAN dictate what they will, and will not, allow on their property. We have no right to free speech or the right to keep and bear arms on THEIR property unless they allow us to have that right. And likewise they are not allowed to say what they want on our property.

 

Those putting on the show have NOT had their 1st amendment rights infringed. Even if those jihadists came in and forcibly made everyone shut up it was still not a violation of their 1st amendment rights, it takes a government agency to violate someone's 1st amendment rights and not some civilian with a gun. What the jihadists did do was violate law which is what is used for interactions between to private parties.

 

And yes there are consequences for everyone's speech, both good and bad, and there should be. One must weigh the consequences to determine if the reward outweighs the risks. For most people the risks are far too great to speak their mind. Everyone weighs those decisions every day and just because someone may have a right to say something does not mean they will not suffer the consequences for what they chose to say. If I were standing in front of a bunch of jihadists I can guarantee I will not say something that might result in my injury or death even though I am in the right and they are in the wrong. Just because someone has the right to say something does not mean they are exempt from the consequences and if those consequences break the law then they will have to deal with their own set of consequences for their actions. I can guarantee there is not a single person on this board who speaks their mind 100% of the time without weighing the consequences.

 

 

 

Turn out the lights--we're done here. It can't be said any better than this.......

Edited May 5, 2015 by Parrothead

[Omega]

Freedom of speech only guarantees that the government will not infringe upon your right. Non government entities can, and do, limit people's speech all the time and it is perfectly legal. Any private entity CAN legally dictate what you can, and cannot, say on their property. I can guarantee that the only reason anyone has a right to free speech on my property is because I let them have that right and because I am NOT a government entity they can either abide by MY rules or leave my property. The right of an individual does not outweigh the right of the property owner, period.
 
And as much as we hate it liberals CAN dictate what they will, and will not, allow on their property. We have no right to free speech or the right to keep and bear arms on THEIR property unless they allow us to have that right. And likewise they are not allowed to say what they want on our property.
 
Those putting on the show have NOT had their 1st amendment rights infringed. Even if those jihadists came in and forcibly made everyone shut up it was still not a violation of their 1st amendment rights, it takes a government agency to violate someone's 1st amendment rights and not some civilian with a gun. What the jihadists did do was violate law which is what is used for interactions between to private parties.
 
And yes there are consequences for everyone's speech, both good and bad, and there should be. One must weigh the consequences to determine if the reward outweighs the risks. For most people the risks are far too great to speak their mind. Everyone weighs those decisions every day and just because someone may have a right to say something does not mean they will not suffer the consequences for what they chose to say. If I were standing in front of a bunch of jihadists I can guarantee I will not say something that might result in my injury or death even though I am in the right and they are in the wrong. Just because someone has the right to say something does not mean they are exempt from the consequences and if those consequences break the law then they will have to deal with their own set of consequences for their actions. I can guarantee there is not a single person on this board who speaks their mind 100% of the time without weighing the consequences.

While I agree somewhat, I dont think you are entirely correct. For while it's illegal to commit crimes, done againt someone because of their race you may also be charged for violating their rights. Kill a black person, refuse to rent due to their race, keep someone from voting because of race (apparently only applies to whites) etc, etc.

[Oh Shoot]

Speaking of the actual events, I've heard the usual revolving clap trap of erroneous firearm terminology stuff.

 

Mostly I've heard they had automatic AKs. (probably weren't, right?)

Also, that the traffic cop used his "service revolver" (probably not, right?)

 

Also that he only fired two shots, both headshots?

 

Also that the cop was shot in the foot before opening fire, but also that it was actually an officer standing next to him that was shot in the foot.

 

I love the media.

 

- OS

[Dolomite_supafly]

While I agree somewhat, I dont think you are entirely correct. For while it's illegal to commit crimes, done againt someone because of their race you may also be charged for violating their rights. Kill a black person, refuse to rent due to their race, keep someone from voting because of race (apparently only applies to whites) etc, etc.

But the examples you give have to deal with things that people do not have a choice in and not related to free speech. Speech is a choice what race they are, if they are disabled or what country they are born into is not. But even with that being said I believe anyone should be able to refuse to do business with anyone for any reason. I am disabled and if someone doesn't not want to do business with me because I am disabled that should be their choice and besides why would I want to support them anyways.

As far as free speech and protected classes I can guarantee that if anyone, who is part of a protected class, is on my property I can legally limit what they say without the fear of being arrested. Just because they are a protected class it does not give them any more rights on my property than someone who is not a protected class.

Just because someone is a protected class does not mean they should be treated differently and definitely not any better than those that are not. Likewise those who are not a protected class should not be treated any worse. In my eyes everyone is the same, and should be treated the same, regardless the color of their skin, their religion, their disability or any other arbitrary class used to separate them from their fellow man.

I am sick and tired of people demanding they be treated better when they are no different and should be treated like anyone else. We were all created equal weren't we? So why in the hell are people looking for reasons to not be equal.

[leroy]

This "art show" hardly falls into the category of something someone may have decided not to do to placate others. On the contrary, its sole purpose was simply to antagonize Mulsims. In this respect, the organizers aren't much different than the Westboro loons. I'll probably never be known as a Muslim sympathizer, but I don't go out of my way to piss them off, much less organize an event and offer $10k to whoever can piss them off the most. If the Westboro bunch ever gets whacked, will you be posting about tyranny and censorship?

The way I see things ya missed the point, or ya don't like it....We have freedom of speech and association in this country... Ya seem to be advocating censorship in the name of " the common good"; along with a pretty good dose of '"...I know best"...I think that sounds a bit elitist ta me...

