‘Savage’ NY subway ads get a make-over– revealing their true character

Israel/PalestineUS Politics
on 144 Comments
Port Authority2
Port Authority subway station ad

A friend just sent us these photos of two of the Islamophobic ads that were put up earlier today by Pam Geller’s organization in ten New York subway stations. They got a makeover; and their true character has been revealed.

The one above is in the Port Authority subway station. I hear it’s right next to a police station.

This next one is in the Times Square station, the 1-2-3 platform. Notice how similar the artful amendment of the ad is to an applique on San Francisco buses last month.

Hate speech
Times Square station

And the one below is from the 8th Avenue line, but at 23d Street.

23d street2
23d  St station

Ten ads went up today. So that didn’t take very long. I notice approvingly that the commenters didn’t seek to nullify Pam Geller’s right to free speech; she got to have her say, and that elicited more speech! Another shot from the Port Authority:

Port Authority3
Port Authority ad, closeup

I wonder what other creative additions we’ll see in days to come; what other expressions of public outrage New Yorkers will make. We’ll keep you posted.

Update, 9/25/12:

The ‘Savage’ ads have been altered in at least seven New York subway stations so far: 57th Street and 5th Ave, 28th Street, 23rd Street, two on 42nd street, 34th street and Grand Central.

photo8
28th street 6 platform
IMG 20120925 080443
57th and 5th Ave (F)

144 Responses

  1. EscapeVelocity
    September 25, 2012, 12:18 am

    Vanadalism is a crime.

    • Accentitude
      September 25, 2012, 5:06 am

      So is inciting violence that leads to the tragic deaths of innocent people.

      • Kathleen
        September 25, 2012, 12:53 pm

        bingo. And if the non violent action is far less serious than the crimes the individuals are trying to stop..well then ..

      • pabelmont
        September 25, 2012, 5:26 pm

        Right, and that awful anti-Muhammad video if not actually made or displayed in violation of some law somewhere was at least done with the intent (or with the reasobable expectation) that a violent response would occur — exactly like shouting “FIRE” in a crowded theater (especially one in which there was no fire). Those whose family died in the violence should at least sue the movie makers and perhaps Google if Google had been adequately warned in advance and had opportunity to “pull” the video before the violence erupted.

      • shankyxyz
        September 26, 2012, 1:37 am

        pabelmont, thats almost the worst anology I have ever heard. if you shout fire in a theater in USA or in Pakistan (recall saudi barbaria has no theatres), everywhere people will scamper for the exit, as it is a reasonable thing to do. but if you make a silly film against the gods/prophets of christianity, buddhism, hinduism or judaism, no one is going to get killed in violent protests, which is the reasonable courseof action. It is only with one of the religions which is waiting to be offended that the resonability fails. now do you see how bad your analogy is.

      • Annie Robbins
        September 26, 2012, 1:57 am

        give me an example of a silly film about judaism that’s comparable. where moses or david is portrayed as a pedophile. jewish mobs kill people too and jewish rabbis have been known to incite people to kill and to show no mercy to innocent civilians.

      • ColinWright
        September 26, 2012, 2:06 am

        Annie Robbins says: “give me an example of a silly film about judaism that’s comparable…”

        Well, there’s Der Ewige Jude, Jude Suss…maybe some others.

        B/W, and I would imagine kind of clunky — but basically what you would seem to be after.

      • shankyxyz
        September 26, 2012, 9:46 am

        moreover it need not be comparable. these jokers get off on much less (remeber silly cartoons). as a result this should not be compared with shoutin fire, as in this case the reasonable expectation is that people would get angry and write a few letters to the editor or sue in court or organize a boycott. its only the religion of peace which decides it needs to go further. so its behaviour is not a reasonable expectation. and for your information i have even seen a porno movie themed on the life of jesus christ (peace be upon him).

      • Annie Robbins
        September 26, 2012, 10:13 am

        Der Ewige Jude, Jude Suss? that’s pre ww2 german film colin. and a movie about christ is not ‘ a silly film about judaism’. and a response telling me it “need not be comparable” is not relevant to my question.

        so, i take it that would be a ‘no’ from you both?

        again:

        jewish mobs kill people too and jewish rabbis have been known to incite people to kill and to show no mercy to innocent civilians.

        just because they are backed by billions of dollars, wear uniforms (some of them) and have an official facade doesn’t change the action.

        if, (not that i would be promoting it) governments representing the protestors had the kind of state backing to find retribution for the kind of filth producing and promoting that kind of video or the islamophobia/zionist entity geller promotes the crowds would not be there. as someone said in an earlier thread, zionists do not need to protest because they have the congress to carry out their bidding.

      • Woody Tanaka
        September 26, 2012, 10:27 am

        That’s a load of crap, shank. What you’re saying is that what is expected in our culture is not followed in theirs. Well, what’s expected in their culture (that religious figures will be protected from insult) is not followed in ours. Does that make our expectectation that people can be permitted to insult religious figures unreasoanble? No, they’re just two different cultural norms.

      • EscapeVelocity
        September 26, 2012, 12:49 pm

        The Last Temptation of Christ
        The Life of Brian

      • Woody Tanaka
        September 26, 2012, 1:03 pm

        “The Last Temptation of Christ”

        Oh, come on. Has there anyone who criticizes this movie ever actually SEEN it?? Do they understand how cinema works?? This is one of the movies most respectful of the Christian theology that I’ve ever seen.

      • Citizen
        September 26, 2012, 1:30 pm

        @ Woody Tanaka
        I don’t know that the American cultural norms are completely different. Larry David episode shows him (accidentally) pissing on picture of Jesus. And we had that fine art exhibit year before with Jesus in piss, didn’t we? True, but let me know when you see an HBO comedy episode on TV where the central character (accidentally) pisses on Moses, or on a pic of David facing Goliath at a fine art exhibit, etc. Get me?

      • xanadou
        September 26, 2012, 3:27 pm

        Agree. Vandalising public property with language that abuses the right to free speech is, indeed, vandalism.

        Furthermore, Geller needs to be educated as to the meaning of the term: precedent. Her posters legitimise similar abuses of the language that once trained crosshairs on an entire people.

      • xanadou
        September 26, 2012, 4:00 pm

        There is a difference. Here’s Glenn Grunwald’s awesome rationale:
        link to guardian.co.uk

        Also the ‘Fire!’ analogy does not apply. That exemption arose out of consideration for an instantaneous involuntary reaction to imminent danger within a filled to capacity enclosure. Even the lack of light in a theater does not make a difference. Just consider the news/pix from clubs where actual fires did break out.

      • Woody Tanaka
        September 26, 2012, 4:18 pm

        Citizen,

        That wasn’t the point. The point was about the fact that we value free speech over protecting religious figures from insult whereas they value the opposite.

      • Citizen
        September 27, 2012, 10:02 am

        @Woody Tanaka

        I addressed your point. Read my comment again. My counterpoint was that we in fact do protect Jewish religious figures at the expense of free speech otherwise applicable to all religions.

