Developing: Pakistani Plane Escorted by UK Fighter Jets — 2 Men Arrested

Doc Thompson’s 24-hour radio marathon, ‘#24forok,’ continues until 9 am ET — Listen Live!

Faith

Did the NYC Subway Authority Just Pass a Type of Anti-Blasphemy Ban? TheBlaze Explores (Update: Agency Confirms New Language)

Sep. 28, 2012 10:04am Billy Hallowell

For updates on this story, click here.

–

In the wake of Middle Eastern furor and intense anti-American sentiment, “blasphemy” has been a hot topic in both media and political circles. With some leaders calling for bans on insults against Islam, fascinating and intense free-speech debates are continuously unfolding. In New York City, where controversy has swirled around blogger Pamela Geller’s ad aimed at Islamic extremism, some are questioning The Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA), the company governing the public transit system, and its new regulations surrounding controversial advertisements.

Following the Geller incident (though there’s no conclusive evidence of late that it is directly related), the MTA has now added a provision blocking any advertisements that “would incite or provoke violence” — a noteworthy change, specifically when considering current sociopolitical conversations.

Before we delve too deeply into NYC’s new-found regulations, let’s look at a brief history of the debate. The battle over Geller’s ad has been a fascinating one. Initially, the MTA refused to allow it to be posted on NYC subways, claiming that it was “demeaning.” But this quickly changed in August, when U.S. District Court Judge Paul Engelmayer ruled that the ad is protected under the First Amendment (read the history behind the ad here). As a result, the ads were finally posted at 10 subway stops, which subsequently sparked outrage.

After claiming that the MTA’s “hands are tied” earlier this month, transit authority spokesperson Aaron Donovan noted, “Under our existing ad standards as modified by the injunction, the MTA is required to run the ad.”

MTA Passes New Regulations for Ads After Furor Over Pamela Gellers Islam Ad

Photo Credit: American Freedom Defense Initiative/ABC News

Now, here’s where it get complicated, especially when considering whether these regulations are blasphemy-related or simply regulations intended to protect the public company.

The MTA approved new guidelines on Thursday and is planning to continue restricting ads that it “reasonably foresees would imminently incite or provoke violence or other immediate breach of the peace,” The New York Times reports. NY1 mirrors this claim, writing, “Sources say the MTA will still ban ads it finds to be incendiary or too dangerous to put up but didn’t say how these decisions will be made.”

In an 8-to-0 vote, the MTA’s board made the startling decision to implement restrictions. New York Magazine has more about the scene before and after the vote:

For the time being, the MTA is still dealing with the fallout from the current campaign. Though the ten ads were instantly defaced, several people showed up to protest when the meeting was opened up to comments from the public. Demonstrators who oppose the ads held signs with messages like “The subway belongs to the 99 percent,” and repeatedly shouted down Pamela Geller, who leads the group behind the ads. She insisted that while many believe that the ad implies Muslims are “savages,” it’s actually about “systemic institutionalized anti-Israel bias.” “This is not against Muslims. I love Muslims,” Geller said.

“We’ve gotten to a point where we needed to take action today,” MTA chairman Joseph J. Lhota proclaimed at a press conference on Thursday. “You deal with a free-speech issue with more free speech.”

Pamela Geller (Photo Credit: Pamela Geller)

A document, reflecting yesterday’s changes, was released by the MTA to TheBlaze this morning. It highlights the transit authority’s advertising standards and reads, in part, “The licensee (‘advertising contractor’) shall not display or maintain any advertisement that falls within one or more of the following categories.”

The document goes on to highlight its restrictions on ads. Among them is the the aforementioned notation that was mentioned by the Times. It proclaims that ads that meet the following description will not be displayed (emphasis added):

The advertisement, or any information contained in it, is directly adverse to the commercial or administrative interests of the MTA or is harmful to the morale of MTA employees or contains material the display of which the MTA reasonably foresees would incite or provoke violence or other immediate breach of the peace, and so harm, disrupt, or interfere with safe, efficient, and orderly transit operations.

TheBlaze reached out to the MTA to find out if this provision was newly-added in light of Geller’s advertisement (after all, less-than-peaceful interactions resulted). A representative initially said that she could not confirm, without doing some research. In a follow-up call, a separate spokesperson confirmed that the violence portion of the langage was added On Thursday (bolded above).

In an e-mail exchange this morning with Geller, the blogger explained that it was not her understanding that some ads would be blocked by the MTA. Speaking specifically about the Times article, she said, “I disagree with that interpretation. The New York Times piece is inaccurate — they have not been following the story at all, so I’m not surprised.”

In an attempt to clarify the MTA’s stance, Geller continued:

“The fact is, the MTA doesn’t mean that it will be enforcing the Sharia or adhering to the blasphemy laws under Islamic law. And if they do, we will certainly fight that. It’s fairly safe to say that the MTA is referring to ads that genuinely incite to violence, such as ads from Occupy Wall Street calling for people to get guns and shoot businessmen and police.

It’s the same as it was before. If they block us, we‘ll sue again.”

Despite this confusion, one provision that is clear, though, is that most ads with a viewpoint (religious, political and moral) will still be permitted, but each will be required to have a disclaimer that tells those viewing the messages that the MTA is not necessarily embracing the views presented within them.

Interestingly, despite the Times and NY1 reports about some ads still being banned (and the violence provision, itself), the MTA is claiming, in light of the Geller case, that it doesn’t have the constitutional right to restrict free speech. In a press release, the government transit authority wrote:

To be clear, the MTA does not believe the First Amendment compels the MTA to open up its ad spaces in this way to a wide range of expressive communications. MTA could, for example, adopt a narrower commercially oriented ad policy, one that limited the range of ads it will display to those selling a product or service, and by doing so, avoid having to run demeaning or divisive ads such as the AFDI ad that resulted in litigation. But the MTA for decades has permitted its ad spaces to serve a broader communicative function than mere commercial advertising, and the Board, today reaffirms that tradition of tolerating a wide spectrum of types of ads, including ads that express views on a wide range of public matters.

