I Can Believe in Freedom of Speech And Still Think You’re An Idiot

Source: David Karp/AP
Source: David Karp/AP

The attack on Pamela Gellar’s Muhammad drawing contest event has sparked a debate on free speech.

Do I believe they have the right to hold such a event? Absolutely. Do I believe it’s stupid to resort to violence because someone purposefully offended your religion? Absolutely. Do I believe it was the smartest idea for an event? Eh.

What’s more interesting to me, though, is how many Americans misunderstand the concept of free speech. This is true even among self-described liberty lovers and Constitutionalists.

Free speech just means that the government cannot punish you for your speech. That’s it.

I’ll defend someone against government persecution for their words. That’s different from automatically defending or supporting whatever they’re saying. As a freedom of speech lover, I don’t have any obligation to be a cheerleader for people who go out of their way to be edgy.

As far as I know, the government hasn’t cracked down on anyone for anti-Muslims comments. Good. And if they do, I’ll defend their right to say such things.

Just like I defend the right for the Westboro Baptist Church to protest without government stopping them. However, I don’t look at their signs and think: “You go, guys! Freedom of speech!” …They’re morons.

Look, freedom of speech does not mean freedom from criticism or disagreement.

Too many people on the Internet don’t get this.

I like to debate online. I don’t know how many times I’ve disagreed with someone and they comment back, “Freedom of speech!” OK? I’m not saying that the government should lock you up. I’m saying that your arguments make no sense and you should try harder.

And for the love of God, Facebook is not violating your freedom of speech.


Facebook is a private website with its own speech policy. No one is forcing you to use it. Yeah, yeah, yeah, you didn’t read it when you agreed to the Terms of Services. No one does. But, it’s there.

If you violate their stated rules, Facebook has every right to delete your posts or block your account.

Same thing with owners of Facebook pages. Can we stop with the, “you deleted my post! I thought you believed in freedom of speech?! I GUESS I WAS WRONG” comments. Take a chill pill, brah.

Freedom of speech doesn’t mean that people have to give you a platform to speak on. No one has to provide you with space on their private website for you to put your drivel on. Just like people have a right to kick you out of their house if you talk smack about their mom.

It also doesn’t mean that you have to be supportive of people with loud controversial opinions. It just means you’ll have their back if the government ever tries to silence them.

Julie Borowski

Julie Borowski is a political commentator living in the D.C. area. She is best known for her YouTube channel where she discusses current events in often a humorous manner. She has two cats.

You may also like...

  • http://www.yourcomputersolutions.net/ Joseph Boy

    awesome Julie, Just awesome.

  • jack clark

    I support Pamela Gellar and I’ll shout as loud as she does. Screw those who are too cowardly to stand up for themselves, that includes Bill O’Reilly, Laura Ingram, Greta Van Susteran, Geraldo Rivera and the rest of the enabling “its only faaaaiiiiiir crowd”.

    • SkippyFlipjack

      At least spell her name right, nincompoop. Geller is a pathetic scare-monger, and this episode has only “sparked a debate about free speech” between her and whoever is standing near her; everyone else knows she’s embarrassing herself.

      • Gabriel Alan King

        So in other words… your a cowardly dumb ass offering up the Bill of Rights as a sacrifice, on your knees before the totalitarian bully of Islam. You should get a head start by growing a beard and buying a Quran.

        • dom.uncl

          As a bearded secular humanist liberty-loving American, i resent that!

          • dom.uncl

            just kidding, i do’nt care…

      • jack clark

        Merely the opinion of another hand wringing appeaser folks, and a spelling teacher at that. I still stand with Pamela Geller.

        • SkippyFlipjack

          “Hand-wringing”? You’re the f*cknuts glorifying the paranoid harpy Gellar [sic]. MUSLIMS! MUSLIMS! OMG MUSLIMS! Your list isn’t of Republican cowards, it’s of people who understand that she’s a freak. Deal with it.

          • jack clark

            Did your mother give you the name “skippy flipjack” or is it just a description of your mental state?

      • http://johnnyangeladvocacygroup.net/ JohnnyAngel Advocacy Group

        Name misspelled or idiot opinion ? I’ll side wit bad speller, witless !

        • Stephen Diehm

          oh look another maniac searching for misspellings. Always a liberal tool. Get a liiFe!

