Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:Pam Geller's determination to spread hate has just cost METRO millions of dollars. In response to Geller's desire to run ads displaying a cartoon of Muhammad, METRO has decided to stop accepting issue ads for the rest of the year. METRO is not allowed to pick and choose among issue ads, so it had to accept Geller's ad it reject all issue ads.

Pam Gelled did not make the decision to forego potential ad revenue.

The metro board made that decision. Funny, they had apparent qualms about the anti-Israel/anti-Semitic ads they have accepted and displayed for years.

The Metro Board has previously accepted anti-Islamic and anti-Arab ads as well. But, as was recognized by the New York Times:

"Pamela Geller, the anti-Islam campaigner behind the Texas event, has a long history of declarations and actions motivated purely by hatred for Muslims."

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/07/opinion/free-speech-vs-hate-speech.html

Also, I challenge you to demonstrate that an anti-Semitic poster has been accepted even a single time by Metro, let alone "for years".

I think that Metro probably has a legal ground to pick and chose among issue ads and reject those that are hate speech or risk provoking attacks. But there would surely be a legal battle over this, so rejecting all issue ads is probably the right move. Hopefully other advertisers will step up to fill the gap.

People keep pretending there is a "hate speech" exemption from the First Amendment. No matter how many times people say that, it is simply not true.

If hate speech amounts to harassment or discrimination in a place or service of public accommodation, then the First Amendment permits restrictions.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:Pam Geller's determination to spread hate has just cost METRO millions of dollars. In response to Geller's desire to run ads displaying a cartoon of Muhammad, METRO has decided to stop accepting issue ads for the rest of the year. METRO is not allowed to pick and choose among issue ads, so it had to accept Geller's ad it reject all issue ads.

Pam Gelled did not make the decision to forego potential ad revenue.

The metro board made that decision. Funny, they had apparent qualms about the anti-Israel/anti-Semitic ads they have accepted and displayed for years.

The Metro Board has previously accepted anti-Islamic and anti-Arab ads as well. But, as was recognized by the New York Times:

"Pamela Geller, the anti-Islam campaigner behind the Texas event, has a long history of declarations and actions motivated purely by hatred for Muslims."

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/07/opinion/free-speech-vs-hate-speech.html

Also, I challenge you to demonstrate that an anti-Semitic poster has been accepted even a single time by Metro, let alone "for years".

I think that Metro probably has a legal ground to pick and chose among issue ads and reject those that are hate speech or risk provoking attacks. But there would surely be a legal battle over this, so rejecting all issue ads is probably the right move. Hopefully other advertisers will step up to fill the gap.

People keep pretending there is a "hate speech" exemption from the First Amendment. No matter how many times people say that, it is simply not true.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:Pam Geller's determination to spread hate has just cost METRO millions of dollars. In response to Geller's desire to run ads displaying a cartoon of Muhammad, METRO has decided to stop accepting issue ads for the rest of the year. METRO is not allowed to pick and choose among issue ads, so it had to accept Geller's ad it reject all issue ads.

Pam Gelled did not make the decision to forego potential ad revenue.

The metro board made that decision. Funny, they had apparent qualms about the anti-Israel/anti-Semitic ads they have accepted and displayed for years.

The Metro Board has previously accepted anti-Islamic and anti-Arab ads as well. But, as was recognized by the New York Times:

"Pamela Geller, the anti-Islam campaigner behind the Texas event, has a long history of declarations and actions motivated purely by hatred for Muslims."

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/07/opinion/free-speech-vs-hate-speech.html

Also, I challenge you to demonstrate that an anti-Semitic poster has been accepted even a single time by Metro, let alone "for years".

I think that Metro probably has a legal ground to pick and chose among issue ads and reject those that are hate speech or risk provoking attacks. But there would surely be a legal battle over this, so rejecting all issue ads is probably the right move. Hopefully other advertisers will step up to fill the gap.

People keep pretending there is a "hate speech" exemption from the First Amendment. No matter how many times people say that, it is simply not true.

Yea, people say that about as many times as they say the First Amendment applies to private companies and organizations. Also simply not true.

Sincere question - is WMATA the "Congress" or "Government" for First Amendment purposes?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:Pam Geller's determination to spread hate has just cost METRO millions of dollars. In response to Geller's desire to run ads displaying a cartoon of Muhammad, METRO has decided to stop accepting issue ads for the rest of the year. METRO is not allowed to pick and choose among issue ads, so it had to accept Geller's ad it reject all issue ads.

