Federal judge bans racist pro-Israel subway advertisement - Polidicks

[url]http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2013/12/24/judge-denies-pro-israeli-group-bid-advertise-mbta-subway-stops/MLQYjHiYMgEUFirtHsuQWK/story.html[/url] [quote]A federal judge rejected a pro-Israel group’s assertion that its free speech rights were violated when the MBTA turned down a subway advertisement on the grounds that the ad was “[B]demeaning or disparaging[/B].” ... Officials with the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority rejected the ad in November on the basis that it violated the agency’s advertising guidelines,[B] which include rejecting advertisements that demean and disparage individuals and groups, promote alcohol or tobacco, and depict graphic violence.[/B] On Friday, US District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton sided with the state’s transportation authority, saying in the ruling that “it was plausible for the defendants to conclude that the . . . pro-Israel advertisement demeans or disparages Muslims or Palestinians.” MBTA general manager Beverly A. Scott said in a statement that the agency is “gratified” by Gorton’s decision. “We will continue to administer our guidelines evenhandedly, so that our customers will not be subjected to advertisements that demean or disparage any person or group,” the statement said. While the MBTA applauded the ruling, lawyers for the nonprofit did not, saying an appeal is imminent. ... In contrast, the Palestinian Refugee ad, the judge said, “conveys information that portrays Israel in a negative light” but does not violate the MBTA’s advertisement guideline, as a reasonable person may disagree or dislike it without finding it degrading or reproachful. “Thus, the question is not whether the advertisement upset some transit riders but instead whether a reasonably prudent person would find that it ‘ridicules or mocks, is abusive or hostile to, or debases the dignity and stature of Israelis or Jews,’ ” Gorton wrote. “The quote plaintiffs selected to express their message does not criticize ‘savage’ acts but instead contrasts the state of Israel with the ‘savages’ who oppose or fight against it.” [/quote] [IMG]http://c.o0bg.com/rf/image_371w/Boston/2011-2020/2013/11/07/BostonGlobe.com/Metro/Images/D.C.BusAd.jpg[/IMG] Good judge.

Expected sandwich advertisement

But wait, Hollywood is always telling us that we're supposed to side with the noble savages when their home is being threatened. The Jew-lords need to get their message straight

"In any war between the civilized man and the savage, support the civilized man" That literally sounds like something a Roman aristocrat would say

I'm getting sick of israeli propaganda everywhere. Maybe if they weren't being a bunch of nazis to the non-jews in their country, but right now, no.

[QUOTE=Tmaxx;43309293]I'm getting sick of jewish propaganda everywhere. Maybe if they weren't being a bunch of nazis to the non-jews in their country, but right now, no.[/QUOTE] Israeli propaganda != Jewish propaganda.

Wow that's an extremely ironic name. American Freedom Defense Initiative. They're not American, They're not for Freedom, and they're Offensive rather than defensive.

[QUOTE=mugofdoom;43309302]Israeli propaganda != Jewish propaganda.[/QUOTE] I doubt those are two ninja stars on that poster.

Ayn Rand. Thats a great idea.

[QUOTE=Crimor;43309316]I doubt those are two ninja stars on that poster.[/QUOTE] wow its almost like israel is a jewish state

[QUOTE=Crimor;43309316]I doubt those are two ninja stars on that poster.[/QUOTE] The Star of David is part of the Israeli flag. What is your point? Don't blame Judaism for all the stupid shit Israel does.

Every Jew agrees with the Israeli government, no exceptions

[QUOTE=Paul McCartney;43309309]Wow that's an extremely ironic name. American Freedom Defense Initiative. They're not American, They're not for Freedom, and they're Offensive rather than defensive.[/QUOTE] Anything that has "freedom" or "defense" in the name is almost always the opposite. See here: American [B]Freedom [/B]Party, Israel [B]Defense[/B] Force.

[QUOTE=Tmaxx;43309293]I'm getting sick of jewish propaganda everywhere. Maybe if they weren't being a bunch of nazis to the non-jews in their country, but right now, no.[/QUOTE] Non-Jews in Israel are treated quite well, actually. It's those in the occupied territories that are treated as shit.

[QUOTE=Starpluck;43309355]Anything that has "freedom" or "defense" in the name is almost always the opposite. See here: American [B]Freedom [/B]Party, Israel [B]Defense[/B] Force.[/QUOTE] Don't forget republic. NK and China proved that.

