(Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)

For the second time in a year, San Francisco Muni buses are featuring ads critical of Islam. The latest ones feature pictures of and quotes from Osama bin Laden and the Times Square car bomber. Local officials and Muslim groups have denounced the ads — but the city has refused to pull them on free speech grounds. We talk to critics of the ads, and the woman behind the campaign.

This video from KGO-TV shows several of the ads discussed on the show. The news story starts about 37 seconds in.

Guests:
Pamela Geller, executive director of the American Freedom Defense Initiative, the group which purchased the ads to run on 10 Muni buses
David Chiu, president of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors
Jess Ghannam, professor of clinical psychiatry and global health at UCSF, board member of the National Association of Arab Americans, former director of the Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee of San Francisco and former president of the Arab Cultural and Community Center

  • thucy

    Maybe, on a quantitative level, we could just acknowledge that Islamic terrorists are real underachievers in the mass murder category?

    I’m counting about ten million killed by Hitler (6 million Jews, half of them Polish Jews, PLUS 3 million Catholic Poles, then Romani, LGBT, and political dissidents). I got 20 million killed by Stalin; and 70 million killed by that wacky overachiever Mao Tse Tung.

    Face it – We lose more people every year to auto accidents than we lost on 9/11. I say that as someone who “survived” 9/11 in New York (and the depressing years afterward.) Over a decade later, I’ve moved on to deal with scarier realities, like climate change.

    But… the Board of Supes has gotta love the distraction Gellar provides – otherwise the media would be asking how the Board of Supes unanimously voted to put SF on the hook for $20 million to billionaire Larry Ellison for his “America’s Cup-Half-Empty”. If any of us ordinary workers screwed up on that level, we’d be prosecuted. Chiu’s not even investigated!

    Gellar, when you (finally) leave, please take Chiu back to Long Island with you in your carry-on luggage.

    • EUCLID1

      You forgot to mention the genocide perpetrated by Turkey which was islamic inspired. This after all was were Hitler got the idea from. Of course it is only the tip of an iceberg. Try looking up some more quantitive results with the millions murdered by you know who, the one we are forbidden to speak about.

      By the way if any one thinks that jihad means struggle in the sense of going to the gym or some other innococent inner struggle to better one self, then I can only conclude you are living in some closed minded make believe utopia were truth is never allowed in.
      Climate change?. I thought it was global warming. Oh, I remember, they had to change the name because of the inconvient cold climate we’ve been having recently. I think you are in need of more quantitive research on this as well.

      • thucy

        “You forgot to mention the genocide perpetrated by Turkey which was islamic inspired.”

        Hmmmm. you mean Ataturk’s Armenian genocide? Let’s see… Ataturk was radically secular. So, you’re claiming this was an Islamic-inspired genocide how?

        Why don’t you just as logically throw in the massacre at Melos in the Pelopponnesian War? Just because it happened in the era before Islam shouldn’t stop you. Or the ethnic cleansing of native tribes in this country by our own military, even though our military was entirely Christian?

        • Guest

          In the linguistic sense, the Arabic word “jihad” means struggling or striving and applies to any effort exerted by anyone.
          In this sense a student struggles and strives to get an education and pass course work; an employee strives to fulfill his/her job and maintain good relations with his/her employer; a politician strives to maintain or increase his popularity with his constituents and so on. The term strive or struggle may be used for/by Muslims as well non-Muslims; for example, Allah, One and Only True God says
          in the Qur’an:

          “We have enjoined on people kindness to parents; but if they strive (jahadaka) to make you ascribe partners with Me that of which you have no knowledge, then obey them not…” 29:8,
          also see 31:15.

          In the above two verses of the Qur’an, it is non-Muslim parents who strive (jahada) to convert their Muslim child back to their religion.

          In the West, “jihad” is generally translated as “holy
          war”, a usage the media has popularized. According to Islamic teachings, it is unholy to instigate or start war; however, some wars are inevitable and justifiable. If we translate the words “holy war” back into Arabic we find “harbun muqaddasatun”,
          or for “the holy war”, “al-harbu al-muqaddasatu”.
          We challenge any researcher or scholar to find the meaning of “jihad” as holy war in the Qur’an or authentic Hadith collections or in early Islamic literature. Unfortunately, some Muslim writers and
          translators of the Qur’an, the Hadith and other Islamic literature translate the term “jihad” as “holy war”, due to the influence of centuries-old Western propaganda. This could be a reflection of the Christian use of the term “Holy War” to refer to the Crusades of a thousand years ago. However, the Arabic words for “war” are “harb” or “qital”, which are found in the Qur’an and Hadith.

          For Muslims the term jihad is applied to all forms of striving and has developed some special meanings over time. The sources of this development are the Qur’an (the Word of God revealed to Prophet Muhammad(S)) and the Hadith (teachings of Prophet Muhammad(S) [(S) denotes Sall-Allahu ‘alayhi wa sallam meaning peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). The Qur’an and the Hadith use the word “jihad” in several different contexts which are given below:

          1. Recognizing the Creator and loving Him most.
          It is human nature to love what is seen with the eyes and felt with the senses more than the UNSEEN REALITY. The Creator of the Universe and the One God is Allah. He is the Unseen Reality which we tend to ignore and not recognize. The Qur’an addresses those who claim to be believers:

          “O you who believe! Choose not your fathers nor your brethren for protectors if they love disbelief over belief; whoever of you takes them for protectors, such are wrong-doers. Say: if your fathers, and your children, and your brethren, and your spouses, and your tribe, and the wealth you have acquired, and business for which you fear shrinkage, and houses you are pleased with are dearer to you than Allah and His Messenger and striving in His way: then wait till Allah brings
          His command to pass. Allah does not guide disobedient folk.” 9:23,24

          See more

          http://www.muslimaccess.com/articles/jihad/jihad_explained.asp

          http://www.muslimaccess.com/articles/jihad/kill_the_infidels.asp

          http://www.muslimaccess.com/articles/jihad/surah9_5.asp

          • aa aa

            Aside from being spam, the biggest piece of malarkey you posted is ” according to Islamic teachings, it is unholy to instigate or start war”. On the contrary, Muslims attacked Byzantine empire & Persia 2 years after Muhammad died and justified it religiously by claiming that Muhammad commanded these attacks. (See Ibn Ishaq) Sunni Muslims developed a whole ideology that it not just a right but even a duty for Muslim leaders to attack nations ruled by non-Muslims. It was even considered a duty for leaders to at least lead a raid every summer on Byzantium’s border, when bigger conquests were not possible (Read David Cook, “Understanding Jihad”, Patricia Crone, “God’s Rule,” Michael Bonner,” Arab-Byzantine Relations”, etc.); .;

        • aa aa

          What an ignoramus you are! No wonder your posts are so ill-informed The genocide against Armenians (mainly took place 1915-1916) was NOT committed by Ataturk, and at that time Ataturk (who was in the army mainly away from the Armenian-populated parts of the Ottoman Empire) was NOT radically secular but a self-identified Muslim. The architects of the Armenian genocide were Enver Pasha,Talat Pasha, Jemel Pasha,and some other top leaders of the “Young Turk”- dominated government of the late Ottoman Empire not Ataturk, who was not a top government man at the time.

          Critics of Ataturk have argued that he did not do enough to stop the massacres of Greek civilians in the early 1920s when he led the Turkish army against a Greek independence drive in Anatolia. These massacres were terrible and led the Great Powers to move the Asian Greek population to Greece for their protection, permanently ending a 4000 year old Greek Asian community. But they are not the same as the Armenian genocide. And Ataturk became radically secular after the early 1920s, not before.

        • aa aa

          And BTW, not only did not Ataturk NOT perpetrate the Armenian genocide (that would be Enver Pasha, Talat Pasha, Jemel Pasha and other top Young Turk government officials), not only was Ataturk NOT radically secular but a self-identified Muslim during the Armenian genocide but the US miliitary was NOT “entirely Christian” when it ethnically cleansed Amerindians. There were indifferents, agnostics & Jews in the army too then. More importantly, unlike the late Ottoman government that perpetrated the Armenian genocide, the US government was not officially Christian (per our First Amendment) when it engaged in that ethnic cleansing.. That was quite different from the genocidal late Ottoman Empire under the Young Turks, because it still self-identified as an officially Muslim state.

  • thucy

    Dr. Ghannam,
    I saw with my own eyes both the destruction of the WTC on 9/11, and the harassment meted out to my Arab neighbors in New York in the years afterward. It was traumatic for them, and for their neighbors and friends who were punished just for sticking up for them. “People have gone blind with their hatred,” a NYTimes photographer said to me of the backlash against our neighbors that first year. He got that right.
    So I am glad you are standing up against this bigotry and harassment. I am glad the Board of Supes has taken a stand, too. But I am also wary of how identity politics often obscures more serious institutional violence. David Chiu is supporting you, but he is in the pocket of developers who are doing much greater violence to this city, and especially to the poor of this city. Further, Chiu started his career as a prosecutor; he was routinely involved in supporting the lies and violence of a very corrupt SFPD in the “war on drugs” which David Simon has more accurately described as “a holocaust in slow motion.” Please don’t be naive about what Chiu is really about, and how he has misled the Board of Supervisors. Please do not sully your good name by remaining blind to how David Chiu, a minority, gained power by exploiting a far more vulnerable minority group.
    If David Simon is right that the drug war is a holocaust in slow motion, then what role has the likes of David Chiu played? And who does Chiu really represent? Align yourself with the good David, David Simon, not David Chiu.

  • Neko

    Jihad means struggle. The struggle to put anti-jihad signs on buses is itself by definition a jihad, albeit one against reality.

    The obsession about Muslim jihads arises out of confusion about recent history. The truth is that 9/11 was perpetrated by the US military industrial complex with some support from Mossad. This is what the evidence and simply the laws of physics show. It was not “jihadis” who did it.

    Certainly “ring leader” Mohammed Atta, who was seen just before 9/11 partying on Jack Abramoff’s gambling boat, and whose girlfriend was a Caucasian stripper, did not perpetrate 9/11. He was a drug-dealer and a patsy, nothing more. Scratch the surface of 9/11 and you find no part of the official story checks out.

    Really all you have to do to see it was a set-up is to learn that a 3rd building was brought down on 9/11, namely WTC 7, and watch the 7 or so videos of that extremely obvious controlled demolition, and then if you are not an intellectual coward you’ll realize 9/11 was an “inside job”– planned and executed by criminal Americans and Israelis.

    Therefore there is really no Muslim “jihad” to be against, no need for signs on buses. Maybe some anti-religion signs would be helpful, but not signs against one religion for the wrong reasons.

  • Louise from Boston

    +
    The critics of the ads are failing to address the question of whether the quotes are accurate. If they are fictional, then, of course the ads should not run. So far the critics have not cited any errors in the quotes or disputed that they are properly attributed.
    If the quotes and the sources are verifiable, then they should be seen. It may be painful for patriotic Arab Americans to read what their co-religionists have said in public, but with this knowledge, they will be better prepared to confront the difficult issues within Islam.

  • chylene6599

    Don’t feel sorry for Islam. They have a long and bloody history, and have been murdering and killing and stealing others’ lands for 1600 years. Their jihad has never really ended. Look up “Hindu Kush”. In India ALONE between 1000-1545, the population on the subcontinent dropped by around 80 MILLION when the Muslims were in control. Look around at what’s happening around the world if you need any more proof.

    • jayson

      you’re ignorantly citing portions of a hate-skewed view of history. open your eyes

    • chrisnfolsom

      PLEASE, what about the Christain crusades? No one has a “lock” on morality. Only point fingers if you are willing to look at yourself – WWJD (What would Jesus do), war, death penalty, gun rights, give me a break. Clean up your own mess before you point your fingers at others – especially when you only pick the extremes of a religion.

      • Cat

        The crusades happened in DEFENSE of Islamic jihad persecution of Christians and slaughter in their own countries.

        • thucy

          Whoa – which historian do you cite? There were many factors which led to the crusades. To focus on the leanest of these may suit your politics, but it does not accord with the historical record.

          • aa aa

            Regarding the main factor: the Byzantine Emperor asked for help from Western Christians against the Turks who had seized over half the Byzantine Empire. Pope Urban indeed organized the First Crusade to help Eastern Christians in general, and the Byzantine Emperor specifically regain territory that Turks had recently taken from them (almost all Anatolia). (Read his 4 extant letters on the 1st Crusade for his motivations)..Without the recent seizure of so much Byzantine land by Muslims no so-called “Crusades” would have happened.

            The problem with chrisnfolsom’s statement is that it wrongly assumes the “Crusades” were as aggressive as the Muslim conquests which preceded and partly precipitated them. The Crusades were a very modest RECONQUEST of a FRACTION of the land previously held by Christians that Muslims had conquered, without any provocation, earlier. None of the tiny Crusader states was ever set up on on land that was not previously held by Christian states (mainly the Byzantines). This contrasts completely with Arab and Turkish Muslims who conquered much more land without any provocation and without owning that land previously (Middle East & Europe 634-1683)..

            It is a big problem that modern Western people like chrisnfolson are taught to think of all the “Crusades” as aggressive as Europeans in the New World or the Arab & Turkish Muslim conquerors of 634-1683.. They weren’t. They were more like the attempts of some Ameriindians to reconquer their lands,

    • chylene6599

      Extremes? What do you call Egypt? Libya? Turkey? Thailand? Syria? Even Mynmar! And Kerry just offered Morsi 250 million dollars of our tax money. Obama is destroying our country and those with the help of the Muslim Brotherhood, and if you are too blind to see that, you will be too blind to notice when ALL your freedoms are gone.

      • thucy

        Chylene, what do YOU call the genocide of native American tribes by our own Christian army? Was that Christian? Peaceful?

        • mr. x

          I don’t see how pointing out the past crimes of others lets anyone off the hook for what is happening now.

        • aa aa

          Highly misleading..US Army had many Christians BUT it also had the indifferent, agnostics & Jews in it when it dispossessed many Amerindians. US was NOT an officially Christian country, had First Amendment separation, & dispossessed Indians not on the grounds of religion but perceived economic utility: in a rapidly growing world, much US land was to be intensively farmed or put to industrial uses rather than used exclusively by small hunter gatherer.& horticulturalist groups.. This is different from contemporary jihadist and traditional Sunni teaching: that Muslims have the religious right (even duty) to attack societies ruled by non-Muslims until non-Muslims come under Islamic rule.

          (BTW since you, like most contemporaries, benefit enormously from the fact that so much US land was dispossessed from Amerindian hunter gatherers & horticulturalists & put under intensive agriculture & modern industry,it would behoove you and others be a little less self-righteous about.how outrageously immoral it supposedly was to have dispossessed so many Amerindians in the name of economic utility. We can’t go back to the economic lifestyle or demographic composition of the Americas as it was in 1492 without displacing & starving millions of all races living in the Americas (and elsewhere) now, However, I agree that the non-economic aspects of Ameriindian cultures (language, religion etc) were in the past, too often, sometimes even gratuitously destroyed or undermined. This is fortunately becoming less commonly justified).

      • chrisnfolsom

        Remember that Islam has only had 100 years to deal with information and freedom, democracy and modern politics – they will change (evolve), and that is part of the reason for their harsh response. Just as with many of the Christians in America having to deal with the fact that their “tribal backward” views from the bible (most concocted as interpretations of the bible) are on the chopping block – and while they aren’t attacking people with knives they are attacking peoples reputations and science in general with their bible inspired beliefs and fairy tails. They just pick which ones they like and ignore the ones they don’t as the Bible (old testament generally) has plenty inhuman, abhorrent type sentiments in it. Anyone who believes in the Old AND New testament and one God has to do a few double takes when reading them (I have btw). Let he who is without sin….

        • mr. x

          It is true that Islam is 600 years younger than Christianity, and maybe that’s why it’s in a nascent state of evolution. 600 years ago, the Christian churches were pretty evil.

          • chrisnfolsom

            I was speaking more to using modern forms of government and commerce and how it “can” uplift individual rights, education and freedoms. We all evolve and grow and while islam has had incredible societies under it in the past the modern era has escaped it and the oil money perverted it – not in a moral way, just given huge amounts of power to those without the experience to know how to absorb it into their society in a way that will promote stability and individual rights.

