No images of Prophet Muhammad — or any issue ads — will run on D.C. transit

Jun 1, 2015

by Reuters

The Washington D.C. transit system on Thursday suspended all “issue-oriented” advertising after being asked to run a subway ad featuring a cartoon depiction of the Prophet Mohammad.

The ban, approved unanimously by the board of directors of the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, prohibits political, religious and advocacy ads through the end of the year, a spokesman said.

The transit system had been asked by the American Freedom Defense Initiative to display the cartoon that won first prize at an event in Texas this month at which two gunmen opened fire near the venue and wounded a security guard before they were shot and killed by police.

The ad, which calls for Americans to support free speech, features a bearded, turban-wearing Muhammad waving a sword and shouting: “You can’t draw me!”


Read the full article by clicking the name of the source located below.

83 comments on “No images of Prophet Muhammad — or any issue ads — will run on D.C. transit

  • ” The ad, which calls for Americans to support free speech, features a bearded, turban-wearing Muhammad waving a sword and shouting: “You can’t draw me!” ”

    Toughy. On one hand any art, even art promoted by a raving lunatic ( Geller ) should be able to be displayed anywhere if the coin is paid for such display.

    On the other hand D.C. Transit is responsible for thousands of innocent passengers that this drawing could make targets.

    It behooves muslims to find another way to show displeasure with the drawings of their prophet. One short of violence.



    Report abuse

  • Geller is as bad as the Muslims who decry images of their prophet Mohammed. They are both the same. An excellent example of the fatal flaw in Homo Sapiens. Brilliantly intelligent, but just plain dog @#$% stupid. Both need to get over it. Hence the Red Card. A soccer term meaning you’ve been very bad, and you are both been sent off the playing field until you can behave in a civilized manner.



    Report abuse

  • All I wanted was an explanation of the Red Card.

    But, since you mentioned it.

    Geller is the idiot of all idiots, but I doubt she will be killing anyone anytime soon. Can’t really say that about the other ” team. ”



    Report abuse

  • Geller is the idiot of all idiots, but I doubt she will be killing anyone anytime soon. Can’t really say that about the other ” team. ”

    Could Geller’s team kill Muslims. Given a change in circumstances. Is Geller’s hatred for the muslims any less than the muslims hatred for the cartooners who depict Mohammed. While Geller’s team and the extreme Islamic team’s actions are different, their psyche profiles are almost identical.

    Geller’s Extreme Team. “I hate you arab black alien, muslim foreigners”

    Extreme Islams Team. “I hate you white christian American western foreigners”.

    The problem is extremists. In this case, religious extremists. It’s the extremist that is the problem, not the particular religious brand they adhere to. Christians today, and the the past, do exactly what Islam is doing today, and in the past.

    Try this. Next time your reading a frothing at the mouth bigoted rant against Islam in this forum, or anywhere, trying swapping the word Islam with Christianity. They read the same. Geller’s team and the Islamic team write the same stuff. They are identical. Both are the problem. So instead of people writing vitriol about Islam, write sensible commentary condemning all religious extremists, including some US Presidential candidates.

    Is suspect the gene pool of Homo Sapiens could be greatly improved if Geller’s Team and the Islamic Team could be weeded out of the gene pool.



    Report abuse

  • After the transit authority vote, Geller told The Washington Post, “WMATA has submitted to the assassin’s veto,”

    I would go along with that.



    Report abuse

  • To quote the Eagles, “there’s a new kid in town”.

    I was going to just say, considering the Phoenix anti-Islam rally incident, I agree the subway poster would put passengers in an uncomfortable situation.

    However, just learned that the rally organizer is an atheist (I don’t know why (war trauma?) but it’s moot). So I post this particular link about Jon Ritzheimer because ‘New Atheists’ and RDF are mentioned.

    http://www.thepostsecularist.com/tag/new-atheism/ So much for the idea that “militant atheists” just sit around drinking lattes.



    Report abuse

  • ” Could Geller’s team kill Muslims. Given a change in circumstances. Is Geller’s hatred for the muslims any less than the muslims hatred for the cartooners who depict Mohammed. While Geller’s team and the extreme Islamic team’s actions are different, their psyche profiles are almost identical.

    ” The problem is extremists. ”

    No, that’s not the problem at all. Geller and her like are constrained by the secularization of the West. Westboro Baptist church, The Duggar’s, anti-abortion nutters and all the nutbags that make up religious extremism in the West are and have been corralled.
    No such secular filter is in place in most of the islamic countries, so extremism is the rule more than the exception there.

    Only secularism ( and education ) can mellow extremism.



    Report abuse

  • Geller and her like are constrained by the secularization of the West.

    I understand and agree with you on this about the west. What do you think about Geller’s psychological profile. I’m informed that she is a zionist, but that makes no difference. The brand name of the religion is irrelevant. Is Geller an extremist in her psychology. Does her world view differ from extremist Islam, in all except name. Would Geller, if you she could, impose her will and world view on all of us. Would she do what ISIS is trying to do. She can’t, at the moment, as you point out. But times change and their are plenty of Geller’s, particularly in the United Theocracy of America. Would she do it if she could. That’s my point of comparison with Islamic extremists. Same brain. Different flag.



    Report abuse

  • The brand name of the religion is irrelevant.

    In this case, I would say she is closer to ISIS than the other main religions in that politics is a huge factor in her mindset.

    Her brand of hate for Islam is based not on a god, but on her perceived defense of Israel.



    Report abuse

  • there obviously was not free speech but the traditional religions have been getting away with posting their crap on the sides of everything, for years. this ‘event’ has apparently resulted in no more religious advertising allowed on this transit system…not all wins are pretty but I’ll take it.



