Savage Geller bus ad hits San Francisco Muni

on 159 Comments
Savage ad
Savage ad

Last month a federal judge in New York City ruled the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) violated the first amendment rights of the Islamophobic group, American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI), when MTA rejected a racist political ad the group wanted to place on the sides of city buses. AFDI, led by Pam Geller and Robert Spencer of the anti-Muslim blog Jihad Watch, is the umbrella group of Stop Islamization of America.

New York Times:

21ad articleInline

The group, the American Freedom Defense Initiative, had proposed an ad that said, “In any war between the civilized man and the savage, support the civilized man.”

Then, between two Stars of David, the ad said: “Support Israel. Defeat Jihad.”

The transportation authority said the ad violated its prohibition on ads that demeaned individuals or groups on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin and five other specific categories. The group was given the opportunity to revise the ad, but it refused, and claimed in a lawsuit that the agency’s “no demeaning” language restriction was unconstitutional.

The judge, Paul A. Engelmayer of Federal District Court, ruled that the rejected ad was “not only protected speech — it is core political speech,” expressing a “pro-Israel perspective on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict” and implicitly calling “for a pro-Israel U.S. foreign policy with regard to that conflict.”

As such, the judge held, the ad “is afforded the highest level of protection under the First Amendment.”

On the same day, impacted by the result of that court ruling in Manhattan, San Francisco’s Municipal Transportation Agency approved Geller’s ads.

San Francisco’s ABC7 News:

San Francisco’s Municipal Transportation Agency has a policy against political ads on its buses, but an ad being displayed now comes pretty close. The ad says, “In any war between the civilized man and the savage, support the civilized man. Support Israel. Defeat jihad.”

James Ashburn was surprised when he saw his bus roll up with the ad on the side. “It really struck me as an inappropriate ad to be on a city bus,” he said. Ashburn took a picture of the ad and sent it to ABC7 News via uReport. He thought the ad crossed a line. “No matter what side you’re on, you should not describe your opponent as a savage,” he said.


The truth being in the eye of the beholder, ABC7 News showed the ad to Muslims going into Friday prayers at a San Francisco mosque. Adam Kennard called it propaganda. Ted Oriqat pointed out that the ad distorts the meaning of jihad. “Jihad, it doesn’t mean killing people or anything like that,” he said. And Oriqat is correct. Jihad means “struggle” and is frequently used as in “striving towards the way of God.”

The bus message didn’t sit very well with the city system in New York. They refused to run them and Geller took the transit authority to court. “And interestingly enough, the day that I won, was the day that San Francisco approved my ads that are currently running on your buses,” Geller said.

“A coincidence? Not according to Muni’s spokesman Paul Rose. “In this specific case, litigation was brought to this organization and the transit agency lost,” he told ABC7 News……..Asked how this particular ad is not considered political in light of Muni’s no-politics policy, Rose struggled to answer. However, the legal action and the fact that the New York MTA has already lost in court have had an impact. “

It is astounding Pamela Geller’s horrific ‘savage’ ads have come to our beautiful city by the bay. This has backfire written all over it and should open the floodgates in a wide ranging way. It will be impossible for SF Muni to refuse counter ads under these circumstances.

(Hat tip MW contributor Matthew Graber)

About Annie Robbins

Annie Robbins is Editor at Large for Mondoweiss, a mother, a human rights activist and a ceramic artist. She lives in the SF bay area. Follow her on Twitter @anniefofani

Other posts by .

Posted In:

159 Responses

  1. just
    August 12, 2012, 10:17 am

    “The judge, Paul A. Engelmayer of Federal District Court, ruled that the rejected ad was “not only protected speech — it is core political speech,” expressing a “pro-Israel perspective on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict” and implicitly calling “for a pro-Israel U.S. foreign policy with regard to that conflict.”

    As such, the judge held, the ad “is afforded the highest level of protection under the First Amendment.” ”

    This is truly unbelievable! Inflammatory hate speech is protected because it is ‘core political’ speech???
    The odious ad goes much further than the I/P conflict. It is Islamophobic in the extreme.

    • braciole
      August 12, 2012, 10:56 am

      Perhaps someone should pay for ads supporting Hamas or Hezbollah.

      • pabelmont
        August 15, 2012, 9:44 am

        Careful here. USA anti-terrorism laws and lists of international “terrorist organizations” may (for all I know) make Muni-ad support for Hamas and/or Hezbollah “material support” for terrorism and send all involved to jail for a long time.

        However, the nasty ad, here, makes two questionable claims: [1] Israel is civilized and [2] Jihad is savage. A mini-ad which supports “Jihad” and questions Israel’s civilized status might not trigger the above mentioned statutes. (Consult a lawyer.)

      • Roya
        August 15, 2012, 7:38 pm

        A mini-ad which supports “Jihad” and questions Israel’s civilized status might not trigger the above mentioned statutes. (Consult a lawyer.)

        A lawyer may not even be able to help as the terminology of the NDAA is very vague when it comes to providing “material support” for “terrorist organizations.” Hence the Daniel Ellsberg, Chris Hedges, Noam Chomsky et al. lawsuit against the government.

    • Carowhat
      August 12, 2012, 2:23 pm

      “This is truly unbelievable! Inflammatory hate speech is protected because it is ‘core political’ speech???”

      I’m surprised you’re surprised. The courts have always given political speech the most protection. It’s really the reason for the First Amendment–not Lady Chatterly’s Lover.

      I personally am glad to see ads supporting Israel. This will make it so much harder for pro-Israeli groups to try to ban ads that target the occupation.

      • justicewillprevail
        August 12, 2012, 2:43 pm

        That would be true, if they weren’t steeped in the hypocritical double standards they employ all of the time.

      • American
        August 12, 2012, 3:18 pm

        I don’t know. Judges can pretty much make any ruling they want.
        Then it can be legally challenged or not.
        If an Ad like this was put up:

        In Any War Between Good and Evil.

        Fight Against Evil.

        Fight for Good.

        Defeat the Evil of the Israeli Apartheid in Palestine.

        Support the Human Right to Dignity and Freedom for Palestines.

        Would the judge or some other judge make a similar ruling that it was political speech?
        Or would it be called hate speech?

      • Carowhat
        August 12, 2012, 4:41 pm

        You’re right. It would be called hate speech and judges would look for reasons to ban it. But to me that’s just another reason to support all political speech. It makes it harder for someone to argue that all pro-Israel speech is protected but anything critical of the occupation is clearly beyond the pale.

      • Citizen
        August 13, 2012, 1:09 pm

        @ American
        But you forgot the usual result in your hypothetical case: if the judge was elected, the next time he’s up for the seat he will be defeated by bukos Zionist dollars streaming in from everywhere. And he will receive an avalanche of Zionist protest letters defaming him. Works 99% of the time–to keep those double standards up.

      • quercus
        August 13, 2012, 7:06 am

        I absolutely agree, Carowhat. And, except for those who are already “true believers”, I think most people will see this silliness for what it is. As thinking, rational, beings, we should always be disinclined to accept one side of the an argument, and in addition, if that one side has to engage is such rhetorical flourishes as to call his/her opponent savage or any other pejorative, that itself should call the argument made into serious question.

        As much as I think this ad stupid and nasty, and if I were to live in San Francisco, I would be tempted to engage in a bit of artistic enhancement to grace the surface of the paper on which it is printed, there is nothing in the First Amendment which says we have free speech as long as it doesn’t offend.

      • Carowhat
        August 13, 2012, 3:54 pm

        Attempts to ban political speech which offends got their start in the civil rights movement where people like college administrators (no to mention the students themselves) absorbed the prevailing worldview that it was not only cruel and immoral but blatantly racist to say anything which upsets black activists. Since virtually anything upset them colleges soon began to ban any speech which upset anyone (especially if the speech came from people opposed to set-asides, quotas, reparations, or affirmative action). The rules have now evolved to the point where politically correct views may be advanced any time any place. Non politically correct views may not be voiced ever, most often on the grounds that (1) it’s hate speech and (2) that it denies certain students a harassment free atmosphere in which to earn their degree.

