Muslim-Hating Pamela Geller Exploits Texas Shooting To Spread Her Toxic Ideology

pamela geller cnn

Sunday evening two men fired shots outside the Curtis Culwell Center in Garland, Texas, which was hosting a “Draw Muhammad” cartoon contest. The two gunmen wounded a security guard before they were both shot and killed by police at the scene. The event was sponsored by Pamela Geller’s American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI), an anti-Muslim organization that the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) lists as a hate group.

Shortly after the shootings, Geller posted on her website:

This is a war. This is war on free speech. What are we going to do? Are we going to surrender to these monsters?

It is a war that Geller is all too eager to engage in. Geller has a long history of spreading lies about Islam. Geller’s falsehoods about Islam include her wild assertion that when Muslims pray “they’re cursing Christians and Jews five times a day”.

Her incendiary ideas also take aim at President Barack Obama, who she argues is beholden to “Islamic overlords.” She also contends that Obama wants “jihad” to win in the United States. Furthermore, she believes Barack Obama’s birth certificate is a forgery, and that he is the love child of Malcolm X.

Despite her complete disconnection from reality, she is a frequent guest on the Fox News network. Apparently hating Muslims gives her that special kind of expertise they are looking for to provide “valuable insight” on issues of religion and foreign policy.

Geller is certainly going to milk the attack for all it is worth, to further spread her broad-brush, inflammatory denunciations of Islam. Unfortunately, her message’s appeal will be strengthened, as she can point to the Garland shootings to try to make her case.

To be clear, no matter how toxic Geller’s rhetoric is, there can be no justification for the actions of the two men who shot the security guard outside the event. Hate speech cannot be countered with violence. Shooting the security guard was a morally reprehensible act.

Furthermore, the actions of the two gunmen do not silence Geller. Instead, the shooting gives Geller more ammunition for spreading her hateful ideology. If the attackers viewed themselves as defenders of Islam against the prejudices of people like Geller, they are dead wrong. Geller’s intention was to provoke and incite Muslims, and if the shooters took the bait, they have become her enablers.

Whatever their reason for committing the shooting was, they have given Geller an opportunity to play the victim as a sympathetic martyr, who was unjustly attacked. The shooters have done everyone who values peaceful co-existence a tremendous disservice. By pouring gasoline on the flames lit by the Queen of anti-Muslim rage, the shooters just became a great recruiting tool for expanding Geller’s intolerant army of Muslim-hating Americans. The whole nation, but most of all Muslim-Americans, will suffer as a result.

 

Image via CNN

46 Replies to “Muslim-Hating Pamela Geller Exploits Texas Shooting To Spread Her Toxic Ideology”

  1. OK, first off… why in the world would anyone host a ‘Draw Muhammad’ contest? By doing this, you are basically spitting in the face of every Muslim on the planet. Not just the ones who live in America.

    Secondly: Lady, you aren’t a martyr. If anything, the blood is on your hands as well as the shooters. Your constant anti-Islamic rhetoric has done nothing but fan the flames of hate and those chickens finally came home to roost in the shooting.

  2. It’s called freedom of speech. And it applies to everyone, even when you talk about crazy religious zealots.

    The fact is that she was proven right, there are Muslims out there who are willing to kill people over cartoons, and those people need to get over it if they want to live in Western countries.

  3. The “Draw Mohammed” event was a direct and hateful insult to all Muslims. Unlike Christianity with its images of Jesus, Mohammed is not ever to be portrayed in any artwork or statuary.
    Geller and her group should be charged for inciting hate….but of course they won’t be.
    She’s evil, truly evil.

  4. “Despite her complete disconnection from reality, she is a frequent guest on the Fox News network”

    I thought that was a pre-requisite for being a regular on Fox..?

    As for the event itself, did the hosts of this event think it was an active demonstration of free speech to attack another religion? Would they be as amenable to a convention based around parodies of Christ? Maybe dioramas showing Romans urinating on His corpse? That’s free speech, right? No-one could object to that…

  5. I’d suggest you think about the millions who don’t want to kill people. I’d suggest you think about the many who have been targeted for violence because of Geller’s rhetoric — including the dead kids of Utöya.

