Pamela Geller has outdone herself with her most inflammatory anti-Islam subway ad yet. The poster combines a quote from the Quran with the image most likely to inflame anti-Muslim passions among New Yorkers – a photo of the Twin Towers in flames during the 9/11 attack.
Geller heads the American Freedom Defense Initiative, who sponsored the previous spate of anti-Muslim ads in subway stations this fall. Transit police have probably only just finished mopping the sweat wrung from their brows by the earlier ads, which prompted the NYPD to double the number of officers in affected subway stations.
Some New Yorkers compared Geller's earlier ads to "shouting fire in a crowded theater" when there's no fire – one of the rare situations in which public safety concerns trump free speech rights. The NY transit authority initially refused to run the ads for that very reason, but was compelled to by a federal court on First Amendment grounds. Geller herself cites a free speech justification, asserting that "I refuse to abridge my free speech so as to appease savages."
AndBegin, Your assertion is logically flawed. While there may be a basis to claim "religious intolerance" where one's own religion is quoted to oppose another, quoting the other's religion offers NO basis (assuming it wasn't misquoted or taken out of context).
@AndBegin I see it as anti muslim ads. I don't have a problem with that. I don't have a problem with anti christian ads. I don't have a problem with any anti religion ads concerning any religion known to man. That would be because "freedom OF religion also included Freedom FROM religion. Run all the ads you want.
@Denizen_Kate Now there is an interesting and intelligent response. But I have to wonder if it is true. I know you can't yell fire in the proverbial crowded theater, but you can if there is actually a fire. I guess the point I am getting at is does the first amendment protect your speech if it is a lie (knowingly or unknowingly)? Seems as though it does in some cases but not others.
@Denizen_Kate cowering down do to fear of terrorists will not work. and stepping on free speech to not offend terrorists is doing that very thing. if anyone is offended by our right to free speech maybe they are in the wrong country and should leave as soon as possible.
@woodtick57 Muslims use "infidel," you are right...but, while working in the Egypt, I found that the word heathern was included in their vocabulary...probably in an effort to call you something that you understood.
@woodtick57 Well, I don't know what you think about Islam, but the Islamic extremists don't care what you are...if you are not a Muslim you are to be eliminated if you do not bend to their rule....and that also goes for Muslims who don't see their extremist view.
The Bible, Deuteronomy, Chapter 7, Verse 2 "And when the LORD thy God shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor show mercy unto them"
@Dan_Tien ...except there ain't hardly any "smitin'" goin' on these days in the name of Christianity, yet there is a whole bunch of it goin' on in the name of Islam, yet we're not allowed to mention those Islamic passages lest we be branded racists.
In my opinion Geller is just as evil as those who attacked us on 9/11. Maybe worse, she knows these very ads might provoke these wackos to attack and kill innocent people, yet knowing that she runs the ads anyway. Blood of the innocents will be on her hands, that said she has every right to run the ads, but the first amnd only prohibits prior restraint of first amendment publication, once the ad is published she can be held liable for injury resulting from the ad. She may not care about the thousands of people living in this area who may be trumatized by this reminder of the day they lost a loved one, but she can be sued for infliction of emotional distress by all those people, thousands literally. I hope they file suit against her and live her penniless for the rest of her life....
And before any fool starts saying I am against the first amendment, understand clearly that if someone publishes something' that causes actual injury to another such speech is legally outside the scope of the first amendment. If you choose not to believe me research the law...
There is a point where free speach crosses the line and becomes hate. Nazi symbols painted on a temple is not freedom of speech but destruction of property. This leans more in that direction than things like flag burning.
Why do you think she's running ad's here in the US? Cowardice. Too afraid to actually confront those that she's speaking about. It's one thing to sing with the choir in church on Sunday, its entirely different to do missionary work in a foreign land if you get what I'm saying. In my opinion, it's silly to attack the Muslim belief as a whole. American Muslims are not the people that attacked the twin towers on 9/11 and were just as angry about it as any other American. To lump them in with crazy extremists is arrogant, and downright wrong. But, you'll never convince the clowns that yell the loudest they are wrong, they are too stupid to see it.
@Fishbone345 WELL how about puting up ads like that when anyone with half a brain knows it might incite some wacko to kill innocent people? or knowing the ads will be seen by thousands of people who lost loved on in the attack that day, and knowing some of those people may suffer serious mental and emotional harm from being reminded of the terror.
