Pamela Geller on the MTA's Support of Sharia-Like Decision To Make Us All Bow To Savages

UPDATED AT BOTTOM OF POST

The Savage Mona Elathawy would 

behead your Freedom of Speech

I would suggest donating money to Pamela's organization

Pamela on MTA's outlandish decision to attempt to insert Sharia/blasphemy law into their

Let me make this perfectly clear. I will never sacrifice my freedom so as not to offend savages. And neither should any other American. The MTA may have injected an ambigous, unconstitutional, and thoroughly reckless revision into their ad policy in order to appease a lawless mob, but it will not stand.

And where were these same gutless cowards protesting against fascists and enemedia tools when the anti-Israel ads were running? Their ugly anti-semitic bias is painfully obvious.

"Since 1838, there have been only a handful of blasphemy prosecutions in the United States, and a broad consensus has emerged that Jefferson and Adams had it right. In 1952, the Supreme Court of the United States finally put the matter to rest in Burstyn v. Wilson, holding in a unanimous decision that "it is not the business of government in our nation to suppress real or imagined attacks upon a particular religious doctrine" or to protect "any or all religions from views which are distasteful to them." The First Amendment, the Court declared, renders any such government action unconstitutional. Religions and religious figures, like political parties, politicians, businessmen, and other members of society are fair game for criticism, condemnation and even mockery." [...]

"Apply this to the current situation, and the implications are obvious. If we punish American citizens for engaging in otherwise constitutionally protected speech in order to prevent foreign terrorists from engaging in violent acts, then we cede to those very terrorists the meaning of the First Amendment. That doesn't sound very promising, does it?"

Geoffrey R. Stone

Geoffrey R. Stone is the Edward H. Levi Distinguished Service Professor of Law at the University of Chicago. From 1987 to 1994 he served as Dean of the University of Chicago Law School and from 1994 to 2002 he served as Provost of the University of Chicago. He is currently Chair of the Board of the American Constitution Society. (thanks to FS)

Here is the bottom line. Whatever capitulation the MTA is hoping to make to the sharia, the fact is that our ads are running, and based on this new ruling, I intend to expand and increase my New York buy.

Go read the whole thing.

Please donate via Paypal to or tax-deductible to director@jihadwatch.org. We don’t get salaries and we don’t have a staff. Your contribution will go entirely to our work for freedom. And for that, may God bless you.

Mailing address:
1040 1st Avenue
BOX 121
NY NY 10022

UPDATE

AND NOW WITNESS FOR YOURSELVES, THE LOGICAL EXTENSION OF THE MTA'S DE FACTO SHARIA BAN




If we are deemed to be wrong for offending Muslim Savages,

then

THE NEXT STEP IF THE POLICE ATTACKING US!

Also, Epaminondas points out that Mona Elathawy is clearly not a Sharia-advocating Jihadist Radical.

I agree.

Elathawy, like Huma Abedin and some other new-fangled Islamists, is a Feminist,

YET,

SHE IS WILLING TO STAND UP FOR PARTS OF SHARIA, INCLUDING BLASPHEMY LAWS.

People like Mona Elathawy, Huma Abedin, Imam Rauf, and Tariq Ramadan, are all the more dangerous, because of their ability/natural tendency to couch their Islamism in the trappings of Modern Society's obsession with the Victim Group-chic version of "Human Rights."

But, if Human Rights does not include the right to criticize the powerful institutions of our society (Government, Corporations, Religion, the Media, and Academia) then we are throwing Free Speech out the window.

No Human Right-based society can continue to exist without it's first principle being Freedom of Expression/Conscience.

Epa says: Actually I've read Elthaway's stuff for years. She wrote for Al Sharq al Awsat and was WAY OUT THERE for Egyptian ladies. She is ANYTHING but savage, or radical.
She is secular to the extreme ... FOR EGYPTIANS
Therefore that is the lesson.

The most secular revolutionary in Egypt, who could not even live safely there, does not understand the NECESSITIES and DEMANDS of freedom of speech.

What does this say about administration foreign policy?

---

Pastorius says: Epa, 
Yes, you are right. But, if we were to follow Elathawy's prescription, we would wind up with a savage culture, just like the Sharia shithole from which she emanated.

She may be comparatively open-minded, but she is proving herself to be a friend of the Dark Age at a "perilous time."


For the record, I imagine Epaminondas would agree with everything I say above about Elathawy,

but

I feel I need to clarify because I believe his point is valid and will be a common objection to those of us who are vehemently critical of this psycho-bitch from the land of Allah.

EPA SEZ:She is a strong lesson.What is far to the secular side in that culture cannot conceive of the reasons for freedom of speech in the VERY FIRST SET OF REAL TESTS OF 'DEMOCRACY'