    • quercus
      September 25, 2012, 6:43 am

      Only if one gets caught, EscapeVelocity, only if one gets caught. And besides I’m not sure how this would go in a court, there would be very good arguments for exercising the right to free speech, and the sign wasn’t damaged, it wasn’t torn, and it is in the public sphere. Are not subways publicly owned? It used to be a crime if a black person refused to give up his or her bus seat. So, frig the law, anyway.

    • traintosiberia
      September 25, 2012, 7:47 am

      You are right but exceptional moment demands exceptional revisit of everything you have learnt and felt sacrosanct. about. “Racism” would not ascribed to and neither vandalism would erupt if they removed these Israeli-posters as they did remove those billboards asking US to stop sending money to Israel. Breakdown of law is same as distorting and manipulating of laws particularly more so when the latter happens from bribery and suppression of information

    • traintosiberia
      September 25, 2012, 8:36 am

      EscapeVelocity
      Do you think vandalism is the only option now left for American people ( who takes subway and trains instead of flying in private jet or roaming around in limousine) to pass /exchange the information like the one provided by Grant Smith about AIPAC and nuclear thievery and the billions of dollars?
      Where do I go to hear about this ? FOX in my Mc Donald is always on and it is always about not doing enough for our only ally in Middle east. It is sad for the Nigerian housekeeper at the Walmart knows everything about Iran being poised to strike at US with nukes and nothing about AIPAC/JINSA/ or Rhode or Franklin or Pearl or Ledeen ( Michael). It is doubly sad if she is also eligible to vote both here and in Nigeria with that kind of knowledge .
      Going back to the basic will reemphasize the fact that long before people found out how to lie they first mastered how to communicate the essential or pertinent information first.If that service is denied then the lying under the freedom of expression should have no place to express itself.

    • Woody Tanaka
      September 25, 2012, 9:45 am

      “Vanadalism is a crime.”

      Yes, and the law should absolutely, if they find out who did it, fine them $1.

    • Shingo
      September 25, 2012, 10:10 am

      Vanadalism is a crime.

      Poor EV equates freedom of expression wih vandalism.

    • MRW
      September 25, 2012, 10:55 am

      Vanadalism is a crime.

      No, it’s not. Not in NY. It’s a civil offense. It’s a jay-walking ticket. Heard of graffiti?

    • sardelapasti
      September 25, 2012, 10:57 am

      This is war

    • Miss Costello
      September 25, 2012, 10:58 am

      EscapeVelocity; “Vanadalism is a crime.” But racism/occupation and the entire shitbag that comes with them, isn’t? How ANYONE can equate ‘vandalism’ with what’s going on in israhel is utterly beyond me. Tiny minds…..

    • Annie Robbins
      September 25, 2012, 11:06 am

      Vanadalism is a crime.

      triple yawn , threadjack!

    • traintosiberia
      September 25, 2012, 11:21 am

      There is an interesting but very pertinent comment by Babbit quoted in American Conservative -[All economic issues lead to politics .Politics lead to philosophy.Philosophy is bound up with the religion]. Savages have tried every thing but the last, until this time.In this century when dissemination of information is controlled and messages are massaged ,shared human values are distorted ,rules are bent to cover the back and to promote the forward thrust of the few ,chances are that segments of people will get worked up and express self in rage and fury as their route is blocked with hyperbole. This is way the revolution works. America moving straight from colonial -agicultural -communal-religious society to liberalism powered by science and industry might have missed that reinvigorating internal commotion also known as revolution that changes a society from within. America has always transferred the internal tension to near and far abroad. Today we don’t have a frontier to settle and occupy. Today’s islamophobia is nothing but an expression of that internal tension.But it is a fig leaf, a foil for a much wider fight to try old method of war and conquers. Remember our denunciation of the demands of Wisconsin workers, OWP, and of 911 family or the self-immolation in Tunisia ,Tibet ,marches in Tel Aviv or in Athens.Describing the issue as a savage versus civilization is the recapturing of the old hymns sang by Kipling asking to shoulder the “White” man’s burden of educating and improving the lives of the uncivilized men arrested at the level of a child and a half-beast. No body supports violence or breaking of rules but only a few if ever tries to understand it thus making it a possibility.

      • RamonaRamona
        September 26, 2012, 12:53 pm

        Excellent response…I want to copy, keep, and use it when discussions like this arise…The last line is so strong, “Nobody supports violence or breaking of rules but only a few if ever tries to understand it thus making it a possibility.”

        Cheers, thanks.

    • Qualtrough
      September 25, 2012, 11:46 am

      Vanadalism is not a crime in any jurisdiction, full stop. People are free to vanadalize to their heart’s content. Having said that, I don’t think I have ever met a vanadal, even in high school.

    • LanceThruster
      September 25, 2012, 6:19 pm

      Vanadalism is a crime.

      Is that an unhealthy fixation on vanadium, or an attempt to damage or desecrate it?

      link to en.wikipedia.org

    • ColinWright
      September 26, 2012, 2:10 am

      EscapeVelocity says: “Vanadalism is a crime.”

      And morality and legality are not identical. I would happily welcome into my home anyone who had defaced one of these posters — I would refuse to shake the hand of anyone who had had a hand in putting them up.

  2. tls5164
    September 25, 2012, 1:07 am

    Are those real defacements? Or are they photoshopped on the ad?

  3. Phil Perspective
    September 25, 2012, 1:48 am

    Someone had a great idea! ;-)

  4. Taxi
    September 25, 2012, 1:50 am

    Hahahaha! Poor spammy Pam, I bet she didn’t see THAT coming, especially in pink.

    I lurrrrrrrv New York!

  5. Handala
    September 25, 2012, 2:08 am

    I hope they’re real but seem photoshopped to me…

    • Ellen
      September 25, 2012, 5:04 am

      Agree, appear to be photoshopped. At same time Phil would know the source of the photos, so trust that they are real.

      Whatever … Racist is an understatement of evil energy behind ads like this.

    • mondonut
      September 25, 2012, 9:27 am

      Some of the photo are definitely photoshopped. Look at the second and last photos as the defacements lap over the frames without a fold.

      • Woody Tanaka
        September 25, 2012, 9:47 am

        “Look at the second and last photos as the defacements lap over the frames without a fold.”

        Too far away to see on the second, but the last one doesn’t overlap the frame. There’s two posters directly adjacent to each other and the overlay covers that spot. I don’t think there’s any “lip” there…

  6. seafoid
    September 25, 2012, 2:40 am

    The lincoln center ad alongside: With the first note, the conversation begins.

    Not with Pammy. She screams blue murder and expects Americans to pay for it.