        No one ever asks whether this results in the school coddling students so much they fall to pieces in rage and frustration once they get out into the real world and encounter a point of view with which they disagree. And why wouldn’t they fly into a rage? No one ever told them people were allowed to say things that offend them.

    • gitelsura
      August 12, 2012, 7:24 pm

      “Hate speech” is often protected by the First Amendment, particularly when it concerns political issues and takes places in a public forum (which bus advertising has been found to be). There are exceptions to 1st Amendment protection of speech against government restriction, such as when speech is obscene, libelous, or constitutes “fighting words” likely to inflict injury and provoke a breach of the peace. .

      In the NY case, the MTA refused Geller’s ad because it violated their “no-demeaning” rules (a form of the “fighting words” exception) which applied to cases where specified categories of people were being demeaned – because of their race, religion, gender, and the like. The court decision against MTA turned on the fact that the no-demeaning rule was not generally applied, but singled out specified classes of people for protection. It was therefore a “content-based” prohibition on speech, which is presumptively invalid under the 1st Amendment. Had the “no-demeaning” rule been written to apply to people more broadly. it would have been “content-neutral”, and passed constitutional muster. In fact, the NY federal district court postponed its ruling for 30 days, in which time the MTA could presumably redraft the rule to be “content-neutral”.

      Muni doesn’t have anything like a no-demeaning” law as in the MTA case. What has been described in the media as a “no-politics” rule actually applies only to political candidates and ballot initiatives, and not to other kinds of political messaging. Maybe Muni could have refused to accept Geller’s ad on the basis that it constituted a “fighting words” exception to free speech (even though Muni had not articulated such a rule in its advertising policy). But Muni was leary of litigation, particularly after the NY MTA case.

      We have to be careful about what we wish for, because, of course, we’re accused of engaging in “hate speech” against Israel/the Jewish people all the time. If the government is given increased power to proscribe speech that offends, we’ll be a likely target. ACLU’s advice is: Fight hate speech with more speech

    • Abierno
      August 12, 2012, 7:27 pm

      Inflammatory hate speech is not protected speech. The litmus test for this ad is whether it could be comfortably be run in Joplin or Oak Creek. I think not. It would be worth a try for a legal complaint to be raised in California – the climate regarding right wing hate speech in this country is rapidly shifting as a result of Brevik, Oak Creek and mosque burning and threats. Also to monitor provacative, anti Islamic acts that may occur as a result of this type of race baiting. The trope of an unseen “war” is particularly disturbing in its connations which invokes a state wherein virtually any action is permitted.

      • RoHa
        August 12, 2012, 9:27 pm

        What makes speech “hate speech”?

      • ColinWright
        August 13, 2012, 3:48 pm

        “Inflammatory hate speech is not protected speech. “

        It should be. Anyway, this ad illustrates quite nicely that it is counter-productive. When one considers cases, and what the specific reaction is going to be, it becomes clear that (a) this ad will only appeal to the converted, and (b) it is likely to energize/offend the uninvolved.

        It’s a great ad. Let them run it. Particularly in San Francisco. I can’t think of a market I’d rather see it in.

  2. Charles Barwin
    August 12, 2012, 10:33 am

    This oughta make a lot of SF PEPs pretty squirmy.

    • Mooser
      August 12, 2012, 11:54 am

      Charles, did you know that many indigenous seaside cultures used dried shark skin as a sort of sandpaper? I can’t imagine what it feels like when the fin is debriding your keister. They didn’t even make it all the way over, like Fonz did.

      • CloakAndDagger
        August 12, 2012, 8:05 pm

        @ Mooser

        I didn’t understand who you think jumped the shark – the PEPs or Geller?

      • Mooser
        August 13, 2012, 10:14 am

        There’s plenty of room on Carcharodon’s back for everybody who wants to take that ride. And PEP pills are the gateway drug to a full on Ziocaine syndrome.

  3. Annie Robbins
    August 12, 2012, 10:35 am

    game on, i’m livid

    graffiti action anyone?

    • MRW
      August 12, 2012, 11:07 am

      Annie, use intelligent graffiti; don’t do anything that would get the graffiti-covered ad removed. Start a QR Code campaign that people can slap on these ads. Use 2″ square Avery labels.

      Use the free generator here:
      You can reference a URL, or type in text at the site for an instant label.

      People in SF are tech-savvy. And this gets at your real audience by age.

      • ritzl
        August 12, 2012, 11:58 pm

        @MRW Elegant!! And crafty! Kind of braconid/parasitic wasp-like.

        Can I tweet this or otherwise pass it around? Me like. Is there a coming QR battlespace? Or is there already a QR battlespace (which of course would have passed me right by)?

      • MRW
        August 13, 2012, 12:35 pm

        @ritzl, absolutely.

      • ritzl
        August 13, 2012, 8:20 pm

        Ya know, this brings up other smartphone methods too. At Christmas my brother had an otherwise normal printed catalog that when you scanned a QR code on the cover and then viewed the pages with a smartphone the printed fully-clothed models showed in the phone in their underwear. Same model, same pose, just undressed. It was pretty neat.

        I have no idea how they did it, but if a bus ad like this one could be tagged in that way, such that anyone viewing this disgusting ad with a smartphone would get a replacement ad or video. The novelty (i.e. interest generating) appeal would be tremendous.

        Also, as I understand it (not much yet) there are apps out there that enable you to digitally redefine a view based on spatial/pattern recognition. The live view changes to the digitally-transplanted view in real time when viewed through a smartphone running the app.

        Just a thought. Your idea opened up whole new worlds of iprotest possibilities. Great stuff.

      • CloakAndDagger
        August 14, 2012, 11:01 am

        I have no idea how they did it

        The typical way is for the QR-code to be for the URL of a web page. Most QR-code scanners will launch a browser when a URL is detected, displaying the web page on your phone – which is why I suggested having avatars with the URL of MW in QR-code.

      • Kathleen
        August 13, 2012, 8:56 am

        Really liked when the Young Jewish and Proud group repeated

        the illegal settlements are deligitimizing Israel etc etc. Great suggestions MRW.

        Hope Annie and team put the spotlight on who is in charge at the San Francisco transportation dept. How hard they were lobbied etc. That add is so racist. Israel civilized? Come on. An apartheid state.

        What is the actual definition of Jihad?

      • Bumblebye
        August 13, 2012, 12:28 pm

        Consider how we anglophones use the words “battle” or “fight” to describe someone overcoming tough circumstances, or serious illness. It’s not a word with narrow meaning confined to physical or weaponized assault upon other(s).

      • MRW
        August 13, 2012, 12:45 pm

        “What is the actual definition of Jihad?”


      • Annie Robbins
        August 13, 2012, 12:49 pm

        QR Code campaign? Avery labels? i don’t even have a cellphone.

        i don’t speak this language MRW, but will pass on this info tho

      • CloakAndDagger
        August 13, 2012, 3:41 pm

        One cool thing that everyone could do is make a QR-code and use it as their avatar when they go on different sites on the internet or post something. The QR-code could be a simple link to MW or a longer message. It may help get the message out to a wider audience.

    • Dexter
      August 12, 2012, 12:15 pm


    • mondonut
      August 12, 2012, 1:39 pm

      So your response to after effects of a court ruling that you disapprove of is to organize criminal actions?

      • MRW
        August 12, 2012, 2:04 pm


        Civil disobedience. Protected by the Constitution.

      • CloakAndDagger
        August 12, 2012, 2:15 pm

        I would have to agree with mondonut on this one. Graffiti or defacing someone’s ad is not civil disobedience and is prosecutable.

        Instead, let’s launch counter-ads of our own. They just made it legitimate for us to criticize Israel openly on bus ads. SF Muni can’t refuse these ads anymore.

