This is what jihadis do:
US police have shot dead two gunmen outside a Prophet Mohammed cartoon contest in Texas put on by a group that has a history of sparking controversy with its statements on Islam.
Oddly, the focus seems to be on the group that sponsored the event rather than the jihadi attackers:
The right-wing American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI) organized the event in a suburb of Dallas. It featured Dutch far-right politician Geert Wilders, who has been outspoken against Muslims and is targeted by radical groups.
Yeah. They were pretty much asking for it, right?
As I've said, this war isn't won until Islam resolves its civil war that will define Islam in a manner that de-legitimizes violent reactions to "insults" to Islam. Until then, we need to react to cartoon contests just as "insults" to Christianity are defended as being protected under the banner of freedom of speech.
We have a long way to go on this front.
The most outraged reactions to such anti-Christian art fall well short of what we expect "insults" to Islam to provoke.
I'm so old, I remember when we were all Charlie.
But we all knew that wouldn't last.
It will be interesting to see how the ACLU reacts to this incident.
And I can hardly wait for the Secretary of Homeland Security to send James Taylor to Texas.
UPDATE: Related from Jonah Goldberg:
I'm no fan of Charlie Hebdo's anti-religious bigotry, but I am even less enamored with murderers who believe that their grievances justify the slaughter of cartoonists. And I have nothing but contempt for those who ridicule the courage of the slain because they proved inconvenient to their oh-so-comfortable narratives.
I know many are saying how awful Pam Geller is in an effort to blame her for being the target of ISIL jihadis. I have no opinion on Geller as a person.
I have a strong opinion on opposing terrorists who shoot at Americans exercising free speech rights. I have a stronger opinion on her right to speak.
The battle ends not when we stop speaking freely but when the reaction to unwelcome speech is a strongly worded letter to the editor of the local paper.
UPDATE; Geller's critics say she was "provocative" to invite cartoonists to draw Mohammed, which Moslems could avoid seeing by the simple act of not looking at them.
Can you imagine if we did this to Moslems?
In an effort to curb what they see as religious extremism in China's northwest Xinjiang region, Chinese authorities have ordered Muslim business owners in the area to sell cigarettes and alcohol in “eye-catching displays,” according to a report by Radio Free Asia (RFA).
We are not the problem.
UPDATE: By all means, refute the woman. Hell, mock Geller's views if you want. Or ignore her.
For all I know, she is as horrible a person as so many people are saying. So what? The idea that free speech can be limited by defining some speech as hate speech is ludicrous. Unless the speech is actually inciting violence (and not the faux incitement that so many on the Left like to accuse conservatives of doing with the most benign expressions or symbols imaginable), it's allowed.
Who decides what the dividing line is? Oh, right, the Left gets to do that (tip to Instapundit). Do they want to take turns with Rush Limbaugh on that duty, hmm?
And apparently the Left has subcontracted the decision on Geller to Islamist jihadis who wanted to kill people at her event. Is that the standard, now? Reward that and you'll get more, you know?
I've said it before and I'll say it again, we really have a very small problem with American Moslems. The overwhelming majority of Moslems here would be considered worthy of death by our jihadi enemies. Every time I see a Moslem woman in a head scarf driving a mini-van, I see it as a part of the battle against the Islamists.
That said, abroad the appeal of jihadi thinking is an issue.
Our freedom of speech (and other freedoms) is not the problem. God willing, it's part of the solution.
