Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

countryjake

(8,554 posts)
93. Whatever it takes to expose the Islamophobia!
Wed Sep 26, 2012, 05:06 PM
Sep 2012

And if it takes yet another "media event" to shine the light on Geller's insidious promotion of such disgusting blatant racism, I would much rather it be executed with angry pink spray paint than the violent outrage we've seen as a result of Geller and her cohorts' antics.

BRAVA MONA ELTAHAWY!

She sure seemed to hate that poster though... socialindependocrat Sep 2012 #1
I've often found that what "seems" to be, and what actually is, are quite often two wholly separate LanternWaste Sep 2012 #13
I am so ashamed... socialindependocrat Sep 2012 #15
Anything to say about the haters who are responsible for that poster at all? sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #65
she hated on a hateful poster.. frylock Sep 2012 #102
I think a reasonable argument can be made that if the action involves no_hypocrisy Sep 2012 #2
But if it's actually public property DLnyc Sep 2012 #42
Here's the rub: Somebody paid to put up that ad. no_hypocrisy Sep 2012 #67
no. here in LA occupiers were arrested for writing with chalk on the sidewalk. chalk! robinlynne Sep 2012 #115
Good on you, Mona!!! Scuba Sep 2012 #3
I would have probably done the same -- Hell Hath No Fury Sep 2012 #7
That is vandalism and is illegal ProgressiveProfessor Sep 2012 #11
Sometimes vandalism is the correct response to hate speech -- Hell Hath No Fury Sep 2012 #38
Correct response is not spray painting the speech of others including another person in the process ProgressiveProfessor Sep 2012 #48
I see this as an act of civil disobedience. Mona will pay her fine. Comrade Grumpy Sep 2012 #100
yep frylock Sep 2012 #105
I hope the fine is HUGE! FrodosPet Sep 2012 #119
whoop-dee-fucking-doo frylock Sep 2012 #104
This seems excessive. Defacing advertising in subway stations is common. Has been for decades. SleeplessinSoCal Sep 2012 #4
Still illegal vandalism ProgressiveProfessor Sep 2012 #12
This message was self-deleted by its author bupkus Sep 2012 #20
In *their* windows? Not by our standards no. 4th law of robotics Sep 2012 #34
This message was self-deleted by its author bupkus Sep 2012 #37
You asked if spraypainting over "jew" signs in their own windows 4th law of robotics Sep 2012 #40
This message was self-deleted by its author bupkus Sep 2012 #43
Right, which is why I clearly said by our standards 4th law of robotics Sep 2012 #45
Surely you can make up better strawmen than that ProgressiveProfessor Sep 2012 #49
The 1st Amendment does not protect property destruction. appal_jack Sep 2012 #5
This message was self-deleted by its author bupkus Sep 2012 #6
Really? Indydem Sep 2012 #9
This message was self-deleted by its author bupkus Sep 2012 #16
What if the billboard called Israel savage and said Support Palestine? oberliner Sep 2012 #17
This message was self-deleted by its author bupkus Sep 2012 #25
Why not? ProgressiveProfessor Sep 2012 #51
Because there's a double standard in America, PP. Scootaloo Sep 2012 #54
You need to read up and get some facts... ProgressiveProfessor Sep 2012 #58
Black Bloc don't much like the occupy movement do you? azurnoir Sep 2012 #64
There are other places to watch the video... ProgressiveProfessor Sep 2012 #68
yep I'll bet on that azurnoir Sep 2012 #90
I know the facts, thanks Scootaloo Sep 2012 #76
lol azurnoir Sep 2012 #91
No, no, no...haven't we been lectured that companies, organizations, etc are not 24601 Sep 2012 #117
No it would not at least IMO azurnoir Sep 2012 #60
There is a difference joeglow3 Sep 2012 #18
This message was self-deleted by its author bupkus Sep 2012 #23
Who gets to define "hate speech"? joeglow3 Sep 2012 #50
NO PROGRESSIVES ARE DEFENDING THE 1st Missycim Sep 2012 #21
This message was self-deleted by its author bupkus Sep 2012 #24
who gets to define what hate speech is? Missycim Sep 2012 #32
This message was self-deleted by its author bupkus Sep 2012 #41
THat is your right Missycim Sep 2012 #53
But this is not abouut a movie it is about a known hate group that was allowed to put ba sign azurnoir Sep 2012 #57
I have no idea if they are a hate group or not Missycim Sep 2012 #62
The names of the associated groups are at the bottom of the sign azurnoir Sep 2012 #70
I agree they aren't a very good group lol Missycim Sep 2012 #77
So if an atheist were to put up a sign that said, FrodosPet Sep 2012 #120
Actually, hate speech is indeed free speech. Whether we agree with that speech is another SlimJimmy Sep 2012 #55
Hate speech most certainly is free speech. nt Codeine Sep 2012 #113
Well, they just silenced the spray painter. Since EVERYTHING is 'speech' now, sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #81
why are you on the wrong side of every issue? snooper2 Sep 2012 #26
LOL... destroying someone else's property is not covered under the 1st Amendment... Comrade_McKenzie Sep 2012 #29
