is a cunt.

Discuss.

5/4/2015 11:18:23 AM

She be trollin' hard for sure, but OTOH I hate the way liberals equate criticism of Islam with racism. I <3 Ayaan Hirsi Ali.

5/4/2015 11:40:07 AM

She's a disgusting, hate-filled twat... But she deserves to be a disgusting hate-filled twat who doesn't need to fear for her life for hosting an event (however ignorant it may be).

5/4/2015 12:21:10 PM

Giganticunt

5/4/2015 12:47:07 PM

I think that her and her AFDI group are the same ones behind anti-muslim ads plastered on the walls of subways in NYC and DC. I absolutely think free speech is important and should be protected. I also think she is a terrible bitch for hiding in her gated community while she relies on the police to handle the lunitics lured by her provocation.


Also, i will be pretty ticked off of my subway is targeted because one of her anti Muslim ads are on it.

5/6/2015 1:08:33 PM

Quote :

"she deserves to be a disgusting hate-filled twat who doesn't need to fear for her life freedom for hosting an event (however ignorant it may be)."

she's operating within the law, and should be allowed to peacably carry out her horrifically disrespectful and inflammatory event.

HOWEVER, in doing that, she's inciting hundreds of angry Muslims, and if one of them kills her (or somebody who participates in her event) that's a risk they're deliberately taking. and nobody has any obligation to protect them...they're deliberately engaging in semi-suicidal behavior.

Do I have the RIGHT to go into a New York ghetto screaming "I fucking hate n*****!" ? Yes. Can I have any reasonable complaints if that gets me killed? No.

5/6/2015 1:17:44 PM

i read this as Pam Grier

5/6/2015 1:17:54 PM

^^ the police do have a sworn duty to protect her

5/6/2015 1:24:54 PM

Someone shouldn't fear for their life for saying something mean. Getting bazooka'd isn't a sensible consequence for calling someone a poopie head. There's a whole series of reasonable escalations to go through first.

[Edited on May 6, 2015 at 1:51 PM. Reason : like karate her in the titty, maybe]

5/6/2015 1:51:00 PM

^^
yeah, but there's a lot of room for interpretation in what that "duty" requires

I mean, why SHOULD the police provide protection for her event? they don't offer protection at book signings, symphonies, craft fairs, etc. I mean, sure, Geller's event is far more likely to incite violence...but that's Geller's fault.

This has provoked some thought in my head, actually. I guess the cops/law in general have 3 possible options:

1. Prohibit the event.
I don't entirely disagree with this stance. Hosting this event is like yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater - it's likely to cause violence and death - and therefore it's not protected under free speech. (goes the argument.)

2. Allow the event, but offer no protection.
This is my stance of choice. There are some moral objections with it; but if you're doing is so offensive that it's causing American citizens to kill you, then it's probably pretty shitty, and undeserving of protection.

3. Allow the event, and offer protection.
I disagree with this one. I don't think that police protection, while you are doing deliberately inflammatory things, is a constitutional right. It has to be handled on a case-by-case basis, and (to my mind) this case is fucked-up enough to not qualify.

5/6/2015 1:54:20 PM

So what about the innocent people around the event? The kids that were brought by their parents to watch this drawing contest?


The subway riders that are just trying to get to and from work, that had nothing to do with Gellar's decision to purchase a subway ad purposefully offending islam?


Do they deserve protection? Because im sure the public is who is left as a target by these stunts of Gellar's. She is probably at home mommy blogging.

[Edited on May 6, 2015 at 3:25 PM. Reason : j]

5/6/2015 3:17:48 PM

Okay, those are reasonably good points, but they're not entirely conclusive.

Quote :

"So what about the innocent people around the event?"

If at all possible, innocent people should not go near this event. If it's taking place in a central location that will be difficult for innocents to avoid (which seems likely) then it should perhaps be forbidden on that basis.

Quote :

"The kids that were brought by their parents to watch this drawing contest?"

Shrug...it's hard to protect children from their parents. I don't think there'e enough clear and present danger for the children to justify interference, here.