      • Annie Robbins
        August 12, 2012, 2:46 pm

        i agree counter ads are the way to go on this. in fact even before i read about this yesterday i sent out an email in the morning to a friend about organizing a local meeting to do just that. we were supposed to do this last month but got sidetracked. anyway, yes we simply must get on it.

      • Bumblebye
        August 12, 2012, 3:30 pm

        The best kind of “counter ads” would surely be to turn their own words against them – using the nastier quotes such as the one by an Israeli general about Palestinians being cockroaches scuttling around at the bottom of a bottle. Or the WaPo columnist who blogged that she wanted to feed Palestinians to the sharks. And plenty others.

      • Dexter
        August 12, 2012, 3:59 pm

        Annie, can you keep me updated on the local meeting if one takes place?

      • Annie Robbins
        August 12, 2012, 4:14 pm

        yes, please email me @ [email protected] and i will add you to our list.

      • American
        August 12, 2012, 5:28 pm

        Oh hell, C&D….we have litteral above the law criminals running our government and country ….and we should worry about pissant laws about defacing ads?….LOL

        Although I agree that their ads should stay up…..they will piss off decent people.

      • American
        August 12, 2012, 5:58 pm

        ”The best kind of “counter ads” would surely be to turn their own words against them”

        There are hundreds of all kinds of racist statements that would shock the public and all kinds of Israeli supporters derogatory statements about America that would set people aflame.
        The country should be flooded with posters with everything from those to quotes from and pictures of our politicans swearing to spend every drop of US blood and treasure for Israel, to posters comparing laying off the US Post Office to giving Israel 3 billion dollars.
        There are hundreds upon hundreds! of this stuff the public has never seen or heard.

      • CloakAndDagger
        August 12, 2012, 6:12 pm

        @ American

        .and we should worry about pissant laws about defacing ads?

        Yeah, the laws only apply to us and not to them. But, more importantly, I don’t want to give them the option to dilute our counter-messages by framing us as vandals and scoff-laws. Sadly, their propaganda skills are better than ours. This is definitely something we need to improve on.

      • Kathleen
        August 13, 2012, 9:03 am

        Annie did not say anything about defacing their adds. Unless I missed something. But counter ads on those buses is a great idea. Although those ads are especially racist. Really curious about who is control of the SF transportation system. Stop sending U.S. aid to build Israel’s illegal settlements! Abide by International agreements.

        Support Israel based on the internationally 67 boundaries. (positive)
        Stop sending U.S. aid used to build Israel’s illegal settlements!

        When Israel walks Apartheid
        When Israel talks Apartheid
        Israel is Apartheid

      • MRW
        August 13, 2012, 12:50 pm


        Defacing an ad is NOT A CRIMINAL offense, which mondonut claimed inaccurately and wanted you all to fall for. It is a civil offense.

        72.36 Jaywalking
        75.10 Riding on sidewalk area
        90.03 Barking dogs
        90.02 Failure to confine animals
        90.04 Defecation of dogs on public/private property
        90.14 Wild or dangerous animals prohibited
        94.21 Litter in public places
        96.03 Open container
        98.17 Off-Street parking
        99.20 Noxious weeds
        115.01 Advertising on private property
        115.02 Advertising on public property
        115.03 Defacing or destroying notifications

        Graffiti is vandalism. Adding a QR Code is ‘defacing’.

      • CloakAndDagger
        August 13, 2012, 3:27 pm

        Defacing an ad is NOT A CRIMINAL offense, which mondonut claimed inaccurately and wanted you all to fall for. It is a civil offense.

        I did not say it was criminal either. I wrote prosecutable, which to the best of my limited legal knowledge, includes civil offenses.

        As an aside, those comparative Palestinian maps in the NJ bus stops were vandalized by zionists. Surprisingly, no surveillance camera shots.

      • Mooser
        August 12, 2012, 5:50 pm

        “So your response to after effects of a court ruling that you disapprove of is to organize criminal actions?”

        Listen Mondosmut, given what is appearing in other articles present in Mondoweiss today on the front page, do you really want to bring up “response to after effects of a court ruling that you disapprove of is to organise criminal actions”?
        C’mon man, don’t you know there are people out there who believe Jews have high intelligence? That’s not an advantage you want to throw away like that.

      • ColinWright
        August 13, 2012, 3:50 pm

        “So your response to after effects of a court ruling that you disapprove of is to organize criminal actions?”

        If I feel the court ruling is illegitimate and the ‘criminal’ action legitimate — sure.

        What’s legal and what’s moral are not identical, and never have been. If there’s anything that’s irritating, it’s people that think whatever is legal is therefore moral.

    • mudder
      August 12, 2012, 2:35 pm

      No need for graffiti. If Geller is successful at framing the I/P debate in this way, then justice will prevail. Let’s hope this sicko, rather than Foxman or Dersh, becomes the face of the pro-Israel side of the debate.

  4. Blake
    August 12, 2012, 10:44 am

    We know there is a bias in America from all quarters. Without that bias “Israel” would be completely alienated. That is why they are desperate to hold onto their last vestige of support and making America complicit in their crimes against humanity.

  5. Koshiro
    August 12, 2012, 10:47 am

    I wish I could say I’m certain that this kind of crude, hateful propaganda will only serve to justly discredit the cause of those who disseminate it. Unfortunately my confidence in the sanity and basic human decency of Western, including American, society is no longer as high as it used to be.

  6. jimmy
    August 12, 2012, 10:50 am

    Stop Islamization of America.

    but the zionization/ of the USA is in full swing for all to see..

    or not see…

    US police forces being Israelized: Gordon Duff

  7. just
    August 12, 2012, 10:51 am

    Let’s see if the ACLU, the ADL, the SPLC, or the Justice Dept. have anything to say about this disgusting ad which could very well lead to hate crimes and incite other violence

    I am beyond furious.

  8. traintosiberia
    August 12, 2012, 11:07 am

    Now can we buy the ad spaces on subway and train and buses across US for that cartoon showing deep and dense perfidious rendezvous between Nethahooooo and Obama up in the sky ( The Hater in the SKY by Eli Valley ) ? It is a political speech.

  9. HarryLaw
    August 12, 2012, 11:13 am

    She’s safe from prosecution in the US, let her try and enter the United Kingdom, the Home Secretary has the power to exclude persons “Not conducive to the public good”If she made it past the Home Secretary here is how we treat hate speech….In the United Kingdom, several statutes protect several categories of persons from hate speech. The statutes forbid communication which is hateful, threatening, abusive, or insulting and which targets a person on account of skin colour, race, disability, nationality (including citizenship), ethnic or national origin, religion, or sexual orientation. The penalties for hate speech include fines or prison or both, come over to the UK Pamela, and make my day.

    • Citizen
      August 13, 2012, 1:21 pm

      @ HarryLaw, and meanwhile the UK, especially Britain, fully support the USA’s enabling of Israel’s activity in every way possible.

  10. Hostage
    August 12, 2012, 11:21 am

    As such, the judge held, the ad “is afforded the highest level of protection under the First Amendment.”

    Israel has designated a specific list of other countries as “enemy states” and “jihad” is a religious principle of Islamic religion. If citizens or employees of the transit authority can’t file complaints with EEOC about religious or national origin harassment, then Jewish faculty and students can fold-up their lawsuits against the state over the so-called anti-Semitic climate on campuses.

    For that matter, what’s up with the attempts by the US State Department “Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism”? Isn’t that a futile attempt to chill constitutionally protected free speech? If Semites can label their brethren “savages”, then surely turnabout is fair play if others describe us all as a bunch of primitive cocksuckers? e.g.
    *Mohels protest restriction on ‘suction’ during circumcision,7340,L-4265887,00.html
    *Norway’s ombudsman for children’s rights has proposed that Jews and Muslims replace male circumcision with a symbolic, nonsurgical ritual

  11. BillM
    August 12, 2012, 11:21 am

    I’d like to thank Pam Gellar and company for helping to bury the myth that Israel is anything other than a leftover colonial enterprise.