With that choice also come First Amendment limitations that constrain the MTA’s ability to disallow particular ads because their messages are uncivil or divisive. We had thought this did not mean having to run divisive ads that demeaned others, but the recent litigation tells us otherwise. A cost of opening our ad space to a variety of viewpoints on matters of public concern is that we cannot readily close that space to certain advertisements on account of their expression of divisive or even venomous messages.

Nowhere in the MTA’s press release are the issues raised by the Times and NY1 mentioned.

The company also took to Twitter on Thursday as well to announce the changes, writing: “We’ve revised our ad guidelines. Ads expressing political, religious or moral views will carry disclaimer: MTA doesn’t endorse this message.”

MTA Passes New Regulations for Ads After Furor Over Pamela Gellers Islam Ad

“This is a paid advertisement sponsored by [Sponsor]. The display of this advertisement does not imply MTA’s endorsement of any views expressed,” the disclaimer that must be placed on political, religious or morality-themed ads will read.

While NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg supported the MTA’s decision, he also spoke out about free speech, claiming that all sides deserve to have their ads viewed on the subway and other related platforms.

“Sometimes, people put up ads you don’t agree with,” he said. “But if you want to be able to put up yours, you’ve got to let them put up theirs. And on balance, this country seems to have gotten that right.”

While the MTA may not be seeking to ban ads based on religious tolerance and blasphemy, important questions need to be asked about what classifies “violence,” which parties would define such a designation and what the attributes will be.

Update: In an e-mail response to TheBlaze, Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) spokesperson Aaron Donovan commented about the addition of an MTA provision that reserves the right to ban advertisements on the basis that they “would incite or provoke violence.”

When asked for the agency’s reasoning for adding this provision, he said, ”Since we hadn’t updated our advertising standards in 15 years, we used this opportunity to address several outstanding issues or potential hypothetical situations. This is one of them.” It is still unclear how much the radical Islam ads placed by blogger Pamela Geller impacted this decision — a question TheBlaze is still waiting for clarification on.

This story has been updated.

–

Related:

Benghazi, IRS, AP...What's next? Only TheBlaze TV offers the truth from Glenn Beck, Andrew Wilkow, and Real News from TheBlaze. Get instant access and a free trial here.

Back to The Blaze »

Comments (137)

Female
Posted on September 28, 2012 at 11:53am
Common Sense or Cowardice, really?

First, I have no desire to support anything Jihad. I love Israel and Jewish people where ever they live.

Second, I support the MTA in that subways and places like the Lincoln Tunnel are very vunerable, with the potential for mass casualties. The posters use of “savages” is inflaming. I believe their are other pro-Israel campaigns which could have been presented without insulting or stirring-up violence.

I believe it is common sense not cowardice to avoid stirring-up trouble-makers. Just like I am not going to spit in the face or insult the relatives of a well known bully.

A dirty bomb or release of toxins or disease or anthrax in a high traffic, potential death toll,, high injury, destruction of property and enclosed area is not worth Pamela Gellar’s free speech. She could buy a billboard, ad in a newspaper/mag, or pay for messages on the sides of car, trucks or buses. with the slowness of traffic her message would be well read.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- usedCZARsalesman
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 12:11pm
  and that “common sense” you just talked about is ONLY to be exercised by WE THE PEOPLE…the government DOES NOT get to decide FOR US what is and is not “common sense”…take you commie BS elsewhere (maybe to a ME country where they stone you for not covering your face)
  
  Report this comment
- Cemoto78
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 1:49pm
  “The posters use of “savages” is inflaming”, why is telling the truth so wrong at this juncture in our lives. Those people who believe in the death, killing, murder, and demise of those who do not share their same “faith”, whether they be Jewish, Christian, Hindu, Buddhists, or Atheists, are SAVAGES. Yes, the actions of the MTA is cowardice and are doing nothing but emboldening the other cowards. The MTA have done nothing but made the pink coward lady a hero to morons who now believe it’s okay to destroy someones property when you don’t agree with them. Why is her free speech so much more protected or rise above mine?
  
  Report this comment
- 00100111
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 2:09pm
  Doesn’t matter if it is inflaming. We don’t suppress speech because someone gets pissed off by it. No riots happened when the “Piss Christ” was put back on display. That’s a lot more inflammatory, but it only offends Christians, so that’s ok. Even offensive speech is protected. If someone is offended, they can publish their own poster and have it displayed to show their point of view. That is how discourse works. You don’t vandalize it or resort to violence.
  
  Report this comment
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 2:35pm
  00100111,
  
  But wouldn’t you say that, as a provider of advertising space, the MTA has a right to determine what ads it displays? You bring up the “Piss Christ,” which did in fact provoke death threats and hate mail, but it’s a poor comparison. Frankly, I’m getting a bit sick of this “Christians are the victims” nonsense. No amount of so-called victimization of Christians justifies the deliberate smearing of any other people, plain and simple.
  
  Report this comment
- desertspeaks
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 2:50pm
  I am truly sick and tired of our country being HIJACKED by a DEATH CULT! a pretended religion who’s only edict to its followers towards non believers is to convert them, enslave them or kill them.
  If they don’t like the message, GO HOME!!!
  
  Report this comment
- shakedowncrews
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 2:53pm
  @PubliusPencilman: what a lame response.
  “You bring up the “Piss Christ,” which did in fact provoke death threats and hate mail, but it’s a poor comparison. Frankly, I’m getting a bit sick of this “Christians are the victims” nonsense.”
  The point of the Piss Christ was not to promote “christians as victims” but instead point out that when boneheads blaspheme Jesus, Christians are offended and protest but don’t resort to violence. An alleged “threat” of violence that didn’t materialize doesn’t count.
  
  “No amount of so-called victimization of Christians justifies the deliberate smearing of any other people, plain and simple.” The ad specifically targets “savages” but does not state that it means all Muslims are savages: that is your interpretation, you read “savages” in context of Israel and assume it means all Muslims. There are peaceful Muslims in Israel too, you think it means them?
  
  No, bonehead, it means the ones that blow up children, fire rockets into settlements, behead and stone homosexuals and women, etc. If we can’t call the perpetrators of such acts “savages” then who the hell fits the description anymore?
  
  And sometimes, it takes shocking speech to drive the point home. You don’t want to be considered a “savage”? then don’t bloody act like one!
  