  7. MRW
    September 25, 2012, 2:43 am

    Serves the cretins right. ;-)

    • Accentitude
      September 25, 2012, 5:44 am

      Now, now…let’s not get hasty. A cretin is certainly not a “civilized man.” Personally, I stopped wearing a loin cloth years ago, so I suppose that it is possible that I moved up the social scale from savage to cretin. However, once I can afford a bow tie and a pedicure, I’m sure I’ll be on my way towards becoming a “civilized man.”

      • MRW
        September 25, 2012, 12:44 pm

        Geller’s the cretin for doing this.

      • Accentitude
        September 27, 2012, 4:35 am

        Agreed ;)

  8. ColinWright
    September 25, 2012, 4:23 am

    I’d prefer to see some more subtle editing. ‘Racist’ and ‘hate speech’ almost make me sympathize with whatever is being so crudely censored. In fact, if I didn’t already know what it was, my first response would be to work the original message out and consider whether it might be valid.

    Replace ‘Civilized man’ with ‘oppressor’ and ‘savage’ with ‘oppressed,’ etc. Whatever. Actually reverse the argument rather than just trying to shout it down.

    • Miss Costello
      September 25, 2012, 11:26 am

      Colin Wright; What are you talking about? Who is trying to “shout” anything down? What are they supposed to do? Leave a sticky note with ‘naughty’ on it? “I’d prefer to see some more subtle editing.” Would you, now. Why? If this ‘ad’ isnt racist, show me what is. As for ‘hate speech’ not up to your liking either, how would YOU define the wording of the ‘ad’? And when was there ever anything ‘subtle’ about Geller? Ever heard the saying, ‘fight fire with fire’? Whose side are you on?

    • ninabeans
      September 25, 2012, 11:34 am

      Some of the ads in San Francisco got edited just as you suggest. But this is more of a dialogue. It leaves the original words so that we can bear witness to the hatefulness, yet still responds in a clear and direct way.

      • ColinWright
        September 25, 2012, 7:06 pm

        ninabeans says: “Some of the ads in San Francisco got edited just as you suggest. But this is more of a dialogue. It leaves the original words so that we can bear witness to the hatefulness, yet still responds in a clear and direct way.”

        I thought the approach taken in San Francisco was considerably more effective.

        Labelling something ‘racist’ or ‘hate speech’ isn’t ‘more of a dialogue’ but on the contrary, an attempt to squelch dialogue by simply declaring the object of the epithet heresy.

        …which it may well be. However, it’s considerably more effective to point out what — specifically — is logically, ethically, and historically wrong with Geller’s formula. It’s actually completely inane, and substituting a couple of words makes that clear.

        If you deny the trinity, which is more convincing? If I burn you at the stake, or if I show that God is indeed one and triune? Our medieval forebears used to choose…choose…choose both! However, surely it’s not an improvement to just to go for the stake.

      • Donald
        September 25, 2012, 7:43 pm

        It’s true that something clever, witty and yet devastating would be better than just a blanket term of “racist”. Not so easy though. If it were, I would make sure all my posts were clever, witty and yet devastating. Simply reversing terms would be accurate, but it’s not really that different from saying “racist”.

  9. Accentitude
    September 25, 2012, 5:09 am

    Anonymous will endorse this in….3….2….1….

  10. Tex Tradd
    September 25, 2012, 5:54 am

    Anyone can obscure the message of another via this method.

    Ideologically righteous hackers could obstruct this blog with a huge “racist” banner, and feel justified.

    I am opposed to both, being influenced by liberal ideals, which some on the Left still defend. As Chomsky put it: “if you’re in favor of freedom of speech, that means you’re in favor of freedom of speech precisely for views you despise.”

    Better to argue with Pamela Geller and her ilk then to stop them from getting their point across. Let them have their say, then find the weak points and attack those.

    • Annie Robbins
      September 25, 2012, 8:07 am

      Better to argue with Pamela Geller and her ilk then to stop them from getting their point across.

      that’s what this looks like. her ‘point’ is still there.

      • ColinWright
        September 26, 2012, 4:54 am

        Annie Robbins says: “Better to argue with Pamela Geller and her ilk then to stop them from getting their point across.

        that’s what this looks like. her ‘point’ is still there.”

        Well, nauseating as it may be, if you genuinely want a free society, you’re just going to have to live with that.

    • Woody Tanaka
      September 25, 2012, 9:49 am

      I think these statements do exactly that. The weak point in Geller’s poster is precisely the fact that it is racist.

      • ColinWright
        September 26, 2012, 4:59 am

        Woody Tanaka says: “I think these statements do exactly that. The weak point in Geller’s poster is precisely the fact that it is racist.”

        Perhaps — but ‘racist’ and ‘hate speech’ (particularly the latter) have been abused so much as devices of censorship that many of us don’t react at all as those defacing the posters intend.

        I don’t object to the posters being defaced per se: Pam Geller exercised her right of free speech, someone else exercised theirs — that’s all fine with me.

        What I’m pointing out is that I don’t think the particular manner of defacing the posters is particularly effective.

      • Woody Tanaka
        September 26, 2012, 9:14 am

        “Perhaps — but ‘racist’ and ‘hate speech’ (particularly the latter) have been abused so much as devices of censorship that many of us don’t react at all as those defacing the posters intend.”

        Perhaps. I hope you’re just more cynical than most. But you could be right. I like it, at any rate.

    • ninabeans
      September 25, 2012, 11:20 am

      The subway is where this conversation is taking place. Ergo, this is the appropriate place to leave a response.

    • EscapeVelocity
      September 25, 2012, 1:39 pm

      Agreed Tex

      Shouting racist, anti-semite, islamophobe….is designed to silence and end communication. To render thoughts taboo, and be part of the informal enforcement mechanism.

      But as you rightly note, a great number on the Left arent interested in Free Speech…which is why their ascendancy in first the Universities, led to Speech Codes, to curtail speech….which then led to Hate Speech laws when they were powerful enough to legislate them. Both direct assaults on speech (and thought).

      • Annie Robbins
        September 25, 2012, 2:04 pm

        Left arent interested in Free Speech

        oh please, what a joke. have you read about the government of israel threatening to shut down the Department of Politics and Government at Ben-Gurion University, which has been the target of right-wing propaganda for the last several years? rightwingers are not more partial to free speech than the left. that’s stupid talk.
        link to 972mag.com

      • ColinWright
        September 25, 2012, 3:45 pm

        Annie says: “Left arent interested in Free Speech

        oh please, what a joke. have you read about the government of israel threatening to shut down the Department of Politics and Government at Ben-Gurion University, which has been the target of right-wing propaganda for the last several years?”

        As you yourself go on to admit, your example doesn’t demonstrate that the Left is indeed interested in Free Speech — it just indicates that the Right isn’t either.

      • Annie Robbins
        September 25, 2012, 9:39 pm

        As you yourself go on to admit

        i’m sorry colin, i fail to see this alleged ‘admission’.

        your example doesn’t demonstrate that the Left is indeed interested in Free Speech

        did you open all the links?