    • Ben in Austin

      Conservatives/Tea Party/Paranoids will consume all of their own for perceived weakness on sharing anger or paranoia. Look at Jack here – probably got 99% of his information from Fox News over the last 10 years, but now calling them weak enablers!
      They’re even turning on Walmart if you can believe that. Paranoia driving them to believe Walmart is part of some tyrannical conspiracy to invade Texas and enslave people using tunnels between their stores. FREAKS.

      • jack clark

        I’m sure you get all your information from PMS-NBC too Ben or maybe you suck up to Al Jazeerha.

  • LSerbin

    You say it best, Julie.

  • Suge White

    This is where the people who eat paint come to hang out huh?

    • Jake Marion

      Nice example of free speech Suge. It is vague and fails to show that you have anything intelligent to say about this issue.
      Nonetheless, the libertarians in the group will honour the non-aggression principle and therefore you can expect that no physical harm will come to you.
      If you were looking for fellow paint consuming enthusiasts, I recommend a Google search.

      • kerston

        Or just visit one of Geller’s blogs 😉

    • Julie_Borowski

      Yeah, welcome!

    • Gabriel Alan King

      We don’t eat it dude, we sniff it. And smoke it…

  • Gabriel Alan King

    Actually… YOUR WRONG. The illegal CIA social media spy monopoly aka “Facebook”, IS a violation of monopoly laws, and the 1st Amendment. Another scam cooked up by the Oligarchs hiding behind “copyright” laws which they also dictate and control. Thus it would be almost as tyrannical as telling certain people they couldn’t use a public sidewalk. There is nothing “private” about CIAbook. It’s another proxy of the NWO exempt from taxes and leeching off the people…. seeking to socially engineer society into patterns of mind control, surveillance, and cataloging. The Facebook monopoly of Social media has long been recognized and largely unchallenged. With copyright Lawyers waiting in the wings for anyone who dares compete. Effectively limiting the options of the sheeple and herding them into the government pens for evaluation and sorting.

    As far as Islam goes…. they can go to Hell. Both Islam and modern “Liberalism” are HOSTILE towards the Republic, freedom, and the Bill of Rights. Both are form of fascist totalitarianism, and therefore cannot possibly be legal in the United States under Constitutional law ! Remember that “tolerant” CHRISTIANS wrote the 1st Amendment ! Guaranteeing free speech and religion for anyone who did not try to force their beliefs upon others.

    On the national level…. Jesus Christ is the declared Lord and King of America, as signed and verified in ALL of the legal contracts which formed the union. “In the year of our Lord”

    ISLAM IS A BULLY. And if you back down to bullies, or meet their demands…. they will only continue to bully people more. And then everyone lives in fear and intimidation under the dictates of the bully.

    • Rob Liz

      Here is how freedom of speech works. The CIA can’t come after you for name dropping them in your irrational rant on the internet. End of story. You do have the freedom of choice to use Facebook or not. If you do then you should be fully aware that your privacy tanked. Facebook as a privately owned entity owns the content you put on it just like any other website does and they can see fit to do with it as they wish. Read the terms of service. If you would like to start your own website and allow everything on it you can do that.

      Learn what freedom actually is. It might take you longer than say, spelling ‘you’re’ correctly, but you’ve been given the freedom to do so.

      • Gabriel Alan King

        So you equate Monopolies and fraud with “freedom” ? Fascinating. And you also assert that Fartbook “owns” anything I post ? LOL. I guess I can’t use my own pictures on other sites then without asking Fakebook first ! And if I would like to “start my own website” I CAN’T. As apparently you didn’t read my comment. That fakebook has competitors locked up with courtroom cronies and copyright vampires. There is nothing “free” about Fakebook. And if your confusing Fakebook with some kind of “free market” notion then “you’re” ignorant of it’s physics.

        • wersdwolf

          I really hope you’re a troll. Either that, or you’re just stupid. You can get on without a facebook. Since it’s a privately owned site, yes, they can catalog and use anything you post ON THEIR SITE, for what purposes they want. If you don’t want them to use what you post on THEIR site, then don’t use Facebook. And you act like there isn’t a ton of other social media you can use OTHER than Facebook. “Other competitors locked up”, there are things like Twitter, Linkdin, Tumblr, etc, etc, that compete with Facebook, I don’t see them getting thrown in jail. Not only that; you probably know NOTHING about Islam. Do you know why the religion started? Anything at all about it other than it’s on the news because of a few radical groups? No? Learn to research something before you begin to judge it.