  Report this comment
- jelptex
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 2:56pm
  …ummm. “insult the relatives of a well-known bully”…
  YOU must be a “racist”, an “Islamophobe”, “anti-gay”…anti (whatever).
  Where is the outrage over “The New Black Panthers” ? or others (some “christian) who spew bilious vile?
  
  I see. PC (and not my computer) rules…
  
  Report this comment
- exposejesuits
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 3:10pm
  Oboma is a Muslim.Muslims kill Christians.America is being destroyed, as planned. We came in like lamb sand rule like wolves.We shall be expelled like dogs and Return like eagles. -Fancesco Borgia[ 3rd Jesuit Superior General] Beware of false prophets,which come to in Sheeps clothing,but inwardly, they are ravening wolves. - JESUS CHRIST [Mathew 7:15 KJV]
  CHILD MOLESTERS and BRAIN WASHERS.The Vatican invented Islam, to kill Christians and non-Catholics .Our families came here to fee religous persecution, of the Catholic Church. WHO ARE THE KNIGHTS OF MALTA? Know your history, or REPEATE IT! Do your homework and study, what has gone on, from the begining of time. What was Hadrians Wall?,Why was it built around ROMAN ENGLAND?
  
  Report this comment
- PIGSWILLNEVERFLY
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 4:22pm
  Anyone can read Bibi’s speech at the UN yesterday at http://www.maggiesnotebook.com/2012/09/last-warning-from-israel/ . It is inspired and beautiful when you read it yourself. here is part of it:
  
  …..”The forces of medievalism seek a world in which women and minorities are subjugated, in which knowledge is suppressed, in which not life but death is glorified. These forces clash around the globe, but nowhere more than in the Middle East.
  
  Israel stands proudly with the forces of modernity. We protect the rights of all our citizens; men and women, Jews and Arabs, Muslims and Christians – all are equal before the law.
  
  Israel is also making the world a better place: our scientists win Nobel Prizes. Our know-how is in every cell-phone and computer that you are using. We prevent hunger by irrigating arid lands in Africa and Asia…..” (Israel is the melody of God’s heart) http://www.momh.org Israel is the only country in that whole area that lives in peace. Peace through Strength.
  
  Report this comment
- CharlieFREE
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 5:33pm
  Since you seem to like common sense, here’s some from Benjamin Franklin – “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.” In case you missed it, Protection of free speech is an essential liberty, so much so that it is FIRST AMENDMENT to the Constitution of the United States …. maybe you should give it a read sometime.
  
  Report this comment
- Female
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 6:03pm
  Ms. Gellar rented 10 subway billboards. Subways are a particularly vunerable area and tightly contained space (yes, I am well acquainted w/NYC). The exercise of her freedom should not be at the cost of other peoples lives (potentially) which is why I suggested other places which have less potential. The MTA has a responsibility for the safety of NYC subways and the right to say no. She could have written something supportive yet less insulting:
  
  Friends of Israel are friends of GOD. Support Israel and prayer for peace.
  
  Report this comment
- cosmic dogma
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 6:50pm
  Female, you are a COWARD. You can not give in to threats of violence. The threats will only intensify, and escalate to the point that ANYTHING YOU DO will be threatened with violence, including taking a breath of air into Christian lungs. By giving in to threats of violence, you are encouraging more violence. Free speech is a right our forefathers fought for, paid for with their lives at times. Once lost, our freedom will only be regained with more blood. Don’t back away from our right of free speech because you are afraid. It is cowardly.
  
  Report this comment
- cosmic dogma
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 6:57pm
  You, my dear, ARE A COWARD. Common sense says not to give in to threats of terror, it will only lead to more and more terror, over more and more minute issues, such as living a Christian life. .
  
  Report this comment
- yiska8
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 8:37pm
  They HATE us. The U.S. Constitution protects free speech. Someone was brave enough to state the savage mentality that equates the savage jihadist and their First Amendment right just got *hit on by the city of New York.The poster spoke truth. They MUST be defeated. They are evil and relentless. And they want to see us all become good Muslims and fly the flag of the Crescent moon over our White House. It is their end goal and you want us to be NICE and non-incendiary? NYC and Bloomberg caved, not surprisingly. The same city hit TWICE by jihadists. But if we’re nice enough, and apologize enough, they won’t hit us again, right??? It’s like the leaders in NYC have an offshoot of battered woman syndrome.Zero common sense and cowardly behavior from the NYC Bloomberg leadership. Weak!
  
  Report this comment
hi
Posted on September 28, 2012 at 11:48am
Prosecute criminals not people exercising free speech.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- johnjamison
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 1:11pm
  Everyday this country is starting to resemble the totolitarian society of “1984″
  
  Report this comment
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 3:00pm
  John,
  
  The MTA revised its guidelines for advertisements that it displays in the public transit system, and you think that suddenly we are on the brink of 1984? Someone should explain to you the concepts of scale and perspective.
  
  Report this comment
Mapache
Posted on September 28, 2012 at 11:38am
the new MTA rule is way too vague and would be struck down the first time it goes to court. What is to prevent ANY group of threatening violence….”We are offended and while we do not condone violence we cannot be responsible for what our community might do since they feel so strongly about the issue.” So, no advertisements for Alcohol in Utah, No advertisements of scantily clad women/men in areas that people might not like, No Pro-Life Ads….etc etc etc…..ANY QUESTIONS?

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- shakedowncrews
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 2:59pm
  You are right, MAPACHE.
  
  Consider that Muslims are OFFENDED by just about anything.
  Scotland: Muslims offended by picture of puppy on police postcard
  http://www.jihadwatch.org/2008/07/scotland-muslims-offended-by-picture-of-puppy-on-police-postcard.html
  
  Muslims were offended by a man walking his dog in a public park where they had gathered and had him arrested for “offending Muslim sensibilities”
  http://frontpagemag.com/2012/arnold-ahlert/muslim-dog-day-afternoon/
  
  “I was arrested at the rally for, “offending Islam” by walking in a PUBLIC park with my dog. Apparently, Muslims do not like dogs. I was warned by a few demonstrators not to go near them. Of course I ignored them and reminded them this is Canada, not Pakistan. Well I was assaulted and returned the favor in kind.
  