    Report abuse

  • I can’t imagine that such a ban would have been implemented if some atheists had decided to post some “God-is-dead” cartoons on the trains. Indeed, atheists have put up posters ridiculing Christian beliefs all over the country.

    The point is, the D.C. Transit authority, and the rest of us, really are afraid of Islamic bigots – not so much of Christian or Jewish bigots. This fear is rational because Islamic bigots have shown time and time again that they are prepared to murder, and die for their bigoted beliefs with far greater frequency and barbarity than Christian and Jewish bigots. This simple fact, based on copious evidence, underscores fundamental differences between Islam and other modern religions. Pointing out this obvious fact is not hate speech, or bigotry, or racism – it is the truth. The question, which is directed towards the worlds’ 1 billion Muslims, is what are you doing to fix this problem ?



    Report abuse

  • Leftist atheists must be the moronic of all social genres.

    Geller is identical to ISIS, in the way she thinks. The world doesn’t need Geller, ISIS, or John, because they all hold extreme views, which means they’re wrong, before they wake up in bed each morning. No extreme view, is ever justified by evidence. BTW. I’m not left wing.



    Report abuse

  • Bill. Do you actually have any argument to rebut my position, that the psychological profile of religious extremists, is identical, world wide, regardless of the brand of religion they adhere to. Not their actions, but the way they come to believe what they do. Have a go Bill. U may surprise yourself. You may end up writing something longer that a Twitter snipe.



    Report abuse

  • Have hundreds of large placards made up featuring the cartoon, and some appropriate wording like “Islam Wants to Kill For This Artwork”. Then organise protest marches through the business districts of major cities. The media will be clamouring to cover the march (hoping for friction of course) and there is no way they’ll be able to blot out the signs.



    Report abuse

  • Nice try Bill. But the question is, “Do all religious extremists think the same way.” And if they do, shouldn’t you also be directly your comments (Vitriol) equally at the US Christian fundamentalists, people like Rand Paul, a person who seeks to have his finger on the button of the worlds largest nuclear arsenal.



    Report abuse

  • “... all hold extreme views, which means they’re wrong.” Illogical.

    No extreme view is ever justified by evidence.” This is absurd. The veracity of an idea is grounded in evidence, regardless of whether it is viewed as “extreme”.

    The notion that “extremism” by definition is evil makes no sense. Just because two groups, Geller and co. and jihadists, are extreme doesn’t make them both evil. What matters is the content of those beliefs, and here there is no contest. Geller likes to poke fun with cartoons, jihadists like to use AK-47s as a ticket to paradise. The false equivalence you try to draw between the likes of Geller, and jihadists only serves to legitimize the latter’s heinous actions.

    Geller is identical to ISIS in the way she thinks“. The fact that Geller and jihadist’s think in the same way is irrelevant. You also appear to have a rather strident conviction in the truth of your words, whether justified or not – does that make you like Geller or a jihadist? Does hatred of bigots get you a free pass to condemn someone else on the basis of your fervently held beliefs?



    Report abuse

  • Hi John, as a leftist atheist myself I don’t entirely agree with your comments, especially the bit about being half Muslim. Contrary to your belief that we are the most moronic of all social genres (personally I think that right-wing evangelicals have that one well and truly in the bag), you will be surprised to learn that many of us, like you apparently, are very supportive of the principles of free speech that Geller is trying to promote.



    Report abuse

  • “… all hold extreme views, which means they’re wrong.” Illogical.

    Explain. Does that mean they’re right. Should I face Mecca when I eat my muesli.

    “No extreme view is ever justified by evidence.” This is absurd.

    Can you give me an example of an “Extreme View” that is true and has supporting evidence. Truth and morality tend to favour the middle of the bell curve.

    The fact that Geller and jihadist’s think in the same way is irrelevant.

    So what was Geller’s motivation. Was it an effort towards reconciliation. Was she “Turning the other cheek.” Was she trying to find common ground near the top of the bell curve to advance the cause of civilized society. Or was she “Hating” the same way ISIS hates. Was she motivated by spite, and anger, and vitriol. Were her motivating emotions the same as ISIS. That’s my point. She is not using civilized evidence based reasoning to improve the world. She is saying “F#$% You.” Which of course gets an identical echo back. Hardly a person worthy of respect. So the fact that Geller thinks the same way, means she deserves equal condemnation as ISIS, or any else who thinks that aggression solves anything.

    Do you equally condemn the American Taliban (See my comments elsewhere) or are the home team favourites above reproach and can do no wrong. There was a saying on my desk calender.

    “It is the privilege of the extremist, never to doubt.”

    It is this refusal to doubt, the hallmark of the irrational mind, that makes extremists of any colour dangerous. The moment you stop doubting. The moment you stop questioning your own motivation and supporting evidence, you condemn yourself to the lethal fringes. So when an extremist wakes up, they are in fact wrong before they get out of bed.

    Give me rational evidence based decision making every time. If you follow evidence, you change your mind frequently. Which is the litmus test. Geller can’t and won’t change her mind. ISIS can’t and won’t change their mind.



    Report abuse

  • 30
    Robert says:

    Geller is as bad as the Muslims who decry images of their prophet
    Mohammed. They are both the same.

    If you really don’t grasp why this is nonsense I wonder if there’s any point in attempting to set you straight.



    Report abuse

  • The point being missed here, and the main reason for Geller & Co’s hatred of Muslims, has little or nothing to do with religion i.e. the demonisation of Muslims for political reasons.

    If Muslims hadn’t had the great misfortune of having oil at their feet and Israel on their doorstep, none of this would be happening. It could just as easily have been Hindus or Buddhists.

    Western insatiable greed is the insidious force behind it and is no friend of ‘free speech’ or freedom of thought..



    Report abuse

  • Why do you say she’s the idiot of all idiots?