  6. Really? Have you been letting Bill O’Reilly whisper in your ear whilst you drink a little there, pal?

    Damn straight we’re anti-freedom; we believe in imposing all financial burdens upon the working and poor classes; we believe veterans should be abandoned to live on the streets once our war machine has churned them out; we believe corporations are the only ones who should receive any form of financial assistance from the government, and above all we should ensure we strip the rights from gays, women and poor people. Oh sorry, that’s the Republicans… Me bad

    What Democrats are actually against is brutal police, against Israel dictating foreign policy to countries other than Israel, and against all forms of terrorism.

    So, please feel free to educate us poor ignorant liberals, at what point did any Democrat defend the Charlie Hebdo Shooting? At what point did any defend the Boston Bombers? At what point did any defend the Fort Hood shooting? Come back when you’re ready to…

  7. Well the way I see it is, Freedom Of Speech DOES have boundaries. You can’t yell “Fire” in a crowded theater. The SCOTUS made that decision long time age. But if they want to practice there freedom to be IGNORANT, then OK. I would be willing to bet that those Bible-Thumping far right so called Christians would have a Hissy Fit if someone started drawing silly ass pics. if there JESUP CHRIST. My problem is, you people on here showing your own hate and ignorance. Can’t you see that this is EXACTLY what they are trying to do. They want US fighting amongst ourselves that we won’t have time to band TOGETHER to OUST THEM from their Ivory Towers and BULLY PULPITS. Please stop all the Hate and Discontent! We Must Stand TOGETHER Or we Will Fall APART!!

  8. The same thought popped into my brain as I was reading the article and what better way to make sure that this was a set up by having them shot & killed rather than subdued and arrested.

    But, of course we are talking about Texas and the police ideology of shoot first and ask questions later. So, it probably was not a set up, even though it looks like it could be.

  9. The issue I have with the Liberal chorus of condemnation over the hosting of this event is the very hypocritical nature of the arguments being waged. There certainly wasn’t the level of outrage when NYC decided to host artwork with a cross soaked in urine or the Virgin Mary covered with feces. These are equally reprehensible depictions of Christian symbols. Christians didn’t show up to kill the Artist or any of the supporters of this alleged artwork.

  10. You are on the wrong site if you expect this audience to understand common sense. Geller and her group have been blamed for ‘asking for violence’. Under that same logic, I guess a woman asks to be raped if she dresses provocatively. Fact is a civilized society has to be able to resolve differences of opinion peacefully. Liberals espouse peace until you disagree with them, then they devolve to the very savages for whom they laud.

  11. There is a difference between free speech and inciting violence. Under Terminiello, behaving in such a way as to incite violence against oneself is lawful. Nonetheless, it may not be prudent.

  12. Emmm…no. The trogodytes just got the arts defunded, because legally, they could not go further. When they can, they will. Some already have.

  13. Yes Freedom of Speech includes the opportunity for folks to make complete asses of themselves; as evidenced by Pox News and their Collective.

    If Ms. Geller wishes to make herself a provocateur, that’s her right. Just like that damned fool of a preacher who burned the Q’uran, and ended up causing several riots that injured American Troops.

    Personally- I feel that any and all costs associated with the shooting and aftermath should be billed directly to Pamela Geller.

  14. Many people, especially those who shout the loudest about their freedoms (to do this, or to not do that) really have no understanding what freedom actually entails in society. Every freedom comes with responsibility — responsibility to treat others in that society as they would themselves wish to be treated. Otherwise, those same people are no better than savages.
    Geller and her followers are no better than savages.

  15. why in the world would anyone host a ‘Draw Muhammad’ contest?
    ““““““““““““““““““
    -> types

    -> self-censors

    -> types

    ->self-censors

    That’s why.

  16. I cannot believe some of the comments I have just read on this blog. Someone named donel just blogged that someone should have shot pamela geller. And to top it all off more people than not agreed with him. If someone had made that comment about someone on the progressive side this site would have banned that person. This is very hypocritical. People on this site are allways accusing people of being racist, tea party, ect. Take a look at what is on this one blog. I am no fan of Pamela geller,but give me a break.

  17. The comments are absolutely right, but there is one that is more basic: under the US Constitution freedom of speech is absolute — and that applies to all speech.
    It appears that many “progressives” have bought the Muslim line, namely that one is justified in limiting all manner of rights (women’s right, gay rights) because someone who is accepted as a “prophet” said so.

