Anti-Islam ads on NYC buses. Whose side are you on?

[C_Clayton_Jones]

DOGMAPHOBE SAID:

“Neither black nor Jew is a quasi-religious totalitarian political ideology.”

And neither is Islam.

Your 'argument' fails as a composition fallacy, where you incorrectly infer that the criminal acts of the few are 'representative' of the whole, and 'representative' of Islam overall.

 

[turzovka]

TURZOVKA SAID:

“Obama's and countless liberals in the West hatred of Israel?”

This is both idiotic and a lie.

Ha! I do not care to take the time to point out your foolishness. But maybe if you know an Israeli he can explain it to you.

 

[HenryBHough]

So, you liberals, freedom of speech is ONLY a bitch when it's YOUR speech that somebody's trying to suppress! Anybody else's? Fair game, huh?

Sorry, Dudette, it don't work that way.

 

[turzovka]

Well just ask yourself this one question. If that sign was about black people instead of Jews would it be free speech or hate speech?

It's in the Koran. It is carried out by many malevolent forces because they are abiding by their religious teachings. It is being sponsored by many so-called "benign" Islamic organizations in the West clandestinely. Many are funding murderers, including CAIR. I, for one, cannot tolerate the cowards in congress and the indifference of our people and the demagogues in the media.

To answer your question, I would not be in favor of anything of that nature against black people.
Black people do not have an ideology however shared by their masses, unlike masses in Islam so I do see a real difference.

I also made very clear that I did not support the ads, but is that not relevant to your response?

What angers me is how little is being done by govts in the West to take on fanatical Islam. I do not care to read about more young girls being raped and made into sex slaves or other children being beheaded in front of their parents. But that's just me.

I only asked the question. If our mass transit system allowed those signs against black people instead of Jews would it be free speech or hate speech? I think you know the answer.

Yes, I know the answer, but it is really not relevant or fair to make such a comparison. I think you knew that answer, too.

It certainly is fair. It illustrates a double standard. You know and I know if those signs were about black people instead of Jews there would be national justified outrage! Why are Jews fair game all of a sudden. I call it hate speech.

Could it be I am misunderstanding you?

These ads are being put up by Jews, more right wing or militant in some ways I admit, but they are defending Israel and Jews, not a display of hate speech towards them.

 

[ogibillm]

Well just ask yourself this one question. If that sign was about black people instead of Jews would it be free speech or hate speech?

It's in the Koran. It is carried out by many malevolent forces because they are abiding by their religious teachings. It is being sponsored by many so-called "benign" Islamic organizations in the West clandestinely. Many are funding murderers, including CAIR. I, for one, cannot tolerate the cowards in congress and the indifference of our people and the demagogues in the media.

To answer your question, I would not be in favor of anything of that nature against black people.
Black people do not have an ideology however shared by their masses, unlike masses in Islam so I do see a real difference.

I also made very clear that I did not support the ads, but is that not relevant to your response?

What angers me is how little is being done by govts in the West to take on fanatical Islam. I do not care to read about more young girls being raped and made into sex slaves or other children being beheaded in front of their parents. But that's just me.

I only asked the question. If our mass transit system allowed those signs against black people instead of Jews would it be free speech or hate speech? I think you know the answer.

Yes, I know the answer, but it is really not relevant or fair to make such a comparison. I think you knew that answer, too.

It certainly is fair. It illustrates a double standard. You know and I know if those signs were about black people instead of Jews there would be national justified outrage! Why are Jews fair game all of a sudden. I call it hate speech.

Could it be I am misunderstanding you?

These ads are being put up by Jews, more right wing or militant in some ways I admit, but they are defending Israel and Jews, not a display of hate speech towards them.

They aren't defending anything, they are defaming muslims

 

[turzovka]

It's in the Koran. It is carried out by many malevolent forces because they are abiding by their religious teachings. It is being sponsored by many so-called "benign" Islamic organizations in the West clandestinely. Many are funding murderers, including CAIR. I, for one, cannot tolerate the cowards in congress and the indifference of our people and the demagogues in the media.