Do not judge a holy book by a sntence. Taken out of context, we have no idea what the intention of the author is. Using words from the Quran and those images send a clear message. I think it is hateful. What would happen if this was aimed at the Jews? I doubt they would tolerate it. Why not put up Nazi symbols and insinuate that all Germans are bad? Or blame all Christians for the actions of the Klu Klux Clan? The extreme right wing's view of the Bible has little in common with my view, but it is the same book. I look at the general message and themes because I feel picking out a few words from a book that has been translated many times is irresponsible. Using those words to condemn people is hateful.
It isn't what the book says that is the problem. The problem is the fanaticism of the people who are reading it. When you have a people riot in the streets because some kid named his teddy bear "Muhammad", we have a reason to worry. Or how about the film maker killed in Sweden because of his movie about their prophet? A perceived insult against their prophet with get you killed. Leaving their faith will get you killed. Many see nothing wrong in raping a girl until she says she has converted to Islam. This happens everyday, legally, in Muslim countries.
@Damned-Yankee True. Almost every faith has extremists who misuse their holy books to hurt others. It is sickening. I don't know what could be done about this. Their religion is not the problem, their hatred and love of violence is the problem.
The Quaran or Bible just provide "justification" The victim is someone they see as preventing them for getting ahead. If America is too rich and powerful. We use our strength to create new ways for us to profit from their resources. If we were not such big bullies, they would have more money. There is some truth to that.
Often the leaders of these groups is not poor, but rich themselves. They ignite the frustration of the poor and turn it into a religous action. These leaders are power hungry bullies who take advantage of the weak.
Read, "Political Violence, The History of Terrorism, Insurgency and Guerella Warfare" by Polk.
(My phone is screwed up, it adds words and the spell check is random, sorry)
I agree with you, but money apparently buys everything these days, even at the expense of an entire public that is subjected to see "hate" speech because someone lacks respect. Next there will be porn on the subways for children to behold because when people forget decency, nothing is considered wrong. The only thing that makes this "ad" right in most people's eyes, is that someone paid for it with money to be placed where it is placed. IMHO that doesn't make it right. Freedom of Speech is one thing, indecency is another. At one time the public wasn't subjected against their will to blatant indecency. So I guess the next step is bring on the Porn and blindfold your children on subways.
The media's message is not one of hate. The media would be blasted if they ran anti-gay articles Bible references. The Southboro (?) Baptist Church doesn't represent all christian's understanding of the Bible.
Somebody should post billboards with a few choice quotes from the Christian holy book as well. Here's one to start: "Anyone arrogant enough to reject the verdict of the judge or of the priest who represents the LORD your God must be put to death." (Deuteronomy 17:12)
Because Christians, like any other extremist like to cherry pick their beliefs. They will absolutely point to certain versus in the Bible as being the "Word of GOD", like the condemning of gays, but versus in the same chapter that ask them to stone to death someone that doesn't keep Sunday holy? No, that one is old and outdated and we don't live that way anymore.
Well, your Deut. quote and mine clearly state to kill the non-believers. the Quran quote says to strike terror in their hearts.... (pretty sure the Q also has lines about killing infidels. most man-made gods have human tendencies like petty jealousy and vindictiveness...
There are so many sentences or phrases in the Bible that taken out of context are hateufl. Have an opinion? Look hard enough and you can find words in the Bible to support it. The words of Holy books are not weapons!
Nice statement. How is it you don't know about the anti-Infidel ideology of Islam, which would be against you and everything you believe in? How is it you can ignore the very attack on 9/11 as being driven by Islam? Islamic terrorism has increased four fold since 9/11, or to break it down for a simpleton like your, that would be 4 times more terror attacks in the name of Islam, rather than folks who just happen to be Muslim doing crime and acts against humanity. Other crime stats do not apply.
So ask yourself, if the freedom of expression of reality gets suppressed, are you on the path of Orwell's 1984?
If they were the only people killing in the name of their god, you might almost have a point, but they ar not. Have you already fogotten the three way religious war in the Balkans and all the people christians slaughtered in the name of their god(s)?
@woodtick57 The Balkans were a powderkeg extracted from the Islamic Ottoman Empire. I've been there. The folks in the early 2000's told a different story. Three centuries earlier, the Turks showed up and decreed everyone were Muslims, so the locals in Bosnia extrated the best of the situation: the women did all the work while the men drank booze and watched them. Little had changed even during the break up of Tito's socialist experiment.
Today, a decade later, due to Saudi funding of Mosques and extremism, the Balkans are sliding into a terrorist hell funded by Islamic Salifst extremists.