  18. You are wrong: your obligation as a US citizen is to protect the rights, including and especially freedom of speech, of those with whom you agree and disagree.
    The US has a Constitution which we all need to respect.

  19. Unless your screen is displaying items mine won’t, nobody seconded that motion. One person suggested we should be shot. I am only suggesting that your lying little mouth be soaped.

  20. That is exactly a point I made yesterday. Well put sir! They are trying to divide us by our differences in hope that we are not bonded by what we have in common. I am a Christian, but we have to be tolerant of all religions and faiths in our country. WE LIVE IN A FREE COUNTRY and we have the right to worship as we like. We are blessed to live in this country, but we have glaring problems that must be addressed. The middle class has to be helped from the crushing burdens the wealthy have forced on us. If we stand together and use our strength in numbers, we can accomplish mighty, mighty things. People of all faiths, beliefs, and colors make up our middle class and that makes us brothers and sisters of the middle class. Let’s stick together and make this what we want, not what the rich want!

  21. Yes. And one’s “freedom of speech” doesn’t inoculate them again backlash…which is, in turn, freedom of speech, as well.

    Those RWers don’t see to understand that truth. Then again, they’re people of “do as I say, not as I do” which – and I’m asserting my free speech here – is a symptom of their innate arrogance and nose-in-the-air sense of privilege while they’re nothing but dipwads.

  22. After what we have seen from the RWNJ in the Repub party and some of their unhinged base…I wondered if this may have been carried out by some of the nut jobs as well.

  23. Anti-Americans and Neo-Confederates. Why? Well, what their dumb little sheeple don’t understand is, when a public is divided, they’re easily conquered and controlled. The few RW-sheep posting here are either paid shills or useful idiots for the elite. They’re selling their fellow American out while they wail about the U.S. Constitution.

  24. The take on this and on the Charlie Hebdo attack is amazing. I consider myself a leftist, but count me out of the attacks on Pamela Geller. She absolutely has a right to say what she wants. And when it was Charlie Hebdo’s staff, PoliticsUSA agreed. Jon Stewart agreed. But you don’t like this woman, so you think she should just shut up and all would be well.

    Hypocrites.

  25. Mr reynarrdine what I was referring to was that there were 13 I agree and 7 no way at last look when I was referring to a blogger that that Pamela geller should be shot. I just think a statement like that is outragous. Also outragous are the insults you threw my way. I even stated I was no fan of Pamela geller. What she did was wrong, very wrong. However she has every right to do what she did.

  26. Victim blaming: A morally repugnant practice*

    *Unless it is regarding bigots who make drawings depicting mystical figures….

    Pam Geller is a nasty, spiteful woman but I absolutely support her right to say whatever the hell she wants as long as she isn’t telling people to go out and kill, defaming anyone, or leading lynch-mobs.

    I would support the same for Islamist crazies (with the same caveats, as covered by our consititution ;D), Antisemitic crazies, WHATEVER.

    let the nutjobs spout their bullshit and 99% of the population will see it for what it is, that is, complete hate.

    And hey, if some psychos turn up trying to kill others for drawing and get themselves killed, that is pretty much what they signed up for. kind of a win/win in my book.

    Fairly surprised that so many seem to think that this sort of stuff should be banned. lolwat.

  27. Victim blaming: A morally repugnant practice*

    *Unless it is regarding bigots who make drawings depicting mystical figures….

    Oh yeah, BTW: depictions of Mohammed were a regular practice and valued heirlooms for families up until the last few centuries, so yeah nah.

  28. It is fairly well known that part and parcel of the Muslim religion is providing men scriptural cover to control women. It does not matter if it is prohibiting women from praying when men are present, disallowing them from questioning a man, telling women to be obedient to their husbands, or that they were created in subjection to a man; control is control and in the Koran women are veritable property of their husbands and subservient to men. Muslims subscribe to this obscene concept.

  29. @ Anbus –

    Show me where I said anything about her not having a right to speak – or wanting her hate screeds banned?

    Please don’t use straw men.

    The point clearly is she should be held accountable for her actions.

  30. No. You are wrong.

    The Constitution is a limit on Government powers. If you wish to be a fool then that is your right to be one- as amply demonstrated here in this commentary.
    Any attempt by me to prevent someone from voicing their foolishness, is by definition a violation of their free speech rights.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.