LA Times Joins In On Victim Blaming/Shaming Pam Geller

As I’ve written and stated in person, people can bear responsibility for their actions. If, say, you’re a reporter or photographer and you get assaulted while covering a riot in a heavily Democratic city, you bear some responsibility since you knew it would be dangerous and still went. But, you do not bear the blame for the assault. That belongs to the person(s) doing the assaulting. You should not be blamed or shamed. The media has decided that that doesn’t apply when it comes to Conservatives who have insulted Islam, and are taking a stand against the hardcore Islamic extremists

(Breitbart) On May 5 the LA Times ran a column claiming cartoons of Muhammad were “verbal attacks” on Islam that resulted in the actions of the two alleged gunman, Elton Simpson and Nadir Soofi. Rather than see the attack as another of example of Islam’s war against the West, the Times suggested the lessons to be drawn from it are in learning the difference between free speech and “hate speech.”

They quoted Garland Police spokesman Joe Harn saying of the gunmen, “Obviously, they were there to shoot people,” yet the difference between attending an event to draw cartoons and attending an event to kill never seemed to take root.

Instead, the Times described Pamela Geller and the cartoon contest in a way that made it look like Geller brought this on herself:

The cartoon contest was organized by Geller as a rallying point for cartoonists and conservatives united in their belief that verbal attacks on radical Islam are a form of free speech.

Geller has posted bus ads and billboards condemning Islam. In 2010, the same year the FBI was investigating Simpson’s vows to fight “kafirs,” or nonbelievers, Geller cofounded American Freedom Defense Initiative, also known as Stop Islamization of America. The organization, considered a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center, hosted the Muhammad Art Exhibit and Cartoon contest, offering $10,000 for the best cartoon of the prophet.

At the same time, the Times pointed to the existence of a Twitter account called “Shariah Is Light” which seemed to predict the Garland attack 15 minutes before it occurred. TheTimes reported that “the Middle East Media Research Institute… believed the Twitter account belonged to Simpson” and that the account “was frequently shut down for spreading jihadist content.”

It’s mentioned briefly in the first paragraph, but the actual headline of the article is “Texas attack refocuses attention on fine line between free speech and hate speech“. Regardless, either one is Constitutionally protected, especially since “hate speech” is simply speech that Liberals/Progressives/Democrats and their pals the extremist Muslims do not like and want criminalized. Much of the article, especially the latter half, is dedicated to attempting to paint a picture of Geller as an “Islamophobe”, extremist, and hater. Something they rarely do with the Islamic extremists. They also attempt to denigrate her personally as unqualified to talk about Islamic extremism. As if anyone needs a degree to understand that the Islamists are savages.

What we have here is victim blaming and shaming, going well beyond the notion of responsibility.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

17 Responses to “LA Times Joins In On Victim Blaming/Shaming Pam Geller”

  1. Hank_M says:

    So, according to the LA Times, Washpo and others, political violence is justified against those they disagree with.

  2. Jeffery says:

    Hate speech can also be free speech.

    At the next Teabagger uprising held here in St. Louis, I’ll carry a sign “Teabaggers Suck Balls” with a non-obscene graphic with caricature of jimhoft sucking balls, and “Jesus was a Teabagger” on the other side with a caricature of Jesus sucking balls. I’ll obviously arm myself.

    How would you respond?

  3. Hank_M says:

    I really don’t know anything about teabagger meetings. But if you meant a Tea Party meeting and showed up with that, I wouldn’t respond.

    Why bother?

  4. Hank_M says:

    As to: “Hate speech can also be free speech”

    As uncomfortable as that might be, that’s absolutely correct.

  5. I can positively tell you what the least likely response wouldn’t be to try and kill you, Jeff, unlike with Islamists.

  6. drowningpuppies says:

    According to sources involved in the investigation into the terror attack and law enforcement preparations leading up to last Sunday’s event, there was virtually no online chatter about the cartoon contest until early last week.

    The chatter began when news broke that two Muslim congressmen, Keith Ellison and Andre Carson, had appealed to Secretary of State John Kerry to deny entry into the U.S. for Dutch parliamentarian Geert Wilders.

    Wilders was scheduled to be the featured speaker at Sunday’s cartoon contest.

    One law enforcement source who was monitoring potential threats to the event told PJ Media the following:

    [Ellison and Carson] clearly set things off. Nothing was being said until that news story came out, and then the usual suspects began to talk about it. By the time the weekend rolled around, there were clear and identifiable incitements calling for an attack on the event.