    In 2014, Geller posted on her Facebook page that all Palestinians should be exterminated, especially the women because they can produce more “little snakes.”

    This woman is a monumental whack job with a lot of money –there is no way that can be a good combination. Calling her an idiot just conserves syllables.



    Report abuse

  • How would you define religion?

    That’s it Robert. That is your rebuttal of my statement. Sure you don’t want to expand that to a few paragraphs to explain your definition of religion, and how that definition is the accepted universal norm. Then expand your essay to drawn comparisons with your definition of religion and my statement. To illustrate to me why I am wrong about Geller.

    Robert. I am desperate for you to set me straight. Try again.

    While you’re thinking about that, read some of my more detailed explanations (Try CTRL F & Search for my name) of why I think Geller is the same and the Muslims who decry images of their prophet. Does it have anything to do with religion, or am I comparing their psychological profiles. Am I asking the question whether the Geller’s of this world are the solution, or are the cause of on going problems. Is Geller’s attitude helpful. Will it lead to a long lasting and peaceful solution. Or is it just more stone age tribal aggression against the “Other” tribe. Ask yourself. If whether Geller was in the Whitehouse that somehow ISIS would cease the function. What would Geller’s Whitehouse response be. Does any of this have anything to do with religion.

    Robert there is so much more you need to tell me. To set me straight.



    Report abuse

  • What has comparing psychological profiles got to do with religion.

    You choose Robert. I don’t care how you define religion. Here’s the Oxfords

    The belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods: ideas about the relationship between science and religion

    Here’s another.

    a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.

    And yet another, for which I have some sympathy.

    Patrick H. McNamara “Try to define religion and you invite an argument.”

    Take your pick Robert. I haven’t read them and I don’t particularly care.



    Report abuse

  • 41
    Robert says:

    I’ve just asked one question which you taken pains to avoid giving a specific answer to. I want to know if you’re coming from a religious stance.



    Report abuse

  • Robert. Are you telling me that you haven’t read anything else I’ve ever written on this Richard Dawkins web page for Reason and Science. Ostensibly, a haven for atheists. Where we all know who our much welcomed religious commentators are. Ewan. Nordic. Valued members. But I am not one of them.

    Given you haven’t done your due diligence, and what you are about to write must be so insightful and momentous, I’ll play your silly game. I am an atheist. I don’t believe in any gods. I’ve argued in these forums consistently that rational evidenced based thinking is better than religious. I’ve oft quoted my favourite phrase, “That religion should be practiced by consenting adults in private, and has no place in modern decision making.”

    I suspect your word game ego will see this as some personal triumph of chest beating mano on mano aggression , but I don’t particularly care. If you can’t write more that one sentence to support your argument, then I for one, and I suspect others in this forum may dismiss you as an auto eroticist.

    So psychological profiles. Is the psychological profile of an extremist American, like Geller, the same as the psychological profile of an extremist islamist. Do either admit to doubt as to their -position. Is it the privilege of an extremist, not to doubt.



    Report abuse

  • Robert. Are you telling me that you haven’t read anything else I’ve
    ever written…Given you haven’t done your due diligence

    Sorry to crush your ego – never heard of you before.

    Ironic that you carry on about “due diligence” since you apparently haven’t bothered to check what posts I’ve made. This is the first thread I’ve commented on.



    Report abuse

  • Muslims base their stance on what their religion dictates.

    From what I’ve seen Geller’s antipathy toward Muslims is based on their demonstrated behavior, which of course is rooted in the dictates of their religion. Their religion specifically calls for violence and sure enough many engage in violence. Even those who don’t specifically go about bombing often engage in equivocation when it comes to asking them to denounce those that do.

    The reason they don’t want to run those ads is out of fear, and she correctly denounces this as de facto acquiescence to Islamic dictates.

    She has a strong case for feeling “bigotry” toward those who adhere to Islam.

    You apparently don’t grasp the distinction.

    https://youtu.be/N46mIHEGHN0



    Report abuse

  • I wonder if there’s any point in attempting to set you straight.

    This is it. This is how you have enlightened me and the readers. Your entire argument could have been predicted. Straight out of Fox News. Even you choice of video commentator says nothing about the proposition, which I will refer you to my comment above, when you decided that I needed setting straight.

    Not once did you “Set me straight” on my contention that all extremists follow the same logic. You had a predictable rant about Islam. “I’m right. You’re wrong. My god is the one true god. Yours is a false god. My god supports my killing. I am the only one going to heaven. blah blah blah.” Who cares. Hence the red card comment. They can all be sent out of the game and made to sit on the sidelines till they learn that extremism, begets extremism. I push you. You push me back. Harder. Geller pushed. The push back killed two people. Simple.

    So in your world, (Channel Animal Farm here) All extremist are equal, but some extremists are more equal than others.

    Why do you think there are these hot spots all over the world. Extremists like ISIS. But also extremists like Bush / Cheney / Rumsfield / Wolfervitz who’s extreme NeoCon ideology was stupid enough to think that Iraq was one country, and not the invention of the British after WW1. That all the disparate tribes in Iraq love one another. That just by removing Saddam Hussein, with absolutely no plan for what happens next, that these stone age tribes will all lay down their Kalashnikovs and think that democracy was all sweetness and light. Bush is responsible for the creation of ISIS.

    So see if you can answer the question, now, again, and not just parrot stuff you’ve heard on Fox, or out of the lips of GELLER. Does an American extremist, arrive at their extreme views, through the same mental processes, as an Islamic one. Absolutely nothing to do with religion.



    Report abuse

  • Your entire argument could have been predicted.

    Wow, you really are upset that I never heard of you.

    Your pompous, dismissive tone unfortunately isn’t backed up with any substance. You’ve failed to show how they’re “the same”. You ignore the fact that Islam does in fact call for violence and their adherents commit violence in the name of their religion. You call them “extremists” when what they are, are those who follow the dictates of their religion.