To answer your question, I would not be in favor of anything of that nature against black people.
Black people do not have an ideology however shared by their masses, unlike masses in Islam so I do see a real difference.

I also made very clear that I did not support the ads, but is that not relevant to your response?

What angers me is how little is being done by govts in the West to take on fanatical Islam. I do not care to read about more young girls being raped and made into sex slaves or other children being beheaded in front of their parents. But that's just me.

I only asked the question. If our mass transit system allowed those signs against black people instead of Jews would it be free speech or hate speech? I think you know the answer.

Yes, I know the answer, but it is really not relevant or fair to make such a comparison. I think you knew that answer, too.

It certainly is fair. It illustrates a double standard. You know and I know if those signs were about black people instead of Jews there would be national justified outrage! Why are Jews fair game all of a sudden. I call it hate speech.

Could it be I am misunderstanding you?

These ads are being put up by Jews, more right wing or militant in some ways I admit, but they are defending Israel and Jews, not a display of hate speech towards them.

They aren't defending anything, they are defaming muslims

Indirectly, they are defending Israel and the hatred and violence exacted against them decade after decade after decade.

The percentage of so called moderate Muslims that are more or less ok with the violence militant Islamic cells are waging against Jews and other "infidels" is far more than you might realize. And surely higher than what a survey might uncover. But having said that, these ads are not about defaming muslims. It is about countering the anti-Israeli rhetoric and propaganda allowed in this nation.

The fact a large number of peaceful Muslims are innocent of the charges remains, but how do you separate the two? At least Israeli soldiers try to do that very exact thing when retaliating against Hamas or Hezbollah, et al. I do not see their side caring one bit about an innocent Jewish civilian.

 

[ogibillm]

I only asked the question. If our mass transit system allowed those signs against black people instead of Jews would it be free speech or hate speech? I think you know the answer.

Yes, I know the answer, but it is really not relevant or fair to make such a comparison. I think you knew that answer, too.

It certainly is fair. It illustrates a double standard. You know and I know if those signs were about black people instead of Jews there would be national justified outrage! Why are Jews fair game all of a sudden. I call it hate speech.

Could it be I am misunderstanding you?

These ads are being put up by Jews, more right wing or militant in some ways I admit, but they are defending Israel and Jews, not a display of hate speech towards them.

They aren't defending anything, they are defaming muslims

Indirectly, they are defending Israel and the hatred and violence exacted against them decade after decade after decade.

The percentage of so called moderate Muslims that are more or less ok with the violence militant Islamic cells are waging against Jews and other "infidels" is far more than you might realize. And surely higher than what a survey might uncover. But having said that, these ads are not about defaming muslims. It is about countering the anti-Israeli rhetoric and propaganda allowed in this nation.

The fact a large number of peaceful Muslims are innocent of the charges remains, but how do you separate the two? At least Israeli soldiers try to do that very exact thing when retaliating against Hamas or Hezbollah, et al. I do not see their side caring one bit about an innocent Jewish civilian.

Speaking of propaganda...

 

[TheOldSchool]

Well just ask yourself this one question. If that sign was about black people instead of Jews would it be free speech or hate speech?

The ad is against Muslims.

 

[turzovka]

Yes, I know the answer, but it is really not relevant or fair to make such a comparison. I think you knew that answer, too.

It certainly is fair. It illustrates a double standard. You know and I know if those signs were about black people instead of Jews there would be national justified outrage! Why are Jews fair game all of a sudden. I call it hate speech.

Could it be I am misunderstanding you?

These ads are being put up by Jews, more right wing or militant in some ways I admit, but they are defending Israel and Jews, not a display of hate speech towards them.

They aren't defending anything, they are defaming muslims

Indirectly, they are defending Israel and the hatred and violence exacted against them decade after decade after decade.

The percentage of so called moderate Muslims that are more or less ok with the violence militant Islamic cells are waging against Jews and other "infidels" is far more than you might realize. And surely higher than what a survey might uncover. But having said that, these ads are not about defaming muslims. It is about countering the anti-Israeli rhetoric and propaganda allowed in this nation.

