What, if any, consequence should be born by Pamela Gellar if she holds another such event?

[Nuclear Unicorn]

I'm guessing her or a supporter are planning such a thing so what should be the "consequence"?


A) no consequence. Let them hold their event but let the criticisms flow

B) arrested and charged with a misdemeanor

C) arrested and charged with a felony

D) denied access to public venues

E) citations issued to any private venues making themselves available to her

F) denied security / protection

G) other

[cherokeeprogressive]

1. What if she SAYS she's going to do it, but the attendees sit inside and sip tea? n/t

[Nuclear Unicorn]

5. Tea is relaxing. She doesn't strike me as the tea sipping sort.

[cherokeeprogressive]

8. Yeah me either.

My point being with the previous response that no one who was not inside the building knew what was actually happening. Surely the shooters didn't.

[virgogal]

2. A.---None. Who knows what could be banned next?

[Dr. Strange]

23. Nickelback music.

That's what will be banned next.

[beam me up scottie]

34. God punishes us by letting Nickelback release another album:

[Dr. Strange]

35. Right click save!

[beam me up scottie]

40. More here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/123040670

I just kicked it, still lmao...

[Aerows]

3. I won't attend such an event

The people who do, and the woman who hosts said event have to live with their own conscience. That goes for both the folks that show up to gun people down as it does to the people that dare them to do it.

I do feel badly for those who have to work security for such an event, but they also made a choice to provide security for an event that is clearly volatile.

[JI7]

4. ridicule

[DisgustipatedinCA]

6. G: other

"Ms Gellar, we spoke with an actuary about your upcoming Mohammedpalooza event, and our actuary tells us that this will present a risk to the general public. You still have your right to free speech, of course, but we're going to need 75 off-duty cops to patrol the venue, so we will need an $80,000 deposit before proceeding..."

[Nuclear Unicorn]

11. Suppression through regulation.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

13. It's a nic side effect in this case. And yeah, it's not a perfect solution.

...slippery slope and all that. But any future events by Gellar would be honest-to-god security risks, and someone needs to pay for the extra security.

[Bluenorthwest]

65. Well the Straight Community is well practiced at that form of oppression, so it is not a tactic

I find to be anything short of fascistic. Think about it. What you are suggesting is in essence collecting protection monies. This is one of the tactics that eventually caused the Stonewall Uprising. Corrupt police, in league with criminals, stage attacks then extort payment to protect from further attacks.

[ProfessorGAC]

64. OK. "You'll Need To Provide Your Own Private Security"

Nothing suppressed there. She can bring in whomever she wants. She can pay them whatever she wants.

Or, she can make a free market decision (something she likely supports) to not do something that will cost too much for the benefit derived.

Making a free marketeer actually have to engage in free market decisions is not suppression.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

69. "Making a free marketeer actually have to engage in free market decisions is not suppression."

I would imagine, without having to stretch credulity too far, that she would be able to find volunteers to provide armed security.

However, it is my understanding she did have armed security and that is why the terrorists were interdicted as quickly as they were.

Should this principle you advocate be universally applied, i.e. should OWS be charged for the additional costs for policing that accompanied their protests or should they have been required to provide security?

[ProfessorGAC]

89. I Didn't Say I Was A Free Market Purist

She is. If the cost of doing something exceeds the benefit, the obvious decision it to not do it. Especially in her two dimensional brain.

OWS were not promoting the wonders of free markets or the miracle of xenophobia.

This is her medicine. Let her swallow it.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

94. "OWS were not promoting the wonders of free markets or the miracle of xenophobia."

Would you be an advocate for government that protects its citizens from unlawful of violence?

[ProfessorGAC]

96. Whoosh!

Discussion over.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

97. Just because you want to pretend the terrorists aren't responsible doesn't make it so.

[on point]

7. G: Other. Her event insurance costs should go up.

[Nevernose]

12. How well would that fly with CAIR?

"We're going to raise your insurance rates because so many Muslims are dangerous." I can't picture that going over very wel lwith the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

[on point]

45. You have a point. Wasn't thinking about the muslims so much as her hate.

I have to support her.

Someone's delusional thinking should not have a right to impose on others.

The color blue is magic in my religion, you can't wear blue!

[get the red out]

103. I would imagine her people will be well armed

Anything could happen. Appropriate insurance rates should apply.