          • Gabriel Alan King

            “Private” my nuts. It’s an NWO funded CIA monopoly scam.

          • Gabriel Alan King

            Maybe you should learn something about the Vatican’s evil creation known as Islam… a modern evolution of the ancient polytheistic Sumerian Moon cult of SUEN, to channel the energies of Ishmael for wicked ends. Not to mention murdering people, raping kids etc. And you can trust my source…. IT’S THEIR OWN BOOK: http://www.answering-islam.org/Quran/Themes/jihad_passages.html

          • kerston

            Nice. A link from an anti Islam site. Going to find a lot of accuracy there.

          • kerston

            If you listen to Geller you will not learn a thing about it. She does nothing but lie about it. But hey that is free speech. Fox has her on as an “expert” and that is a lie, but hey that is free speech.

      • Gabriel Alan King

        Here is how freedom of speech works: “You can say what you want to say. And I can say what I want to say. But I can’t tell you what to say…. and you can’t tell me what to say.”

      • Max Wright

        “Facebook as a privately owned entity owns…”

        Facebook is a publicly owned company. Its trading at $78.51 today.

    • julianterris

      Freedom of speech guarantees you the right to express yourself however you see fit -but it doesn’t guarantee you freedom from the consequences of what you say. I don’t think anyone’s “backing down” to Islamic terrorists -it seems to me that those two (would be) assassins paid the ultimate price for their hatred and intolerance? We live in a world where
      -no matter where you live- your communications are being gathered for (possible) later investigation. Facebook does not have to host your posts if they don’t want to. Article 3 of The Bill of Rights states “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a
      redress of grievances.” -You’re free to choose your religion, say what you will, and vote out the people you don’t want to represent you. Even though you may not be able to tell the difference between “Islam” and “Liberalism” -if it were not for Liberalism you wouldn’t
      have a “Bill of Rights” to begin with. #GodBlessAmerica

      • Gabriel Alan King

        In my comment, I specifically referred to “modern liberalism”…. which is 180 degrees the opposite of the Classical Liberal values of America’s founding fathers. The Bill of Rights was created by Christian Classical Liberals- enlightened by the renaissance and the Protestant reformation.
        Modern “Liberals” and Islam are both fascist totalitarian authoritarians. Seeking to destroy personal liberty in favor of collective psychosis, and political / religious dictatorship decreed by executives. Modern “liberalism” operates through a psyop of weaponized “political correctness”, constructed from a long term incremental highly financed social engineering scheme…. built upon a foundation of bogus officially established “victim / oppressor” narratives. Modern “Liberals” only seek liberty for themselves, while attempting to steal the liberty of any and all opposition.

        Islam is currently the only major world religion which is illegal in the United States. Because it is hostile to the Bill of Rights, personal liberty, and basically everything red white & blue. In fact our Navy and Marines were created to fight Islam under President Thomas Jefferson- founder of the Democrat Party 1792.

        • Jay Stang

          The Navy was founded October 13, 1775. The US Marines were created on 10 November 1775. Neither were created to fight Islam. But both are pretty damn good at it.

        • mrtapeguy

          You seem fond of making absolutist statements which have only elements of truth. I’m not a big fan of the modern-day liberal myself but Islam is not illegal in the U.S.

          As for your claims about the Navy, it was actually John Adams who reestablished them after the Revolutionary War and that was for the purpose of battling the French and Islamic Pirates, not Islam itself.


    • Charles Batchelor

      You really need to lay of on the smack you have been smoking.

      • Gabriel Alan King

        I don’t smoke smack. And your probably irritated about the stuff I said because it is basically all true.

        • Mike De Fleuriot

          Nope, you are a crazy nutter, foaming at the mouth as you claw your way across your spit flecked keyboard.

          • Gabriel Alan King

            While douche bags like you talk smack about a woman who has more balls than yourself ? Standing up to a psychotic violent totalitarian cult ?

          • Benj Clarke

            Come on, this “violent totalitarian cult” has been armed by our own CIA. This whole Muslim thing has us PLAYED by the warmongers who reap great reward from the conflict.