          • aa aa

            Human rights in traditional Islamic societies have, from a contemporary point of view, been quite bad, generally (no democracy or freedom of speech, etc.) and particularly bad for slaves (Muslims never developed an abolitionist movement), women and non-Muslims. These human rights defecits were not caused by “oil money” which many Muslim societies don’t have anyway. The problem is refusing to accept more liberal, progressive practices regarding governance, freedom of religion, speech,, equal rights for women and non-Muslims, etc. in the name of preserving “Islamic tradition.”. Traditional Muslim societies were not much more unjust than other traditional societies (e.g. pre-modern Europe), but they weren’t significantly better either. But while most Western societies in the past 200 years or so have accepted the necessity to separate religion from the state, and change some traditions to move (not always consistently and at fast pace) towards fairer treatment of women,non-Christians, and actually abolish slavery, there has been much, much more resistance to these improvements in the Islamic world..,,

          • aa aa

            600 years younger is not the problem,. The problem with Islam in general is that from the time that Muhammad started ruling Medina, its adherents accepted, even idealized the unity of state, army and religion. This is why it is so difficult for modern Muslims to accept separation of religion and state, Since Christians had 300 years before any state tried to promote them, it was possible for them to eventually accept, even promote separation. And many religions much younger than Islam accept the separation (look at Jehovah Witnesses: they completely reject the unity of church & state). More important than the age of the religion is its history, particularly the historical experience of the formative founders. Christian sources claim Jesus and Paul were persecuted by government officials; Muslim sources claim Muhammad and Umar I were government officials and army commanders..

          • chrisnfolsom

            So you believe that the Mudlom faith will never “graduate” to allow for separation of church and state – asbis the hope of most “liberals” and seems to be why they are attacked for supporting the Muslim’s right to exist by “conservatives”. IF there is no reasoning with Muslim believers/states, and we cannot separate purselves from extremists that they promote then we have a problem….i believe that most people if given a chance want to live peacefully and raise a family, have friends and be productive, and that extremism is generally a persieved persecution, politial manipulation and ignorance. sorry, writing onan iphone, hard toedit… ignorance.on and

          • aa aa

            “Extremism” is a misleading word,if by this you mean “terrorism” . A much bigger problem than terrorist acts (which are rare) that almost all predominantly Islamic societies ENFORCE explicitly Islamic laws, while predominantly Christian (& other non-Muslim) societies no longer do this because they have accepted the principle of separation. These Muslim leaders have every “chance” to separate religion from the law & state right now. No one is preventing them from doing this. They have not yet CHOSEN to do this done this.because they do not want to give non-Muslims equal privileges and rights. And many Muslim men do not want to lsogive women equal legal rights.

            I would never say a group will “never” do something. No one can definitely predict the distant future. But we should not pretend that Muslim leaders in predominantly Muslim powers have already accepted separation of religion & state, or that they are simply the same as the leaders of predominantly Christian socieites., which, as As already pointed out, the no longer enforce explicitly religious laws. religious laws.

      • mr. x

        Neither Thailand nor Myanmar is Muslim, nor do they have significant Muslim populations. And your paranoia about Obama is nonsense. Your post is not helpful.

  • Guest

    I hope Ms. Geller is calling into the program and not in the same studio with Mr. Krasny. I would hate for him to get bitten by this poisonous snake. KQED should not even give such people a platform to spew their venom.

  • Guest

    The obvious response to these billboards is to boycott MUNI. If you ride a bus with one of these ads on them, you are condoning them.

    • thucy

      Prego, not everyone in SF can afford to boycott the only public transport we have.

    • chrisnfolsom

      Perhaps with today’s online media capabilities they could allow a vote on advertisements online before acceptance thus taking away the legal issues that would of course be levied against Muni if they outright denied an advertisement??

      • aa aa

        Does not solve the free speech non-establishment problem with denying one group an ad about religious concepts (like jihad) but accepting others. Daniel Zilberman (above) claimed MuniI ran ads called “my jihad” that tried to promote the idea that jihad is an innocuous term simply meaning spiritual struggle with no reference to war (It can mean that but it much more commonly refers to real wars that Muslims fought against non-Muslims in canonical hadith like Bukhari and in chronicles like Tabari & Baldhuri)..Per the First Amendment, you can’t ban ideas because they’re voted more offensive by more people.

    • mr. x

      must be nice to be rich and have those choices.

      • Guest

        You’re right…this is not an option for everyone and some riders may have no choice and should therefore not be seen as condoning the advertisements. Maybe this is a job for graffiti instead!

        • thucy

          too funny, thanks for the laugh, I needed it after having to hear Geller’s act

        • mr. x

          Great idea! Fight speech with speech.

  • Chris OConnell

    To me, this is sad because Jewish-Americans have been incredibly active in leading social justice causes in this country. There is such a great tradition there of tolerance and anti-racism. This campaign is not being run by WASPs or Nazis. It is driven by Jewish-Americans such as Pamela Geller. And to think that Israel is not a big factor in this campaign would be naive.

    • mr. x

      way to work a little anti-semitism in there.

      • thucy

        Instead of an ad hominem attack, why don’t you explain in clear terms why you call that anti-semitism? We’re waiting…

        • mr. x

          I have to spell it out?
          1. ONE person is responsible for these ads. Not “Jewish-Americans”.
          2. Hinting that Israel is somehow behind it.

          • thucy

            Okay, thank you for spelling that out. My point is that if you want to deny that Geller’s work is hate speech, then you are setting a VERY high bar for what constitutes anti-semitism. In essence, you have different standards for different groups.

          • mr. x

            It’s about generalization. I don’t claim that all Muslims are extremists, or were behind 9/11.

          • Maya Bohnhoff

            “Jewish-Americans SUCH AS Ms. Gellar” not all Jewish-Americans. Israel is not Judaism, nor do the politics of the israeli government represent the religion or all of its adherents, let alone those of us who are Jewish by descent.

            That’s not anti-semitism it’s a recognition that any individual or group of individuals, regardless of their professions can be biased or even prejudiced.

      • chrisnfolsom

        I agree with your criticism to some degree although it is annoying that discussing any weakness in Israel Jews, Jewishness or anything like that is “antisemitism”. IF there is a connection between Geller and Jewish political groups with money from Israel then I that would be a problem for me especially if I was not able to put up an opposing advertisement on a Israeli bus.

        • mr. x

          It’s annoying that making generalizations based on identity gets called out as racism? That’s kind of the definition of racism.
          Geller was very clear that her ads are not about all Muslims.

          • chrisnfolsom

            Yes, when she talked to us, but the advertisements/billboard (as described) did not give any disclaimers and seemed like there was no intent to do so and thus would be seem to be irresponsible in my view.

          • mr. x

            i don’t disagree with that.

      • Chris OConnell

        It is true that I was anti-Semitic for thinking Jews can’t be vile racists. Of course, I know they can be. It is just sad when I see it. I will proudly wear that smear. It has become a joke. I am in good company with Desmond Tutu, Jimmy Carter, Chuck Hagel and really anyone these days who dares to criticize Israel.

        • mr. x

          Claiming that israel is secretly behind these ads is not a criticism of the Israeli government. And the fact that you don’t see that convinces me I was right in my assessment of your intentions. And which Jews were you calling racist? Because I only know of one behind these ads.

  • David Chiu is a moron. SF Board of Supervisors are made up of morons. I have no idea what he’s on about the “community”. Speak for yourself. I support Ms Geller and freedom of speech. SF Board of Supervisors can kiss my Constitution.

  • Matt

    How would the woman behind these hateful signs feel about signs all over public transportation with images of famous Jewish and Israeli people with their racist quotes? How about a picture of Golda Meir denying the existence of Palestinians? One does not need to look far to find offensive, racist comments from Jewish and Israeli leaders. Would she like a campaign like that all over public transportation? Would it further her goal of fomenting dialogue?

    • mr. x

      I think she would reply that Jews and Israelis didn’t fly planes into our buildings, didn’t blow up Marines in Lebanon, and don’t have the death of Americans as a goal.

      • thucy

        And how many Muslim deaths is our largely Christian (ever visit West Point?) military responsible for?

        • mr. x

          I oppose our recent wars, but come on, there’s a difference between someone who happens to be christian being a soldier and someone who is fighting in the name of their religion. Our soldiers are not fighting to spread christianity or kill non-christians because of their religion.

          • thucy

            yeah, but you’re implying that we’re seriously under attack by Muslim fundamentalists when, uh, OBVIOUSLY, the number show that it is we who are attacking and KILLING Muslims in appalling numbers

          • mr. x

            I don’t mean to imply that at all. We’re not under attack here in the US. We’re more under attack by Christian fundamentalists here. But in the US, we have laws that protect us from fundamentalists. My concern is for women, homosexuals and minorities in the Muslim countries whose laws oppress them, not protect them.

          • thucy

            Readers: If Mr. X were thusly concerned, he could have stated so two hours ago. Instead, he brought up attacks on US soil.
            But since his “concern is for women, homosexuals and minorities in the Muslim countries whose laws oppress them, not protect them”, one does wonder why he is not similarly concerned about the hundreds of thousands of Muslims our forces have blown up in our terroristic crusade against terror.
            Thusly I respectfully submit that Mr. X is a paid troll.

          • Sam

            LOL. I think so are you…

          • chrisnfolsom

            Are we not all concerned about others opressesed anywhere? we are justified in going after muslim extremists due to their declared jihad against the USA. HOW we do it is the issue. In life there is collateral damage – if I eat, someone else might not. If terrorists live with their families they might die with them. Our job is to limit collateral damage and win a conflict. Its not pretty, but I will say in all the history of war we are more conscienciose than most – especially given the firepower we have – that is not because we are especially nice, but war is on TV now

          • thucy

            “but I will say in all the history of war we are more conscienciose than most”

            I think you mean conscientious? And try selling that the the people we massacred for the land we now occupy. We’re not the most conscientious, merely the most ignorant of our own history, e.g. how many Japanese cities did we firebomb prior to relatively minor acts of dropping “Fat Man” and “Little Boy”?

          • chrisnfolsom

            yes misspelling… I said that with some reservation, but really, compared to past wars and practices by other countries we generally hold back and after winning don’t try rewrite a society like the japanese over the Koreans, or russians. There was the rather morbid joke in the past that the best way to improve your country was to loose a war to the USA. No one said that about any other country – i know i will catch some for this… I am not pro war at all, but I am not for rolling over dead either.

          • thucy

            “.. I am not pro war at all, but I am not for rolling over dead either”

            Right on. You, me and McGee. The question is how best to accomplish that. And none of us knows that. I used to be much more pro-military, but the fiasco of the last decade and seeing how my friends in the military were treated – it has soured me.

          • Maya Bohnhoff

            We don’t rewrite a society? Do you doubt that we removed Native American children from their homes and sent them to “Christian” schools where they were stripped of their culture, religion and language. Do you doubt that we destroyed their culture, ripped them from their land and sent them to inhabit land the European invaders didn’t want?

            We also rewrote our own history. I grew up with tales of our brave pioneers and founding fathers. Did you know that George Washington and others were involved in illegal (to the British government) land speculation on the western side of the Appalachians and that the push to war was motivated in part by the desire to free themselves of the moral commitment to British treaties with the Native peoples?

            If we are to understand the world we live in now, we need to first understand the part we have had in shaping it.

          • chrisnfolsom

            Yes, in all instances people make mistakes in our past – you don’t s**t your pants anymore (hopefully), but you did as a child – should I still expect such actions? I agree am actually more afraid of our abuse of power than I have been in a while – as proved by the war with Iraq. It is the conservatives which started the war with Iraq and manufacture “facts” to justify it and believed that through their “righteousness” they will change Iraq because our cause is right – FAIL. Religion + ignorance is a terrible mix and unfortunately 30% of America doesn’t believe in the history of the earth, evolution, or respect other cultures as being as relevant as their own. I am truly sad for America in this way. Maya – I agree we have done bad things – OK, but we are not what we were and I just want to keep us from going there again.

          • aa aa

            Bringing up Euro-Americans’ dispossession and killing of many Amerindians is not really relevant here. Alas, Euro-American New World imperialism was not exceptional Sunni Muslims killed and dispossessed Copts, Syriac Christians, Greeks, Armenians, Persians, Hindus, Spaniards, Serbs, Bugarians in the course of their conquest. .If they had discovered the New World first, you can bet they would have treated the “pagan” Amerindians very much like the Europeans, and their Old World diseases would have had the same effect as European & African diseases on the New World populations . Both Western (mainly after 1500) and Muslim leaders ( after 634) were great imperialists who dispossessed millions of “others.”Muslims even killed,dispossessed and enslaved many Western peoples in the period 634-1600, a fact that our elites often try to obfuscate)..
            The point is NOW there is a body of international law meant to limit NEW imperialism, and promote legal equality, freedom of conscience etc.Contemporary Western leaders, though far from perfect ( I was adamantly opposed to both Iraq wars) do a better job overall protecting these. Many Americans will rightly disagree with your attempt to argue that our leaders are worse or much worse than the jihadists are Middle Eastern leaders..

          • Maya Bohnhoff

            We are justified in going after extremists of any stripe, but not to condemn an entire faith and all its adherents because some professing members fail to live up to the principles of their own faith and, in fact, twist them to meet political ends—which is not a failing common only to professing Muslims.

            As Jesus Christ suggests, you will know a person’s professions by their fruits.

          • chrisnfolsom

            Yes – and if we push any anti-extremist agenda we need to be clear about it and not “blanket” statements. I mean the conservatives are labeling Obama as a Muslim for some damn reason, and saying that the Muslim faith is bad so all Muslims are – that is extremist.

          • aa aa

            Who is condemning an entire faith here? Geller’s group, (who I do think tend to overgeneralize BTW), are posting QUOTATIONS regarding one particular religious concept (jihad). You yourself are painting her actions here with far too broad a brush.

          • aa aa

            It is legitimate and moral to be concerned about attacks on US soil AS WELL as how women, gays & non-Muslims are treated in Muslim-majority lands. And no this concern does not make anyone a “paid troll.”

          • Sam

            Well – there have been several terrorist attacks in the US soil by Muslim fundamentalists in the last decade or so. Muslims are mostly killing each other – look at what’s happening in the Middle East. Women and minorities are not treated well in Muslim nations – look at human rights surveys and reports. I am not anti-Muslim, but Ms. Geller makes a compelling argument even though I do not support her 100% or support putting such ads on Muni. It is apparent from your comments that you are really biased towards Muslims.

          • aa aa

            Not a valid argument. At this relatively brief point in history the US in particular and the West in general happens to be more powerful than most Muslim powers. In the seventh through tenth centuries it was definitely the reverse, and from the eleventh to fifteenth centuries it.was arguably also the reverse. Sunni Muslim leaders not only attacked Western states on the grounds that they were led by non-Muslims,but their religious leaders developed a theology that it was a religious duty to do so on the grounds that everyone must be under Islamic rule. (not that everyone had to convert, but non-Muslims had to been under Muslims’ power). And this religious justification for attacking Western societies remained operative up until the 1680s .Contemporary Muslim leaders only attack less often and more weakly because after 1700 they are weaker vis a vis the West than in the past.

            Violence based on the idea that it is a religious duty to attack those who are ruled by religious infidels is more dangerous because it is not susceptible to demonstrable proof or human criticism.

          • Carole

            Our soldiers are not fighting to spread Christianity or kill non-Christians because of their religion. Our soldiers are fighting in order for the USA to maintain power and control in the Middle East. Whether or not any side’s justification is religious ideology or political agenda, it’s a fight for power and control

          • aa aa

            Yes, but there is a BIG difference between powerful countries who accept the idea that states ruled by those of “another” religion have the right to exist (as do the modern US and the Western-devleoped contamporary international law), and those, like traditional Sunni Muslim leaders (634-ca. 1699) and many jihadists today, who think they have a right, even a religious duty to attack states ruled by non-Muslims until only Muslim-ruled states exist.

          • Carole

            I agree there’s a difference, but it’s still a fight for power and control.

      • Maya Bohnhoff

        But Israelis (Zionists to be precise) did commit violence against Palestinians, fellow Jews who disagreed with their politics, and the British administration charged with the mandate for the Holy Land.

        Those persons were not exemplary of the tenets of Judaism. And Osama bin Laden is no more a spokesperson for the principles of Islam than the Grand Dragon of the KKK is a spokesperson for Christian ideals.

        • aa aa

          Bad comparison. KKK’s main explicit ideology is RACIAL supremacism not a particular religion, even though many of them are Christians.

      • Matt

        You don’t need to fly planes into buildings to damage our country. You can damage the country “legally” within the political system, like all the powerful lobbies do– banking and finance, fossil fuels, NRA, Israel lobby, by taking public funds that should be used to provide education and other services to people who need them to create a better society instead of diverting them to war and the subjugation of others. How much of our public money goes every year to Israel to support their subjugation and brutalization of Palestinians? Americans paid for Operation Cast Lead in which the Israel military forces slaughtered 1,400 people, the majority of whom were children, women, and non-combatants. Do not overlook the fact that one of the reasons that Bin Ladin gave for the attack on the towers was the American support of Israeli subjugation of Palestinian people. So, we as a country have paid way too much to support Israel– not only the billions we give them every year– but also the attack on the twin towers and all that ensued. Let’s be real here and realize that supporting Israel as the US government does, is a bad deal for Americans. Just like all interests with powerful lobbies, their interests are not in line with those of the American people. Just like the fossil fuel and the finance industries’ lobbies, the Israeli lobby subverts the government for its interest and the US people are the ones who get screwed.

