• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Shocking Anti-Islam Ad Campaign Coming To New York City Buses And Subways

DA60

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2012
Messages
16,386
Reaction score
7,793
Location
Where I am now
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
'In a move that is certain to further escalate already stretched racial tensions in America's most cosmopolitan city, some 100 New York City buses will soon carry jarring anti-Islamic posters which feature photos of an ISIS beheading victim, his alleged executioner, Adolf Hitler, declare "Yesterday's moderate [Muslim] is today's headline" and proclaim "It's not Islamophobia, it's Islamorealism" as part of an "educational campaign." According to the NY Daily News, the ads, paid for by flame-throwing blogger Pamela Geller, at a cost of $100,000, are intended as an “education campaign” to warn of the “problem with jihad” and Islamic sharia law, Geller said.'

arab%20ads%20NYC.jpg


http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user5/imageroot/2014/09/arab ads NYC.jpg

My reaction?

picard-facepalm2.jpg
 
Not going to happen.

NYC will not allow it.

And I think OP just found a decietful link.
 
How is this going to cause an increase in racial tensions? Islam isn't a race.

I agree this will never fly, unfortunately.
 
Sigh.

First, Islam is a religion, an ideology. Not a race. Sadly, though, it WILL increase racial tension, because, well....people are stupid.

Second, I confess to being a tad...split on this. I can't say that I overly disagree with most of the messages here.

I don't know the answer. But I can say...a big part of me wants to just say "**** 'em" and kill every last Islamist, muslim, etc. And then move on to the Christians, and finally, the Jews.

Learn to ****ing get along, or appreciate the reality that will be living with more and more people like me.

We're sick of hearing about it. We're sick of fighting because of it. We're sick of legislation concerning it.

Learn to get along.



Or else.
 
Being proactively against Islamism is a position that requires a lot of prefacing in order for it to not seem silly. That doesn't mean that being proactively against Islamism is silly, it just means that making bumper-stickeresque ads for it will be silly.
 
'In a move that is certain to further escalate already stretched racial tensions in America's most cosmopolitan city, some 100 New York City buses will soon carry jarring anti-Islamic posters which feature photos of an ISIS beheading victim, his alleged executioner, Adolf Hitler, declare "Yesterday's moderate [Muslim] is today's headline" and proclaim "It's not Islamophobia, it's Islamorealism" as part of an "educational campaign." According to the NY Daily News, the ads, paid for by flame-throwing blogger Pamela Geller, at a cost of $100,000, are intended as an “education campaign” to warn of the “problem with jihad” and Islamic sharia law, Geller said.'

arab%20ads%20NYC.jpg


http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user5/imageroot/2014/09/arab ads NYC.jpg

My reaction?

picard-facepalm2.jpg

A few years ago, the Central Arkansas Transit Authority was successfully sued in federal court for refusing* a pro-atheist advertisement. I wonder if the same result will happen here.

*And they didn't even refuse it, they just required a bond be posted against potential vandalism.

That said, I agree that the ad is misleading and should not be ran.
 
While all racism is bigotry, not all bigotry is racism. Islam is a religion, not a race, therefore anti-Islamic statements, while they are bigoted, are not racist.
 
Here in Toronto, on our buses and subways, religious ads are always controversial. However, if they simply espouse the "benefits" of one religion without disparaging any other religion they have been accepted in limited ways. The ones I've seen have simply been informational such as "get more information here", etc.

Personally, regardless of your views on the topics expressed in the three ads posted in the OP, I believe these ads are dangerous in that they could incite violence against anyone who is outwardly Islamic and clearly many Muslims wear their religion quite clearly in their everyday lives. On that basis, I would oppose them just as strenuously as I would oppose some Palestinian support group who wanted to post ads condemning Israel for Palestinian "apartheid".
 
Here in Toronto, on our buses and subways, religious ads are always controversial. However, if they simply espouse the "benefits" of one religion without disparaging any other religion they have been accepted in limited ways. The ones I've seen have simply been informational such as "get more information here", etc.

Personally, regardless of your views on the topics expressed in the three ads posted in the OP, I believe these ads are dangerous in that they could incite violence against anyone who is outwardly Islamic and clearly many Muslims wear their religion quite clearly in their everyday lives. On that basis, I would oppose them just as strenuously as I would oppose some Palestinian support group who wanted to post ads condemning Israel for Palestinian "apartheid".

That's no excuse to deny others their 1st Amendment rights. If Muslims are offended to the point of violence, then they'll suffer the concequences of their crimes; perhaps other Muslims will come to understand, by that example, that they have to moderate their religious feelings.
 
That's no excuse to deny others their 1st Amendment rights. If Muslims are offended to the point of violence, then they'll suffer the concequences of their crimes; perhaps other Muslims will come to understand, by that example, that they have to moderate their religious feelings.

When do the first amendment rights of one party override the first amendment rights of another? Aren't you disrespecting the first amendment rights of Muslims when you say they "will come to understand, by that example, that they have to moderate their religious feelings"? Isn't the NYC subway/transit system an arm of the government? Can't it be argued that the government is clearly abusing the first amendment rights of Muslims through allowing such ads?
 
Well, that should calm things down :roll:

Pamela Gellar is a nutjob who spends her existance inciting hatred of a entire people based on religious affiliation.
 