Are you gonna be the censor for TGO only, or everybody at large...?

By the way, I'm all for havin everybody have their say... Even the Westboro children...

The point is that you nor anyone else is a "censor" in this country... Ya can argue about and criticize the venue and the value of the "exhibition", and have your day in the "arena of ideas"; just like they have theirs... Ya can't "censor" it, nor can the gubmt... Ya may have missed the discussion of the First Amendment in your civics class...

Leroy


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[mikegideon]

Speaking of the actual events, I've heard the usual revolving clap trap of erroneous firearm terminology stuff.

 

Mostly I've heard they had automatic AKs. (probably weren't, right?)

Also, that the traffic cop used his "service revolver" (probably not, right?)

 

Also that he only fired two shots, both headshots?

 

Also that the cop was shot in the foot before opening fire, but also that it was actually an officer standing next to him that was shot in the foot.

 

I love the media.

 

- OS

 

From Fox... with corrections

 

They had "assault weapons", whatever that is. They were shooting the place up, and both were killed by a security guard Traffic cop with His service pistol. His partner was shot in the ankle. So, these two Muztards attacked Texas, and never even made it to the real cops SWAT type cops.

 

We're gonna need to have a redo. And, y'all need to send more Muzzies this time. There wasn't near enough to go around the first time. :)

Edited May 5, 2015 by mikegideon

[Hershmeister]

Folks - islam demands submission of non-believers - called dhimmi, and the act of self censoring oneself to comply with islamic rules/laws is called dhimmitude.

So all those who say its not a "good idea" to draw mohammed are already on board with islam - even if you don't intend to be - becAuse you have submitted

[Dustbuster]

Here's the latest winner of the draw Mohamed contest:
He deserves the glamour!

[deerslayer]

The way I see things ya missed the point, or ya don't like it....We have freedom of speech and association in this country... Ya seem to be advocating censorship in the name of " the common good"; along with a pretty good dose of '"...I know best"...I think that sounds a bit elitist ta me...

Are you gonna be the censor for TGO only, or everybody at large...?

By the way, I'm all for havin everybody have their say... Even the Westboro children...

The point is that you nor anyone else is a "censor" in this country... Ya can argue about and criticize the venue and the value of the "exhibition", and have your day in the "arena of ideas"; just like they have theirs... Ya can't "censor" it, nor can the gubmt... Ya may have missed the discussion of the First Amendment in your civics class...

Leroy


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

The first amendment and censorship are irrelevant in this incident.  I remember my Civics class quite well.  As dolomite pointed out, 1A pertains to government censorship, which hasn't even been mentioned.  I'm not advocating for censorship, but for a little less stupidity.  I'm glad the Muslim a-holes got toasted and that they cop/security guard didn't get hurt worse than he did.  On the other hand, this was such a failure for the ISIS bunch (if it really was ISIS), that maybe instead of using a couple rookies who can't shoot, next time they'll send some of their car-bomb experts.  Hopefully, none of these idiotic events are held here. 

[QuietDan]

Didn't know you could bait muslims with cartoons. What's the season, and is there a bag limit?

[mikegideon]

Didn't know you could bait muslims with cartoons. What's the season, and is there a bag limit?

 

Season is 365 days/yr. No bag limit. Be prepared to piss off liberals too (I enjoy that part).

[Lumber_Jack]

Folks - islam demands submission of non-believers - called dhimmi, and the act of self censoring oneself to comply with islamic rules/laws is called dhimmitude.

So all those who say its not a "good idea" to draw mohammed are already on board with islam - even if you don't intend to be - becAuse you have submitted

That's bullshit. I'm not on board with anything other than not being a target. I am all for drawing political satire, be it Mohammed or Jesus. I guess I just have more sense than to gather in a large group and poke the bear. I'd love nothing more than to die an old man, never having been in a shoot out with anyone, Muslim or otherwise.

I don't see white Christians marching through the ghetto preaching the ills of young black society. Yet do just that with equally dangerous Muslims. It's one thing to walk on egg shells trying not to offend someone, it's another to go out of your way to offend them on purpose.

Make your cartoons post them on billboards, magazines, interwebs, what have you. But I'll be damned if I'm gonna stand out in the open with a sandwich board of a disgraced Mohammed, just waiting for confrontation.

[KKing]

But I'll be damned if I'm gonna stand out in the open with a sandwich board of a disgraced Mohammed, just waiting for confrontation.

I'm confused. Did someone ask you to?

You seem awfully riled, did they invite you to the next drawing contest or something? Edited May 5, 2015 by KKing

[Lumber_Jack]

I'm confused. Did someone ask you to?

No, it's an illustration. Similar to having a draw Muhammad event. I'm not gonna go out of my way to offend anyone for any reason. Even if Thor core belief is to kill the infidel. I feel there are better ways. It worked ok this time. But what if 2 terrorists were killed and 10 Americans. I don't see a clear winner.

If I seem riled, it's because I was associated with sympathizing with terrorists. Edited May 5, 2015 by Lumber_Jack

[suspiciousmind]

Being offensive is important. If you don't use it, you risk losing it.

[Dustbuster]

Didn't know you could bait muslims with cartoons. What's the season, and is there a bag limit?

I have a whole series of modified Fritz the cat cartoons that I'm sure would lure them out of a hole 10,000 leagues under the sea, let me know when you would like them I'll be more then happy to send them to anyone that is heading out on the hunt Edited May 5, 2015 by Dustbuster