    Betcha Geller wouldn’t have a problem with them if they weren’t prone to committing violence and enforcing barbaric conditions in their majority nations. However, their religion and their behavior are inseparable.



    Report abuse

  • You’ve failed to show how they’re “the same”.

    “I’m right. You’re wrong. My god is the one true god. Yours is a false god. My god supports my killing. I am the only one going to heaven. blah blah blah.”

    Identical.



    Report abuse

  • 48
    Robert says:

    Isn’t there something in the bible about two wrongs don’t make a
    right.

    You’re seriously invoking the Bible?

    I keep hearing you go on about what a whack job Geller is. In the videos I’ve seen of her she comes across as lucid and articulate.

    The only lunacy I hear in this debate is from the hard-line Muslim who regards it as a matter of course that she should be subject to Shariah law for insulting his religion.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wYCfP4Eg1B4&hd=1



    Report abuse

  • 49
    Robert says:

    I’m right. You’re wrong. My god is the one true god.

    You’ve certainly clarified that you genuinely don’t comprehend. Her objection is to the violent acts of Muslims, their objection is to anyone exercising free speech – i.e. expression of thought that they don’t like and the way their objection manifests itself is in violent acts…..



    Report abuse

  • Robert.

    By supporting home grown extremists like Geller, you are aggravating the problem, not solving it. That’s what makes me cross. You, and like minded people think that the Islamic problem is simple. Shout louder, and they will behave. They will know their place. Savages. Won’t work. Never has worked in the past. Never will in the future. So why do you support people, like Geller, who wants to shout louder. The Islamic problem is very deep and complex. There are no Fox News easy solutions. They only appeal to shallow thinkers. Read some of Red Dog’s comments on this theme.

    https://www.richarddawkins.net/2015/06/world-must-confront-jihadisms-roots-in-islamic-doctrine-says-author/

    The point of this whole exchange is that I know this particular brand of religion say this, and that is bad. And that particular religion says that, and that also is bad. Everyone knows that. Every religion has “Kill the infidel clauses”. But who acts on them. Who uses the them as justification. Only homo sapiens who are extremists of any religious colour.

    Tell me there are not American fundamentalists evangelists who are not foaming at the mouth, in anticipation of the rise of Israel which will bring on Armageddon and the final rapture and heaven. Are you saying these guys aren’t as extreme as ISIS. You had that instance of the American general who said they won’t need a budget next year because the Rapture is coming.

    The point is, a small percentage of homo sapiens are prone to extremism on a broad variety of subjects. Shun the extremist. Shun the crazies. Shun Geller. Shun and condemn those who what to have a pissing contest with the other teams extremists. Give them no support.



    Report abuse

  • You’ve certainly clarified that you genuinely don’t comprehend.

    This is the shallow street level stuff. Like a school yard.

    “He pushed me. You pushed me first. You started it. No. You started it. “

    It’s all you get on American media. During my last visit there, I can say that you are being treated like idiots by your commercial news services. The problem with having to get TV ratings. Just serve up the simple school yard arguments and most of the sheeple will watch.

    Robert. The things you are worrying about are just symptoms on the fringe. I’ve tried, and obviously failed, to get you to look in the mirror and see that the problem is not the brand of religion, its the oxygen given to homo sapiens that are way out on the edges of the bell curve, in your country, in ISIS, in the local bowls club. All over the world. There is a way of thinking that leads to heads being cut off, metaphorically and literally. This is what I am trying to get you to think about. Geller is one of those people. The fact that you couch it in a ‘Freedom of Speech” versus “Evil Islam” tells me you get your opinion from people like the ones in the videos you post in support of your position.

    Shallow ratings chasing pulp news to pad out something between advertisements.



    Report abuse

  • 52
    Robert says:

    The things you are worrying about are just symptoms on the fringe. I’ve tried, and obviously failed, to get you to look in the mirror and see that the problem is not the brand of religion

    Are you seriously that unaware of what goes on in Islamic nations?

    Street-level stuff my ass. Do you think Geller would have a problem with Muslims if a number of them didn’t resort to violent acts?

    The attack on the cartoon contest, the Charlie Hebdo attack, The Boston Marathon bombing were “street level” and stark reality.

    I push you. You push me back. Harder. Geller pushed. The push back
    killed two people. Simple.

    You talk a lot of straight-up bullshit. The contest was asserting the right of expression of thought, expressing contempt for the Muslim way. The Muslim “push back” was a demonstration of why Muslims are wrong, of exactly why Geller feels contempt for Islam – as do I and anyone else who has any sense. Geller didn’t kill anyone, Muslims following the dictates of their religion did. It’s black and white – the attackers were in the wrong, period. No room for equivocation.

    If you don’t recognize the superiority of freedom and expression of thought and rational discourse over violence as an expression of adherence to religious dictates, if you don’t denounce their acts as barbaric and inexcusable, wtf are you doing on this forum?



    Report abuse

  • The Muslim “push back” was a demonstration of why Muslims are wrong, of exactly why Geller feels contempt for Islam. As do I and anyone else who has any sense.

    Ladies and gentlemen of the jury. I rest my case. When you loose the ability to doubt your own position, you mimic the aggressor.



    Report abuse

  • Moderator message

    A reminder to all users that the aim on this site is thoughtful, rational, civil discussion and analysis, even where there is vehement disagreement. Argue your best case, try to convince and persuade, and by all means point out what you see as weaknesses in other users’ arguments, but please avoid making personal comments: no rudeness, insult or aggression towards users who disagree with your position.

    Our Terms and Conditions set out the rules and ethos of the site, and can be found at the foot of each page.

    Thank you.