AFDI is an extreme group. Its ads are anything but informative.
 
When do the first amendment rights of one party override the first amendment rights of another?Aren't you disrespecting the first amendment rights of Muslims when you say they "will come to understand, by that example, that they have to moderate their religious feelings"? Isn't the NYC subway/transit system an arm of the government? Can't it be argued that the government is clearly abusing the first amendment rights of Muslims through allowing such ads?

Freedom of religion doesn't negate free speech. If I want to criticize Islam, or any other religion, it's my constitutional right to do so. If the government tells me I can't criticize a particular religion, then that would be government endorsement of that religion.

Aren't you disrespecting the first amendment rights of Muslims when you say they "will come to understand, by that example, that they have to moderate their religious feelings"?

Violence isn't protected by the 1st Amendment.
 
Well, that should calm things down :roll:

Pamela Gellar is a nutjob who spends her existance inciting hatred of a entire people based on religious affiliation.

What people?
 
What people?

Those that you have already publically stated that you hate.

I'm not in love with the Saudi government. They're Muslims and I hate Muslims. I am a big fan of facts and there aren't any facts to support the accusation that the Saudi government funds terrorists.
 
That's no excuse to deny others their 1st Amendment rights. If Muslims are offended to the point of violence, then they'll suffer the consequences of their crimes; perhaps other Muslims will come to understand, by that example, that they have to moderate their religious feelings.
This recent parade didn't gain as much attention as the ads did. ‘Pro-Terror’ (United American)Muslim Day Parade – NYC- 2014- pics/vids | the "silent" majority no more!

There a fear by some of offending Muslims and Islam moreso than other groups or religions and, as well, we might also ask ourselves if anything on that ad is untrue. Given the amount of Islamic violence against innocent people throughout the world in the past few decades I think it's time we dropped our concerns about offending anyone. This does not mean we should be attacking or defaming innocent individual Muslims but I see no problem in attacking the religion which is committing so much violence in the world today.
 
Those that you have already publically stated that you hate.

Oh, so hating Islam equates to being a racist? You're doing the same thing Objective Voice is doing. You folks have a hair trigger. :lamo
 
Everything those ads claim is accurate, and I agree with them completely. The city is apparently trying to claim this is speech that falls outside the First Amendment protection under the "clear and present danger" exception--i.e, that it is calculated to and likely to create an imminent threat of lawless action. I doubt it can make that fly. Good luck to Ms. Geller and her organization. It's high time Americans started calling these lousy SOB's out for what they are. They like the idea of using violence against other people--let's see how they like wondering if some of those people may use it on them first.
 
This recent parade didn't gain as much attention as the ads did. ‘Pro-Terror’ (United American)Muslim Day Parade – NYC- 2014- pics/vids | the "silent" majority no more!

There a fear by some of offending Muslims and Islam moreso than other groups or religions and, as well, we might also ask ourselves if anything on that ad is untrue. Given the amount of Islamic violence against innocent people throughout the world in the past few decades I think it's time we dropped our concerns about offending anyone. This does not mean we should be attacking or defaming innocent individual Muslims but I see no problem in attacking the religion which is committing so much violence in the world today.

Islam is a politically correct religion. Liberals are obligated to defend it. I believe the anti-American/anti-democracy ellements make Islam acceptable to Liberals.
 
Well, that should calm things down :roll:

Pamela Gellar is a nutjob who spends her existance inciting hatred of a entire people based on religious affiliation.

Does Pamela Gellar hate ALL Muslims, or just those who advocate, condone or consider terrorism?
 
While all racism is bigotry, not all bigotry is racism. Islam is a religion, not a race, therefore anti-Islamic statements, while they are bigoted, are not racist.


Technically no. But it adds up to the same thing. These ads isolate a religion/sect and draw a straight line from Islam to terrorism. There is also the "Arab" factor. The largest concentration of Muslims isn't even in the middle east, but Indonesia, and yet this isolates Arab based Muslims.

So in the end, if not racism, then xenophobia....
 
Islam is a politically correct religion. Liberals are obligated to defend it. I believe the anti-American/anti-democracy ellements make Islam acceptable to Liberals.
They've been defending it at least since 9/11 while attacking Christianity, as we can see on these threads. Christopher Hitchens is one of many who noticed these bizarre reactions.
So here is what I want to say on the absolutely crucial matter of secularism. Only one faction in American politics has found itself able to make excuses for the kind of religious fanaticism that immediately menaces us in the here and now. And that faction, I am sorry and furious to say, is the left. From the first day of the immolation of the World Trade Center, right down to the present moment, a gallery of pseudointellectuals has been willing to represent the worst face of Islam as the voice of the oppressed. How can these people bear to reread their own propaganda? Suicide murderers in Palestine—disowned and denounced by the new leader of the PLO—described as the victims of "despair." The forces of al-Qaida and the Taliban represented as misguided spokespeople for antiglobalization. The blood-maddened thugs in Iraq, who would rather bring down the roof on a suffering people than allow them to vote, pictured prettily as "insurgents" or even, by Michael Moore, as the moral equivalent of our Founding Fathers. If this is liberal secularism, I'll take a modest, God-fearing, deer-hunting Baptist from Kentucky every time, as long as he didn't want to impose his principles on me (which our Constitution forbids him to do).
 
Back
Top Bottom