          • Max Wright


        • mrtapeguy

          Uh…”Jesus Christ is the declared Lord and King of America, as signed and verified in ALL of the legal contracts which formed the union.


    • http://gathman.org/vitae CustomDesigned

      You really don’t have to use facebook.

      Use an XMPP server (e.g. dukgo.com) or run your own. Run your own email, or use a 3rd party that let’s you bring your own domain. Run your own blog – or use a $3/mo web hosting site. Facebook adds nothing to pre-existing internet protocols – except an all-in-one app that runs in your browser. That, and the “network effect” – all your friends only know how to use facebook, and have never heard of normal internet protocols.

      I do all of the above – and I try to get friends to use standard protocols instead of facebook. But I still have a facebook account because of the network effect. I keep telling myself I should just delete it and blow off all those friends than won’t use anything else.

      But don’t blame facebook.

      • Gabriel Alan King

        Don’t blame Harvard Vampire / Warlock Zuckerberg for running a CIA monopoly scam ? lol.
        Sorry “custom designed”…. the sheeple prefer a one-click free site. And none of them will leave Facebook AS PLANNED.

        • mrtapeguy

          Oh no. Just after I posted my social security number and all of my other personal information including credit cards in my last status update.

        • Max Wright

          Blame yourself for telling them everything about yourself!!

      • Max Wright

        Or you could just lie about who you really are on Facebook…

    • Rifleman

      Sounds like someone has been binge watching Alex Jones videos on youtube.

    • Anastasia


    • jack clark

      Well said Gabriel.

  • Craig Hansen

    Julie, I agree generally with you, but your presentation is a bit lacking.

    You’re coming close to the edge of blaming the victim, in the Texas Cartoon case.

  • lauraimprovises

    I know exactly what you are talking about. There is a similar problem with “discrimination” concepts. If you don’t want someone to engage in a particular activity on your property, real or cyber, it is “discrimination.” I cringe every time.

  • politicalstripper

    Spot on! You have protection against the Government, but everything else is gravy. Your speech could get you killed. Those be the facts. This position does not mean you blame the victim, it means you understand the facts.

    • http://facebook.com/christophdollis Christoph Dollis

      “Spot on! You have protection against the Government, but everything else is gravy.”

      So in your insane view, the Nazi brownshirts were not violating anyone’s rights to free speech. And I wouldn’t be either if I killed you because I didn’t like the way you used punctuation.

      THIS is your position.

      • politicalstripper

        Is this a discussion about the “Freedom of Speech” or would you like to discuss something else? Your speech is protected against Government retaliation, but where in the 1st Amendment does it say you’re protected against retaliation from other entities? For example, if the Government arrests you over the content of your speech, that’s a Freedom of Speech violation; however, if someone kills you over what you say, that’s murder and not a Freedom of Speech violation. Your Nazi example convolutes the subject matter by correlating a “right to kill” with the “Freedom of Speech”. Sorry about my punctuation.

        • http://fourhundredmonths.blogspot.com/ Ferox

          The First Amendment is not the only guarantor of free speech.

          • politicalstripper

            I assume you’re referencing governmental protections that indirectly tie back to your 1st Amendment rights? For example, someone calling in a bomb threat advising of their intention to blow up a conference for reasons of them being offended, the Government would step in deeming that person’s taking offense not a legal justification to commit this act; therefore the Government stepped in to indirectly protect your Freedom of Speech. If that is your meaning, then I certainly appreciate your reach, and agree, but it has no basis in this argument. The Government stepped in because of the illegal threat, not a freedom of speech violation.

      • kerston

        Weren’t the Nazis employed by the government? Whole different thing.

  • http://tklist.net/?p=478 TKList

    The fact is if we give in to violence or the threat of violence then it leads to more demands.

    • politicalstripper

      So don’t give in to violence. Any one who attacks someone for their speech should be handled by any means necessary. Their violent retaliation should not be tolerated. That doesn’t mean you have to agree with the speech in question, and your disagreement doesn’t mean you blame the victim. For that matter, you can dislike the speech for the exact same reasons as the attackers, and that still doesn’t mean you blame the victim.

      • http://tklist.net/?p=478 TKList

        I agree with you.