You have to consider where after years of sectarian strife within the Balkans where being exposed to religious sanctioned savagery by Islamists, if non Muslims carried out war crimes, they were not the first, nor will they be the last. The reality is war crimes and crimes against humanity continue everyday and they are being carried out in the name of Islam more than any other belief.
You can try to make an argument whereby other faiths have also committed crimes, but if you would just look at the news today and fathom the stats over the last 10 years whereby terrorism in the name of Islam has quadrupled, how does the history that precedes such barbarity excuse what is happening now?
@Dan_Tien No. Religion doesn't blow. Islam isn't a religion. Islam is a cult with 77 differnent sects where within each at its core it is supremist over every other belief and polititical system. Get it strait.
Other religions do not hold sway over secular democracies beyond what is morally acceptable. If you were to compare Sharia law, the final control of Islam in any society, even your own lackluster morals would be offended, and then you'd be killed.
well here we go again,what if we offend them,I mean we can,t blame the whole race for actions of of several million.if you think they need your Protection,go to http://creepingsharia.wordpress.com/ and type in your state,...fortunately in my area we have a lot of backhoes and firearms
there probably are lot of good ones,but I don,t have the time or patience to sort them out anymore,I also don,t care at this point if we have done things in the past to rile them,the war is on now,lets party!!!
If "the crowded theater" is indeed on fire, then it would be unforgivably irresponsible to NOT shout "fire". The photo depicted in Ms. Geller's ad clearly shows the "fire" - though there will be many (anti-Americans) who deny it or dismiss it as irrelevant.
It's strange that you mention panic upon seeing this particular ad. I got a wee bit of a shiver myself, and I believe I can tell you the address of the building from which that picture was taken, as it is EXACTLY the aspect I saw from my office on 9/11. But even I didn't run around like a panicked squirrel when I saw this poster. Wanted to vomit? Yes. Panic? No.
"... inflammatory anti-Islam subway ad ". The ONLY "flames" - were ignited by Muslims on 9/11. They publicly proclaimed their intent to "destroy Western Civilization... from within" in 1991 (and can be verified on the internet): "An explanatory Memorandum On the General Strategic Goal for the Group In North America" (5/22/91) The Center for Security Policy published its "Team B" report in 2010 (also available on the internet): "Shariah: The Threat To America - An Exercise in Competitive Analysis" All who defend the jihadists are siding and abetting our sworn enemy.
Correction, the Islamists have made us all their sworn enemy, far before the US or any other real democracy existsed. Having forgotten that lesson of the past (the pirates of Trippoli), the US is now on a course to scrub all negative mentions of Islam under Obama, regardless of history or current events. Welcom to the new Orwellian nightmare.
"The Muslims" didn't do anything. There are millions upon millions of Muslims all over the world who had nothing to do with it. It would be like me saying everything Timothy McVeigh did was done by "The Christians."
@Zazziness, Your logic is fundamentally flawed. While the Koran and Shariah both command ALL adherents to kill or subdue ALL others without mercy or exception, NO Christian tenet has EVER done so. Consequently, it is correct to conclude that those (who may claim some 'Bilblical" basis for murder) are indeed mere isolated aberrations. Not so with Islamic adherents who may - as demonstrated by Maj. Hasan and his mentor Awlaki - successfully conceal their jihadist intentions for decades - only to pounce on their unsuspecting prey after they've grown complacent - as you have, Zaz.
@Zazziness "Mr. Bush quoted some of them..." Failing to reveal any such "quote" reveals the baselessness of your hollow contention. As for what occurred in "the Old Testament" - you failed to reveal how that is relevant to Christianity, which is founded on the New Testament. Even so, to hold today's Christians hostage for what MAY have transpired 6 Thousand years ago, is a monumental stretch - exceeding even the most remote and microscopic credibility - evidence of absolute desperation. Admit it, Zaz, you're just a cheerleader for the jihadists.
Ughhhh Muslims dont want to see America burn too the ground... This thing about Muslims being bad is BS Christians are no better than Muslims they both murder in the name of god instead of blaming the enitire Muslim faith for 9/11 why don't you blame the people actually responsible for 9/11 Islamic extremist and the bush administration
I wonder why the Middle East didn't errupt into flames over this ad?
could it be that Hillary and Obama didn't push it all around the world like they did with the YouTube crap ?
and they didn't push it around the world like the YouTube crap because they weren't trying to cover anything up this time...
that's why they say reality is a bitch. more proof that their cover story was a hoax, and they intentionally provoked the Muslim population to violence by the ridiculous stories about a video on YouTube when most Muslims in the Middle East had not even heard of it until Obama and Hillary and rice pushed it.