[1StrongBlackMan]

9. None because, apparently, being an idiot is constitutionally protected. n/t

[Bluenorthwest]

68. Not only protected, it is very often rewarded. Shortly before he starred at the Inauguration

Rick Warren was all over the press equating LGBT relationships to pedophilia and incest and various crimes. In spite of great objections raised to his open, recorded and public hate speech he was praised, defended, employed and honored by our own Party.
The parameters of the acceptable were set by straight religious people at a very low place. But it has already been set.

[LondonReign2]

73. Rewarded indeed. She knows the morons interested in her Hateapalooza will shower her with

money and attention, just as she desires.

[Bluenorthwest]

75. My point is that affectations that Geller is some unique monster when she is really just like many

other monsters who are lauded at the highest levels are not very honest. So it is hard not to compare and contrast to the current rhetoric the sanguine reactions to past events of a similar nature.

[Yorktown]

10. H: Let other, nice non confrontational folks, hold religious satire events.

Give in to religious demands backed by threats of violence, and watch the demands grow.


But it's interesting to note options B and C: arrest for free speech advocated in a democracy.

D and E are not bad either: indirect censorship via regulatory/financiary means.

F is kind of cool too. Hey, jihadists, want to shoot blasphemers? Look, no security.

[Nevernose]

14. Despite the fact that I agree w/ everything you wrote

I have to disagree with one small part: Pam Gellar isn't holding "religious satire events."

If someone wanted to throw a "Mock Muhammad in Cartoon Form" event, I'd be all for it (because iconoclasm is awesome).

But Ms. Geller iss just another garden-variety bigot who's going to get someone killed so she can further her false-narrative of Evil Muslims, not to mention her book royalties and speaking fees.

[Yorktown]

20. Yeah. I wrote a thread which initially was bogged down because I mentioned her.

But I likes Christopher Hitchens suggestion after the Jylland Posten incident:

that all mainstream newspapers should print the cartoons on their front page.

I am convinced it would empower the moderates to tell the radicals to shove their diktats on others to avoid the whole religion from suffering backlash.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

22. "all mainstream newspapers should print the cartoons on their front page"

Lover Boy refers to that as "The Beatings Shall Continue Until Morale Improves" school of behavioral modification, which-- as we all know -- is closely related to the "I'll Give You Something to Cry About" philosophy of personal development.

[UTUSN]

15. Whatever happens (her choice) happens. n/t

[beaglelover]

16. A. Nothing.

[Throd]

17. She might hear our 1A right to call her an idiot, but that's about it.

Substitute Gellar's name for someone else's and see how you like that list.

[NobodyHere]

18. A

Why would any freedom loving liberal support anything else?

(except maybe a few amusing "G" responses)

[beam me up scottie]

19. A

Countering her hate like lgbt people do with Westboro Baptist protesters would be a neat idea.

[kentauros]

21. G: Other - "An Act of God"

Tornado, hail, lightning storm, high winds, locusts, frogs, pestilence, the works!

[rollin74]

24. A. nothing

[Kalidurga]

25. A minus criticism

It's noteworthy to me that there are no draw Buddha events. I can't think of any other religion that has as big a reputation for being non-violent. Until religious people stop threatening violence and engaging in violence this kind of thing is going to happen.

[notadmblnd]

26. I think her organization should be sued out of existance

for inciting violence.

I seem to recall that there was a white supremest that had this happen to him. I think it was in Washington or Oregon, a few years back.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

27. Who, exactly, would be the plaintiff?

[notadmblnd]

29. the security guard that was injured for one.

possibly a class action by those who attended the event that she put in danger?

[Nuclear Unicorn]

31. I don't think the security guard would qualify because of "assumed risk" by

virtue of the fact security was armed.

What if, instead, those you mentioned decided to sue the mosque the attackers attended?

[Dr. Strange]

33. Yeah, he'd have a better shot at suing a mosque.

He'd still lose, though.

[notadmblnd]

37. Was this mosque advocating for the destrution for pam geller's group?

[Nuclear Unicorn]

41. I don't know but obviously someone fed them the idea they should kill "blaspemers."

[notadmblnd]

44. Well, I would say that if it were true, then yes they should be sued too.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

46. I would think that would be a case for criminal prosecution.

[Trekologer]

61. If the organizers don't arrange enough security they could be liable

Maybe not for the previous event but at future ones, now that the level needed is known.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

70. Liable to whom for what? I would think the civil authorities have more of an obligation

to keep terrorists bent on murder from making good on their designs.

[Trekologer]

95. Liable to anyone who attends and is injured should another incident occur

Though one could make the counter-argument that attendees also know what they are getting into.

