The Obama administration notoriously refuses to acknowledge that Islamists commit Islamist terror, so it logically follows that a Christian victim of Islamist violence should not address the issue lest it challenge accepted political orthodoxy.
It isn't only in the name of free speech that the views of an itchy polemicist should be tolerated - and I say itchy polemicist promoting thought, not itchy ideologue promoting violence - but because provocation is indispensable to the workings of a sound, creative culture.
It's funny what actors take issue with. Some won't do parts where animals are in jeopardy; some won't ever play anyone remotely unlikable - 'Heroes only, please.' Some won't do violence. I have no such qualms.
I condemn all statements - made in sincerity or jest - that threaten or suggest the use of violence against the president of the United States or any other public official. Such rhetoric cannot and will not be tolerated.
There's a grown-upness about television now that wasn't there before. You do know you're doing stuff for adults who can tell the difference between right and wrong, well hopefully, and make judgements about violence. And with 'Peaky,' always if there is an act of violence, there is a consequence.
The threat or fear of violence should not become an excuse or justification for restricting freedom of speech.
Being offended by freedom of speech should never be regarded as a justification for violence.
We think that Kosovo will continue to serve as a centre of violence and regional instability in future.
The Republican Party of Richard Nixon was called to power in 1968 to bring an honorable end to the war in Vietnam and restore law and order to campuses and cities convulsed by crime, riots and racial violence. Nixon appeared to have succeeded and was rewarded with a 49-state landslide.
Even in a healthy society, violence, lawlessness, and predation lie just below the surface.
I think that when we're talking about youth violence, we're talking about kids who don't have opportunities, so they're engaged in a certain degree of lawlessness, because we as a society have failed them.
We say it all the time: the leftist media is inciting violence and hate by calling everybody a racist and a white supremacist.
Let's create a regime that makes sale of bullets to anybody not licensed to carry a gun illegal, makes resale illegal, micro-stamps bullets so they can be traced. No Second Amendment issues here. This would have a remarkable impact on both violence and the capacity to solve shooting crimes.
We were raised with that discussion about violence and non-violence, and we all pretty much came up on the side of non-violence. That became my foundation with politics and my livelihood.
I think loathing begets fanaticism, and in the end, loathing begets hatred and violence.
We firmly oppose the use of violence in the course of current transformations in Arab States, especially against civilians. We are well aware of the fact that the transformation of a society is a complex and generally long process, which rarely goes smoothly.
How do we stop violence, looting, and riots? The way that we stop that is by making sure that people have the things that they need to thrive.
The motives of these parents vary, many parents don't like the curriculum being taught to their kids, or are wary of the threat of peer pressure or the presence of drugs or violence lurking in too many of our schools today.
For me comedy and violence has a lot in common. Just as you expect, comedy always lurks behind the most unexpected of circumstances.
Intellectual despair results in neither weakness nor dreams, but in violence. It is only a matter of knowing how to give vent to one's rage; whether one only wants to wander like madmen around prisons, or whether one wants to overturn them.