    The mods



    Report abuse

  • 56
    Robert says:

    I rest my case. When you loose the ability to doubt your own position,
    you mimic the aggressor.

    No, I don’t doubt the that expression of thought isn’t the same as the perpetration of violence in the name of religion to squelch free expression of thought. Nor is defending oneself against such violence equivalent to the initiation of such violence, any more than shooting a mugger in self-defense is the same as the act of committing a mugging. Apparently you don’t grasp this.



    Report abuse

  • Apparently you don’t grasp this.

    I do grasp this. I carried a gun for 30 years.

    This web page is the Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science. The whole point of the rationale behind this enterprise is that evidence and reason are the guiding principles. You let the evidence guide your position. If the evidence falls one way, you follow the evidence, but here is the crucial difference. As the evidence changes, so does your position. That is the very essence of Reason and Science. An extremist doesn’t do this.

    If you adhere to an ideology, left wing, right wing, communist, socialist, capitalist, fascist. It doesn’t matter. The moment you pin your colours to an ideology, you have abrogated you decision making. You have out sourced your own thinking to the writer of the ideology. When an issue arises, you simple refer to your predetermined ideology, and parrot the answer. You haven’t thought it through. You have considered the evidence. An ideology gives you a knee jerk response.

    Is Geller’s position that of a rational evidence based person. Is she someone who, if presented with evidence that contradicts her position, would change her mind. Would she publicly admit she was wrong. Back to my desk calender. “It is the privilege of the extremist never to doubt.” The fact that Geller will never doubt her position, means she is an extremist. The same as ISIS. She is part of the problem, not the solution.

    You keep on quoting stuff about who did what. Yes I know all that. It’s common knowledge. Yes ISIS, Islam, and any extremist group are bad, evil, wrong, villainous. (Add in your own adjective) It doesn’t absolve the stance that Geller takes. I know you don’t like what extremist Islam does. I don’t either. But Geller’s approach makes matters worse.

    Here is one suggestion for an improvement. ISIS earns around 1 billion US dollars a year selling oil. How. Shipments. Which ports. Which banks. Cash flow. Buyers. Intermediaries. The CIA would be all over this. The UN Charter allows for sanctions against all players in this chain. Why not expose the business man buying the discount oil. Why not expose the shipping company moving it. Blockade the shipping port and seize the ships. Why not target the cash flow through the banks. Why not name and impose UN sanctions against all of the players. Attack the cash flow. The classic organized crime strategy. Dry up the cash. Starve out the money trail. If America was seen to be following this line of attack, they would be seen as the high ground player. Just one idea. There are lots more high ground strategies. How can ISIS maintain such brilliant IT strategies when both the US and China can hack each other to pieces.

    For a couple of billion dollars, the US could provide safe drinking water to the whole world. The world is not an old west Hollywood movie. The US needs to find more creative ways to exert influence. Geller is not the way. American’s should shun people on the extremes. If Geller puts on a conference, it should only be attended by Geller and her dog.



    Report abuse

  • So David, I have yet to hear you clarify why someone who hasn’t orchestrated any killings for the expression of thought is as bad as those who’ve repeatedly done so?

    If it makes you feel better, I have just as much contempt for Xtianity as I do for Islam, and yes I’m quite aware that there are would-be Xtian Ayatollahs, but they’re currently prevented from burning people at the stake for heresy.



    Report abuse

  • 60
    Robert says:

    David R Allen sez:

    Can you give me an example of an “Extreme View” that is true and has
    supporting evidence. Truth and morality tend to favour the middle of
    the bell curve.

    Your concept of “extreme” is fundamentally flawed. If a criminal randomly assaults you on the street to rob you – apparently to you, calling them a criminal is “extreme”. There isn’t a bell curve, there isn’t a middle ground – there’s a criminal committing a crime and a victim, period.

    When someone correctly recognizes that the root of Muslim violence isn’t in misguided “radicalism” of a few, it’s in the fundamental tenets of their religion, you indignantly label that stance as “extremism”.

    Islam doesn’t recognize rationality and personal liberty as fundamental and it’s reflected in nations where Islam has force of law as well as various acts outside of where Islam is law. For whatever reason you’re bound and determined to ignore this.



    Report abuse

  • 61
    Robert says:

    So David, I have yet to hear you clarify why someone who hasn’t
    orchestrated any killings for the expression of thought is as bad as
    those who’ve repeatedly done so?

    From David R Allen:

    ~crickets~



    Report abuse

  • 62
    Robert says:

    David R Allen sez:

    “It is the privilege of the extremist, never to doubt.”

    It is this refusal to doubt, the hallmark of the irrational mind, that
    makes extremists of any colour dangerous.

    So you feel there is no doubt that this is true….

    🙂

    Apparently you feel the answer is to acquiesce to the demands of terrorists, allow them to dictate what gets said, whether there’s a right to ridicule, to express negative opinions.



    Report abuse

  • Robert

    Apparently you feel the answer is to acquiesce to the demands of terrorists, allow them to dictate what gets said, whether there’s a right to ridicule, to express negative opinions.

    You will need to quote from what I have written to justify this statement because it is not the position I hold. And, I haven’t said it anywhere in this conversation. It is just a personal slander.

    The criminal analogy has nothing to do with whether the species homo sapiens. I should know. 31 years of distinguished law enforcement. Our species is prone to have a people on the fringes of the bell curve who’s views are so extreme, that they are completely devoid of reality. Those people are bad, whether they are islamic nutters or American nutters.