[tularetom]

28. Burn her! Burn her!

[EX500rider]

30. A

[Thinkingabout]

32. She isn't any smarter than Terry Jones or Westboro Baptist. Just over the top.

[Tom Ripley]

36. Leave it up to the god of Abraham's will

[MohRokTah]

38. G) other

She should be forced to pay for additional cop resources to protect her events, to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

43. Like a tax on printer's ink?

[Oktober]

49. Imagine the same thing...

... but for the next 'Black Lives Matter' march.

Gosh, we'd love to have you but it'd be a shame if something were to happen. What with all that violence you know.

Pay up...

Hypocrites...

[Bluenorthwest]

71. Among the abuses that resulted in the Stonewall Uprising was the practice of police of collecting

protection money to protect from attacks by criminals who were in league with the police. It's very common.

[Bluenorthwest]

60. That's one of the things your Straight Religious culture has done to LGBT events and places for

most of history. It was wrong then....

[closeupready]

39. Why do U continue exploiting DU pushing agendas filled with shit

and GOP talking points? I'd really like to know.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

42. What?

[Nye Bevan]

54. How is asking this question "pushing a GOP talking point"? (nt)

[jberryhill]

56. Seriously

She wants attention, and some here are happy to oblige.
.
You'd think no armed person ever tried to attack an assembly of some kind.

[Bluenorthwest]

63. You use the GOP tactic: when asked a direct question, ask another question instead of answering.

Why not answer the question then ask your own? Because your question is not a question, it is an evasion.

[951-Riverside]

47. C. She should be arrested for the Texas stunt that put the town of Garland TX at risk

[Oktober]

50. You chose C...

Arrested and charged with a felony.

Which felony would that be again?

[Nuclear Unicorn]

51. I'm sure it would be the exact same felony the poster would want to see applied to

A person of color who counter demonstrates in front of a KKK rally. Principles and all that.

[Oktober]

55. No hypocrisy here...

Nope... nothing to see... move along...

[Codeine]

99. That's just fucking stupid.

You're not stupid, so stop typing stupid things.

[Marrah_G]

48. A

[Vinca]

52. The only thing stopping her is common sense and she hasn't got that.

It's her right to chum the waters in the name of free speech and it's the right of her followers to put themselves in danger. You'd have to be totally nuts to turn up at one of these events, but I guess you must be nuts to be following Geller.

[Warren DeMontague]

53. I'm sure creative people could draw some funny cartoons of HER that she might not like.

That seems like the rational response.

[jberryhill]

57. Where are the cartoons from this event?

i still haven't seen them. Have you?

[Nye Bevan]

59. Here you go:

http://pamelageller.com/2015/05/sharia-enforcement-muhammad-cartoon-contest-winner-bosch-fawstin-removed-from-facebook.html/

[pampango]

58. Nazi marches are protected by police and attract many more counter-protesters.

Do the same with her future events - and she will keep doing them, it's all she's got.

[Bluenorthwest]

62. The same thing that happened to Westboro Baptist, they did hundreds of hateful attacks for years

and the best responses were of course and as always humor based, involving mockery and wit and ideas. See, people like Fred and Pam are seeking to mock YOU so the proper response is to mock them better.

Events and actions like Geller's are not in any way new or unusual in this country.

[jberryhill]

66. Same as The Who in 1979

Yes, a venue/promoter can be held liable for injuries due to foreseeable risks.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Who_concert_disaster

The suits were settled in 1983, awarding each of the families of the deceased approximately $150,000, and approximately $750,000 to be divided among the 23 injured. The city of Cincinnati also imposed a ban on festival seating, with minor exceptions, for the next 25 years.

[Bluenorthwest]

74. Of course the Who case involved actions and decision made by the venue/promoters/Who wich had

already, at other previous stops on the same tour resulted in injury. They knew that their own methods were causing great risk and they did not alter their own methods. Foreseeable.

In a country where Westboro Baptist has done thousands of hateful stalkings of Jews and LGBT people none of which resulted in violence, how do you establish that it is 'predictable' that hateful events will get a violent response? Do you expect to employ an argument that some groups are less stable than others and thus one must hire extra security, or that some groups deserve protections LGBT and Jews do not?
Every day in the US, there are anti gay billboards, pickets, books, sermons, rallies, statements to the press, church marquees with anti gay messages. The Klan has had many rallies without being shot at. Nation of Islam holds big events in which gay people and Jews are openly attacked in very brutal terms, they are not targeted with violence.....so how do you establish that hateful invective creates foreseeable violent crimes if so much hateful invective is so commonly practiced without any violent reactions?

