Mayor Of Garland, Texas: Pam Geller's Anti-Islam Event 'Invited' The Attack

[DonViejo]

The mayor of Garland, Texas, where two gunmen were killed attempting to storm an anti-Islam event on Sunday, criticized the event's organizers on Tuesday by saying they had "invited" the attack.

Mayor Douglas Athas told the Dallas Morning News that he wished anti-Islam activist and conspiracy theorist Pam Geller had taken her business elsewhere. “Certainly in hindsight, we as a community would be better off if she hadn’t (held it in Garland),” Athas told the newspaper.

“Her actions put my police officers, my citizens and others at risk. Her program invited an incendiary reaction," he said, according to the paper.

Along with other high-profile activists such as Dutch politician Geert Wilders, Geller was hosting a contest of cartoons depicting the Muslim Prophet Muhammad.

Geller has taken criticism for the event from both conservatives as well as liberals, and sparred with interviewers on Fox News and CNN in the aftermath of the shooting.

more
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/douglas-athas-garland-pam-geller-shooting

[randome]

1. She did.

She has an individual right to invite attacks but I hope this makes her toxic to other communities who don't share her yearning for people to get hurt.

As has been pointed out by many, she will never risk her own life, only the lives of those around her.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]There is nothing you can't do if you put your mind to it.
Nothing.[/center][/font][hr]

[GGJohn]

2. Sorry, I disagree,

the 2 assholes put his police, community at risk, they are solely responsible for what happened, they choose to drive from AZ and attempt to commit mass murder.
Pam Geller is a bigoted, vile RW'er, but she is not responsible for what happened in Garland.

[WinkyDink]

3. Ah, the old "She asked for it!" excuse. Funny; when goods are sold, shoplifters aren't given a pass.

[cali]

8. SHe does ask for it. She's fucking damn clear about wanting a war

[Paladin]

4. Exactly so.

And unlike the Charlie Hebdo artists, Geller wasn't around when the bullets started flying---she was off pursuing her primary goal: lowering her position at Breitbart to a gig at Fox "News"........

[951-Riverside]

5. He's absolutely right

This wasn't a first amendment issue, Pam Geller purposely put a town and officers at risk pulling off this racist stunt. Thankfully the attackers were only two idiots because if they had any real training or more people it could have turned into an unbelievable tragedy but when I pointed this out a few days ago I was called an authoritarian.

She needs to be arrested and that injured officer needs to sue her for every last penny she has left.

[GGJohn]

11. Arrested for what?

Exercising her 1st Amendment right?
And I seriously doubt there would have been a different outcome, Garland SWAT were present and on high alert.
The only ones responsible are those 2 terrorists, they chose the course that lead to their deaths.
So sorry that here in the US, we don't have hate speech laws like you would like to see.

[CBGLuthier]

6. Idiot

The mayor that is. Just close the doors and shut the fucking country down because no one understands what the fuck freedom means anymore. Fuck these terrorist asshole but the assholes have won.

[randome]

7. You can invite assholes to shoot up a place and still blame the assholes, can't you?

[hr][font color="blue"][center]There is nothing you can't do if you put your mind to it.
Nothing.[/center][/font][hr]

[GGJohn]

13. Except that she didn't invite them,

they chose to drive from AZ and attempt to commit mass murder over some silly drawings of Mohammad.

[randome]

14. But if you know there is a likelihood of something like this happening...

...and you go ahead with it anyways, isn't that an invitation? I could see the risk as being worth it if she was trying to enhance the human spirit with art or something but that's not what she was doing. She hoped someone would get enraged enough to be violent.

I can still blame the shooters for being shooters but I blame Geller for putting other people's lives -never her own, of course- at risk, for no noble purpose other than to enhance her own reputation.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]There is nothing you can't do if you put your mind to it.
Nothing.[/center][/font][hr]

[GGJohn]

15. You're completely missing the point,

SHE didn't put their lives in danger, those 2 terrorists put those lives in danger by attempting to commit mass murder over some silly drawings.
If those 2 hadn't taken the course they did, then this would have been a non event.

[randome]

17. I get your point but I would never want her anywhere near me or mine.

Because when she's around, there is a greater chance of violence occurring. We can pretend otherwise but reality will have the final say. For instance, I would not take my daughters to a Geller event just to show the world how noble we are.

There are times to be noble and there are times to be pragmatic.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]A ton of bricks, a ton of feathers, it's still gonna hurt.[/center][/font][hr]

[GGJohn]

19. I can agree with that. eom.

[randome]

20. Cool.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]A ton of bricks, a ton of feathers, it's still gonna hurt.[/center][/font][hr]

[GGJohn]

12. +1000. eom.

[brush]

9. One good thing about the Garland shooting is that Geller is being exposed

to a much wider audience. She been pushing her anti-Muslim agenda for years now with NYC transit ads and the anti-mosque campaign in New York.

It is believed also that she had a hand in funding that "Innocence of Muslims" video that sparked the Benghazi attack so she's been at her vile, evil ways for a while.

[snooper2]

10. I guess he'll start using this as an excuse why nobody wants to live in Garland now LOL

The land of gar-

Shitty houses, shitty schools, shitty everything-
There is a reason nobody wants to live in Garland


Sachse, Wylie, Plano, Richardson, sure- Garland- why in the F- you looking at a house there would be first response

[KittyWampus]

16. Could the venue be held financially liable for not providing adequate security?

[GGJohn]

18. Not providing adequate security?

There was more than adequate security, Garland SWAT was there and on high alert, those 2 terrorists didn't make it 20' from their car before being killed.

[closeupready]

21. I completely, absolutely agree with him.

K&R

[Tommy_Carcetti]

22. He's absolutely right. And yet people don't understand that responsibility is a complex thing.

That there can be someone who is primarily responsible for a wrong, but there can also be someone who is secondarily responsibility for a wrong.

Recognizing that there is a primary responsible party does not absolve the secondary responsible party of criticism. Responsibility is not mutually exclusive.

[sorefeet]

23. You can't yell fire in a crowded

theater because some one might get hurt. If you do you will be charged with inciting. So if this woman knows there might be some one hurt, she should not do it. The Broken Spoke in Sturgis was going to have a guy blow off some big shit until they decided some one might get hurt. If they went through with it and some one got hurt, bingo. They would be charged. If your free speech is going to get some one killed then it's wrong.

[Dr. Strange]

24. But that's the true irony here.

Your CONFIRMING her bigotry. She claims that Muslims are violent animals that will kill you if you commit blasphemy. No one said that Andre Serrano's art would get someone killed. No one says that Matt Stone and Trey Parker's South Park episodes or Book of Mormon musical will get someone killed. No one says that the people who performed the Last Temptation of Christ play in Paris should bear any responsibility at all for the bombing there.

Pam Geller has set a damn near perfect evil trap here. And it's not just the two ISIS-wannabes that fell into it. DUers are falling into it. And media members discussing whether blasphemy should be covered by free speech are falling into it.

Speak out against Geller's bigotry. (That's precisely what the First Amendment is for!) But don't confirm her bigotry by suggesting that Muslims can't be expected to avoid violence in response to blasphemy.