Best
195 Comments
Post
  • #3
    !
    I don't see it as anti-Muslim. It's anti-terrorist. If a terrorist wants to bring "the Bible" into it, I think this ad aims to show a misinterpretation of the Quran.
  • #29
    !
    i see anti-muslim, since they used a verse from the quran. had they used a verse from the king james bible, christians would be up in arms about it being anti-christian, dont you agree?
  • #65
    !
    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).
  • #85
    !
    @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.
  • #92
    !
    @AndBegin sure Christians would be up in arms... because then the ad would be blaming Christians for the attack on 911. pay attention.
  • #129
    !
    @bsking obviously, point taking wasnt mastered by you. i was making an example. i would explain it to you slowly, but im sure this site has a text limit.
  • R Load more replies

  • #24
    !
    she put her "slant" on her interpretation.....tell me how that is different than the "media" does every day?
  • #37
    !
    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.
  • #38
    !
    @UnCommonBoston

    i never said anywhere that it (southboro Baptist church ) did. but my opinion of the media and whether they run messages of hate or not differs with yours.

    just look at what the "media" did to Romney the last election.

    branded him as a "dog hater"
    he and his party do not like "clean air " and they want "dirty water"...the list goes on and on.
  • R Load more replies

  • #6
    !
    Well, on the subject of bigotry....almost every Muslim on the planet is absolutely biased against all other religions...to them we are all heatherns and, as such, are unfit to inhabit the Earth.
  • #14
    !
    I believe 'heathens' is the christian term for the non-beievers their god said should be killed. it was real popular against the Amerindians when they were slain in the name of the christian god....

    Muslims prefer infidels, i believe....
  • #58
    !
    @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.
  • #74
    !
    @seedtick

    Oh, the cults never lack in finding ways to make the nonbelievers a threat to the cult. The Muslims only lag behing the christians as it is a younger cult.
  • #82
    !
    @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.
  • R Load more replies

  • #91
    !
    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.
  • #66
    !
    How are Pamela Geller's ads same as "shouting fire in a crowded theater"? Are people going to run around like squirrels all panicked and trampling each other, when they see her ads?
  • #79
    !
    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.
  • #133
    !
    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.

    Politix Mary, where did we get this photo?
  • #31
    !
    "inflammatory anti-Islam subway ad"

    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?
  • #40
    !
    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)?
  • #55
    !
    @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?
  • #59
    !
    @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.
  • #60
    !
    @GillesPembroke

    What does any of that have to do with the fact that christians slaughtered whole villages of woman and children in the name of their god in the Balkans?

    is there some ten year statute of limitations on such things? Why is that your cut-off? Dou you realize 9-11-2011 was over ten years ago?
  • R Load more replies

  • #10
    !
    Meh, there are parallels between the Quran and the Bible just about everywhere, but both sides still insist the other is wrong.
  • #33
    !
    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"

    Come over baby
    whole lot of smitin' goin' on
  • #80
    !
    @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.
  • R Load more replies

  • #195
    !
    The Quran verse itself seems racist or rather discriminatory toward non-Muslims, not quoting it!
  • #194
    !
    Its a real Qu'ran verse I looked it up, and the event was really caused by Fundamentalism Muslims. I was not aware Islam was a race? Where is the racism?
  • #75
    !
    "... 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.
  • #84
    !
    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.
  • #98
    !
    "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."
  • #104
    !
    @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.
  • #115
    !
    @vigilant Malarky. The Old Testament is full of bloody wars of ideology and you can't tell me modern Christians pay no attention to them because Mr. Bush quoted some of them as we were invading Iraq.
  • #121
    !
    @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.
  • R Load more replies

  • #52
    !
    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!!!
  • #56
    !
    Fortunately in my area we have this thing called the US Constitution, so we dont have to fall prey to fear mongers threatening sharia law in the US...
  • #78
    !
    @MongoAPillager

    No need. We have a constitution, and I kno how my country works, so I can't be scared into believing crap...
  • #83
    !
    @woodtick57 well,God Bless ya,I guess if you refuse to look at the evidence,you can ignore them and maybe they will kill you last,sooner or later they are not going to ignore you
  • R Load more replies

  • #9
    !
    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...
  • #15
    !
    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.
  • #19
    !
    @UnCommonBoston Taking out advertisements by paying for them to be there is the same thing as destruction of property? Interesting theory.
  • #21
    !
    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.
  • #23
    !
    @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.
  • R Load more replies

  • #7
    !
    In the military we used to say I will fight to the death to defend your right to say that which infuriates me... of course that was before I retired and joined Politix!:D
  • #4
    !
    Maybe, if all of us would speak to the truths of our beliefs the reality of life and the responsibilities that go with would better guide all our actions?
  • #193
    !
    In this case I have to say the signs should be taken down, they have the right to kill us isn't that enough? Now they are threatening the Christians, enough is enough! How about we put up signs saying to: "Kill ALL radical Muslims? That is freedom of speech too.
  • #191
    !
    Her ads were "inflammatory"? Poor choice of words placed next to photos of Americans on fire wouldn't you say? That's about as inflammatory as it gets. Should any religious extremist type person fly jumbo jets into buildings full of civilians in an Islamic region because of their "differences"
    I can guess with fair accuracy that others practicing that same religion would become unpopular in that region rapidly. I'm sure anyone with a dead relative due to events such as these doesn't give a rats ass about being pc.. Strike terror into unbelievers? Doesn't sound super peaceful.
  • #185
    !
    I think the subway authority should have the right to reject an ad which appears to directly attack a religion and would seem calculated to offend a certain percentage of its riders. I'm all for freedom of speech, but that shouldn't mean for example that the subway should be forced to allow an ad that was nothing but a string of obscenities, for example. Freedom of speech does not guarantee you the right to use public resources to spread your views. If this lady wants to put up the same ad on private property, she should be free to do so.
  • R Load more comments...
Post