    I don’t suppose there’s much point in indicating that this is the crucial message you either can’t understand, or refuse to understand. I’m talking about a defect in our species. You can write paragraph after paragraph on how bad islamic fundamentalism is. I know it. You know it. And the bulk of humanity in the middle of the bell curve know it. It’s not the issue. It is the propensity for our species to be populated by a few extremists, and the damage those very small numbers do to the world. Geller is one such extremist. And before you start typing. I will walk arm in arm with Geller to support her right to say what she wants. But I would also expect that apart from a handful of fellow extremists, no one in America would support her. Does that make you an extremist, or just another victim of America’s appalling journalism. Fox news. The best that TV ratings can scam on the sheeple of America.

    So Robert. In summary. Extremists, of any colour, motivated by any issue, are bad people. Shun the extremist. I’m quite happy to discuss the evils of Islam, but there won’t be much to discuss because there is little we disagree on.



    Report abuse

  • 64
    Robert says:

    David R Allen sez:

    The criminal analogy has nothing to do with whether the species homo
    sapiens.

    Whether the species homo sapiens what?

    What you repeatedly ignore is that the so-called extremists of Islam are just following what’s laid out in their religion – which is full of dictates of violence. The rest are just not putting them into practice, however I don’t hear a lot of condemnation coming from the so-called moderates.

    It doesn’t matter what those who aren’t perpetrating or supporting violence do. The ones that matter are those who are perpetrating violence. You further seem to be promoting the notion that what you’re calling Muslim extremists are a rarity.

    Apparently you feel the answer is to acquiesce to the demands of terrorists

    You will need to quote from what I have written to justify this
    statement because it is not the position I hold.

    No? You label as “extremism” the act of denouncing and challenging those who violently attempt to impose their religious beliefs on others – which is what attacking those who ridicule their beliefs is. As far as you’re concerned those who vocally denounce terroristic violence rooted in a barbaric, irrational religion are exactly the same as the terrorists.

    So far everything I’ve seen from Geller seems articulate and rational. If you’re convinced she’s a nut-job extremist, go ahead and point me toward some examples that illustrate this.



    Report abuse

  • If you’re convinced she’s a nut-job extremist, go ahead and point me toward some examples that illustrate this.

    Easy. And there was much, much more on Geller. This was just a quick sample.

    Quotes

    "Islam is the most antisemitic, genocidal ideology in the world." [5]

    "Obama is a third worlder and a coward. He will do nothing but beat up on our friends to appease his Islamic overlords. All this is going down while Obama plays footsie at his nuclear nonsense campfire -- sucking up to Iran's enablers while beating up our allies."[6]

    "It is well known that Obama allegedly was involved with a crack whore in his youth. Very seedy stuff. Why aren't [the media] pursuing that story? Find the ho, give her a show! Obama allegedly trafficked in some very deviant practices. Where's the investigation? . . . Back in the early 80's, there were only two reasons to travel to Pakistan. Jihad or drugs. I think he went for the drugs and came back with jihad." [7]

    "Jews refuse to get on Obama's Trains". . . "Obama is pressuring Jews to "evacuate" from parts of Israel? And what Warsaw ghetto does the muhammadan [sic] president have in mind? I think I am gonna hurl. The Jews will not go. The Jews will not submit to this century's nazis [sic] and Mansourian poser." [8]

    (On the passage of health care): "The moochers and the looters, the crooks and degenerates voted at 1 am this morning to rip the constitution to shreds, to rape the American people and to nationalize medicine."

    Repeatedly accuses Obama of being a Muslim: Geller's blog contains 267 posts tagged "Muslim in the White House?"[9]

    Geller claims that "devout Muslims should be prohibited from military service" because she believes that Adolf Hitler and Nazism were inspired by Islam. [10]

    In the wake of the terrorist attacks in Norway committed by Anders Breivik, she claimed that the young people killed were bound to become "leaders of the party responsible for flooding Norway with Muslims who refuse to assimilate, who commit major violence against Norwegian natives including violent gang rapes, with impunity, and who live on the dole." [11]

    What would the free world look like with Geller in the White House. Would you vote for President Geller. This is clearly a deranged personality. And you are trying to argue that she is not an extremist. Remember, it is the privilege of the extremist, NEVER TO DOUBT. Do you entertain any doubts about Geller.



    Report abuse

  • TBH, I’m beginning to wonder if Robert has his own Zionist agenda, and any attempts to rationalize will be futile. But by all means, keep trying. I, for one, am enjoying the hell out of your posts! 🙂



    Report abuse

  • Vicki

    I would love to meet Robert in person. To spend an hour. I’m desperate to understand how he can come to this position. I suspect Robert is the collateral damage of the failed fourth estate in America. What is meant to be a free and fiercely independent watchdog of democracy has degenerated into the major news agencies being virtual 24/7 paid advertisements for the Republicans or the Democrats. The best news TV ratings can deliver.

    I gather the most trusted news source in America is John Stewart of the Daily Show. Seen snippets. Appalling that a comic send of US news is the only way responsible US citizens can get an independent review of the events of the day.

    I recently toured for 3 weeks in the US Rockies. Stunning. Every night, I scanned the TV channels trying to find some objective journalism. You know. The stuff the rest of the free world takes for granted. Nothing. No wonder poor Robert just parrots Fox News. If you listening in Robert, may I suggest you branch out and start consuming media from around the world. And you have to read things you don’t agree with or you will suffer from “Confirmation Bias”. The whole point of not being an extremist. Live to doubt your own position. Read often and widely. You will quickly realize that you’ve been scammed by the news services you quote in here.



    Report abuse

  • What is meant to be a free and fiercely independent watchdog of
    democracy has degenerated into the major news agencies being virtual
    24/7 paid advertisements for the Republicans or the Democrats.

    {Sigh} Yes. You were/are witnessing capitalism at its finest. On the bright side, with the advent of the internet sources can be much more varied. On the down side, by our very nature we cherry-pick the sources that best reinforce our preconceived beliefs–much like the bible in the hands of theologians.



