Blogwrath attended the event and posted a detailed account which includes a video clip of the audience's engagement with the panel during the Q&A. Very interesting!
As Blazing Cat Fur observes: "it went downhill pretty fast".
It's easy to see why the audience was disappointed.
Update: In the comments, Fred Litwin responds:
This is a completely erroneous account of the meeting. There were over 120 people there, and a few were rude and complained. What the video and description doesn't show is the many people who came up to me after the event to thank me...far more people than were enraged by my criticism of Pamela Geller. The audience was not disappointed.
Salim gave a very strong defense of Pamela Geller's right to speak, that much I know. Still it's disappointing to see them give the left a wedge issue.
ReplyDeleteTrue, perhaps I shouldn't be too quick to lump the three together. It was Pipes' attitude that rankled most. It would be helpful if they (esp. Pipes) could at least acknowledge that there's more than one way to combat aggressive Islam and Islamism on our own home soil.
ReplyDeleteThe Ottawa version of this event - which I attended and at which Dr. Crowley replaced the priest, the overall atmosphere was the same.
ReplyDeleteSalim Mansur did the best and gave a vigorous defense of Pamela Geller's right to freedom of speech.
Even Dr. Pipes was shocked at how far Dr. Crowley was proposing we should have limitation of free speech and called him on it, but, overall, the audience was disappointed in the Pipes talk...and said do.
In addition, Dr. Pipes quoted statistics that were demonstrably wrong...this did not help.
It occurs to me to ask, while Salim Mansur defended Geller's freedom of speech (that's the least we should expect), did he defend what she says?
ReplyDeleteThis is a completely erroneous account of the meeting. There were over 120 people there, and a few were rude and complained. What the video and description doesn't show is the many people who came up to me after the event to thank me...far more people than were enraged by my criticism of Pamela Geller. The audience was not disappointed.
ReplyDeleteFred, Completely erroneous? Blogwrath's video seems pretty clear on how things went. Daniel Pipes' responses were dismissive and rude. The fellow near the end of the Blogwrath video, who had the most to say of all the questioners, was calm, respectful, coherent and logical in his criticism - unlike Pipes.
ReplyDeleteFurthermore, the attacks on Geller were uncalled for and in poor taste. There's no doubt about that being a bad show.
Yes, completely erroneous. Might have been a bad show to you, but you weren't there. I was. I shook hands with many, many people who liked the event - there were just a few Geller 'types' who were upset. Attack on Geller - my first question to the panel, not shown in the video, was a direct quote from Geller - "Pamela Geller says that there are millions of moderate Muslims, but no moderate Islam...is she right?" A perfectly good question that does not attack her.
ReplyDeleteFred,
ReplyDeleteI concede that you were there, right up front, and that I wasn't. So, naturally, I relied on others' accounts for this post.
Might I suggest that you address the comments you make here directly to someone who was in attendance, namely Blogwrath.
Cheers, JR