    • Daniel Zilberman

      The difference would be that these are real quotes from real (fortunately dead) terrorists vs. made up “quotes” from “famous Jewish and Israeli people”. No political leader of Israel EVER denied existence of Arab states – and Israel has 20% of Arab citizens these days with full rights. And BTW it requires TWO sides to have a dialogue – and we are yet to see the side that uncovered in these ads to express any intent for such…

      • Matt

        Lots of people have swallowed Israeli propaganda hook, line, and sinker, and then take on the mantle of propagandist themselves, which appears to be the case here. I said that Golda Meir denied the existence of Palestinians, the people who populated much of what is today Israel until they were dispossessed of their lands by Jewish forces in the 1940’s. You, in your attempt to further the propaganda, have responded about Israeli leaders denying the existence of Arab states, as if to contradict what I said, but I didn’t say that. I recognize that as a technique of the propagandist, and you did it well, but I see through it. Through denying the existence of these people, Golda Meir and other Jewish leaders of the time, were creating a justification for dispossessing the native peoples of their lands, what today is referred to as ethnic cleansing. “A land without people for a people without land” was the mendacious slogan used. There were people on the land and they had been there for generations. The Israeli state continues its campaign of ethnic cleansing as it continues to demolish homes of Palestinians, destroy orchards belonging to families who have lived on those lands for generations, colonize Palestinian lands, kill, imprison and torture those who resist the colonization and subjugation. Many Arab citizens in Israel would not agree with you that they have full rights. You are simply parroting propaganda. I appreciate that for some it is difficult to recognize the cruelty, the injustice, and the inhumanity inflicted on the Palestinians by Israel, but just because you don’t want to recognize it doesn’t mean it isn’t the reality. I wish you courage to confront the reality and to fight for justice and against ethnic cleansing and subjugation.

      • Chris OConnell

        There is probably not ONE Arab in Israel who would agree that they have full rights in the Jewish State. Well, there is always one but surely it is less than 1%. But you don’t care about Arabs. You care about Jews. Us and Them. Them and Us.

        • Daniel Zilberman

          When have you been to Israel and talked to these Arab citizens Chris? And before accusing ME personally about not caring about Arabs (which btw not required since there are like 500+ mln of them around) – let me ask YOU about US (self righteous “liberals” blasting Israel on any point) and THEM (objective folks like myself who refuse to be duped by leftist propaganda and bloggers like you and Matt) ? Aren’t you the one who exacerbates this divide???

    • CoffeyC

      I believe that she would realize that she has no right not to be offended when someone else speaks truthfully about a problem. I think she would also have the right to see the clip of Morsi on the other side of the bus praying for the death of all Jews. This is not an our team verses those other guys issue. This is about whither or not we are capable of making the next step toward a more civilized world. Ms. Geller seems to understand that.

      • Matt

        Antagonizing and insulting people and whipping up hatred isn’t a good step toward a more civilized world. Likewise subjugating and brutalizing Palestinians is not a good step toward peace.

        • CoffeyC

          On the contrary. I am convinced that this false respect we give to religions that have proven themselves to be both dangerous and inhumane, is a critical flaw that must be fixed as part of solving our problems.

          I also believe that brutalizing Palestinians is a critical misstep…. unless of course those particular Palestinians have decided not to try and build their own nation in favor of launching primitive rockets at Israeli civilians. I also think that she should not be brutalizing other Palestinians and children when those rockets are falling on them too.

          Israel exists. The Palestinians exist. As long as there is a religion that requires that one destroy the other, the subjugation and brutalizing will never end.

          It’s not about land. It’s not about a Palestinian state. It’s about the requirement that Israel and the Jews be destroyed, and Israel’s concomitant need to defend themselves.

          • Matt

            You’ve swallowed the propaganda and are parroting it, trying to give the impression that the choice for Palestinians is to build their own nation or launch rockets at Israeli civilians. You can’t build a nation when the occupying power is brutalizing the people and stealing their land, cutting it up into Bantustans a la South Africa, taking water resources for the Israeli colonizers and depriving the native peoples of their resources. It is an intentional policy of the Israeli government to make it so that there can never be a real sovereign Palestine.

            Palestinians have never killed Israeli children with white phosphorous. Israelis have killed Palestinian children with white phosphorous.

            Your suggestion that a religion requires that one destroy the other is absurd. True, there are extremist Jews who feel that they must destroy all of the Palestinians, such as Baruch Goldstein who massacred 29 unarmed Palestinians and wounded another 125 at prayer in a mosque with a machine gun, but to suggest that the Jewish religion requires that they destroy Islam, you’re extrapolating to the point of preposterousness, and I think many Jews would find your suggestion offensive, not to mention wrong.

            It is about land. The Israelis have stolen the land from the Palestinians, and they are continuing to steal land from the Palestinians. Sure, they use religion and ancient stories to justify their dispossession of the native peoples of their lands, but fundamentally it is about one group of people taking another group of people’s lands, resources, and lives. If it is not about land, then why don’t the Israelis return the stolen lands and homes to the people from whom they stole it? Why do they continue to steal their land? Wake up my friend and take a good honest look at the facts. I wish you courage to confront a history and reality which you appear reluctant to do. Victims can become victimizers. The brutalized can become the brutalizers. Israel is a clear example of that.

          • CoffeyC

            First of all, assuming that someone who does not agree with you has simply swallowed someone’s propaganda is infantile, especially with the amount of information that is available, and given the consistency of the actions of the players. Also, clearly I was being a little too subtle. I don’t for an instant believe that the Israelis believe that they must destroy the Palestinians. The situation is unresolvable, because every Muslim with any influence is constantly insisting that bot Israel and the Jews must be destroyed. It’s on their tv, radio, and in their mosques every single day.

            As for rockets, that is exactly the choice. Groups like Hamas, The PLO, and the Muslim brotherhood are all the Palestinians know, so you can sort of understand how they vote for, and support them. However, they also know full well what these organizations are, and how they operate, so my sympathy is very munched diminished. If a Palestinian mother wants her children to have a life of peace and prosperity, then she has my complete support, and I’ll help in any way that I can. On the other hand, if your Micky-Mouse-like character on Palestinian children’s TV is teaching the glories of Martyrdom against the Jews, and the mother next door is out there chanting for Hamas, and screaming that she raised her children to die killing Jews then a wall around her settlement is the most humane response she can hope for.

          • Matt

            People who swallow propaganda are unaware of how much the propaganda has influenced them. You are an excellent example of this. You parrot the propaganda about saying a religion commands that its adherents destroy those of another religion, a common thread of pro-Israeli propaganda regarding Muslims. I provide you with an example– a historical fact– of Jews who feel their religion commands them to do that, and caried it out through massacre, which is not part of the Israeli propaganda. Still you cling to the propaganda line of “muslims are fanatics” instead of accepting that a characteristic that you and the propagandists attribute to “Muslim thinking” is actually part of “Jewish thinking.”

            Putting a wall around her settlement is the most humane a mother with children can expect? Wow, you are quite the humanitarian. And is killing children with white phosphorous a humanitarian act in your mind? The less humane option available to the Israelis would have been, what killing them through crucifixion? Destroying Palestinian homes I suppose to you shows the great humanitarian nature of the Israeli state, because they do generally, though not always, allow the people to leave the homes before they destroy them. Should Israel be awarded some sort of humanitarian prize for having killed only 1400 people, most of whom were children, women, and non-combatants, in Operation Cast Lead when they could have killed a lot more? Your frame of reference could use some adjustment.

            Ignoring the facts and clinging to the propaganda you have swallowed is rather infantile. That’s how children argue. But there is hope. Humans are capable of change, and I wish you the courage to seek the truth and to stand up to the powerful forces that create the propaganda and promote group-think. Be brave, think for yourself. Seek out information from sources other than those allied with the propagandists. For starters, you could tune in to Democracy Now. Work for justice, not subjugation of people whatever the pretext. Good luck to you.

          • CoffeyC

            Matt, your responses seem to be more about me. I can understand disagreement on issues which have virtually no history of agreement, but your ad hominem approach is nothing less than repulsive. You not only should avoid the too casual use of the word ‘propaganda,’ but it seems you should also avoid any reference to immature reasoning faculties. Like I said, its embarrassing.

            Given the time you might have if you stop finding new ways to misuse those ideas; why don’t you look up the reasons why Israel initiated Cast Lead? While your are at it, How many Israelis died in the sectarian violence leading up to it?

            Your choices of examples when it comes to the violence to sectarian violence are as one sided as your respect for facts and opinions. Just be aware, that many mature and knowledgeable people do not equate a military response against terrorists to end terrorists attacks, with those terrorist attacks. The also don’t equate the original bigotry in a religion, or the deception of an add campaign, as being the same sort of bigotry if you are merely pointing it out. That is, if you can even remember what the subject of this discussion was, before you began trying to craft snide remarks to direct at me.

          • Matt

            From your response it isn’t clear if you feel that the Israeli government should receive some sort of humanitarian recognition for generally allowing Palestinians to leave their homes before they destroy them. Where do you come down on that?

            And the use of white phosphorous on civilian populations. How does that figure into your scheme of Israel as the victim?

          • CoffeyC

            I look at that incident the same way that I look at launching rockets at civilian cities. Is reprimanding the officers responsible enough? I don’t think so.

            What I do think is that all of your examples are one sided. Do suicide bombers allow time for people to evacuate? Does Israel deserve a reward for patience for not doing in fact, which you are trying to suggest that they are doing, which is violently attacking the Palestinians. Why does your propaganda free viewpoint, never include examples from the years of violence that elicited and lead to a military response? (Even if it is only to point out the cyclical nature of that violence?) Would you try to lecture people about bravery and propaganda if rockets and suicide bombers were being dropped on your family? Would you consider people called you an oppressor for not wanting to be victimized, would you direct them to more propaganda sites to make a point?

            This violence will never end, until that which foments it ends – canonized religious hatred and bigotry. It’s not about land, which Israel did give up, but which did not result in an end to the violence. The issue of land, and cycles of violence cannot be solved as long as one of the two peoples involved will only accept the destruction of the other. Unless every human on this planet is free to talk openly about that problem, and to condemn anyone who commits atrocities, we have not even been allowed the proper tools that we need to finally fix the problem.

            People who demand that other people die as a prerequisite to their own moral code need to be recognized and treated as what they are, and not tolerated or sympathized with. People who believe that babbling about propaganda to justify a wholly one sided view, are both an impediment and a waste of time.

            Israel does not deliberately target civilians, in the way you try so desperately to suggest, or in the way that Hamas terrorist do as a matter of course. You should stop using the term “Facts’ as well.

          • Matt

            Bigotry and racism is at the root of the conflict, as it was bigotry and racism which were the justification for one group of people (the Jews) feeling they have the right to steal the land and resources from another people (the Palestinians), and it is bigotry and racism behind the continued ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from their land and their subjugation. People don’t like to be subjugated. Israel is subjugating the Palestinians. Until they stop brutalizing and subjugating the Palestinians, there will be resistance. No justice no peace. Israel has sewn the seeds of violence by dispossessing a people of their lands and resources. They hope those people will go away and have worked very hard and brutally toward that end, but still there is resistance.
            “Israel does not deliberately target civilians.” You don’t know what you are talking about. If you feel the need to defend the brutalizers, the racist colonizers who have “Jews Only” roads in the Palestinian territories, if you feel the need to stay in your comfort zone of believing the propaganda, you are not alone, and you are walking in step with the other sheep who take comfort in groupthink. I agree that it is a waste of time to engage in a discussion with people who spew propaganda, and since you parrot propaganda and dismiss Democracy Now as a propaganda site, I can no longer devote any time to this discussion. I do, however, wish you courage to explore the situation honestly. I know there is tremendous pressure to conform to the establishment views regarding the Israeli/Palestinian conflict and it is not easy to stand up to it. It can be difficult to accept that cherished notions, stuff one has believed for so long actually isn’t true. I wish you enlightenment and courage. Best of luck to you in that endeavor.

          • CoffeyC

            Good luck to you too. I hope that one day you are less dismissive of people with whom you disagree… even strongly… but far more than that, I wish that one day the discussion will no longer be required.

          • CoffeyC

            P.S. Work is a form of punctuated equilibrium today, so I took a moment to look up several articles on Democracy Now. Like most sites, it’s some good, and some bad. A few very good, and a couple very bad. It’s not about the site, it’s about the care and honesty and unbiased nature with which the site treats the subject. I did consider what you suggested. Take care.

          • CoffeyC

            I don’t know why it posted , Matt, but consider the next point.

            Israel isn’t grabbing land based on three thousand years old scrolls. The Jews and the Palestinians had lived together for all that time, but given that Israel was created as a refuge from the antisemitism that is still rampant throughout Europe, but which has never been more virulent than it is in the daily teachings and pronouncements throughout the Islamic peoples in the middle east.

            As long as Islam insists on the destruction of Israel and the death of all the Jews on earth… with it does, then the state of Israel will never be able to accept being squeezed into a narrow strip of land between two such hostile enemies.

            Lastly, clearly there have been atrocities on all sides, but when I trace them back, I find that the first one was when every Arab nation surrounding Israel attacked to destroy them within 24 hours. I also think that it is clear, that Benjamin Netanyahu was absolutely correct when he said that if Israel lay down its arms the result would be the destruction of Israel, but if Islamist lay down their arms there would be peace.

            I lack neither courage nor information. Matt, and what is more, it is quite clear to me that such suggestions are only motivated by your assumption that they have allowed you to come to your brave and informed opinions. Unfortunately, the facts don’t support those conclusion as you would seem to like. If Palestine says that this is not about land, it is not about land.

            Lastly, you bring up Baruch Goldstein. Now even you must realize that for any instance of inhuman violence against Muslims or Palestinians, I can find two that are just as brutal, and in many cases even more disturbing commited by Muslims… both because they were crazy angry, and because of Islam. Clearly you’ve missed the seminal point here, which is that the only way I’d have any respect for your bringing up the violence, is if you had also brought up the events that lead to this particular act of insanity; and, far more importantly: What was the reaction of the state of Israel to Goldstein, and what is the reaction of the Muslim Brotherhood in Hamas when a rocket or a child suicide bomber slaughters innocent Israelis and Palestinians, Hindus, Jews, and, Christians, and poor little atheists like me? How do they each react to the violence, Matt?

            Until your talking points include that, you aren’t the person to lecture me on the morality, courage, or history, Matt. And, you should stop using the word ‘propaganda.’ It’s embarrassing.

          • Matt

            If you are embarrassed by having swallowed so much propaganda, then today is a good day to begin to search for new sources of information. democracynow.org and electronicintifada.net are two places you could start.

            Your recent posts reflect how deeply the propaganda, or if you prefer the term biased information has influenced you.

            Your premise is all wrong– “Israel was created as a refuge..” created by whom at the expense of whom? The native peoples were unwillingly and forcefully dispossessed of their lands by the creators of Israel. Jewish terrorism directed toward Palestinians and the British, and the destruction of 400 Palestinian villages was part of that creation. And yet you assert that the first atrocity was when Arab nations allied to try to get the land back stolen from Palestinians. The destruction of the villages and the attendant violence against the people were not atrocities? The expulsion of people from their homes and the take over of their homes and lands by Jewish invaders were not injustices accompanied by atrocities? You see, your very premise shows that you have been fed or selectively sought out on your own, biased information and you’ve swallowed it. The thing is, you really believe it. that is why I suggest that you seek out information from other sources. You have a choice now, continue on with the group think, which I know many people take comfort in, or to be bold and seek out new information. I know that takes courage, and I wish you courage to seek out the truth.

            “There have been atrocities on all sides” classic propaganda. Operation Cast Lead– 1400 Palestinans including lots of children and women killed by Israelis, some killed with white phosphorous, and 13 Israelis killed, 4 by friendly fire. I suppose the German government could have used that line in 1943 when it dealt with the Warsaw ghetto uprising. After all, many German soldiers were killed by the inhabitants of the ghetto.

  • Lalameda

    Geller, like other sensationalists, are only posturing in order to get pathetic, fearful, bigots to send her money.

    • chrisnfolsom

      I would like to see some facts regarding this – as I would with anything “raising” money. Far too many “non-profit” entities are very profitable to the founders and the people they funnel their money to – full transparency.

      • thucy

        it apparently funds her botox and restylene injections

        • aa aa

          Gratuitous ad hominem not even addressing the ideas at issue. Who’s being hateful now.?

  • tim

    David Chou doesn’t speak for me and a wide variety of San Franciscans, who welcome the discourse on what jihad really means according to Muslims. we love our freedom and way of life, which includes free speech as what Geller is promoting.

    • ddean62

      The First Amendment is great.

  • Go Pamela go! I support you, I support your cause, I support your right to express your view. Wake up SF. Islam will come for you first because this is Gay Mecca. They hate this city, they hate this community. Wake the eff up SF. They don’t like you, stop supporting them.