  7. Dana says:

    Jeffrey wrote:

    At the next Teabagger uprising held here in St. Louis, I’ll carry a sign “Teabaggers Suck Balls” with a non-obscene graphic with caricature of jimhoft sucking balls, and “Jesus was a Teabagger” on the other side with a caricature of Jesus sucking balls. I’ll obviously arm myself.

    How would you respond?

    Considering what the urban dictionary of “teabagging” means, the sign would be correct. Put “Jesus was a Teabagger” on the sign, and you are committing blasphemy, which certainly isn’t against the law in the United States, but which might put you in the rather uncomfortable position of having to explain yourself at the Pearly Gates.

    How would I respond? I’d call you an idiot, but I’ve probably done that already anyway. I’d mock you publicly, but I wouldn’t shoot you or urge that someone else shoot you.

  8. Dana says:

    It seems that the Muslims want to do everything in their power to prove Pamela Gellar right.

  9. Jeffery says:

    Put “Jesus was a Teabagger” on the sign, and you are committing blasphemy, which certainly isn’t against the law in the United States, but which might put you in the rather uncomfortable position of having to explain yourself at the Pearly Gates.

    Since there are no Pearly Gates, no god, no allah and little evidence of Jesus, I’ll take my chances. The fact is I will never be punished for my “blasphemy” since there is no God. Nope – my blasphemy cannot be remedied.

    I can make my signs and sashay through a Tea Party Patriot meeting not worried for my safety, right?

    I was asking about a Teabagger meeting (or as Teabaggers call them, Tea Parties). Do you think I’d be confronted with my “Jesus Sucks Balls” sign?

    How about:

    Jesus is What You Get When a Donkey Mounts a Woman!

    The Virgin Mary Should have had an Abortion!

    Jesus and Simon were Gay Lovers!

    Man Created God in Man’s Image

    The Bible is Like the Koran, Except with More Rape

    God is a Pedophile!

    The Virgin Mary was a Lying Whore!

    Jesus Christ Supports Gay Marriage!

    God Hates the Tea Party!

    Jesus was the First Miscarriage that Lived!

    Do you agree that these signs (with illustrations) would be protected free speech?

    • Jl says:

      Of course they’re protected speech. As the ones in your last post, why wouldn’t they be? Except that your analogy, if that’s what it is, would only work if: The Tea Party group was carrying a caricature of Jesus, and not your sexually explicit example. And, prior to this event, the Tea Party members would have been slaughtering innocent non-believers around the world, for perceived offenses much less than the drawing of a cartoon. And the Tea Party members would have to be pussy delicate doilies that get the vapors over a cartoon of their prophet. Alas, none of those have happened or are true.

  10. drowningpuppies says:

    How about signs that say;
    “The prophet Mohammed was a pedophile just like little jeffy. Ask his grandkids.”

  11. Jl says:

    And if the accounts are true, then the “prophet” was a pedophile. The matter was portrayed very well over at The Other McCain where had a screen shot of the LA Times article “2 Killed at Anti-Islam Gathering.” Below that McCain tweeted: “L.A. Times Dec.7th, 1941: Anti-Japanese Ships Sunk in Hawaii.” Perfect example of liberal cluelessness.

  12. Jeffery says:

    sickpuppy,

    I’m still waiting for the police. You haven’t called? Why haven’t you turned me in? Oh, that’s right – you’re a pussy.

    All talk, no action. All hat, no cattle. All stuffing, no balls.

  13. Jeffery says:

    j,

    There is no qualification that free speech be true! You of all people should know that. Teach lies in almost every post and it’s protected.

    In this case, your example, “Two Killed at Anti-Islam Gathering” is accurate.

    Anyway, the objective of protected hate speech is not to inform but to provoke. For example, “Jesus Christ was a Gay Pedophile” is probably not true, but certainly is inflammatory.

  14. drowningpuppies says:

    Hey, thought you were into offensive signs.
    You don’t want to play anymore?

  15. Jl says:

    “Is not to inform but provoke…” Same could be said about most political ads, even some commercials. There’s hardly a more Orwellian term than “hate speech”. “Anti-Islam event is accurate…” Therefore, it’ s also an anti-Pam Geller article, which makes the LA Times a hate group, under the curious logic of “hate speech”. You don’t think the LA Time editors don’t “hate” Pam Geller? And around we go in a circle. The more accurate description is that it wasn’t an “anti-Islam rally” but a “pro -free speech rally.”

Bad Behavior has blocked 5613 access attempts in the last 7 days.