      • ColinWright
        September 26, 2012, 3:14 am

        Annie Robbins says: “i’m sorry colin, i fail to see this alleged ‘admission’.

        your example doesn’t demonstrate that the Left is indeed interested in Free Speech

        did you open all the links?”

        What you actually said was:

        “oh please, what a joke. have you read about the government of israel threatening to shut down the Department of Politics and Government at Ben-Gurion University, which has been the target of right-wing propaganda for the last several years? rightwingers are not more partial to free speech than the left. that’s stupid talk.”

        All this may well amply demonstrate that the Right is not partial to free speech either.

        However, that was not the issue. The issue was whether the Left was.

        If I accuse you of eating meat, and you point out that I do as well, you have not thereby demonstrated that you are a vegetarian.

      • Shingo
        September 25, 2012, 4:34 pm

        Shouting racist, anti-semite, islamophobe….is designed to silence and end communication.

        That’s hilarious coming from someone who’s tribe have shouted anti Semitism to that very effect.

        Let us know your feelings on Holocaust denial EV. Do you agree with rendering such thoughts taboo?

        which is why their ascendancy in first the Universities, led to Speech Codes, to curtail speech

        Yes, that would explain the laws in CA equating criticism of Israel with anti Semitism.

        The hypocrisy here is mind numbing. You love curtailing free speech when it suits you.

      • EscapeVelocity
        September 25, 2012, 8:22 pm

        Im not a Jew.

        Im a near Free Speech absolutist. The laws making holocaust denial a crime are an abomination. Shameful.

      • EscapeVelocity
        September 25, 2012, 8:25 pm

        Looks like that Hate Speech agenda is nipping the Left on their own arses. I find it schadenfreudastic!

      • Annie Robbins
        September 25, 2012, 9:40 pm

        Looks like that Hate Speech agenda is nipping the Left on their own arses.

        how so? and how is the “hate speech agenda” “left”?

      • EscapeVelocity
        September 25, 2012, 9:45 pm

        My reply got separated from the referring comment.

        The reference is to the recent University of California actions.

      • Annie Robbins
        September 26, 2012, 1:45 am

        the ‘agenda’ is more rightwing if you ask me.

      • EscapeVelocity
        September 26, 2012, 2:47 am

        I think you are blinded in that regard.

        Hate Speech criminalization and speech restrictions were pushed by the New Left Identity Politics post 60s. Western Conservatives have been writing in opposition to them for years.

        Western Conservatives push for profanity and lewd speech restrictions and criminalizaiton. Pornography and adult bookstores, that kind of thing.

        The difference being that Hate Speech criminalization, again as Western Conservatives have been arguing for decades….is a direct assault on POLITICAL SPEECH, the most clearly protected speech with regards to the 1rst Amendment.

        As I said, it’s schadenfreudastic that it’s turned around and bitten the purveyors of this gross infringement upon individual liberty squarely on the arse.

      • EscapeVelocity
        September 26, 2012, 3:03 am

        PS –

        Now you know how Mark Steyn, Elizabeth Sabiditch-Wolff, Ezra Levant, and Lars Hedegaard feel about being punished for speech and thought crimes. Im sure you cheered on their prosecutions. Not to mention the Christians that have been likewise brought under legal persecution for their views on homosexuality.

        And then there is the Leftwing “No Platform” doctrine. I suggest you check into that ugliness.

      • ColinWright
        September 26, 2012, 4:32 am

        There are some of us that find the censors distasteful regardless of their political affiliation.

        Really, they’re all spiritual brethren — they just haven’t realized it yet.

      • Woody Tanaka
        September 26, 2012, 9:02 am

        “The difference being that Hate Speech criminalization, again as Western Conservatives have been arguing for decades….is a direct assault on POLITICAL SPEECH, the most clearly protected speech with regards to the 1rst Amendment.”

        Oh, that’s a load of crap. What the conservatives want is that their bigotry and racism to be elevated to the level of political speech. The laws restricting speech (save a few categories) are, in my book, wrongheaded. But don’t kid yourself. The Left had no intent to ban political speech but discrimination.

      • EscapeVelocity
        September 26, 2012, 1:03 pm

        No Woody Tanaka, as we can see the Left has run afoul of these special protections for minorities with regards to criticism of Jews and Israel. That is political speech that has come under threat of hate speech laws…..while others see it as vile Anti-Semitism.

        Whatever the Left’s intent, the actual effect of the law is to put a big chill on speech critical of minority group’s cultures and behavior…..whilst the intellectual assault and demonization White European Christian Males continued apace.

        For myself, I believe that many Left-liberals were bamboozled by the high rhetoric defending Hate Speech laws, but the hard core Cultural Marxist’s, Identity Politics Left knew exactly what they were doing. No Platform!

    • Walid
      September 25, 2012, 9:37 pm

      I agree Tex, I don’t like this approach either. It’s not much more than name-calling and not much different from defacing a message we don’t like. The good guys could have come up with something better or in the least kept up the campaign against the billions going to Israel.

      • Annie Robbins
        September 25, 2012, 9:42 pm

        kept up the campaign against the billions going to Israel.

        it’s still up in SF.

    • RamonaRamona
      September 26, 2012, 12:56 pm

      But they did find the weak “POINT” and attack IT…The weak point being that Geller’s ad is racist.

  11. seafoid
    September 25, 2012, 6:10 am

    “ So the curtain fell, over that tortured country of unmarked graves and unburied fragments of men: Murder and massacre: The innocent slaughtered for the guilty: The poor man for the sake of the rich: The man of no authority made the victim of the man who had gathered importance and wished to keep it.
    —Terence Poulter, 7th Royal Dublin Fusiliers

    • straightline
      September 25, 2012, 7:11 am

      It’s a great quotation seafoid – particularly the final sentence – but it is by Private David Starret of the 9th Royal Irish Rifles. The one by Terence Poulter – also at the Island of Ireland Peace Park – is:

      “Hostilities will cease at 11.00am on the 11th day of the 11th month. After that time all firing will cease. This was joyous news. Approaching eleven o’clock in our sector you could have heard a pin drop. When eleven o’clock came there were loud cheers. The war was over as far as we were concerned.”

      The war to end all wars!

      • seafoid
        September 25, 2012, 8:21 am

        Thanks

        I must have copied it incorrectly.

        Isn’t it a stunning quote? Puts all the guff about greatest generations in its place and says much about the modern zionist war machine.

      • straightline
        September 25, 2012, 10:31 pm

        Off topic, I know, but …

        David Starret was batman to Lieut Col Percy Crozier of the West Ulster Division of the 9th Royal Irish Rifles.

        Here’s his description of the first day of the Battle of the Somme (link to irishtimes.com)

        “inferno of screaming shells and machine-gun bullets. Crouching, we slowly moved across No Man’s Land. The colonel stood giving last orders to his company commanders, and I beside him. Bullets cutting up the ground at his feet he watched the advance through his glasses. Then he went off the deep end and I danced everywhere at his rear. Something had gone wrong. When the fumes lifted we saw what it was – a couple of battalions wiped out. Masses of dead and dying instead of ranks moving steadily forward.”