  • Chris OConnell

    Baruch Goldstein is a hero to many in Israel. Meir Kahane has many followers, too. Imagine collecting a bunch of extremist quotes of the most radical Jews and aggregating them like this to paint a portrait of Judaism. And then claiming that it is not racist because Jews are not a race.

  • Louise from Boston

    Thank you for reading my previous post, but no one has addressed it. Has anyone, in fact, found any misquotes or lies in the ads? If not, then people are simply speaking in generalizations. An accurate quote may be painful to read, but the pain is generated by the speaker of the original remarks, NOT by Ms Geller or anyone else who simply calls our attention to it. Again, can any of your respondents cite something in the specific ads that is not a genuine quote from a verifiable source?

    • chrisnfolsom

      Just because something is “true” does not address how it is said. If I said with riveting images that “Christians are murderers, sodomites and ignorant hypocrites” I would NOT be incorrect in fact (there are of course many who are), but I would not say it represents Christianity and would be irresponsible to say without context (please don’t pull this out of context..). Irresponsible speech is the right of good people to keep to themselves.

      • On the other hand, she never mentions muslims per se.

        If you said: “Christianity advocates killing children who are rude to their parents”, you would be factually correct, although living in a theocracy means it is not done.

        If Ms. Geller said: “Muslims do this or that ” you would be right.
        Since everything Ms. Geller says about the Shariah is provable, it is truth not hate.

        Sometimes the truth hurts, should we all live a lie?

        • chrisnfolsom

          Picking out the exceptions of a society or group and targeting all of them is incorrect and not “ignoring the truth”, but inciting half truths that will not help deal with the issues, but create FUD – hardly the best way to deal with an issue. I am not defending Muslims here, but civil actions and responsibility – I have seen the ads, and they are just not needed.

          • aa aa

            Some of Geller’s examples are “exceptions” like Bin Laden , but not all. Erdogan is head of a major country. And certain parts of Sharia (particularly regarding family law/sexuality etc.) are not “exceptions” at all:rather they are enforced as parts of many countries’ laws,.
            (There is no comparison with the contemporary Christian world: even officially Christian (like England) or majority Christian countries (like Mexico) no longer have canon law courts enforcing explicitly Christian rules about marriage and the family. Not true in most majority Muslim countries).

        • aa aa

          Christianity certainly does not advocate killing children who are rude to their parents. The Old Testament advocated that, but Christianity rejected those aspects of the ancient Hebrew law codes, which were not in force at the time the religion began (1st century Roman Empire), and were never even promoted by the officially Christian emperors of the late Roman Empire or medieval Europe. Paul & later Christian theologians said those parts of the Torah were abrogated.

      • aa aa

        Irrelevant and incorrect. Gellner is posting QUOTES of contemporary Muslim leaders, so a relevant comparison would be to post a QUOTATION of some contemporary Christian self-styled figure that you find offensive. Though some of the leaders were on the fringes of power (like Bin Laden) others, like Erdogan, are not.

    • notosharia

      Excellent — Yes the truth is always hard for islamists who have their jihad against FREEDOM OF SPEECH . The point of this interview was the professor couldn’t take it. They never can.

  • Chris OConnell

    She’s a New Yorker? I never would have guessed. (From a New Yorker.)

    • thucy

      No, she’s not really a New Yorker. She’s a Long Islander. South shore elbows. Ugh.

      • Chris OConnell

        OK, but New York is more than just a city. And Long Islanders have the most New York accent of all I think (that island technically includes Queens and Brooklyn).

        • thucy

          I’ll nitpick, indulge me this: they don’t have the “most NY accent” – they practically have their own distinct dialect. Long Island doesn’t sound like Queens; Queens doesn’t sound like Brooklyn.

          • mr. x

            can’t we all just get along?

          • Chris OConnell

            More importantly, can you just NOT comment on something?

          • mr. x

            Sure, I won’t comment on this.

            Oops!

          • ddean62

            I am bored with you left wing nut cakes.

  • Chemist150

    This guy is purposely inciting Pamela which is somewhat excitable. Poor interview.

    • thucy

      Are you kidding? This is exactly how “Pamela” almost always behaves when the media gives her airtime.

      • Chemist150

        I guess it was Jess Ghannam provoking her. They were both behaving badly. He was directly attacking her. This is not meant to be Jerry Springer radio but that was what the interview was. He knows she’s excitable and provoke her. Both unprofessional.

        • thucy

          This must be the first time you had to listen to her antics. out of control is her schtick.

    • Guest

      So? And the male (David Chiu?)was unprofessional and intentially provoking her. So? It was a bad interview.

      • thucy

        No, Chiu checked out within first few minutes, dumping Geller on Ghannam.

  • jayson

    discuss the issues sure, but come on, these killers she has quoted are NOT muslims! they are killers waving a quran in front of their guns and no closer to their bastardized version of the faith than the murderers who claimed to follow christian, jewish, hundu, buddhist or other faiths while waging war and terror on their victims worldwide

  • Mrs. Eccentric

    Ms. Geller says ‘no one will discuss this issue!’

    Well, she has the floor right now. What does she want to say about ‘jihad’ that she thinks we need to know? What does she want to say about solving this problem that we need to hear? steph

  • Alixx Ortiz

    Ms. Geller is exactly the wrong spokesperson for her cause. I am wavering between laughing at her, crying for Michael, and shutting off the radio and this absurd woman. My complaint to Michael is that when she was asked to respond to the SPLC, you let her avoid the question.

  • Fay Nissenbaum

    Is it true that Saudi Arabia, our so-called friends, fund the most violent Wahhabi version of Islam? Any particular denouncements for Wahhabism, as a violent and deadly cult that espouses oppression of women, maiming, and murder to push their agenda?

    • chrisnfolsom

      And the only reason they have power to project their ideas is our greed and need for oil – without it they would still be a marginalized society that would have to either stay as they were a short hundred years ago, or make changes giving their citizens power so they could compete/play on a world market. There have been many Muslim run societies/countries that have modernized – Turkey, Iraq, Iran, Egypt, but all have had problems as they never empowered their people who now are looking for religion to give them a chance – just as the Christians had the poor of Rome come to them. We will see what will happen now as I hope we all hope for the best transitions possible – how long did it take for Christians to separate religion from their Governments??? Quite a long time.

      • aa aa

        On the contrary. They were separate from the beginning. Got entangled when the emperor decided that he was Christian too, and followed a Roman tradition of promoting religion (pagan civic cults & emperor cult had been promoted by Roman state).. Early Christians were unusal in NOT being promoted by a state, and it explains why the US and other Christian influenced societies could accept the modern separation… Unfortunately, Islam arose in the late antique world when Roman & Persian empires promoted official religions, so Muslims modeled themselves from the beginning partly on them: conquered others in the name of religion and promoted llaws based on religion.. And they don’t have 300 formative years, as early Christians did of separation, so it’s extremely difficult for them to accept separation at this late stage in the game.

  • islamophobia

    In the linguistic sense, the Arabic word “jihad” means struggling or striving and applies to any effort exerted by anyone.

    In this sense a student struggles and strives to get an education and pass course work; an employee strives to fulfill his/her job and maintain good relations with his/her employer; a politician strives to maintain or increase his popularity with his constituents and so on. The term strive or struggle may be used for/by Muslims as well non-Muslims; for example, Allah, One and Only True God says

    in the Qur’an: “We have enjoined on people kindness to parents; but if they strive (jahadaka) to make you ascribe partners with Me that of which you have no knowledge, then obey them not…” 29:8, also see 31:15.

    In the above two verses of the Qur’an, it is non-Muslim parents who strive (jahada) to convert their Muslim child back to their religion.

    In the West, “jihad” is generally translated as “holy
    war”, a usage the media has popularized. According to Islamic teachings, it is unholy to instigate or start war; however, some wars are inevitable and justifiable. If we translate the words “holy war” back into Arabic we find “harbun muqaddasatun”, or for “the holy war”, “al-harbu al-muqaddasatu”.

    We challenge any researcher or scholar to find the meaning of “jihad” as holy war in the Qur’an or authentic Hadith collections or in early Islamic literature. Unfortunately, some Muslim writers and
    translators of the Qur’an, the Hadith and other Islamic literature translate the term “jihad” as “holy war”, due to the influence of centuries-old Western propaganda. This could be a reflection of the Christian use of the term “Holy War” to refer to the Crusades of a thousand years ago. However, the Arabic words for “war” are “harb” or “qital”, which are found in the Qur’an and Hadith.

    For Muslims the term jihad is applied to all forms of striving and has developed some special meanings over time. The sources of this development are the Qur’an (the Word of God revealed to Prophet Muhammad(S)) and the Hadith (teachings of Prophet Muhammad(S) [(S) denotes Sall-Allahu ‘alayhi wa sallam meaning peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). The Qur’an and the Hadith use the word “jihad” in several different contexts which are given below:

    1. Recognizing the Creator and loving Him most. It is human nature to love what is seen with the eyes and felt with the senses more than the UNSEEN REALITY. The Creator of the Universe and the One God is Allah. He is the Unseen Reality which we tend to ignore and not recognize. The Qur’an addresses those who claim to be believers:

    “O you who believe! Choose not your fathers nor your brethren for protectors if they love disbelief over belief; whoever of you takes them for protectors, such are wrong-doers. Say: if your fathers, and your children, and your brethren, and your spouses, and your tribe, and the wealth you have acquired, and business for which you fear shrinkage, and houses you are pleased with are dearer to you than Allah and His Messenger and striving in His way: then wait till Allah brings His command to pass. Allah does not guide disobedient folk.” 9:23,24

    See more:

    http://www.muslimaccess.com/articles/jihad/jihad_explained.asp

    http://www.muslimaccess.com/articles/jihad/kill_the_infidels.asp

    http://www.muslimaccess.com/articles/jihad/surah9_5.asp

    • aa aa

      Aside from being spam, the biggest piece of malarkey you posted is ” according to Islamic teachings, it is unholy to instigate or start war”. On the contrary, Muslims attacked the Byzantine Empire & Persia 2 years after Muhammad died and justified it religiously by claiming that Muhammad commanded these attacks. (See Ibn Ishaq) Sunni Muslims developed a whole ideology that it was not just a right but even a duty for Muslim leaders to attack nations ruled by non-Muslims. It was even considered a duty for leaders to at least lead a raid every summer on Byzantium’s border if bigger conquests were not possible (Read David Cook, “Understanding Jihad”, Patricia Crone, “God’s Rule,” Michael Bonner,” Arab-Byzantine Relations”, etc.);

  • While I find Ms. Geller’s tone to be shrill and strident, it seems like the other guests are evading the subject matter of the billboards themselves. This being radio, we can’t see the messages. What do the boards say?

  • jayson

    oooh and she just dropped the communist bomb LOL wow she’s reaching

  • Matt

    Shame on Michael Krasny for giving this hatemonger so much air time.

    • thucy

      I hear you, but I don’t think he had a choice once the whole mishegoss went down. If it’s local, our local show should cover it.

    • chrisnfolsom

      I would rather have her responses here than on a muni bus….

    • aa aa

      You’re confused about democracy and free speech. They mean public radios cannot ban someone because their views are offensive to many.

      • Matt

        You’re ignorant about how public radio works. It’s not about banning, it’s about providing access. With respect to the Israeli Palestinian conflict, the coverage on NPR (not necessarily KQED) is extremely biased in favor of Israel, and it’s not about bans, it’s about who and what views they allow to go on the air. Years ago NPR reported fairly on the issues. Then people and organizations who favor Israel organized a campaign to change that, by threatening to withhold funding from NPR, and it worked. Now you get very biased reporting in favor of Israel. It’s a free press, but you gotta have a press. Free speech, but you gotta have access to the airwaves, and the ones given access in “mainstream” or corporate media are people who are biased toward Israel and against Palestinians.

        • chrisnfolsom

          I agree with the bias towards Israel, but credit it more to a large amount of Jewish people working gor public radio AND the fact that Israel has great representation in media, politics and money in general – THAT said, they also as a group are about as fair as you can be and self critical and willing to be fair – as comared to conservative or other religrous groups. I dont believ there is a “Jewish agenda” at NPR, and am recently amused at how the conservatives have become more “pro Israel” and less critical than I have heard from Jewish friends – crazy.

  • I don’t understand why the professor is not acknowledging the truth in miss Geller’s view point. My grandfather was a moderate African Muslim who was persecuted by extremists… The question is are the quotes on the bus factual. If so the public needs to know. Thank you!

  • Advocate

    I am appalled that Ms Geller claims to help Muslim girls….she began a hate page on her Atlas shrugs against a very genuine Domestic Violence organization for Muslim women….all women take offense to her hate campaign.

    • mr. x

      Do they also take offense to honor killings?

      • thucy

        yes

        • mr. x

          cool.

          • thucy

            duh!

    • aa aa

      No, all women do not take offense to her so-called “hate campaign.” Look who’s overgeneralizing now.

  • Please recognize that the core islam has nothing common with democracy. In any muslim majority region, minorities don’t have any rights see Pakistan, Bangladesh, Saudi Arabia. If muslims cannot decide for themselves whether to be on the right side of humanity then other will decide for them and I say from my life experience.Thanks Pamella for raising the issue.

    • thucy

      Yeah, try telling that to all the Muslims who gave their lives for democracy in the Arab Spring. Look at the support we gave for decades to Mideast dictators. It’s not Islam, it’s our refusal to tell the truth about our history in the middle east.

      • EUCLID1

        The only thing Arab spring acomplished is to replace a monstrous dictatership with an an even more monstrous ideology called islam.

        Try telling that to non muslims like the Copts in Egypt who are being murdered & their churches burnt. Islam has a history of brutality since its inception. They have conquered endlless number of Christian lands through violence. Those who refuse to convert to islam are usually murdered. Islam is the force behind the destruction of civilisations.

        • chrisnfolsom

          Change (evolution) is never pretty – you cannot say that the evolution of Christianity has (is) been clean and neat? Human rights, women’s rights, children’s rights, right to speech, beliefs and such are not the result of Christianity, but the governments separate from it. Please don’t confuse a religion with the politics that have shaped it. Again, he who is without sin….

          • mr. x

            That is an argument that the Arab spring was a step backwards, not forwards. They replaced secular (certainly imperfect) governments with religious governments.

          • chrisnfolsom

            Less backwards, but sideways perhaps. Western societies have “done the dance” a few times and we still are – in studying history and science you see something called punctuated evolution in which things change radically in fits and gasps – as nature does, so do we. We will see, but the one thing that is nice is that few will get away with mass murders as they did in the past as with today’s technology everything is a bit more transparent – yes Syria is a current problem, but we are at least seeing it – Vietnam made war public and demoralized war as it should have been for all times.

          • EUCLID1

            Christianity and Judaism is where the western civiliastion got their sense of morals and decency not from islam and not from any ‘isolated’ goverments. It is absolutely ludicrous to compare Islams record of barabrity (which is inherent in the Koran) and that of the immoral acts perpeptrated in the name of Christianity. Its like comparing a drop of water to that in the ocean. Islam has never changed since its inception. Islamic leaders say that if any one tries to change it will result in the usual knife to the throat. Thats how barbaric it is.

            It never ever changes, it is totally consistant through the centuries. I never hear the pope demand immediate death to any one that criticises Christianity.
            Pamela puts her life at risk from islamists because she dares to criticise it. Christianity is debated and critiscised all the time. How many had their lives put at risk. Compare this to it islam.

          • aa aa

            But our modern separation of church & state DID develop exactly because the early Christian church was separate from the state for 300 years before emperors decided to promote Christianity. (Pagan Romans did not have separation: there were officially sponsored civic & imperial cults & some emperors persecuted early Christians for not participating in them).

            Enlightenment-era advocates of separation could point out to Christians that they once had no official sponsorship and were able to thrive. and Christians accepted this. It’s far more difficult for Muslim-majority countries to accept this since Muslims have been idealizing and aiming for unifying state, religion & the army ever since Muhammad started ruling Medina.

      • ddean62

        You are amusing.

  • Stacy

    The guest is incorrect, there are members of all religions killing people. Fundamental Christians have killed people associated with abortion clinics here in the US.

    • mr. x

      Christians aren’t running too many countries that have terrible civil rights conditions for women, non-christians, homosexuals, those who express contrary opinions, etc.

      • thucy

        is that a matter of religion? or is it geography and resources?

        • mr. x

          I think that’s an excellent question that can only be discussed if one acknowledges the existence of the problem. But I don’t think it’s geography, I don’t see how that has anything to do with how a country treats women and minorities, and I don’t know what oil or other resources have to do with it.
          But it’s a good point for discussion!