  At that point I was jumped by four COPS, dragged off and hand cuffed. Oh my the police were so angry! They said I was, “insensitive” and “inciting a riot”. 30 minutes later they cut me a big deal. No charges if I left. So I left. Imagine this happening in Canada? Walking a licensed dog on a leash at the park in front of our Provincial Legislature and being arrested for that simple act!”
  London university considers stopping sale of ‘immoral’ alcohol on campus because it offends their Muslim students.
  British schools drop Holocaust from history lessons so as not to offend Muslims.
  
  Report this comment
TEIN
Posted on September 28, 2012 at 11:32am
It is faux outrage by the extremist, whipping other Muslims into a frenzy, much like the agitating Progressive/Libby radicals do, the radical extremist Muslims/Palestinians have had 1000 extra years of practice….it will be the Prophet this time, next week it will be because there is too much bacon in the world…extremist are looking to be offended…..quit pandering to radical extremists!!! You won’t win!!! You won’t pacify!!! They are imposing their will and agenda!!! As far as I can tell the perversion of the Islam nations is when they went from there original God to follow a new God created by radicals from the words of their Prophet Mohammad…which now has become dogma..and the religion can be described in biblical terms as “the whore”….

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- exposejesuits
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 3:12pm
  The Vatican invented Islam, to kill Christians and non-Catholics “The Vatican wanted to create a messiah for the Arabs, someone they could raise up as a great leader, a man with charisma whom they could train, and eventually unite all the non-Catholic Arabs behind him, creating a mighty army that would ultimately capture Jerusalem for the pope. In the Vatican briefing, Cardinal Bea told us this story:
  
  ‘A wealthy Arabian lady who was a faithful follower of the pope played a tremendous part in this drama. She was a widow named Khadijah. She gave her wealth to the church and retired to a convent, but was given an assignment. She was to find a brilliant young man who could be used by the Vatican to create a new religion and become the messiah for the children of Ishmael. Khadijah had a cousin named Waraquah,, who was also a very faithful Roman Catholic and the Vatican placed him in a critical role as Muhammad’s advisor. He had tremendous influence on Muhammad. While Muhammad was being prepared, he was told that his enemies were the Jews and that the only true Christians were Roman Catholic. He was taught that others calling themselves Christians were actually wicked impostors and should be destroyed. Many Muslims believe this. How the Vatican created Islam. The astonishing story from an ex-Jesuit priest, Alberto Rivera, which was told to him by Cardinal Bea while he was at the Vatican.By Alberto Rivera
  2006 04 13
  
  http://www.redicecreations.com/specialreports/20
  
  Report this comment
lornaduwn
Posted on September 28, 2012 at 11:28am
Why is it important to be able to say what you want? Because sometimes you are the only one telling the truth!

In 2001 a manuscript of an outline of the Muslim Brotherhoods plans to implement a Jihad by infiltration of culture, finance and positions of power with the ultimate goal of turning all countries into Islamic states. Here are just two of the objectives:

To combine all efforts against the supreme forces of evil in accordance with the principle that one must “battle one evil with a lesser evil”.

To nourish a sentiment of rancor with respect to the Jews and refuse all coexistence.

Read the entire outline here:
http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=4475

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
The Gooch
Posted on September 28, 2012 at 11:25am
Watch this, kiddies. The all-powerful feeling and progressive authoritarianism will not back down. Shocking (not) that the OWS now claims ownership of MTA… and free speech.
Fear and politically correct BS will fuel this battle… and appear to be uncomfortably powerful.
Free speech that matters is not a one way street, busybodies.
Progressivism asserts when you should shut up… for your own good, of course. Don’t let these goons call themselves “liberals”. That’s bad comedy.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
JEANNIEMAC
Posted on September 28, 2012 at 11:13am
The Bilderberger, Bloomberg, has been busy implementing Agenda 21 ever since he went against the will of the people and bought himself a third term. A mayor is supposed to run city business. It is not his place to force people not to buy more soda than he thinks he best for them. It is not his place to have schools determine what pupils are allowed to eat. His push for tiny apartments is part of Agenda 21, which intends to squash people into tiny apartments in high rise buildings, after confiscating their private property.
Bloomberg is one of “intellectual elite and world bankers” spoken of by David Rockefeller at a Bilderberg meeting in Germany in 1991. He and his kind intend to rule the rest of humanity in a one world government.
Christine Quinn, head of the City Council, is being groomed to be the next mayor. Gee, I wonder who is financing her?

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- pennies
  Posted on September 29, 2012 at 10:14am
  Mayor Bloomberg why don’t you just don your toga and turban and come on out of the closet.
  
  Report this comment
The highlander
Posted on September 28, 2012 at 11:09am
The cultural Marxists(Communists)and radical Islam share one key objective and that is the destruction of Israel and America’s Christian foundations.This agenda is being driven by forces that get lost in debate between democrats and republicans when in fact the reality is mankind is embroiled in supernatural war between God and fallen angels. The bond between Islamic terrorists and cultural Marxism is a Satanic construct that is being used by elite Luciferians to bring the United States into line with a godless One World Order initiative-but in order to do that the elite must remove Christian and Jewish supporters of Israel from power and status within the US.Free people understand that free speech and the second amendment are the only thing that stand between ones God given rights and the secular Marxist agenda to destroy the rule of law and religious liberty.That is why George Soro’s is pumping millions of dollars into the Obama campaign,leftist media centers,and gay and feminist agendas.The elite understand they have to disconnect people from God and then divide people from one another which inevitably leads to chaos which they hope leads to a global dictatorship were Jesus Christ,freedom, the traditional family,and moral truth are removed from the mind of man. WAKE UP and guard your soul and fight for liberty and truth because Satan and his earthly minions want it all-but remember freedom is always a choice and it comes from God.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
ncjoyce
Posted on September 28, 2012 at 11:00am
Add to the list of COWARDS the NYC Subway Authority

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 11:15am
  Yes, because the definition of “coward” is someone who doesn’t recklessly and pointlessly alienate his/her fellow citizens. In that case, I’d be happy to call myself one.
  
  Report this comment
- Cemoto78
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 2:10pm
  COWARD-a person who lacks courage in facing danger, difficulty, opposition, pain, etc.; a timid or easily intimidated person. Try again!
  
