Judge Rules DC Metro Must Allow Anti-Jihad Signs

page: 1
1

log in

join

posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 02:30 PM
link   
Judge Rules - DC Metro Must Allow Anti-Jihad Signs

The D.C. transit system must allow a pro-Israel ad that equates Muslim radicals with savages, a federal judge ruled Friday. A spokesman for the Metro system said it would comply with the judge's decision and that the advertisements would go up over the weekend.

"The result is absolutely correct," said David Yerushalmi, a lawyer representing the American Freedom Defense Initiative, the organization behind the advertisements. "There simply was no way under the First Amendment jurisprudence that we have today that this ad should not have gone up when contracted." ..... cut .....

The transit system's lawyers called the ad's message "fighting words in the context of current events" and said the FBI was investigating a promise of violence if the ads ran in Washington. Still, the violence that roiled the region has largely abated since then, and there have been few reports of mischievous or hostile reactions to the ads since they appeared in New York.


- This is a first amendment issue. The lawyers for the Anti-Jihad signs are correct.

- The transit lawyers trying to say that the ads were 'fighting words in the context of current events' was lame. That's subjective and totally ignores first amendment rights.

- The ads are anti-radical islam. (as opposed to anti-Islam in general). I'd GUESS that most people .. both muslim and non-muslim won't have a hard time with that.

- I think most people don't really care what is advertised on metros or subways. If it were an in-your-face ad advocating child rape or something illegal like that, then sure. But an ad that is anti-radical-islam-jihad for something on the other side of the planet? My guess is ... not many people will even look twice at them.




posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 03:11 PM
link   
Just because it's the law, it doesn't make it right.

I'm all for free speech but I think we should lead by example and stop this kinda provocative nonsense from been put up. Personally, I'd rip it up if I seen anything like this, I'd do the same if it was anti-any religion. It's all just nonsense. A never ending circle of finger pointing which to be frank, I'm fed up to the teeth with. If you want to be religious the go be it, don't be ramming it down people throats and trying to brainwash people with this crap.



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 03:18 PM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


First New York and now Washington D.C....what states are next?

Does anyone see a pattern here...and why is this really being allowed to happen?

What are the real (hidden agendas) here?

I don't have the exact answers to the above questions; but maybe one of you does.



posted on Oct, 7 2012 @ 06:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by n00bUK
Just because it's the law, it doesn't make it right.

Ill play devils advocate here ...
Where exactly do we draw the line on free speech? WHO DECIDES what is acceptable or not?
What is wrong with saying that radical islamic violence (jihad) is wrong??

Personally, I'd rip it up if I seen anything like this,

Then you'd be tossed in jail for destruction of private property.

I'd do the same if it was anti-any religion..

Violent radical islam that mass murders people is a religion that is worthy of protection?
You do realize the radical islamists would turn around and kill you .. they don't care if you
protect them or not.



posted on Oct, 7 2012 @ 06:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by caladonea
Does anyone see a pattern here...

New York and DC ... big populations and power centers.
And both were hit on 9/11 .. so there will be agreement with the ads.

and why is this really being allowed to happen?

Because making the statement that radical islam is dangerous is free speech.
And that is allowed under the US Constitution.





new topics
 
1

log in

join