  12. MLE
    August 12, 2012, 11:54 am

    Well the first thing I thought of when seeing this ad was the song from Pochantas, so congrats to Pam Gellar for reminding me of Native American genocide.

    But correct in the assumption that for many people on the fence for the whole issue, the references of “savages” and “civilized man” does not sit well with anyone but racist white people.

  13. edwin
    August 12, 2012, 11:58 am

    The add will polarize, isolate, and create a “white” vs. “coloured” siege mentality . It could indeed backfire. I would imagine that most immigrant groups will not be impressed. I imagine that the black community will not be impressed. If European countries notice, they will not be impressed.

    Welcome to the 1930’s.

    • MRW
      August 12, 2012, 2:17 pm

      ‘Savage’ conjures up The Heart of Darkness and the entire colonial experiment. Won’t be lost on the Black community.

      • CloakAndDagger
        August 12, 2012, 2:26 pm

        Yes, that was certainly a stupid choice of adjectives!

  14. chuckcarlos
    August 12, 2012, 12:02 pm

    this is rather humorous…

    another example of that much vaunted “jewish” intelligence?

    like everybody else, some jews can’t dance, can’t cook, can’t run, can’t skip rope and are extremely STUPID….

    these guys should be done with it and just go down to the bunker, suck on a cyanide pill and shoot themselves in the head

    bet these guys are still looking for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and that Mo Atta Iraqi contact in Innsbruck…

    Most likely the ad was put together on the a Mac whose producer was an Arab…

    good for a few laughs…and probably running on the 30 Stockton running through Chinatown

  15. CloakAndDagger
    August 12, 2012, 12:03 pm

    While I am incensed with having to see this on the sides of buses here in San Francisco, I have to agree that this is indeed free speech and protected as such.

    Free speech means allowing the voices of those whom we despise and disagree with.

    However, this does not mean that we should allow it to go unchallenged. It is incumbent upon us to counter this with ads of our own.

    I have great faith in the people of San Francisco. I do believe that most of us are educated enough to know that this is crap. Our challenge is to get to the people who are not as aware – and to do that, we need to have ads of our own. They should highlight how support of Israel is a threat to America and American ideals.

    And so the grand battle begins…

    • Charles Barwin
      August 12, 2012, 12:34 pm

      From what I understand, there is a large population of Israelis working in high tech in the SF area. Should make for some interesting water-cooler conversation.

      • CloakAndDagger
        August 12, 2012, 1:14 pm

        Should make for some interesting water-cooler conversation.

        Yes, there are many companies that are wholly owned by Israelis in Silicon Valley, and others with many Israeli engineers, many of them with dual citizenship.

        In the Israeli companies, it is career suicide to discuss the I/P issues around a water-cooler, and especially with a pro-Palestinian POV.

        It is very unusual to hear conversations about Israel openly in any Silicon Valley company that I am aware of. I think most HR personnel would consider it “creating a hostile environment” to do so.

      • chuckcarlos
        August 12, 2012, 1:28 pm

        try Indian Engineers in microprocessors and computing

        Chinese and Sikh less

        Chinese dominate Biology in Bay Area, Chinese and Sikh Engineers dominate Civil, Structural and Soils Engineering

        MDs are becoming more dominated by Indian Women with nurses in hospitals being Filipino…

        Artists are Hispanic

        generality in Northern and most likely Southern California

        Mac and Apple after all pioneered and produced by one of them no good swarthy low intelligence no culture ARABS

      • MRW
        August 12, 2012, 2:15 pm

        Correct, chuckcarlos. The Indians and Sikhs know they’re next. It just happened.

      • libra
        August 12, 2012, 8:41 pm

        You’ve got everyone nicely pigeonholed there, Chuck.

  16. Dexter
    August 12, 2012, 12:16 pm

    Do we know what company was used to place the ad????

    • ColinWright
      August 12, 2012, 2:49 pm

      “Do we know what company was used to place the ad????”

      Why? Did you want to thank them and suggest other progressive communities they could run the ad in?

  17. Mndwss
    August 12, 2012, 12:53 pm
  18. Chespirito
    August 12, 2012, 1:21 pm

    The ad is noxious, but the judge decided correctly and I am glad to live in a country with fewer laws regulating speech, even “hate speech,” than Canada or the UK. Supporters of tough “hate speech” laws should know that the full force of such will inevitably be wielded against unpopular causes, like the cause of justice for Palestine and the cause of a saner US policy towards Israel/Palestine. (For instance, I was informally accused of “spreading hate” for hosting Palestinian-American speakers at my law school.) Frankly I wish the ACLU had taken a stronger, unequivocal stance against federal hate crimes legislation in 2009.

    But lavish thanks to Pam Gellar for this ad which, though perfectly evil, does have the redeeming virtue of strategic imbecility. Calling Palestinians “savages” is not going to go down well with a lot of people in San Francisco, and will only draw attention to the many strong arguments against American “support” for Israel. I do hope Gellar will get some air time on local TV to justify her ads? The lady is so obviously unhinged, with so much nasty venom spritzing out of her pores (verily, even through the pancake makeup) that she will make many people rethink their default position of unquestioning support for Israel. Who would want to be on the same side of any issue as Pam Gellar?

    • Denis
      August 12, 2012, 2:44 pm

      @Chespirito: Who would want to be on the same side of any issue as Pam Gellar?


      As long as the issue is free speech. Ches, I think you started your comment beautifully, and then went south on us.

      The whining PC anti-speech comments here are a lot scarier than Gellar or her ad. Shame on every one of you. As the USSCt has said many times, the way to counter noxious speech — particularly political speech — is not to ban it, but with more free speech. Gellar disgusts me, what she has to say disgusts me, but I’ll contribute to her cause if it’s the only way to defeat the kind of censorship advocated here.

      You should be paying more attention to Canada, where Harper’s government uses the kind of hate-speech laws advocated here to shut up everyone who criticizes Israel. This website would likely be banned in Canada and UK. Be careful what you wish for.

      • justicewillprevail
        August 12, 2012, 4:06 pm

        The issue is more about double standards, which promote this kind of racism whilst seeking to ban and stifle any rational discussion of Israeli occupation. If you lived in the South at the height of Jim Crow, would you similarly defend the right of the KKK to put up ads about fighting the ‘savages’?

      • Chespirito
        August 12, 2012, 4:59 pm

        Dear Justicewillprevail, thank you for the question. I would indeed, if living in the South at the height of Jim Crow, have defended the right of the KKK to put up ads about fighting the “savages.” Because any law preventing the Klan from doing so would surely have been wielded with ten times the force against the SNCC, NAACP, SCLC and other groups from getting their message out too.

        We need fewer restrictions on political speech today, not more, especially regarding the issue of US policy to Israel and Palestine. What offends my sense of justice is not Pam Geller’s legal right to put up her imbecilic ad, but the way the Irvine 11 were convicted of the misdemeanor of “disturbing a meeting”. Which is to say we agree on the existence of a noxious double-standard, we just seem to have opposed views on how to undo it.

      • justicewillprevail
        August 12, 2012, 7:16 pm

        The Palestinian ads which caused all the fuss were aimed at either political funding or redressing public ignorance about history of the Middle East. If Israel wants to fund ads arguing the opposite, then they can. This is a different league – racist and incitement to hatred, reminiscent of 1930’s Germany, ugly, offensive and liable to encourage attacks – look at those Sikh murders recently. The law should be able to tell the difference.

    • Denis
      August 12, 2012, 9:58 pm

      JWP — you are a blatant hypocrite. Blatant.

      You don’t like the sound of the word “savage” b/c it “promotes racism,” at least when Geller uses it. OK.

      You want to ban speech you characterize as “… racist incitement to hatred, reminiscent of 1930’s Germany, ugly, offensive and liable to encourage attacks.” And yet you are guilty of inciting hatred with own speech.