  Report this comment
- 00100111
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 2:14pm
  So, pencildick, you admit you really have no clue what is going on?
  
  Report this comment
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 2:36pm
  Not at all–apparently you didn’t read very carefully.
  
  Report this comment
Uechi
Posted on September 28, 2012 at 10:58am
New York City and New York State are crap holes. The only place worse is Chicago. If there is ever a nuclear war may I suggest you start with these bastions of Liberty.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 11:19am
  I can’t think of a more anti-American thing to say than to recommend the death of millions of your fellow citizens.
  
  Report this comment
- 00100111
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 2:17pm
  It’d be an act of mercy, trust me. Far more merciful than letting it continue along the path it is on. Don’t worry, pencildick. You’ll get to be a part of it.
  
  Report this comment
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 2:36pm
  By any chance do you call yourself “pro-life”?
  
  Report this comment
universalphilos
Posted on September 28, 2012 at 10:55am
Ia this guidance spoken July 7, 1974, also appropriate for now?
“For the Red Horse [Pakistan] hands out a false hand of peace, and the Bear [Russia] stands and sharpens its claws. Leste the Eagle [U.S.A.] be not ready to fly and spread its wings and protect this land of Israel, then Armageddon should be lost.”
See https://docs.google.com/open?id=0BzyT3fgGxb4-Mnp5THVvU0tNMFU

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- woodyee
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 11:11am
  Nice read, Philos. I especially enjoyed reading Sept. 21, 1970
  
  Report this comment
nurseheidi
Posted on September 28, 2012 at 10:46am
What the Hell happened to New Yorkers?? When did they become such whimps and when did all the men get castrated?-was it done after attending Letterman tapings? I guess it takes a woman to get her done these days. Go Pamela Go! I guess they don’t see that they are moving from Nanny state to Napolean! Never ends well.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 11:18am
  It’s not considered “castration” to simply not alienate your fellow citizens. New Yorkers live and work every day within one of the most diverse communities in the world–I very much doubt that they care at all for your infantile taunting and your hateful “advice.”
  
  Report this comment
- 00100111
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 2:18pm
  They can suck it up, pencildick.
  
  Report this comment
- usedCZARsalesman
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 4:59pm
  I’m having a hard time with this “New Yorkers live and WORK” part of what you said…you call having the highest % of welfare recipients than any other big city in America “working”…oh, to live in liberal bizarro world…
  
  Report this comment
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 5:30pm
  New Yorkers don’t work? Give me the figures.
  
  Report this comment
G.E.R
Posted on September 28, 2012 at 10:44am
This is why New York City is considered the best city in the world. And it’s moments like this(and there have been 1000′s of moments) that I’m proud to be a New Yorker

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- paperpushermj
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 10:54am
  Didn’t I just read NYC was declared the Dirtiest major city in the World?
  
  Report this comment
- Gonzo
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 10:58am
  “New York City is considered the best city in the world”… by New Yorkers alone. You have absolutely no idea how the rest of the country views you, do you?
  
  Report this comment
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 11:24am
  I’m no New Yorker, but New York is one of the safest big cities in the world, one of the most diverse cities in the world, and a major global center for finance, industry and culture. It is a major lynchpin in our national economy. So no, Gonzo, I very much doubt New Yorkers care much as all about what outsiders think of them.
  
  Report this comment
- WATER-THE-TREE
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 11:39am
  That stupid b…h with the spray can should be jailed and made to pay more more signs just like the one she defaced!
  
  Report this comment
- WATER-THE-TREE
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 11:44am
  PENCIL…. Go take a walk in one of those filthy neighborHOODS on a dark night and save us from having to see your CRAP on the Blaze! Idiot! That is if you can leave your OWS tent without being raped!
  
  Report this comment
- The Gooch
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 12:16pm
  Holy shite. I cannot believe this string of comments. Um, where did Islamic zealots target the U.S. so as to get the world’s attention? Not once, but twice. Yeah, the Islamicists are real impressed. But, by all means, give them exactly what they want.
  Ri-damn-diculous.
  “Thank you, effendi! May I have another!”
  I guess some people will just choose to be the ol’ bottom boy everytime. You have fun with that.
  
  Report this comment
- Gonzo
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 12:43pm
  Most narcissist don’t Pencilneck. You should move there, you would fit right in.
  
  Report this comment
- JeffersonsPen
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 2:01pm
  It would be cheaper to build a wall around NY city than across the Mexican border. I would love to see NY become An independent country since it does not identify with 90% of the USA. Your tollarance of SAVAGES would last just long enough for them to take over your fantastic deverse city/country……………You F$#@^%$ don’t have a clue!
  
  Report this comment
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 2:40pm
  Hahaha. I offer fairly solid observations, and I get back more childish temper tantrums. More name calling, more nonsense. No wonder you folks are sinking the Republican party. I very much doubt that this infantile silliness was what the founders had in mind.
  
  Report this comment
- The Gooch
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 8:06pm
  I love logic arguments. Including that of assumed authority. Shine on, you crazy diamond.
  
  Report this comment
backpews
Posted on September 28, 2012 at 10:34am
Oh Yeah, I wonder if the ACLU is going to go marching into NY and kick some civil liberty ****? any bets folks.I doubt it.
I gotta say this seems like a gold mine waiting to happen, whoever gets their first should be able to sue the city of NY into the poor house for violating their rights to free speech.
However it is amazing how fast the state was able to JAIL an obscure film maker, but couldn’t find the time for prosecuting the new black panther party for voter intimidation, or still after a year or more hasn’t been able to untangle the department of justice’s little gun running schemes.
But man…… make an obscure little film questioning islam…….your ass is behind bars yesterday.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- oldguy49
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 10:45am
  how about a ban on muslims killing christians and other non-believers and burning churches…………
  
  Report this comment
- jcldwl
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 10:50am
  I agree but the film maker was in violation of probation for bank fraud so it is a legitimate arrest. The disgusting thing is how the regime lied and lied and lied to the world about how this man’s film was the instigator. Doing this was their attempt to blame America for what happened and then use it to attack our 1st amendment just like this thing in NY. I don’t understand why anyone still lives in NYC.
  