Quote :

" The subway riders that are just trying to get to and from work, that had nothing to do with Gellar's decision to purchase a subway ad purposefully offending islam?"

This is a totally different situation. There should be a law against posting inflammatory (to the point of being likely to incite violence) propaganda on shit that everyday people have to use.

I'm now inclined more towards forbidding the event. Here's the thing. Why should we risk policemen's lives so that this bitch can incite Muslims? We shouldn't. Once she's endangering the lives of innocents (be they policemen or bystanders) she should be stopped.

5/6/2015 3:48:52 PM

that's a slippery slope man. where do you draw the line? just about anything may incite a violent response from a crazy person.

5/6/2015 3:55:58 PM

Well, yeah, it is. I was thinking it'd be nice to have a court decision, to the effect that

"If an event can reasonably be expected to lead to violence, it should be forbidden."

But this would just tell terrorists that all they've got to do is attack an event, and it won't ever happen again. Of course, we could legislate morality and add "Also, this woman's a fucking bitch and her cause is clearly evil, so in that case, since the event's also likely to lead to violence, we should forbid it"; but I'm not comfortable with legislating morality.

Hell, I dunno. Lose-lose-lose situation. I HATE giving her police protection, but I'm starting to see there's a compelling case for doing so.

5/6/2015 4:03:24 PM

Quote :

"Hosting this event is like yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater - it's likely to cause violence and death - and therefore it's not protected under free speech. (goes the argument.)"

That's a pretty big stretch. Likely to cause violence and death? Hardly. The direct impact of the speech in question is not likely to do anything. Yelling fire isn't dangerous because someone might come and beat you up for doing it, it's because it could reasonably cause a stampede for the exits and possibly accompanying injury.

A reasonable reaction to this event might be a protest or the like. It's not likely to incite a riot amongst any but the most unhinged or a particular religious minority.

Nope, as much of a cunt as Geller is there's no one at fault for a shooting except the two religious fanatics who we should all be happy to see are now dead.

5/6/2015 4:09:40 PM

Quote :

"Someone shouldn't fear for their life for saying something mean. Getting bazooka'd isn't a sensible consequence for calling someone a poopie head. There's a whole series of reasonable escalations to go through first. "

Street justice is the de facto rule in most parts of the world, and for most of American history. She has been doing her shtick for a decade now, and this is the first shooting that's happened, those are pretty good odds for her safety really.

Some people always say we don't need laws about racism or discrimination because society will solve these problems, but in a society without these laws, this type of thing is more common-- this is how people tend to solve problems when they don't have a government to help them out.

The consequence of inflammatory free speech is having other people use their speech against you (the right way to do it in America) or stoking some nut job into a violent act. That's human nature.

5/6/2015 4:15:39 PM

So much soapbox in my chit chat. you people are getting old.

5/6/2015 4:31:53 PM

FWIW, when this moonbat's antics were causing a stir here in DC with her subway ads, if I remember correctly, it was the subway system that eventually told her to cut that shit out. Not the government, that clamped down on her free speech... But the subway that eventually restricted what material was suitable for ads.

5/6/2015 7:04:11 PM

She won at Trolling ISIS.

It might not work next time around but this time she won at trolling the most hated organization since Al Quaada.

5/6/2015 11:03:29 PM

Ugh stop giving this woman exactly what she wants. If these idiots don't stop targeting her she will become some kind of mainstream cult hero...

6/3/2015 7:14:59 PM

She won round 2.

If she is eventually assassinated she will have a small paragraph in our history books.

6/3/2015 8:24:31 PM

some might argue that OP is a little bitch



















of course that wouldn't be me because we're BFFs

6/3/2015 8:50:08 PM

Heh


She tried to get new anti Islam ads put on the metro here again. The metro responded by banning all ads perpetuating some agenda for a while

6/3/2015 8:54:05 PM

Metro should charge her enough money to pay for all 8-car trains during rush hour.

Then she could plaster her dumb shit drawings wherever she wanted for all I care.

6/3/2015 9:00:23 PM