      Here are three recent examples of your own invective and hate-filled, free-speech on this blog. It took me 3 minutes to find them. There are many more.

      Example #1. “I suppose the hardhearted swine will tell us they wanted publicity. They are beyond reason.” Jun24.2012 [“Swine” in reference to Israelis OK. Savages not. Hmmmm . . .]

      Example #2. “Sanity has completely deserted these people, as they construct ludicrous, self-serving narratives to justify their slimeball occupation and relentless violence. The depths of their racism is grotesque, military service clearly rots your mind with its construction of a fantasy enemy only believable to those deeply embedded in a cult. Pathetic and dangerous stereotyping which can only fuel more psychopathic violence by the laughably ‘moral’ IDF.” Jun19.2012 [“Slimeball, pathetic, psychopathic” – clear incitement to hatred.]

      Example #3. “Let’s face it, the Israelis are sick, lowlife pond dwellers who imagine they have the right to ruin lives of people who have the wrong parents. How dumb and perverted can you get.” Jun18.2012 [“Sick, “low-life”, “pond dwellers,” “dumb,” “perverted” – this language will get you locked up in Germany, England, Canada.]

      And you have a problem with “savage?” If speech were to be banned b/c it is offensive, yours would go out the door a lot quicker than Gellar’s.

      You are the epitome of those who want to control or eliminate the invective of others while spewing your own. Your ideas, like Gellar’s, are not without value in the marketplace of ideas. Even your rabid contention that other’s free speech should be repressed according to your standards is not without value, dispicable as that contention is to those of us who value freedom of speech above any other freedom. In America you are entitled to spew the hatred you do, and, ironically, you are entitled to be a hypocrite, which is the point you don’t get.

      BTW, since you asked . . . yes, I was in the South before Jim Crow ended, having lived in Virginia most of my life and studied law there. And I was in Virginia when a young black ACLU lawyer there defended the free speech of KKK idiots who burned crosses on their own property. That black gentleman obviously got it. You should give it some quiet thought, maybe you can get it, too.

      • Mooser
        August 13, 2012, 10:18 am

        Denis, I’m glad you want to encourage free speech. I’ve been holding back quite a bit, restraining myself, for the sake of decent dialogue. But since you think it’s the right thing to do, I can now freely tell what I think, and know.

        Let the Jew-baiting begin!

      • ColinWright
        August 13, 2012, 1:06 pm

        Mooser says: ‘Denis, I’m glad you want to encourage free speech.’

        There’s hypocrisy for you. Our resident censor, and he wants to encourage free speech.

      • Citizen
        August 13, 2012, 1:39 pm

        @ Mooser
        I think the cockroaches deserve a voice in your logic.

      • Denis
        August 13, 2012, 2:29 pm

        @ Mooser: But since you think it’s the right thing to do, I can now freely tell what I think, and know. Let the Jew-baiting begin!

        Nothing new. Assuming you are in the US, your Constitutional right to bait Jews, or gentiles, or Yankees fans, or Republicans has been there all the time. Just click your heels, Dorothy, and fly away.

        Of course your right to bait Jews on MW, specifically, is limited by the moderators, who do a pretty good job of encouraging lively discussions that are not too far over the top. Enjoy. [I’m not even sure I know what “baiting Jews” means, but I’m sure they’ll sort you out.]

      • justicewillprevail
        August 13, 2012, 5:50 pm

        Wow, Denis, that’s an impressive chip you’ve got on your shoulder. A very good lawyer’s attempt at dragging up some carefully selected text, expressing revulsion at israeli state actions and their agents, conflated with questioning whether a democracy should allow racist publishing in advertising. Hmm, yes, must be the same thing. You can get earn big bucks with this sort of fancy legal footwork, why are you spending time on here? Karl Rove could probably use an intern.
        Burning crosses is free speech? No wonder the settlers feel free to harass and intimidate Palestinians, after all it’s only free speech.

  19. justicewillprevail
    August 12, 2012, 1:21 pm

    Unbelievable. Language straight from racist, colonial literature, most of it typically Western justification for looting and genocide in the 16th – 19th Centuries (not to mention its ultimate apotheosis in Nazi Germany). Does the First Amendment protect ignorant, racist hate speech, and incitement to hatred and violence? This ad puts Israel in the same league as the KKK, who would be proud of it. Yes, support the civilised person, that would be the ancient cultures of the Middle east, such as Persian (ie Iran) and Palestinian. If anybody qualifies as savage, Israel fits the bill like a glove. This is sick.

  20. Dexter
    August 12, 2012, 1:26 pm

    Ok, so we should be able to put the word “DON’T” in front of “SUPPORT,” the letter “I” after “ISRAEL,” and the word “APARTHEID” at the end — so the ad would read:


    This is so doable!

  21. The Hasbara Buster
    August 12, 2012, 1:26 pm

    OK, here’s what I’ll do.

    I’ll place an ad in the NYC subway reading:

    Between the civilized man and the one who kills little children to drink from their blood, support the civilized man.


    Yeah I know, it’s the f*cking old blood libel, but I think Judge Engelmayer will have no problem with it. After all, it’s “core political speech” advocating “a pro-Palestinian perspective in the Israel-Palestine conflict”, and implicitly calling for “a change in US policy regarding that conflict;” and, as such, it “is afforded the highest level of protection under the First Amendment.” No objection to make.

    DISCLAIMER (heeding David Samel’s advice): I don’t plan to run such an ad; it’s a reductio ad absurdum argument, for God’s sake.

    Seriously now, how can a man with such a large piece of sh*t in the brain become a NY judge?

    • Setanta
      August 12, 2012, 7:16 pm

      How can a man without a large piece of shit in the brain become a judge in the US? Being a proven shithead is a prerequisite for the job.

  22. mudder
    August 12, 2012, 1:41 pm

    UN GA resolution 3379, adopted in late 1975, declared that “Zionism is a form of racism and racial discrimination.” I am sure many SF residents will rightly be wondering why that resolution is considered infamous.

  23. Les
    August 12, 2012, 1:48 pm

    Picket San Francisco synagogues until the signs are removed. It’s time we heard from the establishment rabbis.

    • CloakAndDagger
      August 12, 2012, 2:05 pm

      If we picket the synagogues, we are guilty of conflating jews with zionism just like Pam Geller.

      • MRW
        August 12, 2012, 2:14 pm


      • CloakAndDagger
        August 12, 2012, 2:21 pm


        So, how are we better than they are?

      • Mooser
        August 12, 2012, 2:39 pm

        Right, Cloak and Dagger! With a little dialogue, it might just be possible to get some synagogues on record against the ads.
        Should be possible to get local Rabbis to speak against the ads.
        And it’s a tactic very much worth trying. And who, exactly, wants to stand with Pam Geller on anything?

      • Kathleen
        August 13, 2012, 4:03 pm

        Some of this is taught in synagogues

      • CloakAndDagger
        August 13, 2012, 11:31 pm

        I don’t accept that. It sounds similar to: “some terrorism is taught in mosques”.

  24. traintosiberia
    August 12, 2012, 2:07 pm

    How does zionism work in public space and in Government spaces?
    1- In public space use antis emitism to silence potential negative news on zionist activities in and around world .
    public space ,use the idea of freedom of speech and freedom of expression to defile the human and human activities inimical to zionist interest
    3-In government space ,threaten the senators and Congressmen if the Israeli lines are not toed
    4-Use the idea of terrorism to remove any muslim or Arab from US administration or from legislative commission.

    Removal of ads asking for stopping American aid and transfer of money and weapons to Israel -2012 for being antisemitic.

    Removal of Al Marayati from National commission on Terrorism instigated by Rabbi and AJC in 1999
    Demand to remove laila Al Marayati and Joseph Zagbi from Clintons adminsitration
    Calling Minnesota Senator antisemitic for not supporting AIPAC driven sanctions on Palestine
    Terming Desmund Tutu as antisemitic
    labeling as antisemitic anyone who dares to question Israeli approved dialogue on Iranian nukes.