  Report this comment
- Cavallo
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 11:25am
  It all depends on how the policy is enacted. Some of this might just be common sense. Incitement to violence is not protected or free speech. However, if it is enacted to prevent the speech of legitimate criticisms of religion, politics, or other legitimate advocacy then they have violated the first amendment (being an agency of the government). The disclaimer is just common sense and I am actually surprised that they didn’t have the forethought to have a policy like that already. If they prevent speech simply because they think ******* will get upset and hurt something, then the organizations will sue and the MTA will lose.
  
  Report this comment
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 11:27am
  “how about a ban on muslims killing christians and other non-believers and burning churches”
  
  Oh, are those things legal in the U.S.? No, so your comment makes no sense whatsoever.
  
  Report this comment
- 00100111
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 2:21pm
  pencildick, the world is bigger than just the US. You have been paying attention to the rest of the world, right? You have noticed that it happens quite frequently, yes? No? You haven’t noticed? You’ve been too busy fapping to photos of Obama? Typical.
  
  Report this comment
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 2:58pm
  It’s not the world that is at issue, it’s the people who will see and be affected with this advertisement. Please, tell me you understand this very basic point.
  
  Report this comment
RightThinking1
Posted on September 28, 2012 at 10:22am
Ah yes, the very ‘liberal’ New York, NY. The city so stupid they had to name it twice.
As a always say, scratch a liberal, find a Nazi.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 11:36am
  Did you express the same sentiment after 9/11? That it was just a stupid city so who cares?
  
  Report this comment
RamonPreston
Posted on September 28, 2012 at 10:21am
This is serious. Our constitution does not allow for armed revolution. It does allow for revolution from within. These muslims will take over our government, change the laws to make Christianity illegal, and Christians will be beheaded. The FEMA camps already have coffins and guillotines.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- U.N.hater
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 10:33am
  Our constitution does not allow for armed revolution. A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. Oh yes it does! it’s to start useing the constitution and nock this bullsh!! off!
  
  Report this comment
- woodyee
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 10:40am
  Our Constitution does not allow for armed revolution? What the heck do you think the 2nd Amendment is for? It does not imply revolution for anyone – it specifically mandates for defense of the Country and the Bill of Rights.
  
  “A well regulated (trained in arms) Militia (the people), being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed (shall not be trumped in any way).
  
  You punish individuals for their actions, not the people for what individuals do, unless you’re a politician. No need to strip a criminal of his right to bear arms, unless the punishment is inadequate, which is yet another problem politicians and judges and their acolytes in the ACLU foist on us.
  
  Report this comment
- Quixotic-911
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 11:20am
  A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a FREE state, the right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
  These are the all important qualifiers, the people, and naturally the militias, have no moral or legal obligation to necessarily secure an unfree state. Then it’s up to the people to decide when the state ceases to be free and act accordingly.
  
  Report this comment
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 11:38am
  Well, good thing a bunch of crazies on a conservative message board don’t define “the people.”
  
  Report this comment
tarpon
Posted on September 28, 2012 at 10:17am
problem defending their religion is there….

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
normbal
Posted on September 28, 2012 at 10:17am
Well, scr*w them and the camel they rode in on.

Better get your Mohammedan jokes and insults out there NOW while you’re still safe, protected by our (America’s) constitution and rule of law and not global Shari’a (muslim law).

Islam: a tyrannical political system masquerading as a religion.

Communism: a religion masquerading as a tyrannical political system.

Obamunism: a little bit of both.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Sirfoldallot
Posted on September 28, 2012 at 10:17am
Our Unfreedom rules start in NYC it seems.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Watcher1952
Posted on September 28, 2012 at 10:16am
People of New York need to wake up and start taking charge of their city…..no large drinks….food being controlled ……now freedom of speech is being attacked. If you give an inch they will take a mile…. sorry state of affairs

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 11:41am
  It is there city, so maybe you should but out and stop being so condescending towards them.
  
  Report this comment
- The Gooch
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 12:01pm
  Pencilduck:
  It is there (sic) city, so maybe you should but (sic) out and stop being so condescending towards them.
  
  Hmm, I’d say th condescension is coming from the powers that be, not the average Joes and Janes on the street. But, yes, if the governed are submissive to the will of the governors, then they own their lot.
  
  You do realize this is an OPINION forum? Oh, wait. Some speech (as determined by you and others), is not welcome and should just “go away.” Yep. I think that about sums up your stance.
  
  Report this comment
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 2:45pm
  Thanks for pointing out the spelling errors–not one of my best posts in that regard.
  
  However, you are missing the point entirely. You TEA party folks are all about small government and being left alone by the powers that be, yet you insist on butting in on whatever local issues you feel aren’t going your way. It’s the arrogance of assuming that everyone needs to “wake up” if they don’t run their communities like you think they should that runs counter to what you profess to believe.
  
  Report this comment
- The Gooch
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 8:03pm
  Boy, did you call THAT wrong.
  “Conservative” issues that I’ve stepped off the reservation on:
  Intrusive probes for women who want abortions. Yeah, I think we all know what it is being ended at this point.
  The arrest of the silently dancing hippies at the Jefferson Memorial. These folks weren’t “hurting anyone’s experience” and were basically harmless protesters. Oh, the horror.
  I am NOT a TEA Party member nor am I a partisan sheep.
  I believe in free speech FOR ALL and have defended subjects of articles and posters with whom I disagree on NUMEROUS occasions.
  But thanks for assuming we all must be “either… or…”.
  You have every right to disagree with me So be it. I’m just correcting your assumption. I want to leave you the hell alone in your little private world because I want you and your ilk to leave me the hell alone in my little piece of heaven. I’d ask the same of Muslims, but they apparently see things one way: Their way.
  I’m not a busybody telling other people how to live in detail. I do, however, have a strong dislike for such bullies and will meet them on the battlefield of ideas.
  Free speech for all… screw the vaunted feeling. Muslims have a right to make whatever ridiculous demand they want. And the CIVILIZED world has the right to say “Feg off”.
  
