It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
(visit the link for the full news article)
The ads – reading, "In any war between the civilized man and the savage, support the civilized man. Support Israel. Defeat Jihad." – went up in 10 stations across Manhattan after a court victory by a conservative commentator who once headed a campaign against an Islamic center near the World Trade Center site.
In a 71-page report, the rights group said the repeated use of air-burst white phosphorus artillery shells in populated areas of Gaza was not incidental or accidental, but revealed "a pattern or policy of conduct".
Geller, executive director of the American Freedom Defense Initiative and publisher of a blog called Atlas Shrugs, has said she's not concerned that her ad could spark protests like the ones against the depiction of Muslims in the video "Innocence of Muslims." Violence linked to the movie has left dozens in seven countries dead, including the American ambassador to Libya.
Originally posted by charles1952
I'm missing a lot here. Are the posters here saying that Jihad is more civilized than Israel? It seems that the ad is saying Israel is more civilized than Jihad, support Israel. I don't see the grounds for offense. It sounds right to me.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but if a person acts like a savage, doesn't that make him a savage?
You don't see a problem in calling people savages?
Amazingly enough, I don't. I don't see any particular race as having a monopoly on savagery. Maybe we're using different meanings for "savage." You know, that might be what's causing the trouble. People interpreting it in various ways, and some see it as a racial remark, while others might not.
You don't see any racism in that term at all??
A number of the allegations are based on not what a soldier claims to have seen himself but rather things he was told by others. And then there's the fact that the accusers have chosen to remain anonymous, usually avoiding reference to specific units or locations so as to prevent them from being identified — which also prevents independent verification. "A considerable portion of the testimony is based on rumors and secondhand accounts," an IDF representative told the Israeli media in response to the report. "Most of the incidents relate to anonymous testimony lacking in identifying details, and accordingly it is not possible to check the allegations on an individual basis in a way that would enable an investigation, confirmation or refutation." The IDF, she said, would investigate any specific allegations brought to its attention.
Originally posted by charles1952
reply to post by polarwarrior
Dear polarwarrior,
Thanks, I'm glad someone got back to me so I could see what I was missing.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but if a person acts like a savage, doesn't that make him a savage?
You don't see a problem in calling people savages?Amazingly enough, I don't. I don't see any particular race as having a monopoly on savagery. Maybe we're using different meanings for "savage." You know, that might be what's causing the trouble. People interpreting it in various ways, and some see it as a racial remark, while others might not.
You don't see any racism in that term at all??
I'm just guessing because I didn't see the video or the game, but I suspect that a large number of Green Bay fans went temporarily savage after the ref's call.
With respect,
Charles1952
Originally posted by thePharaoh
.....
HOW IS IT FREE SPEECH WHEN THERE IS AN OBVIOUS AGENDA FOR WAR
HOW IS IT FREE SPEECH IF YOUR INCITING HATE
HOW IS IT FREE SPEECH IF YOUR ALIENATING A MINORITY
HOW IS IT FREE SPEECH IF THERE IS AN AGENDA TO GAIN PUBLIC SUPPORT
HOW IS IT FREE SPEECH...IF YOU HAD TO PAY FOR IT (lol)
HOW IS IT FREE SPEECH IF IT IS FABRICATED LIES
HOW IS IT FREE SPEECH IF YOU INTEND FOR BLOOD TO BE SPILT
Sure. But are the two really equal?
If were all apparently savage at one time or another...wouldn't it be hypocritical to call someone else a savage as if you were not?