    • Citizen
      August 13, 2012, 1:53 pm

      @ traintosiberia

      I don’t mind Pam’s ad. What’s good for the goose, is good for the gander. How about an ad that simply says: “If you favor justice for Palestinians, you must be an ‘anti-Semite'”?

      Or “UN GA resolution 3379, adopted in late 1975, declared that ‘Zionism is a form of racism and racial discrimination.'”

      Or: ” “In any war between the civilized man and the savage, support the civilized man.” Then, between two Old Glory flags, the ad says: “Support the Palestinian people. Defeat Zionism.”

  25. PeaceThroughJustice
    August 12, 2012, 2:22 pm

    From Pam Geller’s site:

    This is a great victory for the First Amendment. The freedom of speech is increasingly threatened in the U.S. in recent years — the Left and Islamic supremacists are doing all they can to rule honest discussion of Islamic jihad violence and Jew-hatred out of the realm of acceptable public discourse. Judge Engelmayer has struck a huge blow against this sinister authoritarian effort and for the freedom of speech that is the cornerstone of all our freedoms.

    And while you’re reading this, remember that Atlas Shrugged has a daily readership more than twice that of MW, and that hers is just one of hundreds like it. Phil insists that there is a sea change going on in the Jewish community, but it seems somebody out there still enjoys the old tribal message.

    PS Do you think Judge Engelmayer might be Jewish?

    • Mooser
      August 12, 2012, 2:44 pm

      “And while you’re reading this, remember that Atlas Shrugged has a daily readership more than twice that of MW,”

      Didn’t a company just abandon Facebook advertising because they discovered the millions of “clicks” whic drove up their rates were being produced by “bots”?

  26. sky7i
    August 12, 2012, 2:30 pm

    Thankfully, most people know that civilized men don’t typeset in ALL CAPS!

  27. MRW
    August 12, 2012, 2:32 pm

    Ayn Rand calls Arabs “savages.”

  28. ColinWright
    August 12, 2012, 2:38 pm

    This is good. I suggest running this ad in all far-left, multi-ethnic communities. It should produce excellent results.

    It’s hard to believe anyone was dumb enough to think this was a good idea — but I’ll take it.

  29. The Hasbara Buster
    August 12, 2012, 2:44 pm

    It’s curious how the Zionists who pushed for the removal of the Seattle ads (which contained no racial slurs), claiming that it was hate speech, not free speech, are now supporting these racist Geller ads on the grounds that they’re free speech. Cake, having, eating.

    • Hostage
      August 12, 2012, 5:20 pm

      It’s curious how the Zionists who pushed for the removal of the Seattle ads (which contained no racial slurs), claiming that it was hate speech, not free speech, are now supporting these racist Geller ads on the grounds that they’re free speech. Cake, having, eating.

      Clear Channel was privately owned. It took down the billboards based on company policy. These ads are placed with a government agency.

  30. DICKERSON3870
    August 12, 2012, 2:46 pm

    Pamela Geller is an absolutely adorable bigot! She is surely the pride of Long Island (where she was born and raised, and also the home to Islamophobe Peter King’s congressional district)!
    You go girl! ! !

    P.S. A NICE FILM FROM AUSTRIA: The Whore’s Son (Hurensohn), 2004, NR, 86 minutes
    For 16 years, young Ozren has believed his mother’s story that she doesn’t come home at night because she’s working hard as a waitress. But then one day he learns the truth: She’s a prostitute, and he’s the son of a whore. Set in Vienna in the early 1990s, this coming-of-age drama tracks Ozren’s journey of self-discovery as he copes with his seemingly loss of innocence. Michael Sturminger directs.
    Language: German (English subtitles)
    Netfix Format: DVD
    Netflix listing –
    Internet Movie Database –
    The Whore’s Son (Hurensohn), a film by Michael Sturminger Austria Trailer HD [VIDEO, 01:32] –

    • Annie Robbins
      August 12, 2012, 3:11 pm

      she’s a freak

      • Philip Munger
        August 12, 2012, 7:10 pm

        That one has the most hits of any Pam Geller on Youtube, IIRC. There was one with more hits, where she gets sort of snockered on wine and, uh, opens up. She took it down a couple of years ago.

  31. DICKERSON3870
    August 12, 2012, 3:00 pm
  32. Dan Crowther
    August 12, 2012, 3:07 pm

    Good for San Fran – these people should be able to say what they want. Full Stop.

    The problem with the PC police is that they allow for the racists, the bigots etc to mask their real meanings, by abstracting and so on. Lee Atwater (southern strategy):

    “You start out in 1954 by saying, ‘Nigger, nigger, nigger,’ ” said Atwater. “By 1968, you can’t say ‘nigger’ — that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states’ rights, and all that stuff. You’re getting so abstract now [that] you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things, and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites.”

    These guys have played the PC movement like a piano. Its time we all step back and invite them to say what they really mean.

    • dbroncos
      August 12, 2012, 10:29 pm

      “These guys have played the PC movement like a piano. Its time we all step back and invite them to say what they really mean”

      Word yo!

      • Citizen
        August 13, 2012, 2:03 pm

        @ Dan
        You mean like Phil was doing with Zell in another recent article here?

      • Dan Crowther
        August 13, 2012, 6:42 pm

        Yep. Exactly. Let them say what they really mean, in the language they want to use. They’re their own worst enemy, but only if the veil of abstraction is lifted.

    • American
      August 13, 2012, 7:29 pm

      @ Dan

      excellent point.

  33. DICKERSON3870
    August 12, 2012, 3:08 pm

    RE: “Asked how this particular ad is not considered political in light of Muni’s no-politics policy, Rose struggled to answer.” ~ ABC7 News

    MY COMMENT: Yes, I can see how even a “Philadelphia Lawyer” might get flummoxed (have difficulty) answering that!

    Philadelphia Lawyer – Woody Guthrie [VIDEO, 02:38] –

    • Rusty Pipes
      August 12, 2012, 5:03 pm

      SF Muni’s “no-politics policy” is dead because, after considering New York’s example, it cannot afford to litigate the matter in order to enforce it. If it now rejects other political ads, it can be accused of violating free speech and preferential treatment.

  34. ToivoS
    August 12, 2012, 5:08 pm

    I don’t get it. Pro-Palestinian bill boards in S. Cal and bus adds in Seattle are removed at the instigation of Israeli firsters. But this obviously hate filled add wins court backing. Why? Do the Zionists have better lawyers? Or just better judges?

    BTW, I agree with the court here, my complaint is why that kind of justice is not available to the Palestinians. Hmm, isn’t that how it works in Israel? Maybe we are seeing Israel justice migrating to the US.

    • MRW
      August 13, 2012, 4:47 am


      Maybe we are seeing Israel justice migrating to the US.

      Yes. We are. Damn smart observation and damn shame.

      • Citizen
        August 13, 2012, 2:06 pm

        So let’s give kudos to the Israel Firsters who obviously have Dick and Jane’s number, considering the Jewish community in the USA is only 2% of the whole. Hard not to conclude that’s one BIG DUMB goy cow so easily pushed over. Hey, didn’t Bibi say that to his Israeli pals when he thought the tape recorder was off?

        Imagine if our usual majority white American politicians, both incumbents and wannabees were as tribal as our Jewish community, instead of merely being motivated by more actual individualism (when not by only pure power and materialism, a combo aspect of pure individualism itself) when it comes to foreign policy and national defense.

    • ColinWright
      August 13, 2012, 6:43 am

      “Why? Do the Zionists have better lawyers? Or just better judges?”

      They’re better organized, and if they’re as given to infighting, I haven’t noticed.

      Too many opponents of Israel want to win the argument. Israel’s supporters just want to win.