          • thucy

            It’s a far more integrated discussion than merely looking at religion. And when I wrote “resources” I wasn ‘t specifying oil. Have you read “Guns, Germs and Steel”? You might find it a jumping off point for looking beyond screeching one-note-ism of Geller’s focus on religion

          • mr. x

            I have, actually! It’s great, although his latest book is a bit racist. But I still don’t see how any of that is an excuse for the oppression of women, gays and minorities.

          • thucy

            I didn’t say it was an excuse, and I don’t think anyone else did, either. But tell us, Mr.X, what exactly you found racist in Diamond’s latest.

        • aa aa

          Muslims certainly made conquests and developed laws that discriminated against non-Muslims because of religion. Sunni ulama developed the idea that it was not only a right but a duty to conquer lands ruled by non-Muslims.

      • Stacy

        The US does not have the greatest history in regard to civil rights conditions, treatment of women and homosexuals, not to mention the lack of respect for Muslims (since 9/11).

        • thucy

          There’s also that small matter of the genocide of native tribes, slavery, etc

          • aa aa

            At the same time Muslims too committed genocide (Armenians, Pontic Greeks, Anatolian Assyrians), killed, conquered and enslaved many Greeks, Armenians, Hindus, Copts, pagan Africans, Serbs, Bulgarians, Spaniards, Persians, Assyrians,and others in the process of acquiring their empires. The deliberate behavior of Muslim conquerors towards the peoples around them was not significantly better than Europeans & Euro-Americans in the New World. So the relevant issue is: what is your human rights record NOW that we have something called international law?

        • mr. x

          For sure, but I like to think we’ve made progress since then. And while there have been individual cases of discrimination against Muslims, even Bush was really good at making it clear that Islam is not the enemy, and our laws protect against discrimination.

      • chrisnfolsom

        Plenty of Christians are killing science, education, freedom and reason every day to justify their belief in talking snakes and fundamentalism which costs lives in many other ways – and yes perhaps saves a few with their charitable activities – but ultimately at what cost?

        • mr. x

          totes, but we have laws that protect us from those extremists. I worry about the people in Arab lands who don’t have such laws to protect them; who, in fact, are struggling against laws which oppress them.

          • chrisnfolsom

            I am not very religeous, bur respect the wisdom of many religions and dont believe you can force your beliefs values and morals on others. You can lead by example and try your best to keep power (money, weapons, technology) out of the hands of those you dont agree with. If we would not have enriched countries and the leaders of countries with untold riches they would be much less able to oppress their people – the west through greed and limited vision has enabled individuals and societies scarcely out of the Stone Age (harsh yes) to have tools ghey never should have. Hopeully technology will end-run many of these issues and help the oppressed in those countries.

    • aa aa

      The few who did went to jail.

      • chrisnfolsom

        Unfortunately it wasnt the “Christians” who put them away but the government – many “Christians” are quoted as saying they had it coming, or through their silence and lack of effort “supported” the murderes. As with the Muslims and their extremists it is really sad when a group cannot lean up their own mess – especially when claiming some higher moral ground.

    • aa aa

      The few who have were immediately tried and have served jail time. Today many Muslims who kill non-Muslims in Muslim-led countries like Egypt or Indonesia often go scot-free.

  • I’m pretty sure “jihad” pre-dates Islam… I’m really not sure of Ms. Geller’s point.

    • mr. x

      That’s silly. It’s a part of Islam. What it means, how to use it, is up for discussion. But it exists as part of Islam.

      • thucy

        I think she meant the concept of all-out war existed pre-Islam. But, yeah, even the word “war” in English is used in different contexts, e.g. “war on poverty” which was obviously non-violent.

        • mr. x

          Sure, no one is claiming that war began with Mohammed.

        • aa aa

          Jihad is not used in Sunni Muslim texts to mean “all out war.” It means war that is religiously justified. Take a look at David Cook, “Understanding Jihad.” Actually, it is hard to find an exact analogue to the Muslim idea of jihad before Islam. See Patricia Crone “God’s Rule”. She points out that holy war to the ancient Greeks meant only defending a religious sanctuary, not what the Muslims did to the Roman, Persian and other non-Muslim empires.religiously justify agressive.wars of permanent expansion against an empires with the aim of destroying them because they are not ruled by Muslims. The late Roman Empire thought of their defensive wars against the Persians as protecting Christianity, but had no thought of destroying the Persian Empire and all other non-Christian empires BECASUSE they were n’t ruled by Christians.

          As usual, thucy displays her profound ignorance of the issues..

    • aa aa

      No. See Patricia Crone’s discussion in “God’s Rule.” She, who knows vast numbers of relevant primary sources, points out that there is no exact analogy to jihad before Islam.

  • R Albright

    I’m looking at the Southern Poverty Law’s Hate Map for California. There are a number of Neo-Nazi and other hate groups in the area. I have to question if these groups would be allowed to run racist ads on Muni buses, or is there a special category for anti-Muslim hate that society still finds acceptable?
    I would love to hear other ideas besides boycotting Muni to show our disgust with this outright bigotry – not taking the bus is not an option for many of us.

    • thucy

      Great point, I wish you’d called in

    • aa aa

      Actually it would be bigotry for MUNI to run MyJihad ads, which try (see Zilberman’s claim) to portray jihad wholly positively, and not about violence and then to refuse ads by Geller which use quotations from some Muslims to show that jihad is indeed violent.

      One possible solution: no ads about any religious concepts like jihad,or life beginning at conception, or from religious groups. Period. ,

    • Matt

      Fight fire with fire. Place signs on busses that include the extremist views and racist statements of many Israeli and Jewish leaders and Israeli soldiers toward the Palestinians and examples of the brutality inflicted on the Palestinians (massacres, intentional malnutrition of the people of Gaza, murders, house demolitions, orchard demolitions, wiping off the face of the earth hundreds of Palestinian villages). For starters, Golda Meir’s denying the existence of Palestinians.

  • Why is KQED giving voice to a known hate group leader, full of bile and bigotry? This is an embarrassment for the station.

    • Yancy Picklefeather

      This was the worst thing ever, and I’m disgusted by all the support she seems to be getting in the comments here.

      • mr. x

        I don’t know how much support she’s getting. But some people aren’t attacking her personally, and trying to address the issues.

        • thucy

          Hmm… by calling Chris anti-semitic a few notes up you are somehow addressing the issues? I don’t buy it.

          • mr. x

            I responded to that. Check it out below!

      • aa aa

        Worst thing ever? You have a very sheltered world view if hearing someone like Geller is the “worst thing ever.” Never heard of Hitler? Mao? Stalin? Enver Pasha?.Tamurlane?…

    • aa aa

      Ad hominem.
      And radios should not boycott someone simply because her ideas offend many. What do you think democracy & free speech mean?

  • chech

    Jeff Ganham was such a sniveling coward in this exchange. He used every ad hominem he could think of in order to avoid addressing any issues.

    • mr. x

      It’s like he’s in denial about the existence of extremism, instead of just condemning it.

    • chech

      I think future intellectuals will consider this era a dark age 1one where we let the stupidest among us instantly shut down any debate by screaming “xenophobe” or complaining that something is hateful.

  • mr. x

    Very disappointed with the gentleman opposing the ads. He did nothing but attack Ms Geller. There are probably things to say to her, but the attacks mean nothing.
    She has a point. Where are all the Muslims fighting against oppressive extremists governments and individuals? Denying it doesn’t make it go away.

  • I appreciate the anger that people may feel because of the ad but I think that Mr.Ghannam is painting Paula as a hate speaker and not addressing the fact that she isn’t speaking out against Islam, but against Muslim extremists.

    • thucy

      Southern Poverty Law Center also iidentifies her work as “hate speech” and Geller has a record of attacking Muslims. so, Im going with the experts, not the Long Island housewife, on this one.

      • mr. x

        Or, you could listen to what’s being said, decide for yourself, and stop taking the opinion of strangers as gospel.

        • thucy

          I did listen to Geller, but listening to Geller, an uninformed harpy, does not oblige me to buy her bull, and it is not as constructive to dialogue as reading The Financial Times
          Telling me to listen to Geller is like telling me to listen to Farakhan

          • mr. x

            Even a broken clock is right twice a day. If you close your mind, how do you know which people are worthy of ear and which are not? You just take other people’s word for it?

          • thucy

            You totally missed the point…

          • mr. x

            Instead of repeating that over and over, can you articulate the point?

          • thucy

            I think you’re actively resisting articulation, so I’ll not waste more of my time with your sophistry, thanks anyway

      • ddean62

        They are are identified as a left wing group of nuts, living very well from the donations from nuts such as yourself.

  • Sandy Tom Farley

    To counter these ads, we contributed this morning through the Global
    Giving web-site to U.S. Movement to SAVE Palestinian Villages, a project organized by a friend here on the Peninsula. Go to
    globalgiving.org/projects/usmovement/ to show your support. Even a small amount helps.

    • mr. x

      if supporting terrorism and anti-Israeli activity is counter to these ads, then Ms. Geller might have a point.

      • thucy

        if you imply their efforts to support displaced people is supporting terrorism, then you are disingenuous beyond belief

        • mr. x

          supporting displaced people is lovely. supporting hamas, not so much. i have no idea about that group, and i apologize for jumping to conclusions.

        • Chris OConnell

          Reading the torrent of comments, of course Mr. X is disingenuous. My guess is he is paid for this.

          • mr. x

            I can get paid for this????

            LOL. You guess……poorly.

  • Grad student prospect

    After hearing Ms Geller on Forum, I am more opposed to these hate ads. LOL, calling people communists then tea party???? This woman is off her rocker.

  • Yancy Picklefeather

    What the hell did I just listen to? Please never have that racist harpy on again. She does not deserve to use KQED as a microphone for her hate speech.

    • mr. x

      She didn’t actually say anything hateful, with the possible exception of calling the Southern Poverty Law Center a communist organization. The gentlemen, however, called her all kinds of rude names.

      • Yancy Picklefeather

        Calling a bigot a bigot is what he did. Do you even live in SF? We do not want that s**t here.

        • mr. x

          How many times are you going to ask me that, Yancy Picklefeather, if that is indeed, your real name, as if only SFers have free speech?

          • Yancy Picklefeather

            I didn’t mean to ask you twice, I thought this one was deleted because of cusses. I’m frustrated that this awful woman from Long Island can come to my community and stir up stuff, call us racists and abetting jihad if we complain about it, and then have random goofs from who the hell knows where tell us to suck it up because freedom of speech. Its my MUNI buses here, I pay for them like all the other San Franciscans. I’m sure if it was a vote we would choose not have those ads.

        • Daniel Zilberman

          Oh, but do we want other “free speech” biased against Israel – we have PLENTY of that in our lovely City by the Bay. Bet it doesn’t bother you nearly as much, “Yancy”?

          • Yancy Picklefeather

            What are you even talking about?

        • ddean62

          Calling you a member of the loony left is being kin to you.

      • Yancy Picklefeather

        Do you even live in SF? Do you just exist on this message board to defend bigots?

        • mr. x

          Why yes I do, thanks. Why, does free speech only apply to San Franciscans? Do you really just label people and write them off? And I’m not really defending her, I”m trying to address the issues, not attack or deify people.

          • thucy

            It does seem that if you were really interested in addressing the issues, you wouldn’t be defending someone as deliberately provocative as Geller

          • mr. x

            I”m not actually defending her, am I?

          • thucy

            Why, yes, you have not merely defended her, but aped her arguments for her.

          • mr. x
          • Sam

            @thucy – take a chill pill 🙂 You sound more offensive like how Ms. Geller was today, but defensive like Mr. Ghannam today 🙂 I agree with mr. x – I don’t think he was defending Ms. Geller. For the record – I’m a liberal living in SF.I don’t agree with Geller much even though I’d say she made some compelling arguments. But Mr. Ghannam failed to convince me his side.

          • ddean62

            Ms Geller has a right to free speech, get used to it. Enjoy it. Embrace it. It is a constitutional right.

          • ddean62

            She gets results. She keeps islam in the lioght. Good for her. Donate.

          • aa aa

            Regarding free speech, it’s exactly those found offensive by many, like Geller, who must be defended in her right to express herself.

          • Yancy Picklefeather

            You are playing this free speech martyr thing so if you were from outside the city I was going to tell you to mind your own business, as you don’t have to look at hate speech when you ride the bus. I do. Hate speech has no place on anything I pay for with my taxes. If the KKK had the cash, would you be cool with them putting swastikas on the bus? Its the same free speech argument.

        • Daniel Zilberman

          There also recently series of “MY Jihad is..” ads on SF public MUNI – and that was extremely offensive to anyone who really understands its meaning as “holy war against Western democracy”. Was it not bigotry???

          • aa aa

            Good point. I did not see them, but if true, where is the SF council saying they will use taxpayer funds to counter such “insensitive” ads? Muni needs consistency: either don;t take money to for any ads that are about religious concepts (like jihad, life at conception) at all, or post them all. And no publicly funded counter ads, unless you’re going to do that for all the groups’ ads that someone finds offensive..

        • ddean62

          Hell of a lot of loony left on here.

      • thucy

        Calling SPLC comunist isn’t just hateful, it’s wacko

      • Carole

        How is calling an organization communist “hateful”? It may or may not be accurate to call a particular organization communist, but communism is a political theory, not a “hate” label.

    • ddean62

      The truth is “hate speech” what every that is? Was Mohammad a pedophile? Of course he was.

  • chylene6599

    There were 5 crusades, all to stop the invasion of Islam into Christian lands. Islam gave the conquered people three choices: Submit, pay tribute, or fight to the death. Crucifixion and amputation of limbs are still penalties for apostasy. This is a barbaric and savage cult. Before you criticize Pm, and what she is doing, read the Quran yourself, Look into Islam’s murderous history, and then you will see why she is trying to warn your ungrateful selves.

    • thucy

      “all to stop the invasion of Islam into Christian lands”

      Okay, you’ve made clear that you have your own, special version of the Crusades. And you say “Nevermind!” to what those doctoral twits at Oxford write, right? Sigh.

      • mr. x

        You think there are scholars at Oxford that think that the Crusades were not an attempt to reclaim formerly Christian land taken by Muslim armies?

        • thucy

          Name your scholar, and I’ll tell you exactly what you’re selectively leaving out. Bring it, Mr.X!

          • mr. x

            Thucy, you’re the one who brought up the “doctoral twits at Oxford”, not me.

          • thucy

            Can’t bring it, we see.

          • mr. x

            LOL. Gee, and you were so reasonable for a while.

      • aa aa

        There’s no question that the First Crusade was preached by Urban because Western Christians were asked by the Byzantine emperor to help fight the Seljuk and other Turkish dynasties who had recently seized almost all Anatolia from the Byzantines, and had caused havoc even in Palestine. All the primary sources (Urban’s 4 extant letters (esp. to the Flemish & to, Catalan counts), Gesta Francorum, Raymond of Agilers, Alexis Comnenus’ ,letter to the abbot of Monte Cassino, etc.) agree that the aim was to reconquer certain lands that Muslims had taken from Eastern Christians: Western Anatolia, part of the Levant & Jerusalem. Thucy you need to learn what real history is: by actually reading the relevant primary sources.
        And before that, you can start by examining an historical atlas: look at all the lands under Christian rule (mainly Byzantine) in 600. Then look at what happened to so much of that land by 1095 before the First Crusade. Pay close attention to what the Byzantine Empire looked like even as late as 1000, and what happened after the Turks took Anatolia from it by 1095. Then look at the map in 1150. Even at their height, the Crusaders only took back from Muslims a small fraction of land that was under Christian rule in 600. That’s why we historians correctly characterize the so-called “Crusades” as warfare to reconquer certain lands that Muslims had earlier taken from Christians. Much of the Crusades’ goals were ephemeral and of dubious long-term value (e.g. taking Jerusalem back) but the First Crusade was absolutely vital to the salvation of the Western world because by forcing the Seljuks to abandon Nicaea as their capital for Iconium they helped preserve the Byzantine Empire in this period. Without the preservation of Byzantium in the High MIddle Ages there would have been no Renaissance or Reformation because these depended on the Byzantines’ preservation of so many Greek religious, historical and literary texts. (Muslims never preserved these: they were only interested in Greek science & philosophy, but not Greek history or literature, & certainly not the Greek NT or other Greek Christian works).

  • Chris OConnell

    Pam Geller is quite a character. I like to think that was not actually her on the phone, but it was Anna Deveare Smith playing a role.

  • It’s important to understand who Pamela geller is. Here is a sampling of her hits. http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/lgf-search.php?q=Pamella+geller

  • Pamela Gellar is one of the most obnoxious political agents out there. Jews and Christians have historically killed frequently in the name of God, and Christian Europe invaded two Muslim nations, one of which DID NOT ATTACK THE USA, in the name of democracy.

    Jewish and Christian states-the USA, UK and Israel – have also backed some of the most vile, violent and terroristic regimes around the world, such as Guatemala and South Africa in the 80s. I guess it is wrong to kill Christians and Jews with the name of Allah on one’s mouth but it’s ok to kill Mayans and black Africans with money on one’s mind? If Mrs Gellar was really a “human rights advocate” or w/e the heck she calls herself, she would turn her critique back at the USA and its foreign policy.