  Report this comment
PubliusPencilman
Posted on September 28, 2012 at 10:15am
You folks are not conservatives. Conservatism is about respect. Respect for your fellow citizens. In this case, the ad is clearly calling Muslims savages–let’s not be naive. It would be just as easy to make an ad that supports Israel without dehumanizing anyone.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- usedCZARsalesman
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 10:44am
  lol, conservatism is about respect? Where did you get that garbage? Conservatism is about government leaving us the hell alone and every individual succeeding or failing based on their own merits…If you can make a fortune out of insulting people (which thousands of comedians/media hosts have) then GOOD FOR YOU! You have the right to insult and disrespect ANYONE and they have NO right to stop you from doing so. The ONLY recourse conservatism has for “hate speech” or “disrespect” is changing the channel…
  
  In any case, where does a commie shill like you come off telling us what conservatism is “all about”?
  
  Report this comment
- Gonzo
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 10:45am
  I guess we should have “respected” Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan as well.
  
  Report this comment
- RJJinGadsden
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 10:45am
  PUBLIUSPENCILNECKEDGEEK, In a manner I do agree, our freedoms do come with responsibility. You lefties are the ones who carry these freedoms to their extremes with no concern as to whom you offend. NOW, you want to bend over backwards for one and ONLY one religious extreme that threatens to kill at the drop of a hat? You want to surrender YOUR freedom of speech to radicals? I guess as long as you can willy nilly offend Christians, Jews, and conservatives in general then you are just fine with that? And, you can only blame conservatives? You remind me of a female body part….boob.
  
  Report this comment
- getourcountryback
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 10:47am
  And it would be just as easy for those peace loving muslims to accept our way of living wouldn’t it? But no, they want their way or no way. I say no way to them and if the shoe fits……….
  
  Report this comment
- zanbuscus
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 10:48am
  Actually, that ad is calling Islamic EXTREMISTS aka terrorists aka the Muslim Brotherhood (which happens to be a HUGE group) savages because they are all about violent jihad. And the President of Egypt, I don’t know if you know this, is a member of the Muslim Brotherhood. Many of the leaders of these Middle East countries ARE Muslim Brotherhood members or affiliates.
  
  Report this comment
- palerider54
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 10:52am
  Definition of SAVAGE: One who uses women and children as suicide bombers to kill innocent women and children civilians. 2. nation, race, or religion that fires missiles into non military neighborhoods. 3. nation, race or religion who fly planes into office buildings to kill innocents and strike terror into all who reject their religion.
  
  Islam, woman abusers, child molesters ,violent, cave dwelling SAVAGES. Got it?
  
  Report this comment
- kansas hawks 3
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 11:01am
  Have you looked at the videos of the people over there? Have you read anything about the people from there? I think your response says it all.
  
  Report this comment
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 11:32am
  “Definition of SAVAGE: One who uses women and children as suicide bombers to kill innocent women and children civilians. 2. nation, race, or religion that fires missiles into non military neighborhoods. 3. nation, race or religion who fly planes into office buildings to kill innocents and strike terror into all who reject their religion.”
  
  Ok–everyone take note of the fact that you are blaming an entire “nation” or “race” for 9/11. That’s exactly the kind of racist thinking that this billboard promotes. Thanks so much for proving my point.
  
  And really, I’m sure some of you are reasonably smart, so you know that it’s not actually an argument when you counter my point about alienating fellow citizens with shrill and vague nonsense about what all of “them” do. That, too, is the very definition of racist thinking. No stretch of the imagination needed there.
  
  Report this comment
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 11:35am
  UsedC,
  
  “conservatism is about respect? Where did you get that garbage? Conservatism is about government leaving us the hell alone and every individual succeeding or failing based on their own merits”
  
  No, that’s not actually the definition of Conservatism. That libertarianism/free market fundamentalism, which is not the same thing. Maybe you should read a book and you might know what you are talking about.
  
  Report this comment
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 11:40am
  RJ,
  
  ” NOW, you want to bend over backwards for one and ONLY one religious extreme that threatens to kill at the drop of a hat?”
  
  No, I want to bend over backwards to not alienate good American Muslims who have just as much right to live here as you or I. At least pretend for a second that you are thinking rationally about this issue and aren’t just trotting out cartoonish nonsense “at the drop of a hat.”
  
  Report this comment
- The Gooch
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 11:53am
  Neither you, I, nor Muslims have a “right” not to be offended. The Islamic manipulators behind the scenes aren’t stupid; they know EXACTLY what strings to pull in the West to advance their argument for their desired ban of free speech. “What’s really as important to the West as to many of us? Oh, the unquestionable feeling.” And, like good little emasculated useful… persons…., many folks on the West will happily comply and help fight for the demise of free speech.
  Screw your feelings, screw my feelings and screw the feelings of Islamicists.
  By the by, the conservatives you need to worry about in this equation are the zealots of Islam. Fine, I’ll remain civil and refer to them as what they present as: Zealots.
  Oh, and Islam is a religion, not a race.
  You suck at this game. But I respect and WILL DEFEND your right to submit your opinion.
  
  Let’s keep this simple: Do you believe that ANY and ALL religions have a cogent argument to limit the rights of others? Not just speech, but action? Because if there is a “foot in the door”, folks attempting to make you submit won’t just stop with what you can say. They’ll then move onto what you can (and can’t) do. How about it? Does submission define civility and does religious fervor have a right to shape your existence… even if you don’t subscribe to the brand of crazy at hand?
  I’m all for playing nice. I’m not for being told I’m not allowed to play.
  
  Report this comment
- usedCZARsalesman
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 12:19pm
  @PENCIL…
  
  “Ok–everyone take note of the fact that you are blaming an entire “nation” or “race” for 9/11. That’s exactly the kind of racist thinking that this billboard promotes. Thanks so much for proving my point.”
  
  http://www.faithfreedom.org/features/news/poll-most-muslim-countries-want-sharia-law/
  
  Look at Jordan, Egypt, and Pakistan…when 80% of a population is in FAVOR of stoning for adultry, DEATH for leaving Islam, and having you hand CUT THE F^%K OFF for stealing…I would say it’s perfectly reasonable to label the entire nation as “savage”…you are a fool. I hope you keep sucking up to these savages until the day the sodomize and behead you
  
  Report this comment
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 2:48pm
  Yes, let’s keep this simple:
  “Do you believe that ANY and ALL religions have a cogent argument to limit the rights of others?”
  No. However, as a vender of advertising space, the MTA has the right to define the advertisements it thinks are appropriate. They already do–I don’t see you taking issues with any of the other guidelines. Do you argue with this basic point? If not, then you haven’t a leg to stand on regarding this issue.
  