    Report abuse

  • I’ve never quite understood why cherry picking is considered a bad thing to do. It’s an essential prerequisite for cherry cake.



    Report abuse

  • Would you vote for President Geller.

    Would you vote for President Pat Robertson?

    I’m not aware that Geller is running for POTUS.

    The formatting disaster you created aside, I copied/pasted enough of it to find it on her blogsite. She clearly has it in for Obama. Some of what I saw I understand to be disproven – the business about his mother posing for porn, just coincidence that a model happens to look a lot like Stanley Dunham posed for pics. However I have no doubt there’s a lot about Obama that isn’t known and he wants it kept that way. But there’s enough about him that is known to look at him with a wary eye – for example the influence of Jeremiah Wright which Obama distances himself from now, only for political reasons.

    After a long period of pointless, inexplicable obstinance he finally produced what’s probably an authentic photocopy of his long-form birth certificate. However something I’ve noticed is that I have yet to see a single other shred of evidence putting his mother in Hawaii at the time of Obama’s birth. Utility bill, grocery receipt, nothing. I bet you haven’t either. May or may not be meaningful I find it odd that no one seems to recall him being at Columbia.

    This is someone who had no compunction whatsoever with standing before America and lecturing business owners that they didn’t build that business. That statement by itself makes his motives suspect.

    I don’t take anything any politician says they did or didn’t do at face value. As you may be aware, politicians, including presidential candidates and various sitting presidents have a shaky history of truth-telling whether it be matters of state or personal indiscretions.

    Looking at random at an issue she talks about – the death of Alberto Nisman, that seems to check out. The circumstances are absolutely suspicious.

    While I feel confident that you don’t possess the credentials to make a clinical diagnosis of her, whatever her psychological profile, it doesn’t negate the reality of what Muslim terrorists have done. She’s lucid enough to correctly articulate that they feel they should be able to squelch speech they don’t like the world over by use of terroristic threat and terroristic act. That’s irrefutable.



    Report abuse

  • TBH, I’m beginning to wonder if Robert has his own Zionist agenda

    Oy vey!

    Lol – no Zionist agenda.

    any attempts to rationalize will be futile.

    To rationalize? Rationalizing isn’t generally recognized as credible.



    Report abuse

  • I researched some of the Obama links you raise. Fascinating. Would it come as a surprise Robert, that conspiracy theories like this, only occur in the USA. The rest of the world has conspiracy theorists, but they are very much treated as fringe nutters. Why do you think the US has so many people who take these accusations seriously. You seem to. Do you believe that Obama wasn’t born in Hawaii, and that somehow he is a secret moslem, with an agenda to harm the US. Geller seems to believe this. Why does this only happen in the US, and not around the rest of the world.

    From Australia, we just hear international news. What are your thoughts on 9/11. Did a plane actually crash into the Pentagon. Was there any CIA involvement in the twin towers crash. I saw a video recently that said that the towers had been packed with demolition explosives, which was the only way to explain their collapse.

    To rationalize? Rationalizing isn’t generally recognized as credible.

    Rational is defined as “based on or in accordance with reason or logic.” Doing this is not credible in your eyes. If being rational isn’t a credible way to come to conclusions about stuff, what would you recommend. If I wanted to understand something, but given “Reason and Logic” are not the way. What should I do. Maybe this would help me understand your position.



    Report abuse

  • Robert.

    The Koran has references to violence. But would it be a surprise to you that the bible has more references to violence, which instructions for christians to commit this violence.

    The bible has 842 passages that reference violence. The Koran only has 333. If either book had just one reference to violence, it would be one too many but I digress. So if the bible is worse than the koran, shouldn’t Geller be giving two thirds of her time to trashing the bible, and only one third of her time to the Koran. Why do you think most christians, ignore the bible’s instructions to commit violence. Why do only the extremist moslims commit violence based on the Koran. Around 1 billion muslims in the world. And only around 1 million extremists. Why aren’t the remaining 999,000,000 muslims beheading people. Just something to ponder on Robert.



    Report abuse

  • 76
    Robert says:

    conspiracy
    theories like this, only occur in the USA.

    Um, sure they do.

    Conspiracy theories aren’t needed to find plenty of concrete examples of reasons to distrust gov’t.

    From Australia, we just hear international news. What are your
    thoughts on 9/11

    A bunch of jihadists commandeered some planes and murdered a lot of people.

    As far as CIA involvement – my first inclination is that it’s nonsense, haven’t seen any compelling evidence to support the notion, nor a compelling motive that really makes sense.

    Australia eh? Ok, this definitely explains some things about your outlook. You’re the folks who fell all over yourselves to abdicate your personal liberties because of a single statistically anomalous event. What was that you said about sheeple? Lol – Australians lead the way on being sheeple.

    Rational is defined as “based on or in accordance with reason or
    logic.”

    Rational and rationalize are two different words with very different meanings.

    None of your banter changes anything about the reality of Islam and the actions of Muslim terrorists.



    Report abuse

  • because of a single statistically anomalous event.

    31 years on the force carrying a gun and on not one occasion did I ever have to drawn that weapon. I’d say the sheeple of Australia make a good choice. Find me an LEA that can say this.

    Conspiracy theories aren’t needed to find plenty of concrete examples of reasons to distrust gov’t.

    You know this is another uniquely US trait. We don’t have this in the rest of the civilized world. In Australia we have a clear separation of powers between tiers of Govt, no one arm can do anything without being caught. The Judiciary are independent of the law enforcement who are independent of the politicians. Plus we have a number of bodies like the Independent Commission against Corruption or similar names. Our journalist still function as the fourth estate which means they report without fear or favour, until the US media which is absolutely vital if you want to call yourself a democracy. Apart from politicians, no one is elected. No Sheriff. No D.A. No Judge. So zero chance of political influence. This is pretty stock standard around the Western world so the issue of trust in Government doesn’t come up.