    It is true that there are dangerous Jihadis who use Islamic texts to justify their acts and who have committed horrible crimes to Christians and Jews, but violent ideology is not a Muslim phenomenon alone and Mrs Gellar comes across as not only hyperbolic and shrill, but outright bigoted. To Mrs Gellar, settler fanatics tearing up trees, pelting Palestinian shepherds with rocks and even shooting at people in the name of a “holy land” (as documented in haaretz and numerous other sources) or Christians in many African countries pushing to make homosexuality punished more severely must have been all made up.

    • mr. x

      The US, the UK, and Israel also have large minority populations which have full civil rights. They experience discrimination, to be sure, but the law protects them.
      Compare that to the many Islamic nations that actively discriminate against their minority populations, support honor killings, and the many which support terrorism by rewarding the families of terrorists.
      Whitewashing the issue, ignoring the real differences, and being in denial does not make the problem go away, and it doesn’t make it better for peaceful Muslims.

      • Tell that to Bedouins which Israel is kicking out of their land in the Negev to build farms for Israeli investors, or to Palestinians in the West Bank whose land was given to settlers, only to have those settlers attack the Palestinians often without legal ramification. Just because a minority group looks equal, it doesn’t mean that it is really treated equally before the law or in a just manner.

        And again, foreign policy is critical. The US cannot argue that it cares for the civil rights of Latin Americans just because it gives Latin Americans in the US equal rights, while supporting governments that commit genocide against indigenous people. I know the example of Hitler is overused, but would we say that a government which supported Germany but gave Jews equal rights during WWII was not morally culpable in the genocide? Human rights does not end at a country’s own border.

        • mr. x

          Of course there are problems, as there are with minorities in the US. But in the US and Israel, there are courts, elections, free speech, etc. There are ways to deal with such injustices. No such paths for remedy exist in the radical Islamic countries.

          What country supported Nazi Germany but gave Jews equal rights during WW2?

        • mr. x

          Is there a country that supported Germany but gave Jews equal rights during ww2? Which one?

          • chrisnfolsom

            that is a worn out argument. Just because a group was abused at one time does not give them any “pass”to abuse someone else – you should feel empathy for them. Of all the oppressed minorities in the world the Jewish people are the most enlightened and powerful and like how America had the sympathy of the world after 9/11 and blew it with our segue into Iraqu, Israel’s continued oppression, aggression and such toward the palestinians has weakened their position in the world, removed any empathy for them and reenforced the fears of their enemies. I wish the best, but fear the worst.

    • aa aa

      “Christian Europe” invaded 2 Muslim nations? You mean Iraq & Afghanitstan? “Christian states-the USA.” ?The US is not officially Christian & unlike both Iraq & Afghanistan have separation of religion & state & does not enforce religious laws. Much of Europe is not Christian, but rather religiously indifferent. Even those European nations that have an official church (like UK) no longer.enforce religious laws through canon law courts (they were dissolved 1800-1850) Characterizing the contemporary West as “Christian” is tendentious.

  • What about the chief rabbi of Israel’s Shas party which said that gentiles were meant by god to serve Jews, and that it was ok to kill gentile babies as long as it could save the life of a Jewish person? That is a political party which not only gets moderate votes but is in the ruling coalition. Yes, that’s right, Israel’s ruling coalition includes a party which literally thinks enslaving or killing not only the Palestinians but every non-Jewish person in the world is morally acceptable.

    • mr. x
      • I would consider a powerful Mizrahi Rabbi who is the ideologue of one of Israel’s bigger political parties is more of a significant religious figure than anyone from the ADL. His party also continues to hold much political clout, which indicates that his bigotry didn’t prevent him from getting votes, nor did it prevent him from joining various Israeli governments. Imagine if the head of the GOP said that blacks were meant to serve whites. Surely we would expect him to be kicked out of the party, not kept on as a significant ideological figure in their party.

        The main point I’m making is that it’s not only Muslims who try to use ancient religious texts to justify violence and hatred.

        • mr. x

          It’s not a battle to see who is a bigger religious figure. Hateful things are said sometimes. And you can’t be kicked out of being a rabbi.

          But your (obvious) point is taken. Muslims are not the only ones who have individuals who say obnoxious things. Great. That’s established.

          What does that have to do with institutional sexism and racism and violence as found in many Muslim nations, but not in Christian or Jewish nations? I’m not talking about racist people, I’m talking about racist laws.

      • thucy

        and there’s the rub, because if you put the shoe on the other foot, the same condemnation by Muslim leaders doesn’t suffice for Geller

        • mr. x

          I didn’t hear the Muslim leader on the radio today condemning those quotes, I heard him attacking Ms Geller and denying the existence of extremism.

          • thucy

            then you need to listen to the audio again, because you’re clearly hearing only what you wish to hear

        • EUCLID1

          The problem is that they don’t. They actually preach it in Mosques.

        • aa aa

          Condemnation is not enough. Muslim majority countries need separation of religion and state, and an end to laws legally discriminating against women & non-Muslims. There is no valid comparison to the legal human rights situation in the contemporary West and current Muslim majority countries.

      • chrisnfolsom

        I didn’t see any Jewish leaders listed – just the ADL. My BIGGEST – to a degree – issue with most religions (and people) is that they are not self-critical and in doing so allow the perversion of their message. You can’t have it both ways especially if you are claiming some moral high ground – I kind of spit up a little in my mouth when I wrote “moral high ground” …. regarding just about any religion – sorry, in a bit of a down period reg religion.

  • Hakim Beigh

    I hate to break it to everyone, but Geller won that debate. She’s refined her strategy, and honed her skills. In other words, the wolf has bleached her sheep’s clothing. You have to listen really carefully to hear the boiling cauldron of noxious waste simmering right beneath the surface. People who don’t know her history could easily be taken in by this, which is why confronting her with knowledgeable articulate professionals is so important. I’m really disappointing in CAIR for bowing out of this one. They handed her an easy victory. David Chiu and Jess Ghannam had the best of intentions, but they were outclassed by a mercenary demagogue.

    • thucy

      Yikes, I think you’re right. Ghannam wasn’t up to it. did you notice that Chiu didn’t stick around to take her on.

      • chrisnfolsom

        Therein lies another aspect of public debate and that is the skill of the debaters – not the merit of the arguments and of course the moderator hopefully can equalize things a bit, but we are left with giving credence to idiots at times – look at right wing Radio – do you honestly think you can win an argument against a Rush Limbaugh argument on his show? He has quite a few ways to shut you down – including cutting your call when he wants – and people eat that crap up.

    • aa aa

      Wolf? Noxious waste? Who’s ad hominem and hateful now?
      CAIR is full of “knowledgeable” professionals? I Haven’t heard any yet.

  • Truth Teller

    “We have to kill all the Palestinians unless they are resigned to live here as slaves.”

    Chairman Heilbrun of the Committee for the Re-election of General Shlomo Lahat, the mayor of Tel Aviv, October 1983.

    • Hakim Beigh

      Damn… I wonder if Geller would dish out $5 grand on bus ads with that quote to start an important discussion about slavery?

    • mr. x

      LOL. So you oppose putting quotes by Muslim extremists, and to make your point, you post quotes from Jewish extremists (if it’s even a real quote).
      Does that make sense?

      • thucy

        don’t assume no one noticed that you’re intentionally obscuring his point

        • mr. x

          Honestly, I”m wondering what his point is. That there are extremists who say terrible things? Okay, obvious point taken.

  • Truth Teller

    “We must use terror, assassination, intimidation, land confiscation, and the cutting of all social services to rid the Galilee of its Arab population.”
    Israel Koenig,

    • mr. x

      Is there a point?

      • thucy

        If you don’t want to see the point, then you won’t

        • mr. x

          Especially if no one can articulate it.

        • chrisnfolsom

          That is BS as this is the same tactic as are the Muni billboards – out of context statements which really don’t contribute, but divide.

          • Sam

            Right – when I saw it, I was like WTF!?

  • Truth Teller

    “One million Arabs are not worth a Jewish fingernail.”
    — Rabbi Yaacov Perrin, Feb. 27, 1994

    • mr. x

      So?

      • thucy

        I think his point is that there’s plenty of hate coming from a variety of groups
        I don’t see Geller demanding to know why so many Hindus are burning brides, or so many atheist Chinese are aborting female fetuses. Hmmm… doesn’t fit her narrow view of the biggest problem in the whole entire world

        • mr. x

          So many Hindus are not burning brides, that is racist and ignorant.

          • aa aa

            Alas, there are still occasional bride-burnings by Hindus, but the point is that the Indian government outlawed it. Many Muslim countries still DEFEND their discriminatory laws against women & non-Muslims: like unequal laws on divorce, defending the right of a man to strike his wife, underage marriage, etc..

        • Sam

          @thucy – see now you are being racist, biased, ignorant and arrogant. Now you sound like Ms. Geller. You are arguing against somebody who sounder like you. Well – Ms. Geller sounded more convincing and rational.

        • aa aa

          There is a BIG difference between modern India, which has officially outlawed suttee & of course bride burning, and many Muslim majority countries that still DEFEND the many discriminatory laws against women and non-Mulsims that they still have on the books
          . India could have argued that because some Hindus committed suttee, or demanded dowries, or observed caste that it was part of Hindu culture to maintain them. To their credit they did not, but said they must try to end these things. Many ulama & Muslim majority states argue they have to allow polygyny, unequal divorce laws,underage marriage, laws that forbid conversion of Muslims, ban domestic violence shelters, and on & on,. because to do otherwise undermines Islamic traditions & laws.

  • Carole

    Why are these posters referred to as “ads”? There is no product or service being advertised. They are clearly propaganda, and clearly hate
    propaganda.

    • aa aa

      There are other religious ads on buses that some find offensive or manipulative: ads trying to dissuade women from aborting (“choose life”) or evangelistic ads . It would be problematic on First Amendment grounds for Muni to accept money to post the latter ads, but not Geller’s adds. To deny Geller, they would have to have a general policy of not accepting any ads about religious ideas..

      • Carole

        Yeah, I get that. But my comment was not about the First Amendment. I was pointing out that it is incorrect to refer to propaganda posters as advertisements. I think my original comment is clear.

      • Carole

        Yes, I get all that. However, my comment was not about first amendment rights. Rather, I was pointing out that it is incorrect to refer to propaganda posters as advertisements. I think my original comment is clear.

      • Guest

        Yes, I get all that. But my comment was not to do with First Amendment rights. Rather, I was pointing out that it is incorrect to refer to propaganda posters as advertisements. I think my original comment is clear.

        • aa aa

          There’s not such a clear distinction between propaganda and advertisement. For many, a poster trying to dissuade unhappily pregnant women from abortion is propaganda. The “My Jihad” posters that Zilberman mentions (below) were also not “ads” for products or services. Would you also call them “hate propaganda.”?

      • Carole

        Right, I get all that. But my comment was not to do with First Amendment Rights. Rather, I was pointing out that it is inaccurate to refer to propaganda posters as “ads” (advertisements). I think my original comment is clear.

  • Devon

    I’m a professor of rhetoric here at a Bay Area university, and my students are examining arguments in favor of and against hate crime legislation. I plan to have them listen to today’s program as an example of how debates fall apart when emotions run high and the people participating doggedly talk past each other. That was what frustrated me the most: they did not respond to each other’s points, but repeated what they had already come on the show to say. I actually commend Michael Krasny for having Ms. Gellar on the show. Marginalizing or silencing those deemed offensive is much more dangerous than hearing and responding to what they have to say–and pushing them to explain themselves. I only wish that the guests had been capable of actually engaging with each other’s ideas.

    • mr. x

      Well said.

    • thucy

      Devon, I agree, however my criticism is that if you invite someone with a record as vitriolic as Geller, you can’t be surprised when she starts calling people communists.

      • Daniel Zilberman

        Whereas I agree that rethoric of Pam Geller did go overboard – the facts that she highlights – a universal and all consuming hatred of Western liberal (in a true sense of word) values by world jihadists and using deadly terrorism to advance their goals. These are facts that should speak volumes – but not on pubic transportation for sure.

        • thucy

          ” These are facts that should speak volumes – but not on pubic transportation for sure.”

          That was it, perfectly.

          • aa aa

            Problem is that Muni has been taking ads from groups with other religious messages for years. It’s not acceptable to say to one group, we find your take on a religious idea too offensive to post but not to another group (e. g. conservative Christians trying to get unhappily pregnant women to “choose life” i.e. dissuade them from aborting). Muni needs a consistent policy: for example NO ads at all about religious ideas or from religious groups at all. What they should not do is pick and choose which ideas about religions or religious ideas they find too offensive to post, or they feel they must use taxpayer money for counter ads or “training.”.

        • notosharia

          Actually that’s where they should be . It makes people THINK — A place like San Francisco-stan NEED to think outside their LIBERALISM! Think how creative it is to see such a message —-the TRUTH!

    • Hugh Caley

      I think, though, that there have to be limits. Pamela Gellar is a fringe nutcase, a hate monger and, well, idiot, by any meaningful definition of those words. The Southern Poverty Law Center and the Anti-Defamation League both define her groups as “hate groups”. I mean, is there a limit to how crazy/awful you have to be to not be allowed on the show?

      • thucy

        whoa, the ADL defined her group as a “hate group”? good for them!

      • Quoting Islam is now Islamophobic?

        While I agree that it is difficult to find anything in the koran that is neither abrogated nor hate-speech, you must have a better argument than “Someone told me she was a nasty person so I am not going to listen to what she says”.

      • notosharia

        You’re wrong. Pam stays on the subject – and is able to site examples. Islamists do not. Why – because their political stance (SHARIA) IS from a culture that we here in the USA are totally opposite. You bet I am an ISLAMOPHOBE!

    • Sam

      I agree as well. Both had valid points, but they both held on to their biased views, and argued with each other. I was frustrating, and makes me question their credibility and validity of their statements. I think Ms. Geller was overly offensive, and Mr. Ghahnam seemed more biased and defensive dodging Ms. Geller’s questions and comments.

    • Gracchus

      Considering that there is a mountain of evidence that 9/11 was perpetrated by the military industrial complex, and that Al Qaeda is run by the CIA, the anti-Muslim fanatics out there are really living in a fantasy land, where logic and scientific laws do not matter, and only political spin is considered.

  • Guest

    Why
    are these posters on buses referred to as “ads”? There is no product or service
    being advertised. They are clearly propaganda, and clearly hate
    propaganda.

  • EUCLID1

    Pamela Geller is a beacon of hope in saving our freedom and democracy which our fore fathers died for.

    • Chris OConnell

      LOL.

    • ddean62

      That she is.

  • Kirk Brooks

    This discussion was the first I’d heard of this issue. I haven’t noticed the ads on a bus nor have I heard of any of the people involved so I’m responding solely to what I heard on Forum this morning.

    First I have to say I think Michael could have/ should have done a better job of focusing the discussion. Ms. Geller is clearly something of a lighting rod, energetic and even a bit brittle. However she opened her remarks on topic and about the topic. Mr. Ghannam on the other hand started out addressing her personally and continued to do that by opening responses with, “how can I respond to a woman like that?” Where was the moderator to moderate? If the discussion was about “a woman like that” and “a man like that” this was fine but it if was about the topic it wasn’t and only served to heat up an already charged topic.

    On to the topic, the level of misunderstanding and mischaracterization was startling. I gather the ads are quotes from various sources, many of them dead, imprisoned or discredited, but the discussion kept suggesting Ms. Geller made them herself. The difference is important and, again, lost due to anyone trying to keep things on topic.

    I was struck by Prof. Ghannam remarking that Ms. Geller’s actions weren’t doing anything to create discussion about the topic. I laughed out loud – they had in fact done just that and absent this impetus whatever discussions he has bee having would not have been on Forum.

    I found the comments from various listeners interesting when they would break down along the lines of, “I’m all in favor of free speech but …” You know it’s free or it’s not – there isn’t a ‘but’ in free. And the reason it’s important is because the most important free speech is frequently highly charged, unpopular, heretical, offensive and spoken by people on the margins.

    One point Ms. Geller kept repeating is that Islam is a religion, not a race or nationality. It’s not racist to be anti Islamic. It’s racist to assume anyone with brown skin is Islamic, for example. It’s not racist to speak disparagingly about someone’s belief in god. It’s offensive and in this country it’s a constitutional right. Personally I am offended by people promoting any version of god or religion.

    Discussions like this one often have a tone that makes me feel I should have a cloth to wipe the spittle off my radio speaker. These are important issues and the emotion wrapped around them makes it easy to slip into talking about the people in the discussion instead of the topic of the discussion. This seems to me to be a lot of the problem with American political discussion in general – it’a all focused on the personalities instead of the principles.