      • Lordoomer

        I agree that we should not let muslims establish sharia law in all the world like they are trying to do.

        • politicalstripper

          I don’t think all Muslims want sharia law, but you’re correct, it has no place in this country.

  • Loud Noises

    Every time they use violence another event will be held. We will never be silenced by savages who have no understanding of humanity.

    • Mike De Fleuriot

      Can I hold a Draw Jesus day at the same place you are holding your Draw MoMo day?

      • Gabriel Alan King

        You can draw pictures of Jesus humping a sheep covered in poop…. and Christians won’t give a damn. They’ll just laugh at you. Just like when those liberal idiots put a cross in urine. Our God is REAL so we don’t care what you say. And it will be fun to watch you grovel before him soon….

        • Mike De Fleuriot

          lol,Really, the Christian love just shines though from you. You know, I claim something is real, I can present evidence for that thing to anyone on demand. How about you?

          You can’t say something is “real”, and then claim it exhibits none of the properties of any other real objects, and can’t ever be examined or analyzed empirically. That’s pretty much a good definition of “not real”.
          — PZ Myers

          • Loud Noises

            So was Shakespeare real?

      • Loud Noises

        Knock yourself down! You wouldn’t have to worry about retaliatory violence, that’s for sure.

      • http://fourhundredmonths.blogspot.com/ Ferox
      • kerston

        Can you imagine if some one tried to hold an anti Israel event like that? No one would even rent them the venue.

    • kerston

      Hmm nothing savage about the decades of bombings of Muslim countries and innocent civilians killed. No not a thing because bombs are humane.

      • Loud Noises

        Completely different conversation, of which your sarcasm adds nothing.

  • robin Grace

    Ya did good Julie….

  • Speechless Panda

    You look like you been sucking on a pole in that picture julie. How do you like THAT for freedom of speech, u moron

  • Ed Kline

    Kind of all over the place on this one.

    • http://facebook.com/christophdollis Christoph Dollis

      Quaking fear will do that to a person.

    • Gabriel Alan King

      Julie kind of flounders a little when it comes to “the religion of peace”… lol

  • http://twincitiescommons.blogspot.com/ Sully Bach

    Julie, shooting people is a little beyond criticism or disagreement.

    • Julie_Borowski


  • Michael Allen Moore

    I often wonder how may people actually understand that the Constitution simply restrains the government. To many people seem to feel that any Constitutional right is allowed anywhere they are- even if its private property.

    • Gabriel Alan King

      The Constitution not only restrains “government”…. it also restrains any persons or people who would seek to take away your freedoms and rights.

      • Michael Allen Moore

        Individuals or groups do not have the ability to take away rights except through co-opting the government in their plans (through Court Injunctions, Congressional acts) or through use of force. The first is covered by the Constitution because it restrains the government from taking part in those actions and the second way is covered by the criminal code, not the Constitution (someone physically restraining you from exercising a right is guilty of assault, not violating your Constitutional rights).

        • http://fourhundredmonths.blogspot.com/ Ferox

          If I shoot you in the head I have certainly infringed upon your rights, even though that action is not specifically enjoined in the Constitution, and even though I am not a part of any government.

          • Michael Allen Moore

            Yes, but no one is going to say you are guilty of violating my rights – they are simply going to say you committed the criminal offense of murder. While yes, if you wan to get nit-picky that would be a violation of my right to life but my entire point is that Constitutional rights only cover protection by the government. If it covered everyone I wouldn’t be allowed to kick someone off my yard if they were protesting or stop tell someone who was being rude or offensive they had to leave my house.

  • Gabriel Alan King

    ” I don’t have any obligation to be a cheerleader for people who go out of their way to be edgy.”

    TRANSLATION: I don’t have the GUTS enough to offend current political correctness, to stand side by side with an incredibly brave woman named Pam Geller, to defend my country and our Bill of Rights against a fascist violent psychotic totalitarian patriarchal pedophile ancient Sumerian Moon cult.

    • http://facebook.com/christophdollis Christoph Dollis

      Penguin Books could use someone like you.