    Why don’t you trust your government.

    My “Banter” is not trying to change your mind on Islam and Muslim terrorists. Your views differ little from mine on this. What I am trying to help you with is the concept of an extreme mind, and whether a person displaying these tendencies is a trustworthy source of information. How would you listen to someone, then try to determine if that person’s views were correct. How would sense check what was said. How would you research and seek out third party corroboration of what you’ve been told. And would this be a good thing, if you want your opinion to be something of substance. So that when you express your opinion, you know you can back it up with reasoned evidentiary material. Geller is the case in point. It’s very simple to see that she is out on the edges of the bell curve, and that a world designed by her would be a seriously violent place.



    Report abuse

  • Rational and rationalize are two different words with very different
    meanings.

    You’re right, and it was a careless mistake on my part. I apologize. What I should have written was you seem to be resistant to any criticism of Geller, and the only reason I could think of was you were sympathetic to her political views. Of course, that doesn’t mean it’s the only reason out there. You might say you appear to rationalize her actions.

    For the record, I get “affect” and “effect” mixed up, too. But I have to say, I do pretty well with the homonyms “to, two and too” and “their, they’re and there.”



    Report abuse

  • David R Allen
    Jun 8, 2015 at 4:56 am

    Conspiracy theories aren’t needed to find plenty of concrete examples of reasons to distrust gov’t.

    You know this is another uniquely US trait. We don’t have this in the rest of the civilized world. In Australia we have a clear separation of powers between tiers of Govt, no one arm can do anything without being caught. The Judiciary are independent of the law enforcement who are independent of the politicians. Plus we have a number of bodies like the Independent Commission against Corruption or similar names.

    You have picked out one of the features which biases US politics and law.

    The system of mayors and governors elected by voters manipulated by bought media friends of big-money campaigns, then appointing their new police chiefs and DEAs, is a system designed to facilitate corruption.

    Our journalist still function as the fourth estate which means they report without fear or favour, until the US media which is absolutely vital if you want to call yourself a democracy. Apart from politicians, no one is elected. No Sheriff. No D.A. No Judge. So zero chance of political influence. This is pretty stock standard around the Western world so the issue of trust in Government doesn’t come up.

    In OZ and Europe, where new governments retain officials appointed by previous governments, there is much less likelihood of a bunch of political stooges taking over the whole area, and conspiring together, or covering each other’s corrupt practices.

    Why don’t you trust your government?

    The short answer, is that many Americans have good cause to distrust their government, their media, and their law enforcement systems, while many others have little confidence in the willingness of officialdom to take an even handed and honest approach.
    Even scientists have their honesty and integrity attacked by disreputable well funded media denial campaigns, when they honestly report matters which threaten big-money vested interests.



    Report abuse

  • In OZ and Europe, where new governments retain officials appointed by previous governments, there is much less likelihood of a bunch of political stooges taking over the whole area, and conspiring together, or covering each other’s corrupt practices.

    I worry about America. We need a strong and morally just America to add balance to the world. But I fear their institutional democracy is not best practice for precisely the reasons you cite above. It would unthinkable in Australia to have a law enforcement official appointed by a politician. The media would scream corruption and separation of powers. The politicians through bipartisan negotiations appoint people like Police Commissioners from a pool of highly respected professional serving Police Officers. The same with judges, public servants and the Director of Public Prosecutions.

    As a former serving enforcement officer, I carried a warrant from the Crown (sadly we’re not a republic yet.) and that warrant authorized me to act with complete independence, even from a commanding officer. It was my decision and mine alone, to exercise legal power. I of course, would be held accountable for any abuse. All appointees are fiercely independent of the politicians and the politicians know it. It means it is in the politicians best interests to select candidates of the highest personal integrity knowing that if an issue arises, they will get the best and fairest possible investigation.

    This failing in the American system leads me to think that the democracy practiced in the US of A is not world’s best practice. This is know world wide, and lessens the ability of America to stand up without moral stain, lead the free world and call tyrants to order.



    Report abuse

  • Sorry sport, you can’t b.s. me. I’ve gone around on this with other Aussies

    Sorry folks I tried. Robert’s mind is closed to any rational discourse. Farewell Robert. But if you do come to Australia, it’s our sharks, snakes and spiders that are more dangerous than its criminals.



    Report abuse

  • You’re the folks who fell all over yourselves to abdicate your personal liberties because of a single statistically anomalous event.

    Mass gun murder statistically anomalous??? By that reckoning Christmas in this country is even more statistically anomalous. In fact, since the Australians have given up their “right” to own and carry assault rifles, mass murders really have become statistically anomalous in that country.

    The gun culture in this country is a sickness that kills about 11,000 every year and maims tens of thousands more. This is a part of the total cost of gun ownership, a cost that most civilized countries are not prepared to bear.



    Report abuse

  • The gun culture in this country is a sickness that kills about 11,000 every year

    I always find it fascinating to talk to a pro gun American. They are almost identical to the religious. There is nothing you can say that will change their mind. The fact that the evidence is overwhelmingly against them, is no impediment, which is the same as religious nutters. They believe in something on faith, without evidence or contrary to the evidence. Every other civilized country with a similar demographic has almost no gun crime problem. Their is some left over cancer in American culture that I speculate comes from Hollywood’s treatment of the wild west, and untrue myths obscured by time, from the war of independence.

    As I said above, carried a gun for 31 years dealing with organized crime, gangs, and later terrorism. In 31 years, my gun never left it’s holster. I never once pointed it at another human being. We have criminals with guns, but they are very rare. Yet people like Robert (A fascinating psyche profile) laugh at Australia. Oh well.



    Report abuse

Leave a Reply

View our comment policy.