        Oh what a lovely war!

    • American
      September 25, 2012, 10:36 am

      Good quote seafoid.

      • ColinWright
        September 25, 2012, 7:12 pm

        American says: “Good quote seafoid.”

        The only problem with it is that if you look up the numbers for World War One, I think you’ll find the children of the rich and powerful were slaughtered even more savagely than those of the poor.

        Not that the whole thing was more intelligent on that account — but my impression is that World War One really was an equal-opportunity war. Rich and poor got to die together.

      • Annie Robbins
        September 25, 2012, 9:44 pm

        more savagely? do tell.

      • straightline
        September 25, 2012, 10:39 pm

        I think what Colin is getting at is the death rate of middle level officers in trench warfare would have been relatively high – they were in the trenches with their men. On the other hand I didn’t see high level officers such as Douglas Haig and his cronies doing much dying! From Wikipedia:

        Paul Fussell, a literary historian in The Great War and Modern Memory, writes that “although one doesn’t want to be too hard on Haig … who has been well calumniated already … it must be said that it now appears was that one thing the war was testing was the usefulness of the earnest Scottish character in a situation demanding the military equivalent of wit and invention. Haig had none. He was stubborn, self-righteous, inflexible, intolerant—especially of the French—and quite humourless … Indeed, one powerful legacy of Haig’s performance is the conviction among the imaginative and intelligent today of the unredeemable defectiveness of all civil and military leaders. Haig could be said to have established the paradigm.”

        There may be something in the penultimate sentence here, though I have more respect for military leaders than I do for political ones.

      • ColinWright
        September 25, 2012, 11:41 pm

        Annie Robbins says: “more savagely? do tell.”

        Well, I do know the Germans managed to slaughter their own university and gymnasium students by enrolling them as volunteers, forming them into hastily trained ‘new Reserve’ divisions, and then hurling them against the British in the late fall of 1914 in the ‘kindermord bei Ypern.’

        Then at some point late in the war, King George V started expressing concern at just how many of the scions of the British aristocracy had gotten killed off — and the British aristocrat with two or three siblings or sons ‘killed in the war’ seems to have more or less a staple of the post-war scene.

        Finally — and of course here we’re degenerating to pure anecdote — Kipling’s only son was killed in 1915, two of Renoir’s sons were severely wounded, and of Roosevelt’s four sons, two were wounded and one was killed outright.

        I don’t have numbers — but in general my impression is that both enthusiasm for and volunteerism for the war was most prevalent among the upper and middle classes, and of course junior officers are the ranks with the heaviest casualties in war in general. So I’d put money on the war having mown down the rich in larger numbers than the poor.

      • seafoid
        September 26, 2012, 3:49 am

        The war followed an economic depression.
        The rich wouldn’t help the poor so they chose war.

        It was the end of an era. Social democracy gained in strength after the war.

        The comment is useful IMO because very few soldiers ever get the macro picture behind the reason why they are fighting.

      • Ellen
        September 26, 2012, 4:15 am

        Colin, and WwII as well, at least in Europe. Even the Krupp family of Krupp steel, who understood themselves as a sort of Royalty of the times, lost two sons and third wound up a Russian POW during WWII.

        Their father, BTW, only took the name Krupp when he married into the family. He was the grandson of US General, Henry Bohlen.

        The idea of sacrificing your children for ideas of country –blut und boden — crossed social classes back then in Europe and probably the US. But no longer.

  12. Taxi
    September 25, 2012, 7:41 am

    Eleanor Roosevelt once said “With freedom comes responsibility”. The freedoms of a society, in speech and in action, if not practiced responsibly, lead straight to anarchy.

    Me I’m particularly partial to:
    “In Dreams Begin Responsibility”, Delmore Shwartz.

    Eleanor was a nice, practical lady. But Delmore was deeper.

    • American
      September 25, 2012, 4:34 pm

      I’m with the Jesuits…’there is an exception to every rule’.

      Freedom of speech justifying hate ads, my ass. The Anti Muslim Prophet video should have been shut down by youtube and banned. Period.

      Read the youtube guidelines and check what they removed in the past and tell me
      google and youtube haven’t routinely allowed hate videos aimed at Islam, while they shut down other hate films.

      Community Guidelines – YouTube –
      link to youtube.com
      If this describes your video, even if it’s a video of yourself, don’t post it on YouTube. Also … But we don’t permit hate speech (speech which attacks or demeans a group based on race or ethnic origin, religion, … When they do, we remove them..”

      Now, how anyone can construe ‘savages’ in Geller’s ad as not racist or Innocence of Islam film as not attacking and defaming a religion is beyond me.

      • Taxi
        September 25, 2012, 10:51 pm

        It’s the western double-standard, the hypocrisy, that inflames the east.

      • ColinWright
        September 26, 2012, 5:28 am

        Taxi says: “It’s the western double-standard, the hypocrisy, that inflames the east.”

        There’s certainly a double standard — but to be fair, I’m not sure that’s what inflames the east. ‘Innocence’ might well have provoked riots even if you could engage in Holocaust Denial et al to your heart’s content.

        However, free speech is not a universal and eternal verity. It hasn’t been practiced by all societies at all times.

        Nor is it now. So I’m not surprised it ruffles feathers. That’s a pity — but it doesn’t make me feel inclined to accede to my right to practice it being abrogated.

        One place I think I part ways with a lot of people is that I don’t expect there to be a perfect solution to all conflicts. Naturally, it’s distinctly unfortunate if people choose to pointlessly exacerbate these problems — but I don’t expect the problems to all somehow magically go away. They’re just going to be there — and past a certain point, we may just make matters worse if we try to eliminate them entirely.

        So yeah, in the West people can make stupid anti-Islamic movies, and in the East, they may riot about these movies — but that’s just the way it is. It’s a pity there are people boorish enough in the West to make the movies, and it’s a pity there are people insecure enough in the East to be provoked about it — but that’s just the way it is.

      • EscapeVelocity
        September 25, 2012, 11:31 pm

        Where were you when the National Endowment for the Arts was funding Anti-Christian “art” in the form of Piss Christ and Elephant Dung Mary?

        H

      • ColinWright
        September 26, 2012, 2:17 am

        American says: “I’m with the Jesuits…’there is an exception to every rule’.

        Freedom of speech justifying hate ads, my ass. The Anti Muslim Prophet video should have been shut down by youtube and banned. Period.”

        I disagree. Ultimately, freedom is neither efficient nor conducive to peace and quiet.

        Nevertheless, I want it. None of this is to say that I don’t regard those who produced and distributed this as complete vermin. However, if we do want to be free, we do have to both put up with them and with the fury they manage to provoke.