The fact a large number of peaceful Muslims are innocent of the charges remains, but how do you separate the two? At least Israeli soldiers try to do that very exact thing when retaliating against Hamas or Hezbollah, et al. I do not see their side caring one bit about an innocent Jewish civilian.

Speaking of propaganda...

Go ahead... speak.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

DOGMAPHOBE SAID:

“Neither black nor Jew is a quasi-religious totalitarian political ideology.”

And neither is Islam.

Your 'argument' fails as a composition fallacy, where you incorrectly infer that the criminal acts of the few are 'representative' of the whole, and 'representative' of Islam overall.

Bullshit. Just because you are monumentally ignorant if the ideology in question, that doesn't make my statement a fallacy. It just means you know nothing about the subject matter.

 

[WillowTree]

Well just ask yourself this one question. If that sign was about black people instead of Jews would it be free speech or hate speech?

It's in the Koran. It is carried out by many malevolent forces because they are abiding by their religious teachings. It is being sponsored by many so-called "benign" Islamic organizations in the West clandestinely. Many are funding murderers, including CAIR. I, for one, cannot tolerate the cowards in congress and the indifference of our people and the demagogues in the media.

To answer your question, I would not be in favor of anything of that nature against black people.
Black people do not have an ideology however shared by their masses, unlike masses in Islam so I do see a real difference.

I also made very clear that I did not support the ads, but is that not relevant to your response?

What angers me is how little is being done by govts in the West to take on fanatical Islam. I do not care to read about more young girls being raped and made into sex slaves or other children being beheaded in front of their parents. But that's just me.

I only asked the question. If our mass transit system allowed those signs against black people instead of Jews would it be free speech or hate speech? I think you know the answer.

Yes, I know the answer, but it is really not relevant or fair to make such a comparison. I think you knew that answer, too.

It certainly is fair. It illustrates a double standard. You know and I know if those signs were about black people instead of Jews there would be national justified outrage! Why are Jews fair game all of a sudden. I call it hate speech.

Could it be I am misunderstanding you?

These ads are being put up by Jews, more right wing or militant in some ways I admit, but they are defending Israel and Jews, not a display of hate speech towards them.

J

Not the way I am reading it

Killing Jews signs coming to New York transit WashingtonExaminer.com

But say you are right. If that speech is anti muslim, anti Jew or anti black is it free speech or hate speech?

 

[SAYIT]

Well just ask yourself this one question. If that sign was about black people instead of Jews would it be free speech or hate speech?

The ad is against Muslims.

Not so. The ads confront vicious Islamist militancy and the culture that spawned and cultivates it.

 

[TheOldSchool]

Well just ask yourself this one question. If that sign was about black people instead of Jews would it be free speech or hate speech?

The ad is against Muslims.

Not so. The ads confront vicious Islamist militancy and the culture that spawned and cultivates it.

It promotes discord and incites violence. That's it.

 

[SAYIT]

Well just ask yourself this one question. If that sign was about black people instead of Jews would it be free speech or hate speech?

The ad is against Muslims.

Not so. The ads confront vicious Islamist militancy and the culture that spawned and cultivates it.

It promotes discord and incites violence. That's it.

Similar ads in other states had neither effect. You're just blowing smoke.
From the article:
"In his ruling in favor of AFDI, Koeltl said the ads could not reasonably be considered an incitement to violence, even if someone didn't understand them."

 

[TheOldSchool]

Well just ask yourself this one question. If that sign was about black people instead of Jews would it be free speech or hate speech?

The ad is against Muslims.

Not so. The ads confront vicious Islamist militancy and the culture that spawned and cultivates it.

It promotes discord and incites violence. That's it.

Similar ads in other states had neither effect. You're just blowing smoke.

Well don't kid yourself the 'similar' ads didn't do ANYTHING because the average person has learned to recognize and ignore bullshit. But I'm not interested in what the ads will do, just the intent behind them. And the intent is absolutely to attack Muslims by spreading discord and, with a little luck, to incite some violence.

 

[SAYIT]

Well just ask yourself this one question. If that sign was about black people instead of Jews would it be free speech or hate speech?

The ad is against Muslims.