[QUOTE=l337k1ll4;43309392]Don't forget republic. NK and China proved that.[/QUOTE] And over half of Africa.

I guess the department of defence and ministry of defence causes war then. Then again I'm inclined to believe that. [editline]26th December 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Tmaxx;43309293]I'm getting sick of jewish propaganda everywhere. Maybe if they weren't being a bunch of nazis to the non-jews in their country, but right now, no.[/QUOTE] When people use "Jewish propaganda" unironically it's no wonder antisemitism is on the rise.

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;43309417]I guess the department of defence and ministry of defence causes war then.[/QUOTE] Yeah I bet these people believe the Department of Justice administers injustice. lol

"American Defense Initiate" you mean Israel lobbyists right?

Why would anyone limiting freedom-of-speech be celebrated? Propaganda or not, I'm guessing that these posters were put up on private property without complaint of the property owners, so this is clearly censorship. Even if these were put up on public property, they weren't funded by the state and limiting them in the subway means they can limit any offensive poster anywhere else. Not a good call, not a good call indeed [highlight](User was banned for this post ("You guessed wrong; didn't read the article" - Starpluck))[/highlight]

[QUOTE=StickyWicket;43309481]Why would anyone limiting freedom-of-speech be celebrated? Propaganda or not, I'm guessing that these posters were put up on private property without complaint of the property owners, so this is clearly censorship. Even if these were put up on public property, they weren't funded by the state and limiting them in the subway means they can limit any offensive poster anywhere else. Not a good call, not a good call indeed[/QUOTE] It directly states that Middle easterners are savages and that they deserve to be subjugated lol. Imperialism is about 150 years late.

[QUOTE=Paul McCartney;43309504]It directly states that Middle easterners are savages and that they deserve to be subjugated lol. [/QUOTE] I think that he's arguing that people should be allowed to hold those opinions and express them. I would agree.

[QUOTE=Rangergxi;43309519]I think that he's arguing that people should be allowed to hold those opinions and express them. I would agree.[/QUOTE] I agree, but on private property.

The ironic thing about that advertisement is that it looks like something that would come out of Nazi Germany.

A transportation authority refused to use the adverts a group wanted because the advert outright dehumanizes Muslims.

[QUOTE=Paul McCartney;43309504]It directly states that Middle easterners are savages and that they deserve to be subjugated lol. Imperialism is about 150 years late.[/QUOTE] So what? Do people have a right not to be a offended in a subway? Like I stated, propaganda/hate/pornographic/drug related or not, it's still covered by what we call freedom-of-speech. What nonsense is this, where one day someone can ban speech against jihadists, and the next ban shit for not being politically correct. Ask yourself if this denial of speech is really a good example of justice.

[QUOTE=Smug Bastard;43309531]The ironic thing about that advertisement is that it looks like something that would come out of Nazi Germany.[/QUOTE] It honestly looks like nothing from Nazi Germany.

[QUOTE=StickyWicket;43309558]So what? Do people have a right not to be a offended in a subway? Like I stated, propaganda/hate/pornographic/drug related or not, it's still covered by what we call freedom-of-speech. What nonsense is this, where one day someone can ban speech against jihadists, and the next ban shit for not being politically correct. Ask yourself if this denial of speech is really a good example of justice.[/QUOTE] This wasn't the federal government coming along and shouting at the person to shut up or they would be taken to a FEMA camp and shot. It was a regional transportation administrative body which refused an application for a particular advert because they thought it would upset people, especially Muslims who don't like being referred to as "savages".

[QUOTE=StickyWicket;43309481]Why would anyone limiting freedom-of-speech be celebrated? Propaganda or not,[B] I'm guessing that these posters were put up on private property[/B] without complaint of the property owners, so this is clearly censorship. Even if these were put up on public property, they weren't funded by the state and limiting them in the subway means they can limit any offensive poster anywhere else. Not a good call, not a good call indeed [highlight](User was banned for this post ("You guessed wrong; didn't read the article" - Starpluck))[/highlight][/QUOTE] It amazes me that people still post only after reading the title and whatever big fancy image is in the OP. It's in the first sentence of of the article.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;43309528]I agree, but on private property.[/QUOTE] Why not public? So only popular opinions should be allowed?