      • ColinWright
        September 26, 2012, 5:15 am

        American says: “…I’m with the Jesuits…’there is an exception to every rule’…”

        Maybe…but the difficulty with permitting exceptions is that this opens the way to abuse, and then to subverting the original principle entirely.

        It’s not often realized, but Hitler is actually a rather good example of that.

        The Weimar Constitution had an ‘exception’ that permitted rule by emergency decree. This exception had been employed by the three chancellors preceding Hitler — all of whom ruled largely by emergency decree.

        So legally, once Hitler came along, there wasn’t much to stand in his way.

        I like freedom of speech being an absolute right. Of course, my right to abuse you for your exercise of it would also be an example of freedom of speech. For example, I have complete contempt for those purveying Islamophobia. They are utter sewage, in my opinion. I’d just rather not live in a society where I have the right to shut them up.

  13. Kathleen
    September 25, 2012, 7:49 am

    Wonder how that Dept of Justice investigation into that anti Muslim piece of trash is going? Wonder if Pam Geller made the investigation list for promoting such a piece of trash last year at her website?

    • Sumud
      September 25, 2012, 8:16 am

      What investigation is that Kathleen?

      I know there were some fairly strong links between Geller and Norweigans islamophobes like Brevik. If their victims weren’t muslims they’d all be in Guantanamo Bay by now…

      • EscapeVelocity
        September 25, 2012, 1:44 pm

        Breivik’s victims were Western Leftists.

      • Bumblebye
        September 25, 2012, 3:28 pm

        Breivik’s victims were young people, some of them kids, and some of them Muslim, on an island summer camp. So what if it was a political camp for a mainstream political party? It certainly wasn’t about the kind of politics that hates group a, b, or c; or whose policies are about robbing others of their rightful land and country!

      • Shingo
        September 25, 2012, 4:31 pm

        Breivik’s victims were Western Leftists.

        Breivik’s victims were Norwegians you moron.

      • Ellen
        September 25, 2012, 5:40 pm

        “Breivik’s victims were Western Leftists”

        Classy comment, despairing, labeling and demonizing dead youth.

        You sound happy about their fate?

      • seafoid
        September 26, 2012, 3:57 am

        “Leftist” is a term used by YESHA ideologues in Israel. It serves as an insult, the equivalent of calling someone a paedophile.

        In prison paedophiles are often killed. “The victim was a paedophile” – it almost justifies the act.

      • ColinWright
        September 26, 2012, 5:38 am

        EscapeVelocity says: “Breivik’s victims were Western Leftists.”

        But he did kill them because he’d convinced himself that they were among the villains in the Islamophobic universe in his mind — and Geller et al did help to create that.

      • Sumud
        September 26, 2012, 7:57 am

        Breivik’s victims were Western Leftists.

        I know who they were.

        The kids on the island had an event a day or two before about Palestine, it was covered on MW at the time.

        When I said “their victims” I was referring to “Geller and Norweigan islamophobes”.

  14. traintosiberia
    September 25, 2012, 8:05 am

    Pamela Geller is about to ring the number at Israeli PMO to find out how to manipulate this desecration of free speech to the advantage of Nathanyoo -Romney team against Iran .After all it is antisemtism to call anything related to the benefit of Israel as “racist” .

    • Kathleen
      September 25, 2012, 8:33 am

      Do you think Netanyahu’s people would actually be caught having a meeting with Geller?

      Was just able to get in a relevant question with the Director of the Council of Foreign Relations Stewart Patrick about what will come up at the UN General Assembly on Cspans Washington Journal. He was talking about Syrian refugees but completely failed to bring up Iraqi refugees created by the U.S. invasion. Also was able to ask about whether UN resolutions 242 and 338 will come up during this UN session. Think Phil and team will be interested in his detailed answer. Telling. I was actually amazed that he said what he said. Brought up Jerusalem’s status. This segment on C Spans Washington Journal will not be up until later. My questions at the end of the segment with Stewart Patrick (Anna (middle name) Boulder Colorado)

      People should take the time to call into Washington Journal and talk about the facts on the ground in the conflict. Have been calling in for over a decade about this issue and other issues. Remember millions listen to this program. Stick to the facts. Mention Mondoweiss (was not able to get this in this morning) and other fact based and relevant websites having to do with middle east issues. Stick to the facts. Be polite with screeners and on the program. Millions listen to these programs. Effective way to get fact based info out there. Bring folks to Mondoweiss, Race for Iran, Informed Comment etc

      • Citizen
        September 25, 2012, 10:15 am

        @ Kathleen
        Kathleen’s question on WJ CSPAN today can be heard at 35.41, 42 of this video, and Patrick’s response runs to 39.42 in the video. He says the Iraq refugee problem is a big issue at the UN and at relevant US agencies. Re resolutions 242, 333, he says the Road Map is the working standard, with “some limited adjustments” of the borders “for Israeli security,” and with the caveat that Palestinian ROR aspect will be “very, very limited.” And the “trickiest” issue is Jerusalem. Concludes initially something has to be done to get the players willing to move forward, and Obama will address that problem of lack of movement (which he did two years ago).

        link to mfs-theothernews.com

      • Citizen
        September 25, 2012, 10:20 am

        Sounds to me like all that Patrick envisions at the UN will result in the can being kicked down the road again.

      • Kathleen
        September 25, 2012, 12:55 pm

        At least he did not say that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel as Obama did at the Aipac conference a year or so ago.

      • gamal
        September 25, 2012, 4:18 pm

        “Do you think Netanyahu’s people would actually be caught having a meeting with Geller?”
        I recon you might be amazed by this the BBC’s Ernie Rea’s, “Beyond Belief” discusses Islam in America with a Mr. D. Pipes and one P.Geller. I know Ernie and participated in what was described as his best eva episode, a Priest implored me to preach at his Church during it ( and I am no less bogus/ersatz than Ms Geller), but then Ernie et al made this: Islam in America

  15. Accentitude
    September 25, 2012, 8:26 am

    Isn’t it ironic that Abe Foxman and the so-called Anti-Defamation League are keeping quiet on this issue? Or do they only get up in arms when one “defames” Israel and the Jews?

    • seafoid
      September 25, 2012, 8:53 am

      Ain’t that just so.

    • Kathleen
      September 25, 2012, 9:03 am

      bingo

    • Kathleen
      September 25, 2012, 9:05 am

      Abe and friends are trying their best to force CSpan’s Washington Journal to shut down phone calls from folks who call in and state facts about the I/P issue and how Israel is pushing the U.S. into another military confrontation with Iran. Camera’s Cspan watch

      Camera is a bit late on this one. Many of us have been calling in to Washington Journal for decades getting out the facts on the I/P issue. Directing people towards reading Edward Said’s, Former President Jimmy Carter’s, Norman Finkelsteins etc books. Directing listeners to the UN site. Encouraging folks to read UN resolution 242, 338 etc. Letting viewers know that the U.S. has vetoed sending in UN observers into the conflict for decades. Etc Etc Although Camera is doing their manipulative best to get the open dialogue on Washington Journal shut down..it is not working

      Cspan is not caving to their demands

    • tokyobk
      September 25, 2012, 11:25 am

      ADL has condemned Geller at every turn. They do say she has the right to put up the ads (which of course she does — however stupid) but that they are reprehensible. But, carry on as you were.