    One listener posited the question of how would Ms. Geller like it someone were putting up ads quoting the old testament of the Bible? There’s lots of material there to rub against current mores. I think that’s a great idea, myself. I do just that from time to time. So I get the irony and provocation of these bus ads. I mean – bin Laden? How much more discredited could a quote be?

    My final thought from this segment came when Prof. Ghannam stated his group was active and vociferous in their denunciation of violence in the name of Islam. Well where is it? He said something along the lines of “if you just listen” you will hear it. I’m pretty plugged in to listening in places I’d expect to hear it and I have to say I find very little noise coming from Islamic groups about these issues. Whenever something big happens everyone makes the expected statements of disavowal but I never hear much beyond that and in such times they are almost perfunctory. Are ‘American muslims’ different from others? Or are they? What do I make of countries embracing Islam in their government denying women’s rights, criminalizing homosexuality and generally embracing a view of the world reminiscent of the Dark Ages? I understand an individual may say, “well I don’t support that” but then why are you not actively doing something to change it?

    • thucy

      Kirk,
      I’ve tried to “actively do something” (peaceful protest) to get my government to stop killing hundreds of thousands of Iraqi women and children and doctors, etc. But even though I live in a democracy, I can’t effect change. So… I think you’re avoiding the larger issue of “rights” – the right not to live in fear of being blown up by American bombs.
      Kirk, how many Iraqis have we killed? How many Afghan children? I’m not ignoring your point, merely hoping you can acknowledge the elephant in the room.

      • Kirk Brooks

        You know, these are good points and good things to discuss they just aren’t part of this topic. Our invasion of Iraq was stupid, imperial and politically motivated. I don’t think anything good has come from it. But that’s not what this discussion is about.

        • thucy

          But Kirk, that’s like trying to address the patient’s pulmonary issues without acknowledging that the heart rate is dangerously high. The two are complementary, and have to be addressed together.

          • aa aa

            Red herring.. Our government must uphold freedom of speech and not establis religion (by playing favorites) even when some of our leaders do foolish things & arguably immoral things (like Iraq invasion IMO). The issue is that Muni has taken money from other groups for years with various messages about religion.( I’ve seen plenty of ads from conservative Christians trying to dissuade unhappily pregnant women from aborting). If they say they won’t post these ads because they’re offensive, they would be picking which religious ideas they find acceptable, which is a threat to 1st Amendment rights regarding speech & religion. If they use taxpayer money to counter ads from folks whose ideas they find offensive, that’s potentially a First Amendment issue since then government officials would be promotibng certain views about a particular religion or religious ideas, which they should not do.

        • Amy Zucker Morgenstern

          Sure it is. Because you doubted that Muslims disavow violence and discrimination or try to change it, and thucy pointed out that we don’t like everything about our countries (for that matter, I don’t like everything about my religion, and I’m a minister), and yet try as we might to change them, they don’t always change.

          Would you like a list of examples of Muslims working for peace and expressing moderate views?

          “Moderate Islamic Preachers Gain Followers in Indonesia,” Wall St. Journal, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443635404578038541261622144.html
          (Indonesia is the largest Muslim country in the world)

          http://muslimpeacecoalition.org/about.php

          http://mpf21.wordpress.com/

          http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/22/world/world-film-protests

          http://www.freemuslims.org/

          http://www.islamicpluralism.org/

          May I suggest that if you are very plugged in yet these are news to you, you might want to plug in to other news sources than the ones you are using?

  • Carole

    Why are these posters on buses referred to as “ads”? There is no product or service being advertised. They are clearly propaganda, and clearly hate propaganda.

  • Hugh Caley

    Shame on you, KQED and Michael Krasny, for giving Pamela Geller a forum. Information about her career is readily available. It’s like giving David Duke a forum. No, no, no! Is there any limit to the kind of scum that you will allow to speak on the show?

    • chrisnfolsom

      As she is not prevented from putting messages on Muni buses perhaps here – a relatively safe location – we can discuss and find ways to discuss this and other issues and come to a consensus as to how to handle them.

    • aa aa

      Scum? Comparing some one stridently critical of traditional Islamic concepts like jihad to KKK members? You’re pretty strident and extremist yourself.

  • Walter Dolen

    Jess Ghannam appears to be the extremist, not Geller…

  • Silpa

    I am disappointed that this woman and her agenda were given legitamacy by covering her on Forum! Forum today sounded more like Fox News rather than the informed/respectful discussion we are used to hearing!

  • Walter Dolen

    Who is the name caller here? Again just listen to Ghannam. Just listen. Who is painting with a broad brush. Who is calling someone hateful? When she is just pointing out some aspect of Islam. Islam has to change, not the US. Who is bombing and killing? Who else but the Muslims. Why is Ghannam defending the extremists in Islam. YOU Ghannam need to examine YOUR views.

  • EUCLID1

    Pamela Geller is hated by the islamo/marxist brigade because she knows and speaks the truth. As,indeed many geat historical leaders did before they ultimately got the recognitioned they deserved.
    Robert Spencer is another truth teller who understands and knows more about islam and the threat to western democracy that it poses than any islamic apologist. That is why telling the truth about the evil that is islam puts your life at risk from jihadists. A rational debate is not an option neither for the luny left or islamists because they know they would lose.

  • BayMom

    I don’t want to see anything regarding politics or religion on public transportation. Not the white washing of the word “Jihad” by the Muslim group and not the descriptions of how that word has been used by terrorist groups. It is not the right place for that kind of thing. When I lived in D.C. there were anti Israeli advertisements on the metro and it really pissed me off. I had to take the metro to work and did not appreciate the negativity first thing in the morning.

    • aa aa

      I sympathize with this view. The trick is to get Muni to be consistent and therefore fair to all the groups: no ads from certain Muslim groups whitewashing the meaning of jihad, no ads quoting self-styled jihadis, to show how benighted they are, no ads urging pregnant women to “choose life,” no evangelistic messages from the churches who think a bus might be the place people can find Jesus, etc. .

  • livingengine

    Michael Krasny has failed his audience.

    He lets his guests insult, taunt, and lie about Pamela Geller, and never tell us that CAIR is a “working organization” of the Palestine Committee. (page 6 of Elbarrase Search 19)
    http://www.txnd.uscourts.gov/judges/hlf2/09-29-08/Elbarasse%20Search%2019.pdf

    The Palestine Committee is the international support group for HAMAS created by the Muslim Brotherhood.

    Michael Krasny should not allow himself to be a tool for jihadis in this country.

    Michael Krasny should do a segment on the Holy Land Foundation case, or he should get off the air; its that bad.

    Shame on Michael Krasny.

  • mdfine

    Pamela Geller is a heroine. The rabid attacks lavished on her are never rational. The truth of what she says is indisputable. She allows herself to be exposed to all the calumnies the wretched liars can devise because she loves freedom. She cares enough about the sad lot of Muslim women, for example, to actually do something to save them from the “honor” killings inflicted on them by their own families in compliance with “holy” sharia. Contrary to what the benighted Board of Supervisors and District Attorney of San Francisco may think – if that is the correct term, all the hate in this case is one-sided and it aint coming from Ms. Geller.

    • Chris OConnell

      Pamela Geller is dastardly. The unfettered praise heaped on her are never rational. The falseness of what she says is indisputable. She allows herself to be exposed to all the fawning adoration her wretched fans can devise because she hates Muslims. She cares nothing about the sad lot of Muslim women, for example, but will gladly exploit “honor” killings inflicted on them by their own families in compliance with “holy” sharia to advance her agenda. Like the benighted Board of Supervisors and District Attorney of San Francisco may think – if that is the correct term, all the hate in this case is one-sided and it is coming from Ms. Geller.

      • mdfine

        If you don’t have the wit to find your own words kindly refrain from stealing mine.

      • aa aa

        Nonsense. “All the hate in this case” isn’t “one sided.” Ganem also engaged in ad hominems by trying to tar Geller as a racist., and using expressions like a “woman like that.”. Nor is the “falseness of what she says” “indisputable”. And there isn’t a shred of evidence that Geller “hates Muslims.” She is stridently critical of traditional Sunni teachings on jihad, and some other aspects of sharia and traditional Islamic dogma. It does not follow that someone “hate Muslims” because they dislike various Islamic ideas. I dislike Roman Catholic teaching on contraception. It does not mean I “hate” Roman Catholics. Like most people in the media eye, Geller sometimes overgeneralizes but then so does Gannem and many of her opponents. Frankly, many of these issues are too complex to be well treated in fora like radio, TV or bus ads. But Geller certainly has a right to pay for ads and have them posted if Muni also posts ads discouraging abortion or promoting various other religious groups & ideas…

    • Maya Bohnhoff

      “Holy Sharia” doesn’t call for honor killings. Honor killings were a facet of Arab life BEFORE the advent of Muhammad. He, in fact, gave women among the tribes human rights where before they had none. He reminded his male followers repeatedly that they must revere women and be their partners and friends. He also repeatedly said that women were equal in the sight of God to men. These things are recorded in the Qur’an. But just as many Christians have forgotten (as the new Pope pointed out in a speech last year) that Jesus befriended lepers and prostitutes, many Muslims have forgotten the principles of the faith they profess and replaced them with human doctrine or ancient tradition.

      Also, there is no prescription for “Sharia law”. It’s what any interpreter of Qur’an and tradition makes it.

      • mdfine

        Thank you for your response.I agree that honor killing is an Arab custom. Although not positively commanded by the Quran, honor killing is both justified and tolerated by the following Quranic verses among others:.

        Surah 18, Al-Kahf (The Cave), verses 66 – 84, mention that a boy was killed because he was about to bring his parents grief and dishonour through his unbelief. Muslim commentators are not in agreement whether the servant of Allah who murdered the boy was an angel or a prophet. The important fact is that Allah wanted him to be dead because the boy would bring future dishonour to them.

        According to Surah 24, An-Nur, (Light) verse 2, the punishment for adultery is 100 stripes, contrary to hadiths found in Sahih Bukhari, 2.413, 8.805, 814, and 819, where it is stoning to death. Islam prescribes that the family should refer to the law, rather than carrying out their own punishment.

        Surah 4, An-Nisā’ (The Women), verses 34-35 state that men are in charge of women, being their protectors and maintainers. What happens if they fail in their duty to keep them out of harm’s way or women are simply unwilling to reconcile? The pressure of the Muslim community is on men to control the wives and daughters entrusted to them. In order to keep the honour of the family, be it for cultural or religious reasons, the strain could become so great that murder seems to be the only answer.

        Surah 3, Al-i-‘Imran verse 110 proclaims, “You are the best nation produced [as an example] for mankind. You enjoin what is right and forbid what is wrong and believe in Allah….” (Sahih International Translation)

        Traditionally, this verse has been understood to be addressed to Muslims and Arabs. “Anyone who becomes a Muslim becomes an Arab.”4 There is no distinction between Islam and culture. Islam is the culture of the Arabs. Anything a Muslim traditionally does in his culture is inherent to Islam, whether or not it is in the Qur’an.

        Muslims aim to follow their Arab prophet in the way he dressed, kept his beard, ate, dealt with his enemies towards the end of his life,5 etc. There are many beautiful aspects in Arabic culture that are indeed worthy of copying, such as poetry, proverbs and wisdom, humour, intuition, romance, hospitality, loyalty and courage. However, as with all cultures, some aspects are bad, such as superstition, disunity, pride, temper, carelessness, lack of organisation, resistance to authority, pessimism and revenge. Blood revenge still exists in Arab villages. Revenge killings are common among Arab families and tribes. Take for example the animosity between Shi’a and Sunni Muslims that still exists today. It can to a great extent be traced back to their violent ways of determining a successor for their common prophet of Islam.6 Since to be a Muslim is to be an Arab it is quite possible to justify honour killings in that way by labeling them as part of the Islamic system.

        A hadith used by some Muslims who follow the Shafi school of Islamic law within Sunni Islam justifies female genital mutilation to reduce their sexual drive. It is hoped that this practice would help to protect women from an otherwise increased risk of losing the honour of their families.7

        Narrated Umm Atiyyah al-Ansariyyah: A woman used to perform circumcision in Medina. The Prophet … said to her: Do not cut severely as that is better for a woman and more desirable for a husband.8

    • EUCLID1

      well said.

  • Chris OConnell

    Sam Harris makes many of the same points that Geller does about Islam. But he does it calmly, with logic, and not seething with what can only be called hate. He is not holier than thou, partial to other religions, or aiming to cement a clash of civilizations.

    • thucy

      Brilliant point, thanks. I’d been wondering about that.

  • $23331171

    What is wrong with you “fracking” Liberals that feel compelled to defend all of the atrocities of Islam?
    I know, I know, Muslimes hate Christians. . . Therefore, they must be good!
    However, they hate YOU even more. Trust history (you have to learn it first): The enemy of your enemy in NOT your friend!

    • chrisnfolsom

      Do you have to hate your enemy? I know if your enemy knows you hate them it makes it harder to deal with them. Remember Matthew 5:44 “But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you” What is it with you “conservative” Christians that hate at all? Are conservatives the only Christians – not – there are many “liberal” Christians – you cold argue Christ was liberal if you read his book…. Is WWJD just lip service to make you feel good?

      I was willing to tolerate conservative Christians until recently when to defend interpretations of the Bible you undermine science and common sense – yes Interpretations as in reality if it wasn’t an interpretations then there would not be different versions of the Bible and different versions of Christians to argue against each other – and you want me to suspend my belief in what I see and what makes sense for people who praise Christ and his teachings but believe in the death penalty, casting the first stone, talking snakes and justifying acquiring wealth beyond need at the expense of others???? What a load of cr_p.

      History?? What the one that only goes back 6000 years? You confuse backing Muslims as humans – and wanting to treating them as such – as not holding them accountable – I sure as hell do, as I do every culture and religion as I learn about them. There are serious problems we have to deal with politically and spewing hatred and ignorance is not the way to negotiation. Your conservative rhetoric, stances and non-negotiating tactics have gridlocked our American government (hopefully not for long) and I sure as hell don’t want your tactics to be used internationally. I am a liberal and have been when I was Christian and now that I believe in the teachings and story’s of the Bible, but not the teaching of “The Church” of hate, polarization, ignorance, self-righteousness. God bless you.

      • $23331171

        I have no clue on where you got the Idea that I am a “conservative Christian”. In fact, I am an agnostic and a Libertarian.
        With all your rhetoric, , . You still refuse to acknowledge the real danger that Islam represents to modern civilization: Saudi Arabia (our “friends”) still beheads, mutilates, stones and crucifies people! (You can Google it yourself).
        I don’t know if God created the Earth 6,000 year ago or if it was a fart from a slug in the 5th dimension 16 billion years ago. . . And, neither do you; and not even Stephen Hawking!
        All we have is theories. . .
        There is an inescapable fact: Islam is a cancer that is feed by Liberals; and will not stop unless stopped!
        Washington DC will not do it because they are wholly owned by the Saudis.
        All you are doing, is feeding the shark, in the hope that it will eat YOU last!

        • Andrew

          Islam – like all forms of authoritarian theism – is a symptom of the twin pathologies of credulity and unreason. As a self-identified Libertarian and student of history, I’m sure you’ve diagnosed this same sickness in other times and places – and with other religions.

          • $23331171

            Other religions have adapted to modern times and for the most part have given up on the Idea of ruling over their countries: The Pope, for example, with all his hoop- la-la, is content to weave from his balcony while wearing a fancy hat. . . As far as I can tell, he hasn’t burned any witches at the stake for some time.
            Islam, on the contrary, seem to have as their goal to rule the entire world in 6th century fashion. . . And, have no problem beheading all who get in their way.

        • chrisnfolsom

          Sorry as your argument I think can easily be taken as that of a conservative Christian – you have to make assumptions in life…. Yes Muslim affiliated individuals have commuted atrocities, as have others and THOSE are the targets. If they are so vile then why do we do business with them and enable them, sell the extremists the tools to do what they do – those enablers are also to blame, and they to a certain extent are us.

          • $23331171

            The answer is on my previous post: The Saudis (our “friends”), the most repressive government on earth, has bought and paid for most if not all our politicians.
            We shouldn’t even have diplomatic relations with them. Instead, we keep on going to war to protect them and drive up the price of oil to enrich them at the expense of the American People..
            The simple truth is that Washington DC is a foreign enemy on our soil.

    • Maya Bohnhoff

      Muslims don’t, as a rule, hate Christians. Muhammad referred to Christians as the brothers and sisters of Muslims. They and the Jews were the People of the Book and Islam a continuation of the previous faiths. The Qur’an is full of praise of Jesus Christ (whom Muhammad calls Ruhu’llah—the Spirit of God).

      Islam has committed no atrocities. Neither has Christianity nor Judaism. Nor any other faith. Atrocities are committed by people for a variety of reasons they are quick to justify.