  Report this comment
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 2:51pm
  UsedC,
  
  And look at how those numbers are so dramatically lower in more democratic countries like Turkey and Indonesia. But, of course, Pakistanis in Pakistan are not the people seeing this ad–American Muslims will encounter it, and they’ll have to deal with the negative images it is pushing. Stop playing naive.
  
  Report this comment
- usedCZARsalesman
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 4:36pm
  Those are the “savages” that pose the threat to the nation of Israel…thus the title of “savage” is fitting…at the end of the day, freedom of speech should NEVER be restricted because evil people MIGHT do evil things…according to YOUR line of thinking, we Christians (in order to stop the constant assault on our religious freedoms by atheists) should sodomize and murder a few atheists every time they take down a prayer mural, or stop a pregame prayer at a HS football game…we do that a couple of times and the atheist will be FORCED to let us do whatever we want because everyone is afraid of what we might do…why do you think the American people have always had a policy of NOT negotiating with terrorist? They wrote a childrens book about it, “If you give a mouse a cookie…”
  
  Report this comment
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 5:34pm
  “according to YOUR line of thinking, we Christians (in order to stop the constant assault on our religious freedoms by atheists) should sodomize and murder a few atheists every time they take down a prayer mural…”
  
  Wow. I can’t think of a better example to prove you have no idea how logic works.
  
  Report this comment
- The Gooch
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 7:50pm
  Pencil,
  Playing the part of reverent statesman (and discriminating capitalist) seems a bit forced considering the CLEAR AND PRESENT call from Islam that free speech will not be tolerated. Context matters. Dance around the issue all you want. I suspect your support for the MTA’s seesawing on this issue has as much to do with it cheesing off the proper people (from your perspective) as with any concern about manners and commerce. Atheists wanna knock on Christmas with public advertisements (as they are wont to do in the upcoming season), it’s their money and a message I can ignore.
  As always, different rules for different people. One of my favorite tactics of progressives.
  
  Report this comment
ColoradoMaverick
Posted on September 28, 2012 at 10:12am
The radical Muslim extremists have infiltrated every aspect of our government, our schools, our media, everything. Christians and Jews and every other peaceful religion need to take a stand and fight back. This is a matter of life or death.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 11:42am
  Haha. You’re nuts.
  
  Report this comment
- 00100111
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 2:06pm
  Well, at least you used the correct version of “you’re”. I’ll give you that much, pencildick.
  
  Report this comment
Gonzo
Posted on September 28, 2012 at 10:11am
Isn’t this the same city that currently has a crucifix immersed in a jar of urine on display?

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- RJJinGadsden
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 10:45am
  Yeah, but at least it is in a private gallery.
  
  Report this comment
- Gonzo
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 10:49am
  So what, it offends me. It should be taken down. We can play this game too R.J.
  
  Report this comment
- The Gooch
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 11:38am
  Not to fear, Gonzo. If you want to take this measure to an extreme, Islamicists will destroy the artifacts and edifices of all other religions. I’m sure even a cross in p!ss won’t escape the most dedicated of the zealots.
  
  Report this comment
Detroit paperboy
Posted on September 28, 2012 at 10:10am
Yes, we should say nothing as they kill their daughters and behead their wives in the name of Allah, the pedophile murderer………..

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Gonzo
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 11:06am
  Hey, you can’t say that Detroit! We have laws against that kind of slander against “the prophet”!
  
  Report this comment
- The Gooch
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 11:31am
  Good point. If this Islamic equivalent of the “I’m rubber, your glue” mandate passes, you can bet the news will have to meet the approval of state and religious monitors. Onward to progress.
  And, yes, I realize this is MTA’s fight at the moment and there is no indication this orgnaization is being specifically pressured or guided by Islamicists. But MTA is certainly being influenced by progressives and leftists. You can’t have it both ways, kiddies. The “we support free speech, but for….” argument shows this breed of “do as say, not as I do” clowns to be anything but liberal.
  
  Report this comment
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 11:43am
  “we should say nothing as they kill their daughters and behead their wives in the name of Allah”
  
  What do you mean “we should say nothing”? If an American Muslim does that, he will be prosecuted according to the law. No one in this country is standing by and letting that happen, so what are you talking about?
  
  Report this comment
- The Gooch
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 12:09pm
  Um, Pencil, the point is that (not sure you’re paying attention), many zealots are asserting you and I have no right to question ANY action concerning the Islamic faith. If a zealot takes action in the name of Allah with the blessing of Muslim potentates and we challenge that action in the proverbial public square, we just insulted Islam. Are you not picking up what the Islamicists are putting down? “You have no rights once Islam is factor and my feelings come into play.”
  Yeah. That kind of negates the whole due process to which you allude. “A Muslim had his feelings hurt?! Why, of course, case dismissed. Now, step forward Mr. Prosecutor while the attending cleric decides how YOU will be punished.”
  
  Report this comment
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 2:57pm
  “many zealots are asserting you and I have no right to question ANY action concerning the Islamic faith.”
  
  No, that’s not the point here. This is an extreme and nonsensical view. This article is about the MTA having the right to define the advertising they allow displayed in the public transit system (which they already have guidelines for). This article is about that organization not displaying an ad that paints Muslims, including American Muslims, as “savages.” That’s what we are talking about. It’s you who are confused on this point.
  
  Report this comment
- The Gooch
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 7:41pm
  Pencil,
  Parse as you will. You see a simple exercise in etiquette. Sure it is…
  I see a one way street of expectations.
  We are both allowed our views. For now.
  
  Report this comment
Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
Posted on September 28, 2012 at 10:09am
Top down, bottom up and inside out – Federal, State, County, City, Municipality – one begins top down, another part bottom up until they meet in the middle and all is turned inside out for the rest of America.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply

It appears that you have Javascript Disabled. Please enable Javascript in your browser preferences for a better user experience on TheBlaze. You can not comment without Javascript enabled.