      Letters to the Editor
      New York Jewish Week March 26, 2012

      To the Editor:

      Pamela Geller attempts to change the subject when it comes to her own vitriolic rhetoric against Muslims (Letters, March 23). But let’s be clear: Geller should not be allowed to get away with playing the victim and hiding behind the mask of a “patriot and proud Zionist.”

      Geller’s self-righteous campaign to show the world the “true face” of Islam is abhorrent and morally repugnant. Geller, in views she outlines in her blog, has linked Islam to bestiality and rape of minors, compared Muslims to Nazis and asserted that Islam inspired Hitler. The Anti-Defamation League has closely followed her anti-Muslim scapegoating and that of Stop Islamization of America, the organization she leads, and has posted additional examples of her comments on its website.

      Terrorism inspired by fundamentalist Islam is indeed a true threat to America, Israel and democracies around the world. But in directing her rhetoric at the entire Islamic faith — indeed, in supporting campaigns to suggest that Muslims should abandon their faith entirely — Geller fuels and fosters anti-Muslim bigotry in society.

      Sincerely,

      Robert G. Sugarman
      National Chair (ADL)

    • EscapeVelocity
      September 25, 2012, 1:50 pm

      Generally speaking, Abe Foxman is primarily concerned with Jews, but secondarily he is concerned with the protection of all non white European non Christians. Or said another way…..he is hostile to white European Christians, and when hate crimes are perpetrated against them, his and the ADL’s reaction is not to defend the victims of that hate crime, but to accuse racists and white supremacists of using the incident to gin up hatred, and calling for the burying of the news story so as to protect minorities from a backlash by white European Christians.

      The ADL is a despicable organizaiton.

      • ColinWright
        September 25, 2012, 3:52 pm

        Escape says: “Generally speaking, Abe Foxman is primarily concerned with Jews, but secondarily he is concerned with the protection of all non white European non Christians…”

        I don’t think that’s so. Sometimes Foxman makes gestures in that direction, but ‘The Innocence’ was the quintessence of defamation.

        I was watching to see if he’d serve up one of his pompous denouncements. He didn’t.

      • Woody Tanaka
        September 25, 2012, 4:41 pm

        “I was watching to see if he’d serve up one of his pompous denouncements. He didn’t.”

        Nope. Went on at length about the fact that the guy who apparently made it apparently lied about who he was and where he got the money for it, but not one word condemning the film, itslef.

        But who expects differently? This is Foxman. The man’s an anti-Muslim bigot and showed his true colors during the anti-American protests against the Park51 facility.

      • EscapeVelocity
        September 25, 2012, 8:29 pm

        One thing we can all agree on is that Abe Foxman and the ADL are hypocrites de jour.

  16. Philip Munger
    September 25, 2012, 8:52 am

    Anyone reading here who wants to modify one of the “Savage” ads, feel free to reprint and paste my Netanyahu WANTED poster on the ad:

    link to flickr.com

  17. seafoid
    September 25, 2012, 9:14 am

    Where there ever anti Soviet ads on the subway in NYC?

    Islam is the enemy. But why ?

    • Matthew Graber
      September 25, 2012, 10:33 am

      Its easier to slander 5 million Palestinians living in exile than to grant them dignity, respect, and equality. Its a Zionist coping mechanism.

    • ColinWright
      September 25, 2012, 7:21 pm

      seafoid says: “Islam is the enemy. But why ?”

      Such a good question. We did rather eagerly leap aboard the 9/11 Express, didn’t we?

      Sometimes I think it’s because collectively, we just love to hate. And there are so few we’re allowed to hate these days…sniff, sniff.

      Can’t hate Blacks. Can’t hate Gays. Certainly can’t hate Jews. Not even really okay to hate Asians…no more Commies to speak of.

      It is curious. In this connection, there was an interstice between the fall of Communism and the rise of ‘Islamofascism.’ I remember noticing that in action movies they were really floundering for villains. I mean, neo-Nazis are certainly villainous, but a tad improbable. Sinister Chinese start to verge on the unacceptable.

      And then Islam popped up. Oh boy oh boy oh boy!

      Happy days. The response has at times verged on open joy.

      • Annie Robbins
        September 25, 2012, 9:46 pm

        hollywood is so predictable.

      • seafoid
        September 26, 2012, 4:08 am

        I remembering watching a Bruce Willis move in Cairo around the time of the Iraq invasion . It was on in a swanky multiplex and the crowd was middle class. The plot involved some action in the Middle East where Bruce lands in the desert amongst some shifty bad guy Bedouin. And they started talking in classical arabic in the style of university professors and the whole cinema started laughing.

        The whole experience was weird. Middle class Arabs are desperate for Western culture but they can’t interpret Hollywood the way Americans do. Especially when their people are the bad guys.

      • ColinWright
        September 26, 2012, 4:37 am

        “…The plot involved some action in the Middle East where Bruce lands in the desert amongst some shifty bad guy Bedouin. And they started talking in classical arabic in the style of university professors and the whole cinema started laughing. ..”

        That is pretty funny when you think about it.

      • seafoid
        September 26, 2012, 12:09 pm

        Imagine an Arab film set in Compton where the locals converse in Shakespearean English. Or an Iranian film set in Japan where the farmers speak in the language of Noh theatre.

  18. kayq
    September 25, 2012, 12:04 pm

    If Israel is the “civilised man” then hell, I am fine with being a savage.

    If stealing land, bombing innocent people, practising apartheid walls and so on is “civilised”, then so be it.

  19. chuckcarlos
    September 25, 2012, 1:08 pm

    best to leave them alone…

    they are worth their weight in gold in advertising for the destruction of Israel

  20. ColinWright
    September 25, 2012, 3:58 pm

    chuckcarlos says: “best to leave them alone…

    they are worth their weight in gold in advertising for the destruction of Israel”

    Maybe. On the other hand, there’s the inverse of ‘nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people.’

  21. mikelevinson
    September 25, 2012, 5:43 pm

    Martin Luther King Jr. did a lot of things that were illegal. Gandhi did a lot of things that were illegal. Cesar Chavez did a lot of things that were illegal. Harriet Tubman did a lot of things that were illegal. Phil Berrigan S.J. did a lot of things that were illegal. Daniel Ellsberg did a lot of things that were illegal. The workers in the CIO did a lot of things that were illegal. The suffragists did a lot of things that were illegal. Jews escaping Hitler did a lot of things that were illegal. The law is not sacred. Peace and Justice ARE sacred.