Pam Gelled did not make the decision to forego potential ad revenue.

The metro board made that decision. Funny, they had apparent qualms about the anti-Israel/anti-Semitic ads they have accepted and displayed for years.

The Metro Board has previously accepted anti-Islamic and anti-Arab ads as well. But, as was recognized by the New York Times:

"Pamela Geller, the anti-Islam campaigner behind the Texas event, has a long history of declarations and actions motivated purely by hatred for Muslims."

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/07/opinion/free-speech-vs-hate-speech.html

Also, I challenge you to demonstrate that an anti-Semitic poster has been accepted even a single time by Metro, let alone "for years".

I think that Metro probably has a legal ground to pick and chose among issue ads and reject those that are hate speech or risk provoking attacks. But there would surely be a legal battle over this, so rejecting all issue ads is probably the right move. Hopefully other advertisers will step up to fill the gap.

People keep pretending there is a "hate speech" exemption from the First Amendment. No matter how many times people say that, it is simply not true.

Yea, people say that about as many times as they say the First Amendment applies to private companies and organizations. Also simply not true.

Sincere question - is WMATA the "Congress" or "Government" for First Amendment purposes?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:Pam Geller's determination to spread hate has just cost METRO millions of dollars. In response to Geller's desire to run ads displaying a cartoon of Muhammad, METRO has decided to stop accepting issue ads for the rest of the year. METRO is not allowed to pick and choose among issue ads, so it had to accept Geller's ad it reject all issue ads.

Pam Gelled did not make the decision to forego potential ad revenue.

The metro board made that decision. Funny, they had apparent qualms about the anti-Israel/anti-Semitic ads they have accepted and displayed for years.

The Metro Board has previously accepted anti-Islamic and anti-Arab ads as well. But, as was recognized by the New York Times:

"Pamela Geller, the anti-Islam campaigner behind the Texas event, has a long history of declarations and actions motivated purely by hatred for Muslims."

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/07/opinion/free-speech-vs-hate-speech.html

Also, I challenge you to demonstrate that an anti-Semitic poster has been accepted even a single time by Metro, let alone "for years".

I think that Metro probably has a legal ground to pick and chose among issue ads and reject those that are hate speech or risk provoking attacks. But there would surely be a legal battle over this, so rejecting all issue ads is probably the right move. Hopefully other advertisers will step up to fill the gap.

People keep pretending there is a "hate speech" exemption from the First Amendment. No matter how many times people say that, it is simply not true.

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:Pam Geller's determination to spread hate has just cost METRO millions of dollars. In response to Geller's desire to run ads displaying a cartoon of Muhammad, METRO has decided to stop accepting issue ads for the rest of the year. METRO is not allowed to pick and choose among issue ads, so it had to accept Geller's ad it reject all issue ads.

Pam Gelled did not make the decision to forego potential ad revenue.

The metro board made that decision. Funny, they had apparent qualms about the anti-Israel/anti-Semitic ads they have accepted and displayed for years.

The Metro Board has previously accepted anti-Islamic and anti-Arab ads as well. But, as was recognized by the New York Times:

"Pamela Geller, the anti-Islam campaigner behind the Texas event, has a long history of declarations and actions motivated purely by hatred for Muslims."

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/07/opinion/free-speech-vs-hate-speech.html

Also, I challenge you to demonstrate that an anti-Semitic poster has been accepted even a single time by Metro, let alone "for years".

I think that Metro probably has a legal ground to pick and chose among issue ads and reject those that are hate speech or risk provoking attacks. But there would surely be a legal battle over this, so rejecting all issue ads is probably the right move. Hopefully other advertisers will step up to fill the gap.

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:Pam Geller's determination to spread hate has just cost METRO millions of dollars. In response to Geller's desire to run ads displaying a cartoon of Muhammad, METRO has decided to stop accepting issue ads for the rest of the year. METRO is not allowed to pick and choose among issue ads, so it had to accept Geller's ad it reject all issue ads.

Pam Gelled did not make the decision to forego potential ad revenue.

The metro board made that decision. Funny, they had apparent qualms about the anti-Israel/anti-Semitic ads they have accepted and displayed for years.

