Posted on 03/15/2016 8:11:01 AM PDT by raptor22
To provide disclosure:
1. Trump is not my preferred candidate.
2. I fully supported Geller’s event.
The article failed to distinguish important differences between Trump’s words and
Geller’s event. Trumps criticisms of Islam refer to its use of violence and terrorism, and the need to carefully screen all immigrants. He has never mocked the religion in an obvious taunt.
Also, as a businessman, he would be much more pragmatic in any public event as far as inviting violence. Geller knew her event could end in violence; she was showing the violent tendencies of Islam.
Finally, as a politician, Trump would be much more conscious of the Constitution and its protections.
He didn’t attempt to stop her free speech.
...you lying douche!
I did not read or hear Trump’s comment regarding Pam Geller’s poke at Islam but Geller did stir the Muzzies. Was that wrong? No and I doubt that Trump said it was. To mock a goat shagger is your right in this country. The Constitution does not ban “fighting words.”
-----
This is the party of Lincoln and the USA not the CSA. You want to fly the Confederate flag as an official govt flag then join the party it belongs to - the Democrats.
WATCH: @TedCruz introduced by man minutes before he called for execution of homosexuals
Ted is done!#OhioPrimaryhttps://t.co/doD1K8PCNQ— Jared Wyand(@JaredWyand) March 14, 2016
“He didn’t attempt to stop her free speech.”
Bam!
Rather than deflect, why don’t you answer the question?
8 more hours and the Creep Ship Ted, sinks into the ocean of slimyness.
Criticizing someone’s action IS free speech
Trump did not approve of Geller’s provocation and said so
Far cry from blaming her for muslim intolerance
He has nothing to apologize for
It is doubtful his opinion has changed and he was free to express it
Since he’s obviously not a muslim appeaser it will be interesting to see what his approach is to dealing with muslim anger and militancy
It won’t be by staging provocations
Sorry, but no.
I will. Allow me to turn this around. After the heat of Gellars gathering, Cruz rightly placed blame on the source of the problem. At this time it was politically expedient and scored him points. When the time came to rightly blame the moveon/BLM protesters, Cruz again chose the political expedient route and opted to blame Trump this time so that he could hang his hat on this issue. Consistently expedient.
The flag is flying as an official govt flag is not a free speech issue. The Republican party fought to destroy that flag and all it stands for. You don’t like being in the party of Lincoln, then leave.
Be careful there, FRiend. Because that's an extremely slippery slope. If that argument is accepted, think how easy it would be for other things to be classified as "inflammatory". That's how those terrible "hate laws" have come to be in other countries.
Donald did not set out to PURPOSEFULLY to provoke anyone other than those candidates, media and notables who have attacked him.
Geller set out PURPOSEFULLY to provoke Muslims.
Big difference.
I actually agree with what Geller was doing but it doesn’t make this comparison valid. It is a false comparison. Shows that Sobieski is not smart and is grabbing for any mud that can be slung at Trump.
Back then Megan Kelly defended Pamela Gellar against Trump attack on free speech
Now Megan Kelly attack Trump’s free speech for inciting violence
Trump is not the only one that is hypocritical
She basically dared the terrorists to do violence to her only because they were determined to do so anyway and she stood up to that. but that doesn’t make her Wrong. She was not going to relent her rights no matter what they were going to do to her.
Trumps situation is that he knows he is in danger and as much as he doesn’t want to instigate anyone, he knows he is inasmuch as those who want to stop him are determined to do violence anyway. But he also knows we need to change the direction of the country and that he is basically the only one who can lead that change. So he gets up there every day and talks about it.
Either way, the bad guys are not Pam or a Trump, it’s the people that have got nothing but violence to stop people like you and me from changing this country.
No, not at all.
Trump didn't criticize the jihadists. At least Cruz criticized the protestors. Trump did criticize Geller for taunting the poor jihadists.
Very similar circumstance to what happened in Chicago.
At lease some Trump supporters aren't making excuses for this. But not you.
“Comment taken out of context.”
Really? Here’s the comment:
On May 4 of this year, Trump tweeted: “The U.S. has enough problems without publicity seekers going out and openly mocking religion in order to provoke attacks and death. BE SMART.”
So what is “out of context?”
You still didn’t answer the question around Trump’s anti 1st amendment stance saying it should ONLY be in a museum. Is this a hypocritic infringement of those us who choose to honor our ancestors who fought for that flag? This time don’t give a deflective response and answer the question
I'll bet you feel like punching somebody in the face, don't you...................
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.