[NCTraveler]

67. If she is properly permitted for the event.

And takes proper security into consideration. I would say nothing. If something were to happen, and the event coordinator is negligent, there would then be the possibility of criminal charges followed by a civil suit. Ain't life grand.

[Snow Leopard]

72. A

Free speech rules

[Tommy_Carcetti]

76. As with the case with any hateful bigot, my best hope is that she gets completely ignored.

The one worst thing that could happen to her is that no one pays attention to her and she doesn't have a platform to spew her hate on the cable news channels and talk radio.

The reality and the problem is, however, that she'll have her insane bigoted followers who will give her all the attention and support in the world. And she'll have Fox News and talk radio willingly paint her as some sort of free speech martyr even though she actually hates the First Amendment.

And sadly there still may be some who take her bait and fall for her provocations and act out violently, just so she can give herself a platform.

But I'd love for her to get completely ignored by everyone.

After a while, I really had to wonder why the media continued to give any coverage to the lunatics at Westboro Baptist Church. It would have been so much better if everyone pretended those fools were invisible. Same with Geller.

[Bluenorthwest]

86. Well Tommy, some of us could not pretend Westboro was not picketing our friend's funeral

and some response was required. The better elements of the 'faith community' sure did not do a thing about it, nor did the straight community. You folks let us deal with literally hundreds of such events, over many years and in all 50 States without ever raising so much as an arched eyebrow about it. They did not hold private gallery events, Tommy, they came to LGBT homes, sanctuaries, graves and other locations, stalking us with horrible denigrating language. They also did this to Jewish people live and in print.
The fact that folks like you,Tommy, wanted to ignore Phelps while you make OP after OP about Geller provides a contrast which indicates agenda.

[whatthehey]

98. I wish the WBC clowns all the ill in the world, but what would you have suggested?

They were, and are, careful to remain within the law and profit from suing any offering interference

[truebluegreen]

77. A...and well-earned, near-universal disapprobation. nt

[alc]

78. the people who hate her mostly hate gay marriage also

What happens if people like her are shut down and the radicals move on to threatening gay weddings?

Her motives are different than those getting married. But I'd say the consequences of deciding to go ahead with an "offensive" gathering that could "provoke" radicals into violence should be the same. So I pick A - let them hold the event. The radicals need to understand that if they want to be in this country they have to deal peacefully with those who offend them.

[UglyGreed]

79. Je Suis Pamela N/T

[Tommy_Carcetti]

80. Allez parler pour vous-même, mon pote. a/t

[UglyGreed]

81. instigateurs ne méritent pas de soutien ???

[Tommy_Carcetti]

82. Elle peut aller avoir des rapports sexuels avec elle-même. a/t

[UglyGreed]

84. je suis d'accord

[Tommy_Carcetti]

85. Mort de rire. a/t

[randome]

87. Get a room, you two.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]

[eloydude]

83. Next time she holds such an event, a $5 million deposit from Geller herself....

to be guaranteed for disbursement after such event is over.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

88. And a tax on the printer's ink for the exhibits?

[Codeine]

100. So you're basically saying Muslim Americans

are so inherently untrustworthy and violence-prone that we need enormous insurance waivers at any event where any elements of Islam are the subject?

Because if that's your stand, it strikes me that your ire is misdirected.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

90. Just as an aside for anyone who claims Geller wasn't trying to provoke a violent response.

Does anyone think that these two jihadists would have lived quiet lives as peaceable and loyal Americans if we hadn't held the contest? They would have waged jihad elsewhere, on a less-protected target, and killed more people. The jihadists were the end of the line. By drawing them out, we exposed their network. And because we secured the perimeter, we were able to expose the network without getting anyone killed.

http://www.newsweek.com/qa-pamela-geller-woman-isis-wants-dead-330244

[trueblue2007]

91. i view her as a threat ..... throw her in jail

[Nuclear Unicorn]

93. I would think those actually trying to kill people would be the bigger threat.

Perhaps throwing them in jail would be more useful.

[Codeine]

101. On what ground?

Luckily we need more than that to imprison people in America.

[LanternWaste]

92. I'n really not in any position to determine what consequences should happen

I'n really not in any position to determine what consequences should happen should she continue baiting the lowest common denominators out there, merely observant enough to realize that consequences most likely will happen, regardless of my wishes or the wishes of anyone else.

[backscatter712]

102. Let her spew her garbage. She's an idiot.

I'm not inclined to lift a finger to provide security for her. She can cover that herself.

I'll just join the world in ridiculing her.

[WestSideStory]

104. None, would be unconstitutional

Including denyingn equal protection under the law.