  • Mike De Fleuriot

    //Free speech just means that the government cannot punish you for your speech//

    Even more than that, anyone is allowed to say whatever they want to. Even shouting fire in a theatre, what happens after the words have been spoken has nothing to do with the right to say those words. Consider the shouting fire in a theatre, if it was not allowed and there was a fire, who would be responsible for the deaths from the fire? Shout fire and then let us see if there is a fire or not, once we know that there is not a fire or there is one, then we can decide what to do to the person who shouted fire.

    If an idea is expressed, only then can it be examined to see whether or not it is valid or not, if it is not allowed to be expressed, then we can never be sure whether or not it is a valid or invalid idea. Geller and her bigots have the right to express their ideas and we have the right to examine them and determine whether or not they are valid or invalid.

    But any normal person already knows that this is the rational way a modern human behaves when they are faced with a subject that is presented to them. Muslims and other religious people do not seem to have this feature in their makeup.

    • Gabriel Alan King

      Wait a second… Geller is a “bigot”, for standing up to a violent psychotic bully cult, and it’s theocratic totalitarian attacks on the Bill of Rights ? A violent cult which OUTLAWS free speech and bosses people around ?
      Maybe the next time Muslims do a mass beheading of people who disagree with them you can call me a “bigot” for opposing their dictatorship.

      • Mike De Fleuriot

        The problem is that you oppose them using your own religious point of view, which is that your world view is the correct one, and everyone else is wrong. This you are unable to show to be correct, because you like all theists have failed to show that gods can actually exist. You have jumped directly to gods do exist and talk about what they demand and want.

        I would suggest you look up the famous Susan B. Anthony quote, the one about the views of a god are those which the believer says they are.

        Geller does stand up to Islam, but the methods she uses are bigoted and hateful, and you know and support them, which says a lot about you as well.

  • Jake Marion

    For every free speech, there is an equal and opposite free speech.
    Responding to free speech with assault weapons or incarceration, this is criminal insanity.

  • francoismarie

    Look at europe ,they were open and today the menace is all over,i applaud Pamela Gellar, if you really have read the CORAN, they do not want to talk , even the so call modarate are silence, the all thing will terminate in a very bad war for the world ,we need a CHARLES MARTEL!!! you have to expose the carnage.

  • Matthew Battle

    Julie, what is your opinion on the argument being made by many that the incident in Garland is an attack of freedom of speech?

  • Stubbsme

    Sorry Julie, but the first is not there just to stop the government from impeding your write to speak your mind. It is there to stop any group of people from stifling the voice of any smaller group or individual. It guarantee’s the right of the individual to be heard without sufferance from any one or any group. This is supported from reading the intentions of the founders as well as a whole bunch of court rulings. I have the right as an individual to think and believe as I see fit, so long as I do not violate the rights of another. Drawing a freaking cartoon does not violate any one’s rights and certainly does not justify murder. By your logic the government shutting down the West Borough Baptist is bad, but me double tapping a couple of those bastards for what they do and say to our vets is perfectly acceptable.

  • http://facebook.com/christophdollis Christoph Dollis

    Julie, if you can’t reasonably satirize a mass-murdering, torturing lying political leader who molested a 6-year old and said he flew on a horse, WHO can you satirize?

    • kerston

      I see you listen to Geller and the other Islamophobes. No one really know how old Ayisha was. You want to talk about some other religions with out there beliefs? I imagine some people might not like some of that kind of free speech. All depends on whose side of history you are on about the rest.

      • http://facebook.com/christophdollis Christoph Dollis

        You are evil.

    • kerston

      I you really want some one to laugh at this is hilarious. How insane and ignorant can she be? Of course I think she is an idiot. If you don’t see it in this article maybe you are an idiot too?


      So stupid it is hilarious. She is a raging Zionist. Doesn’t she realize Kosher slaughter is the same?

  • NPanamevris

    I’m all for freedom of speech but I think the real question is, does Pam (or anyone else) have the freedom to offend, provoke & antagonise a bunch of crazies that will cut ones head off… off course they do!!

  • MarcAllanFeldman

    There is a reason that ad hominem is considered a fallacy and not a valid argument. Very intelligent people often make very bad decisions. People of low intelligence are often dedicated to very good causes and get excellent results. Part of my interest and critical evaluating turns off as soon as someone says “idiot” or “moron.” This is insulting both to people of lower intelligence as well as to the people who hold different views and communicate in different ways from you.