Not so. The ads confront vicious Islamist militancy and the culture that spawned and cultivates it.

It promotes discord and incites violence. That's it.

Similar ads in other states had neither effect. You're just blowing smoke.

Well don't kid yourself the 'similar' ads didn't do ANYTHING because the average person has learned to recognize and ignore bullshit. But I'm not interested in what the ads will do, just the intent behind them. And the intent is absolutely to attack Muslims by spreading discord and, with a little luck, to incite some violence.

I'm not interested in what interests one such as you. That is what our courts are for and the judge added, "Moreover, there is no evidence that seeing one of these advertisements on the back of a bus would be sufficient to trigger a violent reaction. Therefore, these ads — offensive as they may be — are still entitled to First Amendment protection."

Killing Jews Is Worship Ads Can Run on NYC Transport Judge Rues

 

[TheOldSchool]

The ad is against Muslims.

Not so. The ads confront vicious Islamist militancy and the culture that spawned and cultivates it.

It promotes discord and incites violence. That's it.

Similar ads in other states had neither effect. You're just blowing smoke.

Well don't kid yourself the 'similar' ads didn't do ANYTHING because the average person has learned to recognize and ignore bullshit. But I'm not interested in what the ads will do, just the intent behind them. And the intent is absolutely to attack Muslims by spreading discord and, with a little luck, to incite some violence.

I'm not interested in what interests one such as you. That is what our courts are for and the judge added, "Moreover, there is no evidence that seeing one of these advertisements on the back of a bus would be sufficient to trigger a violent reaction. Therefore, these ads — offensive as they may be — are still entitled to First Amendment protection."

Killing Jews Is Worship Ads Can Run on NYC Transport Judge Rues

Thanks for restating the OP for no reason.

 

[SAYIT]

Not so. The ads confront vicious Islamist militancy and the culture that spawned and cultivates it.

It promotes discord and incites violence. That's it.

Similar ads in other states had neither effect. You're just blowing smoke.

Well don't kid yourself the 'similar' ads didn't do ANYTHING because the average person has learned to recognize and ignore bullshit. But I'm not interested in what the ads will do, just the intent behind them. And the intent is absolutely to attack Muslims by spreading discord and, with a little luck, to incite some violence.

I'm not interested in what interests one such as you. That is what our courts are for and the judge added, "Moreover, there is no evidence that seeing one of these advertisements on the back of a bus would be sufficient to trigger a violent reaction. Therefore, these ads — offensive as they may be — are still entitled to First Amendment protection."

Killing Jews Is Worship Ads Can Run on NYC Transport Judge Rues

Thanks for restating the OP for no reason.

Clearly you either did not understand it or simply ignored it because it mocks your pre-conceived silliness. I thought a repost of the judges reasoning might do you some good, Princess. Evidently I was wrong about that.

 

[TheOldSchool]

It promotes discord and incites violence. That's it.

Similar ads in other states had neither effect. You're just blowing smoke.

Well don't kid yourself the 'similar' ads didn't do ANYTHING because the average person has learned to recognize and ignore bullshit. But I'm not interested in what the ads will do, just the intent behind them. And the intent is absolutely to attack Muslims by spreading discord and, with a little luck, to incite some violence.

I'm not interested in what interests one such as you. That is what our courts are for and the judge added, "Moreover, there is no evidence that seeing one of these advertisements on the back of a bus would be sufficient to trigger a violent reaction. Therefore, these ads — offensive as they may be — are still entitled to First Amendment protection."

Killing Jews Is Worship Ads Can Run on NYC Transport Judge Rues

Thanks for restating the OP for no reason.

Clearly you either did not understand it or simply ignored it because it mocks your pre-conceived silliness. I thought a repost of the judges reasoning might do you some good, Princess. Evidently I was wrong about that.

Here let me re-post my completely unchanged opinion:

That ad is nothing more than an attempt to spread discord and incite violence. Some people have no shame.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Here let me re-post my completely unchanged opinion:

That ad is nothing more than an attempt to spread discord and incite violence. Some people have no shame.

Did you mean to use the word "intelligent" or "educated" instead of "changed, by any chance?