      • Citizen
        August 13, 2012, 2:22 pm

        @ Colin Wright
        RE: “Too many opponents of Israel want to win the argument. Israel’s supporters just want to win.”

        That’s because Zionist propaganda has been embedded in American soil at least since Leon Uris’s Exodus. You gotta admit, Paul Newman does not look like Sheldon Adelson, or George Soros for that matter. Adelson actually looks like a toad dreamt up by Julius Streicher–remember him? He was the only German hung at Nuremberg for his speech.

    • Roya
      August 13, 2012, 8:32 pm

      Maybe we are seeing Israel justice migrating to the US.

      Great observation, ToivoS. Philip Giraldi commented on this as well.
      America Adopts the Israel Paradigm (intro):

      I recently read a fascinating article by Scott McConnell, “The Special Relationship With Israel: Is It Worth the Cost?,” which appeared in the spring 2012 Middle East Policy Council Journal. Even for those of us who have closely followed the issue of Israel’s asymmetrical relationship with the United States, Scott provides some unique insights. He observes, for example, that the result of the “special relationship” between the United States and Israel has been the wholesale adoption of Israeli policies and viewpoints by Washington’s policymakers and pundits. As Scott puts it, there exists “a transmission belt, conveying Israeli ideas on how the United States should conduct itself in a contested and volatile part of the world. To a great extent, a receptive American political class now views the Middle East and their country’s role in it through Israel’s eyes.”

  35. Taxi
    August 12, 2012, 5:10 pm

    I humbly submit my posterized response:

    Promoting Islamophobia At Home
    In The Name Of Supporting A Foreign Country
    Is Against Our Beloved Constitution.

    • anonymouscomments
      August 13, 2012, 3:04 am

      is it against our constitution?

      i would say-
      “Is against US interests, and even the interests of said foreign country, and their civilians who seek peace and justice”

      • Taxi
        August 13, 2012, 8:10 am

        It’s against the Constitution to promote religious discrimination – the use of the word “Jihad” specifically targets moslems, and moslems are a religious group.

        They’re conflating, trying to hide israel’s occupational crimes behind America’s fear of Wahabism, an extremist islamic Saudi cult, no different from Likudism and Born-Againism.

      • Citizen
        August 13, 2012, 2:28 pm

        @ Taxi, you’re right, but in all my conversations with American Christian fundies who support Israel no matter the cost, not one of them has ever recognized even the word “Likud.” Further, even worse, they have no idea what factual “Zionism” is, and most never heard that word either.

  36. Rusty Pipes
    August 12, 2012, 5:11 pm

    Interesting that the NY case and the SF ads were approved weeks ago. However, their appearance on Muni buses just after the Sikh Temple massacre will make the racism of the ads even more obvious to the average SF rider: Islamophobia kills — underwritten by right-wing Zionists.

    • Rusty Pipes
      August 13, 2012, 2:08 pm

      Is it necessary to mention that, while there were hate crimes (resulting in deaths) against Sikhs following 9-11, 98% of Homeland Security funds for protecting religious communities have gone to Jewish organizations?

  37. American
    August 12, 2012, 5:38 pm

    I must be going thru some kinda brain rewiring or transition cause every time I look at this post headline it flips words to ……” Savage Geller hit by bus”.

  38. Shmuel
    August 12, 2012, 6:09 pm

    In any war between civilized man and the savage, support the civilized man.

    Like this?

    Or this?

  39. elephantine
    August 12, 2012, 9:49 pm

    Wow absolutely disgusting.

  40. dbroncos
    August 12, 2012, 10:01 pm

    This could have come straight from the archives of Mussolini’s Italy, Hitler’s Germany, or Jeff Davis’ Confederate States and that’s how it will be read by most onlookers. Geller and her rich, powerful pals may be disappointed to learn that their ads will have the opposite effect from the one they intended.

    • Citizen
      August 13, 2012, 2:48 pm

      @ dbroncos
      You are living in a bubble. Don’t you have any contact with average, regular Americans? They don’t “onlook” the way you imply. They are way too ignorant, and as well, propagandized since childhood.

  41. dbroncos
    August 12, 2012, 10:25 pm

    In this case Muni clearly opted to avoid a costly court battle in spite of its own “no politics” rule. The ruling in NY may have influenced their decision to drop their objections but just as important is the understanding that there is a bottomless pit of money behind Geller and her organization. Citing the legal precident in NY is a euphemism for money=power in the same way that the decisive “Jewish voters” and “Jewish support” is a euphemism for the bank accounts of a handful of Jewish millionaire and billionaire donors who will spare no expense when the cause is defending Israeli fascism.

  42. Inanna
    August 13, 2012, 12:53 am

    I wonder how Geller thinks that this ad makes her civilised?

    • Citizen
      August 13, 2012, 2:51 pm

      @ Inanna
      Geller does not think her ad makes her civilized, she thinks that her ad is the earnest result of her being civilized.

      • LanceThruster
        August 13, 2012, 3:48 pm

        Geller on one hand says she supports the “good” Muslims, and one the other says there are no good Muslims.

        Savage “logic” to say the least.

  43. ColinWright
    August 13, 2012, 5:00 am

    Looking at the ad more closely…

    ‘American Freedom Defense Initiative’? This is starting to feel like I’ve gotten trapped in a somewhat lurid science fiction story about a dystopian future.

    Somebody is making all this up, right? I mean, that’s okay. I can handle it. Just tell me this ride isn’t real.

  44. ColinWright
    August 13, 2012, 6:47 am

    What’s nauseating is considering the self-appointed ‘civilized men.’

  45. Kathleen
    August 13, 2012, 9:06 am

    These ads up on SF buses demonstrates how an allegedly liberal city is filled with right wing radical folks who support Israel no matter what they do. Another strong example of how this conflict unites alleged liberal congresspeople and others with those on the radical right on this issue. Been happening for decades

    • Citizen
      August 13, 2012, 3:00 pm

      @ Kathleen
      SF is like the Jerry Springer Show. Pretty open, what goes on there, but always controlled by Jerry, pretending he’s just an honest broker with an occasional urge to stick in an egging-on dagger, always quickly sloughed off by him as as “just joking.” Neither set audience nor TV audience (mostly) have a clue. Very lucrative. Then Jerry pontificates morality and ethics at the close of each window presented as pure reality.

      • Kathleen
        August 13, 2012, 4:09 pm

        I spent a day with Springer in Athens Ohio. Worked for the Athens County Chair and she often had me pick up the big shots visiting our area. Interesting and fun. Jerry was considering running for Governor at the same time Strickland was going for the spot. I had great fun with him. So smart, quick and patient with everyone who came up to him “Jerry, Jerry, Jerry” He often listened to people in an interested way. I let him know within the first hour that I thought his show was ridiculous…he laughed…he knows it. I also shared that I thought his show was going to be tough for people to get over and take him seriously. Although I think he would actually have made a good Governor (just not better than Strickland) Lots more to the day. He did write a big fat check for our local Dem party.

    • Dexter
      August 13, 2012, 10:30 pm

      Exactly right Kathleen. The Palestine-Israel conflict is the only issue in which so-called liberals and conservatives agree with each other 100 percent of the time. Once again, America is on the wrong side of history.

      Are we the most uninformed, apathetic people on the planet? It’s a rhetorical question.