  • MarcAllanFeldman

    Pamela Geller is not a philosopher, a teacher, or a politician. She is an activist. She sees her job as motivating people to make change to make this a better world as she sees it. She is not nearly as afraid of violence as she is about apathy, irrelevance, and meaninglessness.
    There are problems in this world that we should address. Activists decide that sometimes they need to do things that are hurtful, disruptive, or destructive to get attention, focus, and to get people to do something. I believe that having a Mohammed-drawing contest, holding up the Senate to talk for 13 hours straight, or burning down a CVS in Baltimore are all examples of things that are wrong and that people should not feel that they have to do, but it can be difficult to argue against the results.

    • kerston

      Nice try. She is an opportunist raking it in on the 911 cash cow of fear and hate. There is nothing she is doing that will improve anything.

  • The_Rocketeer

    yes, facebook or other private sites can impose their own rules.. but more interesting is what national laws are being proposed or are already in place to inhibit free speech.. Even in today’s UK election, this was an issue. The Labour Party was pushing anti-blasphemy laws to pander to their Muslim voters, and they almost won with that plank in their platform. The UN is also pushing to get this passed internationally.. The USA need to stand against this creeping theocratic fascism, and I urge my fellow American to show some damn backbone on this issue.. that means you too, Zuckerburg!

  • http://johnnyangeladvocacygroup.net/ JohnnyAngel Advocacy Group

    Well Julie…ISIS and CAIR are simply two different sides to the same coin. Who is defending Islamic appeasement ? Those unfamiliar with Islam.Who are not FEELING well because of the art event ? Muslims! Don’t upset Muslims, any group but Muslims, blacks and gays. They all play the same game. It’s a strategy that you are simply not well versed in. I have a question for you. If a rapist says “she was asking for it by the way she dressed” should the girl have to change her clothes ? Freedom of speech is more important than appeasing those being offended !! We are at war with those who would put you in a “sack” with eyeholes. Step up Julie and smell the blood of patriots !!

  • http://www.freekentucky.com/ waypasthadenough2

    The point isn’t really whether or not fake book is ‘violating free speech’ but participating in the ‘conspiracy’ to keep the average sheeple, a sheeple. Google is working hard at mainstreaming the net. When the public first started using the net it was, as far as I could tell, mostly patriot types, because there was no where else to go. The press is only ‘free’ when one owns the press. When they sweep us off into a dark corner and pretend we don’t exist anymore, let’s see how ‘free’ our speech is then…

    There’s no such thing as an unbiased reporter

    politically but prep for what history shows will have to be done. It’s way past
    time to prep for what will be required: http://www.freekentucky.com/what-will-be-required/

  • Adam N.Steve

    the people who were REALLY upset over Gellar’s event were met with a barrage of gun fire from law enforcement.

  • Alex Clark

    I do not have to like or agree with Pamela Geller or her contest in order to support her right to have it. No religion should be above critique. We all know that if it would have been a draw Jesus contest that nobody would have died and that there would be no controversy. Kowtowing to bullies only leads to more submission.

  • Political Updates

    Julie said “Free speech just means that the government cannot punish you for your speech. That’s it.”

    Rights aren’t there to only protect you from governmental action – but from the actions of individuals as well. The government’s job is to be the protector of rights – so the government should protect you if you decide to say something that might “offend” someone else. You have a right to free speech – you do not have a right to not be offended.

    From the Declaration of Independence:

    “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed…”

  • Poeticlargess

    So it’s not just the Liberals that are having the wrong conversation. Content- Irrelevant, likability – irrelevant, classy, palatable delivery that I don’t have to look bad defending to my Lib peers – irrelevant. Geller can get a whole lot more offensive and “edgy” and only be a better and currently very necessary example of free speech. She didn’t choose the example. They said draw cartoons and we’ll kill you. You can say, ”Ah, was that too edgy, sorry for my friend here”, or you can say “I guess I have to draw cartoons.” She didn’t even pick the venue, the folks who had the Islamphobia sensitive conference there before her did. She’s taking the fight directly to them on the ground they choose. Though I with you Julie 95% of the time I disagree on this we all do have an obligation to do are part in the protection/fight/war in defense of our rights or there gone in a generation. Even if it’s just cheer leading for those doing the actual fighting – but unfortunately you can always tell the pioneers by the arrows in their back

  • http://johnnyangeladvocacygroup.net/ JohnnyAngel Advocacy Group

    So speech is then OK when government approved ? Is that what your saying Julie ? What if government doesn’t approve of speech calling for anarchy ? Would you want rabble rousers stirring up trouble at the security of your country ? What if someone broke intelligence laws and their oath and then went to this country’s sworn enemy for many years and divulged your country’s secrets to them ? Is that good speech and should that be free , when in fact it is attempting to subvert ALL your other freedoms ? Think on these things !!