The Metro Board has previously accepted anti-Islamic and anti-Arab ads as well. But, as was recognized by the New York Times:

"Pamela Geller, the anti-Islam campaigner behind the Texas event, has a long history of declarations and actions motivated purely by hatred for Muslims."

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/07/opinion/free-speech-vs-hate-speech.html

Also, I challenge you to demonstrate that an anti-Semitic poster has been accepted even a single time by Metro, let alone "for years".

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think if Gellar is that invested in free speech, she should put billboards, placards, etc. with her hate messages on her home, car, kids' backpacks, etc.

She has put her life on the line many times, and she is certainly a target now. She is a brave and courageous woman and we need more people like her.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Funny that it took Pam Gellar to finally get Metro to drop all of those anti-Israeli ads it was happily posting all around.

I'm not a fan of an outsider who tried to make millions of commuters into a symbolic target in order to prove a point.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Muslima wrote:You don't get it , do you? The bikers are planning an ARMED protest. Armed men/women want to show up to terrorize worshippers at a mosque, and that is okay with you? If a group of Muslims stood outside a church with guns at Sunday service, the whole world would go nuts!

If they don't pull their weapons, it's fine with me. I can see, given what happened in Paris, and what happened in TX recently, why they would want to be sure they are armed. If they are in their legal rights to carry, they are within their legal rights. If they start shooting without physical provocation, then I will take issue.

Really? So you'll only take issue with this once they start shooting. I'm sure worshipers of any persuasion find that very reassuring. There is really something wrong with you people.

Yes. Reason-being is because the Muslim community has put death threats out there towards people who draw Mohammed. And tried to carry out that threat in TX, and DID carry out that threat in Paris. The bikers are well-within their legal rights to stage the protest, as well as to carry weapons, and feel it prudent to do the latter. If that intimidates some in the Muslim community who have radical tendencies, that's a good thing. I would think that decent Muslim individuals who don't support terror from their communities would want the radicals suppressed as well.

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:Pam Geller's determination to spread hate has just cost METRO millions of dollars. In response to Geller's desire to run ads displaying a cartoon of Muhammad, METRO has decided to stop accepting issue ads for the rest of the year. METRO is not allowed to pick and choose among issue ads, so it had to accept Geller's ad it reject all issue ads.

Pam Gelled did not make the decision to forego potential ad revenue.

The metro board made that decision. Funny, they had apparent qualms about the anti-Israel/anti-Semitic ads they have accepted and displayed for years.

The Metro Board has previously accepted anti-Islamic and anti-Arab ads as well. But, as was recognized by the New York Times:

"Pamela Geller, the anti-Islam campaigner behind the Texas event, has a long history of declarations and actions motivated purely by hatred for Muslims."

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/07/opinion/free-speech-vs-hate-speech.html

Also, I challenge you to demonstrate that an anti-Semitic poster has been accepted even a single time by Metro, let alone "for years".

Anonymous wrote:

Muslima wrote:You don't get it , do you? The bikers are planning an ARMED protest. Armed men/women want to show up to terrorize worshippers at a mosque, and that is okay with you? If a group of Muslims stood outside a church with guns at Sunday service, the whole world would go nuts!

No Muslima, we all get it. It is you who clearly does not get it.

It is highly offensive to my personal beliefs when someone burns a bible. Or an American flag. Or uses NEA funds as payment for creating a so called "art piece" named "Piss Christ."

But I support those people's RIGHT to express themselves because that is among our common American values and laws as originally set out in the BOR and constitution. In fact, I'd gladly die fighting to protect those rights as would everyone who has served our great country; I've taken an oath to uphold and protect those rights.

See here is what you don't get Muslima - we value religios tolerance in America and our tolerance is more important than your stupid religion and false prophet.

We've practiced religious tolerance in America since before there was a U.S. So if your mosque decides to hold a bible burning, then it's appropriate for me and every loyal American, to protect your right to do so, even if it means that I or the police need to stand outside with guns; ready to defend you from law breakers.

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:Pam Geller's determination to spread hate has just cost METRO millions of dollars. In response to Geller's desire to run ads displaying a cartoon of Muhammad, METRO has decided to stop accepting issue ads for the rest of the year. METRO is not allowed to pick and choose among issue ads, so it had to accept Geller's ad it reject all issue ads.

Pam Gelled did not make the decision to forego potential ad revenue.

The metro board made that decision. Funny, they had apparent qualms about the anti-Israel/anti-Semitic ads they have accepted and displayed for years.