  46. traintosiberia
    August 13, 2012, 9:12 am

    How propagnda works-very soon she will be quoted of her strenous efforts to bring the dark side of Isalmofasim to good,naive,wetern catizen’s awareness until another Breivovic( Norweigian fundamentalist terrorist ) conjures up something succeessfully. Oh! wait.Didn’t just something like that happen in Wisconsin? But the media picked up wrong lesson from that teachable moment. “Sikhs are different.They are often misidentified as mulsim.Thye are a peaceful religion.The killer is skin head and racist”As if killing a muslim would have been perfectly understandable and may be condoneable.It was more likely that man was a killer out to kill as many muslim as he wanted .He just ended up in wrong place from wrong lesson and wrong information. But is this unexpected? it is symtomatic of wider stupidities that are cultivated in US. That same thread of stupidity makes sure that while Sikh may not be differntiated from another rag -head or towel-head ,it makes sure that it conceals hides the reason for anger at US from those lands that are victims of perennial American intrusion.
    Following 911, call went out of draining swamps of intolertant ideologies. Following Wisconsin, system of justice went out to make sure a logic is provided for this kind of violence. Following 911, every utterances in every mosques and in each verse of Koran was scrutinized.Idea of taming Islam at its core was raised. Idea of changing the creed was demanded. idea of converting them wholesale to a new faith ( i wonder why to Christianity why not Hindusim or Buddhism were demanded) was raised.
    But the routine outburst of hatred in the columns of NY group of news paper or in FOX never get addressed even after 11 years folowing 911.

    In so called intellectual circle another way “manufacturing reality and support” for that holographic reality works. Here how it goes –

    “an article by Barak Ravid — based on interviews with an unnamed Israeli official — claiming that U.S. intelligence had now concluded that Iran was making rapid progress toward a bomb. The information in the article was subsequently “confirmed” by Israeli defense minister Ehud Barak (who for all we know was the source of the original leak), but quickly denied by American officials. (Side note: shouldn’t someone ask Ravid and his editors if they now want to retract the story?)

    Yes a plan and a request for mass murder of the thousands order magnitude against a nation that has not hurt anybody travel across the globe on the wings of machine for “freedom of expression” and “honest reporting” that report truth and reality. the source is the reporter and the publisher and also deliverer of the message at the doorstep of the morons of differnet stripes united in hatred aginst mulsim/arabs. Just like the justice system when it comes to muslim, they are cop,prosecution,and and the judge. the World from India to Mynamar to Sri Lanka to Norway is provided a reason to go after their local mulsim population. At least that what you get when you read the media coverage and the letters on these violences from these countries. This kind of Bus ad is nothing but attempt to keep that kettle of hatred boiling.

    • Annie Robbins
      August 13, 2012, 9:47 am

      The information in the article was subsequently “confirmed” by Israeli defense minister Ehud Barak (who for all we know was the source of the original leak)

      traintosiberia, yes, barak was the source of the leak…

      Noam Sheizaf reports at +972 that this “anonymous decision maker” pushing war is none other than Ehud Barak:
      (big cut..go read)…Not to be upstaged by his own anonymous persona Barak went on Israeli Radio and trumped this ‘new intellegence’ which has since morphed into a new US National Intelligence Estimate report claiming the US has learned Iran is even closer to a bomb.

      • traintosiberia
        August 13, 2012, 12:17 pm

        This is not an isolated event. Things like this have been happening from the early years of the Republic following Barbary war when the need for Navy suddenly became a national need for security and interest and “aliens” were hounded and laws were instituted against any naysayers to war.That time also saw manufacturing of truths to stir anti Muslim/anti Arab craze. Things never change. The foot soldiers of those days have striking resemblances to the current crop of myth-generator to hate-monegrs exemplified by Judith Miller to Geller. Only this time repurcussion is global.

        Following 911, 2002 saw massacre of muslim in India ( Gujrat), in Xinxiang,and in Chechen and obviously Nathahoo found out “it is good for Israel”.
        But these deeds are always justfied using either national interest or freedom of expression while same is denied to who hold differnet views.
        Will NY Times ever or WaPO or CNN ever show the effects of sanctions or war on iran,Iraq,or on Libya? Will they allow muslim organization or Plaestiniana take out any ads supporting thier causes?

        No they are independent organization. Thats why.
        So why does not governemnt step in saying that any conatct with their reporters will be on hold until the secular Government see an impartiality?

      • Citizen
        August 13, 2012, 3:15 pm

        Yeah, Annie, I think traintosiberia has the SOP down pat. Too bad for all Americans and Israelis especially, not to mention the rest of the world’s people. Meanwhile, we have, for example, Joe Lieberman, being touted as a lone rational person amid US politics, when he’s actually a poison entering the skin of any humane, rational person., American or otherwise. I guess it pays to look like an oatmeal cookie. Kosher and all…

      • traintosiberia
        August 13, 2012, 9:07 pm

        Thanks Citizen and Thansk Annie

  47. LanceThruster
    August 13, 2012, 1:35 pm

    If it’s read top to bottom and then left to right it says “SUPPORT DEFEAT ISRAEL JIHAD.”

    Maybe a few strategically placed arrows might help.

  48. stopaipac
    August 13, 2012, 2:51 pm

    To: Paul Rose ‘[email protected]
    Media Relations Manager
    San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency

    Mr. Rose,

    It was with great sadness that I read of MUNI giving into those that spread hate and racism in our community. Declaring a whole people “savages” belongs in the dustbin of 19th century colonial racism, not on a city bus in the 21st Century of a progressive city like San Francisco.

    Such organized hate has consequences, Mr. Rose. We saw it this month in the senseless slaughter of innocents in Oak Creek, Wisconsin as families were worshiping together. We saw it again in Joplin, Missouri when a mosque was burned down to the ground just days later. We saw it last year in Norway as Anders Breivic, a man inspired in part by the writings of the very same people sponsoring this MUNI ad campaign, killed 77 people.

    Enough is Enough!

    We call on MUNI to immediately remove these ads and to apologize to the whole Bay Area for allowing their vehicles to be used as a “Hate on Wheels” program for those who wish only to increase polarization in our community. MUNI also must especially apologize to the Palestinian and Muslim communities here in the Bay Area, as it has, unwittingly, perhaps, put their lives at greater risk.

    Many would welcome an open and clear debate regarding the wisdom of continued US military support of Israel’s program. It could include ads on buses from many different perspectives. There is nothing wrong with that political debate. But this ad, declaring a whole people as mere savages, is without any genuine political value. It is racist to its core.

    Remove it now.

    Jim Harris
    Stop AIPAC

    • ColinWright
      August 13, 2012, 4:24 pm

      Good letter. Would you object if I blatantly plagiarized it?

    • Dexter
      August 13, 2012, 10:27 pm

      Great letter Jim. Clear and concise.

    • Rusty Pipes
      August 14, 2012, 6:49 pm

      Great letter. I hope you cced the Chronicle. I don’t know how they’ll spin the ads, but I don’t see how they can ignore them.

  49. imforjustice
    August 13, 2012, 3:04 pm

    This is blatant racism – unbelievable that anyone anywhere in our country would think it’s okay. What is our country coming to?

    • Kathleen
      August 13, 2012, 4:11 pm

      I am sure Annie will get to the bottom of just who was involved with the passing of this. In the mean time counter adds are the way to go

      • Tobias
        August 14, 2012, 6:27 am

        Kathleen, I think these ads are despicable. But my view is that they lay a fiendishly clever trap. Geller is trying to provoke a reaction. She knows the counter argument is of course, that Muslims or Palestinians – or opponents of Israel – are not savages. That they are not is debate as it were, on her terms (literally and figuratively), and as Chris Matthews tells us, if you’re explaining to the American people, you’re losing.

        Ignore her feint and answer her with ridicule. Neanderthals like the ones in the old Geico ad campaign could be used. If I remember right they were always upset about being called savage. There are plenty on this site – I’m thinking Mooser – with the ability to write good witty copy.

  50. Jabberwocky
    August 13, 2012, 10:04 pm

    Perhaps we should ask whether the judge was basing his decision on the US legal and constitutional considerations or his support for Zionism?

    Not that Phil generally allows questioning of the loyalties of employees of the US government.

  51. ColinWright
    August 14, 2012, 4:53 pm

    Bigotry is immensely seductive.

    If one can just put over the notion that the bigotry is justified, just watch how many run, not walk, to join the lynch mob. People want to hate.

    Telling them it’s okay is almost sure to work.

Leave a Reply