  • http://fourhundredmonths.blogspot.com/ Ferox

    “Free speech just means that the government cannot punish you for your speech.”

    It means that in part, certainly. But it also means that the government protects me from violence by others who do not like my speech.

    And while insulting someone’s religion apropos of nothing is certainly stupid, insulting their religion in response to a death threat (for daring to insult their religion) is a vital defense of a principle of freedom, upon which our entire experiment in pluralistic society depends.

    In my opinion, at long as Islamic extremists and their enablers support violence against those who say things insulting to them, freedom loving people in the west should go out of their way to provoke the extremist elements, to anger and arouse and insult them. If we back down one inch on this, we will be encouraging the very worst elements of that culture to view us as easy meat. I believe that would be a fatal mistake.

  • weneedtowork

    I support her event because she is bringing awareness to the intolerance that is going on right now with radical Islam. There are people killing people for drawing pictures of Mohammad whatever his name is.

  • kerston

    Nailed it Julie. Geller is a jerk and I say that not even counting this show of stupidity. How about her Halal Turkey article. Check that out. Great laugh and example of her pure ignorance and stupidity. The woman lies on her blogs and articles and anyone with good sense should ignore her and hope she goes away a bad case of diarrhea. Yep no one is stopping her from her free speech or free lies so what is her problem…oh she wants FBI protection as she calls herself a hero that saved lives, compares herself to Rosa Parks etc. Rosa Parks didn’t get FBI protection. And Freedom Has Consequences. Use it wisely. Sadly her use of free speech spreads ignorance and hate. And no that doesn’t mean I approve of the shooters one bit and I am glad they got what was coming to them. I do not thank her for it though. She didn’t save lives. She put peoples lives at risk that had nothing to do with her antics.

  • C_in_Chi

    I’ve said the exact contents of this article before, and couldn’t agree more. And just because you can say something, doesn’t always mean you should.

  • Elioron

    While I agree that free speech doesn’t protect you from criticism or dissension, it needs to protect people from mistreatment for it. Saying that the 1st Amendment should only protect you from government discrimination is like saying that the 1st Amendment should only apply to government discrimination of race and religion – that private companies or organizations are not bound by it. That is not the case, nor should it be. Firing someone because of their personal opinions should not be acceptable unless they were representing their employer or acting in an official capacity when they said it, just as firing someone for practicing their religion outside of work would be unacceptable.

  • The_Rocketeer

    Julie, you’re headed down a slippery slope that ends in a very bad place… when voluntary restraint against offending others grows and eventually manifests itself as legislation (google anti-blasphemy laws), you have lost your freedom of speech. Even some states in the USA still have them on the books.. and as the power of Christian fundamentalists grows, there have been serious proposals to reintroduce them… the UN also wants to make anti-blasphemy international law, in case you haven’t heard. If you can’t fully support Pam Geller exercising her legal rights, you may not be as much in favor of liberty as you think you are.

  • will nist

    Problem is Pamela Gellar as I suspected doesn’t believe in free speech for everyone. Just those she agrees with. As suspected I posted something on her site when all the drawing stuff was going on and she was going on and on about free speech. The comment I made was quite offensive to Jews and Christians. I have nothing against those groups but was curious if she really believed in what she was saying. My comment was posted with a few well deserved nasty reply’s made to it. In short order the comment was censored (with a weak excuse just to me that censorship isn’t censorship). She’s as empty as I believed and just a far and potentially criminal far right Jew who has no concern whatever for free speech. She was coming from the exact place I suspected she was. A racist hateful person with a huge chip on her shoulder.

  • RONonymous

    You can say whatever you want but no one has to listen or agree. No one has to give you a forum, air time, print space, or a flagpole to hang your symbol on.