  22. stevelaudig
    September 25, 2012, 7:09 pm

    Self defense is no crime. Defense of others is no crime. Being an unregistered agent of a foreign government may be though.

  23. Avi_G.
    September 25, 2012, 7:31 pm

    I was recently reminded of the Zionist argument in favor of maintaining a Jewish majority between the river and the sea, an argument often summarized as the Arab (Palestinian) demographic bomb.

    What prompted that recollection was a scene from the movie Mississippi Burning (1988).

    In the movie the spokesperson of the local klan expresses his disapproval of integration and mixed communities when he says to the newd media:

    “Television Commentator: Are you, sir, a spokesman for the White Knights of the Ku Klux Klan?

    Clayton Townley: I told you, I’m a businessman. I’m also a Mississippian, and an American! And I’m getting SICK and TIRED of the way us Mississippians aregetting ourviewsdistorted by you newsmen and on the TV. So let’s get this straight. We do NOT accept Jews, because they REJECT Christ! And their control over the International Banking Cartels are at he root of what we call Communism today. We do not accept Papists,becausethey bow to a Roman dictator! We do not accept Turk, Mongrels, Tartars, Orientals nor Negroes because we are here to protect Anglo-Saxon Democracy, and the American way! Television Commentator: Thank yo

  24. rob
    September 25, 2012, 8:43 pm

    EXCLUSIVE VIDEO: Woman defaces ‘anti-jihad’ ad in Times Square station
    By BRIAN STILLMAN, GEORGETT ROBERTS, JENNIFER FERMINO and DAVID K. LI
    Last Updated: 7:22 PM, September 25, 2012
    Posted: 7:13 PM, September 25, 2012
    Cops busted a lone protester — angry with subway ads equating enemies of Israel as “savages” — as she spray-painted over one of the controversial signs today

    link to nypost.com

    I could swear the ‘cop’ tells Mona she could have killed the woman….

  25. gingershot
    September 25, 2012, 8:47 pm

    The Atlasshrugs site of Pam Geller has pictures and story of Eltahawy being arrested for defacing the ads:

    “Islamic supremacist journalist Mona Eltahawy was arrested today after assaulting a defender of freedom who caught her in the act of vandalizing one of AFDI’s pro-Israel ads in the New York Subway Stations”

    Way to go, Mona!

  26. mymarkx
    September 25, 2012, 9:21 pm

    Unlike many modern people, I still retain a bit of a survival instinct.

    So, if by “civilized man” Geller means, “the one with nuclear weapons,” and by “savage,” Geller means “the one without nuclear weapons,” in any war I’ll support the savage, as there’s bound to be less fallout and less collateral damage.

  27. DICKERSON3870
    September 25, 2012, 11:41 pm

    RE: “A friend just sent us these photos of two of the Islamophobic ads that were put up earlier today by Pam Geller’s organization in ten New York subway stations. They got a makeover; and their true character has been revealed.” ~ Weiss

    MY COMMENT: Beautiful! “Like a rainbow”, it really highlights Pam Geller’s true color, that of “white supremacy”. Just like old J.B. Stoner. And Pammy Cakes’ personal attorney, David Yerushalmi!

    AN EARLY AUTUMN EVENING’S MUSICAL INTERLUDE sponsored by the makers of new Ziocaine Über-Xtreme®: It’s guaran-damn-teed to blow your effing mind!™

    You with the sad eyes
    Don’t be discouraged
    Oh, I realize
    It’s hard to take courage
    In a world full of people
    You can lose sight of it all
    And darkness still inside you
    Make you feel so small

    But I see your true colors
    Shining through
    I see your true colors
    And that’s why I love you
    So don’t be afraid to let them show
    Your true colors,
    True colors, are beautiful,
    Like a rainbow. . . ~ Cyndi Lauper, 1986

    Phil Collins: True Colors (Live at Paris 2004) HQ – link to youtube.com

  28. Mayhem
    September 26, 2012, 2:53 am

    These ads by Geller and co have been preceded by other MTA ads from pro-Palestinian “Two People’s, One Future”  seeking to weaken Israel by having the U.S. cut billions of dollars in military aid to its closest ally in the Middle East.
    Apparently none of them were defaced.

    I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it

    This concept seems to be too libertarian for people around here. Too much effort it seems to have to respect free speech. Mona Eltahawy has proven that.
    Would Mondoweiss agree it is free speech if pro-Zionists were to deface this website?

    • Walid
      September 26, 2012, 4:32 am

      “Apparently none of them were defaced.”

      Not defaced, but some were simply taken down in LA by a CBS subsidiary a week after they went up.

    • ColinWright
      September 26, 2012, 4:42 am

      Mayhem says: “These ads by Geller and co have been preceded by other MTA ads from pro-Palestinian “Two People’s, One Future” seeking to weaken Israel by having the U.S. cut billions of dollars in military aid to its closest ally in the Middle East.
      Apparently none of them were defaced.”

      There is a distinction between calling for a reduction in US aid and in labeling a quarter of the planet’s population savages and all but openly calling for war to be waged against them.

      One might as well bleat that no one objected to Canada building a railway — so how dare progressives call for a boycott of Nazi Germany?

      The Pro-Palestinian ads maligned nobody. Geller’s ad is a piece of racist filth. She can legally put it up — but I’d cheerfully deface it myself.

    • ColinWright
      September 26, 2012, 4:46 am

      Mayhem says: “…I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it

      This concept seems to be too libertarian for people around here. Too much effort it seems to have to respect free speech. Mona Eltahawy has proven that.
      Would Mondoweiss agree it is free speech if pro-Zionists were to deface this website?”

      Oh you can abuse the right to free speech to your heart’s content. However, if you do start finding it amusing to fart loudly at memorial services and the like, I’m not going to fret too much when you get beaten to a pulp in consequence.

      But you can do it. In fact, I’d urge you to.

    • rob
      September 26, 2012, 5:30 am

      @ Mayhem,

      Regarding the “Two People’s, One Future” ads in NYC subways.

      “Apparently none of them were defaced.”

      In Queens, the one I kept an eye on, it was just completely scraped off, no sign it had ever been there. The people must have taken a lot of time to do it. And it was reported but never replaced.

      • Mayhem
        September 27, 2012, 5:03 am

        Yes there was some hatespeak uttered – refer link to mujahideenryder.net
        People complained and the authorities responded by removing the objectionable ads. That’s the democratic process in America.
        @Colin I understand your sensibilities to accusations against your Muslim colleagues. They are your anti-imperialist. anti-American buddies so you have to give them your unconditional support.

  29. talknic
    September 26, 2012, 2:57 am

    Compared to a nuke, a guided missile, tank, war ship, submarine, aircraft carrier, fighter bomber, white phosphorus, a flock of fletchettes and all the highly funded newfangled explosive technology designed for slaughtering humans, one savage olde beheading is far more accurate, far less collateral, far friendlier on the environment and a hell of a lot cheaper.

Leave a Reply