      • $23331171

        You are a pathetic Dhimmi. Just this week, our “friends” the Saudis beheaded 7 men. Saudi Arabia still mutilates, stones and crucifies. . . If that is not an atrocity, you are beyond help.
        Outlaw Islam – Nuke mecca!

      • Andrew

        Wow, what an incredibly facile denial of the long history of atrocities committed by followers of *Islam, Christianity, AND Judaism*

        For millennia, acts of both violence and love have been perpetrated by believers of all denominations, with *explicit reference* to their religious motivations. This is a testament not to the intrinsic evil or good of the religions, but to their absolute incoherence, from which anything might be rationally justified.

        • notosharia

          You didn’t listen to Pam enough. Christians and Jews do not commit jihad now. The savages of jihad do.

    • notosharia

      Michael Savage said it long ago–LIBERALISM IS A MENTAL
      DISORDER. Liberals confirm this (sadly) on a daily basis. They are the prey that the jihad of islam is about.

  • Andrew

    The Qur’an – like the New and Old Testaments – is not a logically or semantically consistent text: it’s a collection of ancient myths and parables, subject to the historical contingencies of translation, revision, and reinterpretation (both conscious and accidental). You can justify *quite literally anything* from such unbounded, incoherent documents. The truth is that Islam, along with its Abrahamic sister religions, has over the course of its long history served as the motive for both appalling cruelty and extraordinary humanity.

    For Ms. Geller to insinuate that Islam is uniquely or inherently violent or political is an ahistorical piece of propaganda; to claim, as Prof. Ghannam does, that the horrible atrocities committed by the current historical instantiation of radical Islam are somehow mitigated by press releases and lukewarm disavowals, is a trivialization of those atrocities.

    In short: this issue is too complex and too important to be debated by idiots.

    • Maya Bohnhoff

      The Qur’an, like the Old and New Testaments is more than just a collection of myths. The stories are there, certainly—myth or metaphor or interpretation of real events. But each of the texts—notably the Gospels and many Surihs of the Qur’an—are prescriptive in nature and, yes, they are coherent. And in that coherence lies their appeal to our humanity. It takes an act of willful disobedience and rationalization to use the prescriptive words of either Christ or Muhammad to motivate the sort of atrocities recorded in the histories of both faiths.

      I agree with your assessment of Ms. Geller’s insinuations, but the disavowals I’ve seen and heard from Muslim groups have not been lukewarm. They are, however, not the sort of thing that sells ad space or newspapers. Conflict is “sexy”; peaceful statements of solidarity and good will, not so much. When, right after 9/11, a group of about 5000 Muslim clerics held a peace conference in New York denouncing the violence and calling for solidarity, the only major news organ that covered it was the BBC.

      • Peter

        The koran peaceful? What are you talking about?! As far as I remember the koran is everything but peaceful. Read “The End of Faith” — this book quotes very extensively from the koran and shows that it is everything but peaceful. The problem is, that there is no way around this book — the koran is gods word and thus god wants Muslims to make war against unbelievers.

      • aa aa

        Many words attributed to Muhammad in the hadith do condone atrocities. The Quran condones killing & fighting “unbelievers” for religious reasons. It is quite easy to see how this would lead to violence against non-Muslim societies, and in fact the Quran & hadith were certainly used to justify militarily attacking non-Muslim states like the Byzantine Empire (634-1453), medieval Spain, & medieval Balkan kingdoms.

  • Mary

    While Ms. Geller is not necessarily the most elegant messenger, I appreciate what she is trying to do — shine a spotlight on the dark, ugly crevices of a religion. Islam is a religion, not a race. It is a set of ideologies that has driven much murder, rape and misery (mostly for Muslims in the Muslim world and especially Muslim women.) Only by shining a harsh light on these bad ideologies can they reform. Why are progressive liberals in SF tip toeing around a religion that would happily see them killed for criticizing the worst aspects of it? Who has murdered Buddhist monks in Thailand? Who razes Christian villages to the ground when there’s a rumor of blasphemy? Who will you have to hide from if you draw an insulting cartoon of a “prophet” who raided and murdered people and had a 9-year old girl as a wife? Any religion who holds this Muhammed as its moral exemplar and resists any criticism of him must be scrutinized, not enveloped in piteous liberal sympathies.

  • CoffeyC

    I’m sorry, but this is exactly what is wrong with this country. Our officials, as demonstrated in Mr. Chiu, are absolutely clueless. What is shocking is, that this level of denial can only be accomplished by several factors in concert. The firmly held belief that political correctness or political viewpoints not only dictate political strategies, but also determines facts in the world at large is key. This must be accompanied by a breathtaking ignorance of what this religion actually teaches, and… the ability to cleave to self deception on a level that allows ignoring every news story published on the subject. I wish I could say it’s shocking, but it’s clearly the uniform of the day.

    The CAIR/muslim brotherhood backed MyJihad adds are undoubtedly correct in that Jihad has always included the inner struggles of believers; but, that does not abrogate Fourteen hundred years that include violent and brutal expansion of Islam through Jihad, whenever the Muslims in question had the physical capability to do so. (All four Sunni schools, and the single Shiite, teach Jihad as a violent struggle against unbelievers to spread the control of islam.) Nor does it change the fact that their adds are part of a carefully orchestrated agenda that is antithetical to our fundamental beliefs in personal liberty, religious freedom, and equality of all peoples before the law.

    Chiu has built a whole field of straw men. Ms Gellers adds are unpleasant to have to face, but they are not anti-Arab; They are not bigotry; They are not racism; and, they are most certainly not ‘hate speech.’ They merely repeat the accurate an verified statements of those who are trying to destroy our civilization, and kill our citizens. If this “community leader” can tout that to actually stand up those very failings in islam, is to be bigoted and racist, he has failed at morality, rationality, citizenship, and worst of all – reality.

    America is a great nation, and represents a great people. Not perfect, indeed far from it; but, Mr Chiu is representative of same isolationist / German-American Bunde groups prior to the great struggle against political fascism. If we do not confront this problem if religious fascism before it becomes an open clash of, civilizations between the west and the religion of peace, the result may be as tragic in human consequence and as prolonged as any violent struggle in history. We must show all good muslim peoples, and those modernist elements within Islam, that they will have our support in reforming islam to something suitable for the 21st century, and, that those whom they must face, those who cleave to Islam’s Seventh Century warlord morality, and canonized racial bigotry, will not be given free reign to institute their continually stated goal of destroying our culture, our country, and our laws.

    Always remember. Sharia has different definitions for blasphemy, libel, and slander than western common law does. In sharia the truthfulness of statements are irrelevant, and such distinctions are made wholly on the judgment that a statement is embarrassing for Islam or muslims. The sooner western culture realizes that you cannot appease political or religious tyrants, the less damaging and costly this struggle will be. Branding our right to free speech, a right that was expressly designed to counter that type of tyranny, is the stupidest thing we could possibly do.

    Chiu and his ilk are dangerous, self-destructive, fools, and if we are not careful, they will take all of us down with them. Our western insistence for the protection of minority rights does not extend so far as to allowing the destruction of our laws and culture, but only enlightened and aware citizens can prevent it. It has never been, by doctrine or practice, a protection regarded very highly in any Islamic Regime. .

    • notosharia

      Bravo,bravo! So well said. Loved reading such COMMON SENSE! This is what our culture is about!

  • aa aa

    The public funding issues should have been better clarified. It doesn’t make sense that a publicly funded transit agency takes money from a group to post their ads, and then wants to use taxpayer money to counter those ads with some sort of “sensitivity” workshops. (Crazy waste of public money: sort of like when US government used to subsidize its tobacco farmers & then spend money on ads telling us how unhealthy tobacco is). Also, the “sensitivity” training would require public funds to be used to promote a particular interpretation of a religion or a religious concept (jihad) which could be a First Amendment violation on many grounds.

    If SF council members are so offended by the ads that they want to use Muni funds to counter the message, don’t take the money in the first place. Ah, but since they have been taking money from other religious groups to post more “positive” ads for years (witness all the ads telling unhappily pregnant women to “choose life”, etc.) they have to take these ads too. For it is indeed not acceptable from a First Amendment point of view to only accept ads with a “positive” message,but not one with a message about a religious concept (jihad) the SF government finds negative or offensive,

  • Peter

    nobody dare to talk about the holocaust since this would be hate speech against the germans!!!!

  • I find interesting the affinity between the Left in America and other Western countries and radical Islam. On matters of sexual morality on which the Left attacks Christianity, most of Islam and especially radical Islam is far worse from the Left’s perspective.

    • Chris OConnell

      It sounds like you don’t really know anything about the Left and Islam but it sounds like you have equal disdain for adherents to both groups.

  • What is not surprising is the Left ignores or downplays the threat to America posed by radical Islam. The Left did the same with the threat posed by the Soviet Union and other communist controlled countries around the world.

  • created4el

    LOL! Pamela Geller is so powerful she hijacked the term “jihad”. That is hilarious! It seems to me the Muslim speaker’s sole purpose was to call Ms. Geller names. It seems to me if CAIR focused their effort on the “few” bad apples that also apparently highjacked (how many hijackers hijacked Islam anyway?) the religion then maybe they wouldn’t need to spend so much energy telling everybody what Islam isn’t when what CAIR says seems to contradict the overall narrative of the religion. The Muslim speaker says the Muslim community speaks out against the violence… but again it seems to me that if so few can create such a big stink that opposes mainstream Islam then the majority ought to speak out in equal force. For example, the attack on our embassy… where were the majority Muslims denouncing the attack? I mean if you want to protest then do so with picket signs but to go and kill people? Where is the protests at the embassies when Muslim leaders spew intolerance and hate or the call to put sharia over all governments? Where is the protests against groups like Boko Haran who go around killing indiscriminately? Or the recent attacks in Bangladesh against Hindus by Muslims or attacks in India against Christians by Muslim? Where is the Muslim outcry?

  • Peter

    According to Pat Condell, people which call others islamophobic are in fact racists, as they apply different standards to (in this case) Muslims and western people. They are patronizing Muslims.

  • sparrowhawk58

    You may not like Ms. Geller’s style, but she is one of the few people brave enough to stand up for human rights OF MUSLIMS. She draws a distinction between practicing Muslims in general and jihadists who intimidate and bully them. Right now, the Saudis are poised to execute a young man–by CRUCIFIXION–for his involvement in a robbery, That’s shariah, he’s a Muslim, he’s the victim. How is standing against such atrocities wrong? And why are so few media outlets carrying the AP-sourced crucifixion story? I guess that would be considered “divisive.”

  • livingengine

    Pamela Geller vs. the SPLC

  • A.H

    I am a former Marin and Alameda counties resident, now living in Belgium where we have a very serious Islamic problem.

    I just listened to this episode and must comment: Ms. Geller, you are an inflammatory racist pinhead. Just listening to your invective made my skin crawl. What you’re doing is just as racist as what you think the Islamics are up to. Yes, they may have done some evil things [9/11 for example] but Christians are just as bad [the Crusades]. All you’re doing is fomenting hatred and intolerance.

    During the broadcast, you were incredibly rude and intolerant yourself; you used the typical “if I shout more loudly and interupt more often, I’ll be the winner” method of shutting down discourse. That is a typical holier-than-thou, loud-mouthed New Yorker braggart attitude [sorry to NYers. Most of you are just peachy]. My family is from the NJ/NY area and I’m used to the stand on your discussion crap but you take it to a whole other level.

    You do not belong in the public eye so get lost, leave the country, go somewhere where you cannot cause further problems. Simply put, you are a hate-monger.

    • aa aa

      Saying that the so-called “Crusades” are just as bad as the aggressive conquests that precipitated them: the Turkish Muslim conquest of Anatolia & Northern Syria 1050-1095 and Arab Muslim conquest of the Levant, North Africa & southern Europe (634-1085) is like saying that Amerindian attempts at reconquering their lands were just as bad Europeans’ conquests of their lands in the first place.. A modest reconquest of a fraction of land previously taken from a group is certainly not as bad as the unprovoked aggression. that precipitates the modest reconquest.

  • Ridwan Sheikh

    It works both ways! No one is putting bus ads claiming, Judaism is a religion of violence when Israel subjects the Palestinians to its brutality on the lives of people who just want to get on with their lives, just like everybody else. There’s a big, big difference between freedom of speech and inciting hatred on a people, whatever their faith. The U.K realise this, why can’t the U.S govt see that!

    • A.H

      Because people have become very adept at hiding behind our Constitutional ‘rights’. Freedom of speech does not mean freedom to be a hate-spewing citizen; there are limits to all our freedoms. I’m not free to kill animals if I feel like doing it. I’m not free to express my personal viewpoints if they conflict with societal norms. We have responsibility within our freedoms: to know when we can and when we SHOULD NOT show our personal viewpoints. A.H

  • It’s a pity that the person who agreed to oppose Ms. Geller appeared blown away by her vitriol and was unable (?) to refute her points. I can think of many people who could have done this; what happened here is that she “won” (at least, according to the Atlas Shrugged cadre). One could no doubt create ads with Israelis wishing death to Arabs as counter-posts, but what would be the point? Hate + hate = hate squared (bad math but I hope you get my point). Here’s a case for you: http://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/may-all-arabs-die-israelis-facebook-express-joy-jordan-bus-crash-killed?utm_source=EI+readers&utm_campaign=16cf2c5e42-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email
    Judith Berlowitz

  • G-Man

    This the first time I had ever heard of Ms. Geller and of her cause and causes although I have long held the opinion that a Jihad is well underway and has made significant advances against Western society.
    There is enormous pressure from secular society to further separate church from state particularly when it comes removing laws and references to Christian faiths. With Islam it seems that the opposite applies. The success of the secularist movement seems to have to do with the enormous force both financial forces of atheistic groups and the concerted effort of those working discredit Christianity by bringing attention to the illegal and immoral actions of a percentage of those who call themselves Christians.
    Secondly Christians themselves are appearing to buckle under the weight of these initiatives due to a cohesion that Christianity has never had. When the present state of Christian apathy is added to the equation it would seem that a new era of Christianity is unlikely.
    Islam, as a movement has not faced any of these problems and are in fact gaining some of their strength from guilty white, left-wing apologists who seem to be opening the door and laying down for forces like but not limited to Islam.
    Wake up everybody – before it’s too late.

    • chrisnfolsom

      Wow, another appeal for the poor oppressed “Christians”. Please get over it. You had your chance and took over the Republican party and while espousing freedom tried to take mine away – especially when it came to believing in reason and science. I am fed up, and as long as you jeapardize my future and the future of this nation by attacking science and reason to justify the 2000+ year old stories in your books, and the current obserd interpretations of those books I and many others will lump you in with all the other extremists – sorry. What the religiose right has done to our country over the last 25 years is more of a threat than the radical muslims – there are issues of course, but fighting extremes with extremes gets you no where – look at our government currently.

      • G-Man

        Where in my posting did you see an appeal for Christianity?

        Remember, the pendulum swings in both directions. Where it is in its arc is hard to say but one thing is for sure is that it will swing back to the right..it’s physics and it’s politics and it’s power.

        • chrisnfolsom

          Sorry, didnt mean to insult/insinuate – reading too many posts… yes, pendulums and bell curves of possibilities… things can stunt the swing from time to time and at times the entire pendulum can be pushed one direction or the other – this I hope.

          • G-Man

            No insult taken. I was curious though about your interpretation of my post.

          • G-Man

            As for the pendulum all it might take is for an influential, informed and intelligent right wing leader to emerge.

      • aa aa

        “What the religios right has done to our country over the last 25 years is more of a threat than the radical muslims -” . Non-Christians are far better off here, even with the “religious right,” than non-Muslims are in any self-styled Muslim state, (including so-called “moderate” ones like Indonesia or Turkey) let alone those like Saudi or Iran that are run by “radical Muslims.” Your false equivalence is itself extremist.

        • So what you are saying is that different religions are better off here than in Muslim countries? Was that an argument? My reference to the “religious right” was in using their religious beliefs to affect public policy. The Baptist church was FOR Roe v. Wade as it on principle showed a separation of church and state and if the Government could tell a woman what to do in her own personal body it could perhaps tell a church what to do at some point. Well, we all know that the church has changed it’s tune on this and the joke is on them as it was the republican party that decided to split the democrats on religion – all those Catholics and other Christians who for generations voted Democrat as proud Union members were now forced to pick between their church and their wallet. And when it came to other issues – you don’t like science and what it says – write your own books “create” your own history and (comically) you own museums. NONE of this would have happened without the push of the “religious right” to push their agenda on others – just as the “Muslim right” has been trying to do in their countries. Freedom “my way” is not freedom at all – If the Religious Right wants to stick to the beliefs of 2000 years ago and force those on others then you won’t have to worry about liberals and gun control, you will have to worry about liberals with guns defending their right think and believe the way they want – yeah, a little over the top…. 😉

Sponsored by

Become a KQED sponsor