Keith Haring was a vandal? Who knew? closeupready Sep 2012 #33
This message was self-deleted by its author bupkus Sep 2012 #44
Umbrage if free, take all you want, but the vandal's actions were illegal ProgressiveProfessor Sep 2012 #47
these people aren't progressives by any stretch frylock Sep 2012 #106
Who sold the ad space? The Transit Authority? Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #8
MTA fought it in court and lost ProgressiveProfessor Sep 2012 #10
The Transit Authority was forced to place them there by a judge ProudToBeBlueInRhody Sep 2012 #35
:face plam: Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #39
During this there was also an altercation with a supporter of the poster ProgressiveProfessor Sep 2012 #14
If the poster supporter started the altercation, self-defense closeupready Sep 2012 #19
I watched the video ProgressiveProfessor Sep 2012 #46
well let's take a gander at it but folks don't miss the anti-Obama ad that is attached to Calos's azurnoir Sep 2012 #59
I think they rotate like those here at DU ProgressiveProfessor Sep 2012 #71
I watched the video, and being 100% honest, closeupready Sep 2012 #61
Do you think that she spay painted the counter protestor as well? ProgressiveProfessor Sep 2012 #69
Assault and battery, no. closeupready Sep 2012 #72
I do not agree with the part about a perp not being responsible for their actions if warning ProgressiveProfessor Sep 2012 #79
Culpability is shared. closeupready Sep 2012 #83
Not at all, I question the vandal's motives because of the set up with the media ProgressiveProfessor Sep 2012 #86
If I stare at you, that is not A&B. If I touch your shoulder in closeupready Sep 2012 #96
Prosecutors waste all sorts of time and public funds on bogus prosecutions ProgressiveProfessor Sep 2012 #98
I think that Gellers employee (according to Miller) azurnoir Sep 2012 #73
I commented on it earlier...though it may have been elsewhere now that I think about it ProgressiveProfessor Sep 2012 #78
She's an activist and a very dedicated one starroute Sep 2012 #22
Fascinating. I wonder even if she closeupready Sep 2012 #28
Good. That's vandalism. nt Comrade_McKenzie Sep 2012 #27
This message was self-deleted by its author bupkus Sep 2012 #30
Good God, this place is silly. It was an act of civil disobedience. Comrade Grumpy Sep 2012 #101
It will most likely include restitution to the very people she was hating on. ProgressiveProfessor Sep 2012 #108
Yeah, 50 cents to replace that poster is gonna make Pam Geller's day. Comrade Grumpy Sep 2012 #110
It would, even if it is just symbolic. I really see both sides as drama queens at this point ProgressiveProfessor Sep 2012 #114
I doubt it 4th law of robotics Sep 2012 #31
I support Eltahawy's act of Civil Disobedience. bluedigger Sep 2012 #36
Including what looks like assaulting a counter protestor with paint? ProgressiveProfessor Sep 2012 #52
That isn't what I see. bluedigger Sep 2012 #74
Spray painting people, even if they get in your way while you are doing something illegal, is also ProgressiveProfessor Sep 2012 #80
Then she must be satisfied with the actions taken. bluedigger Sep 2012 #109
But more dramatic for both sides if there is a criminal complaint ProgressiveProfessor Sep 2012 #112
I might have done it too mitchtv Sep 2012 #63
I thought the OP read she was marrying the ad darkangel218 Sep 2012 #56
As long as the ad consents, what's the problem? closeupready Sep 2012 #66
Aparently the ad didnt consent so she's in jail now darkangel218 Sep 2012 #75
I knew I wasn't the only one n/t Duer 157099 Sep 2012 #85
Brava Mona! countryjake Sep 2012 #82
I'm wondering now if the "fighting words" doctrine closeupready Sep 2012 #84
Probably not, but it doesn't matter, anyway... countryjake Sep 2012 #87
I am sure she know how to throw a media event... ProgressiveProfessor Sep 2012 #88
Whatever it takes to expose the Islamophobia! countryjake Sep 2012 #93
Making it a media event the way she did, leads me question to her motives ProgressiveProfessor Sep 2012 #95
"the vandal" ????????? countryjake Sep 2012 #97
Yes...what was done was vandalism ProgressiveProfessor Sep 2012 #99
Yes, it was vandalism. Much more importantly, it was an act of civil disobediance. Comrade Grumpy Sep 2012 #103
Only spots I know of who slime Mona with nasty terms like... countryjake Sep 2012 #107
if someone was defacing hateful anti-Semitic ads posted in nyc subway stations - I wonder how many Douglas Carpenter Sep 2012 #89
I wonder how many DU'ers would be telling others to "Have a nice shower." Behind the Aegis Sep 2012 #92
War doesn't have rules Shitty Mitty Sep 2012 #111
If she created the work she defaced it would be protected performance art onenote Sep 2012 #94
video here riverwalker Sep 2012 #116
Why resort to vandalism? There are so many legal ways to protest the ads. Nye Bevan Sep 2012 #118
It was set up as a media event ProgressiveProfessor Sep 2012 #121
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Woman arrested for marrin...»Reply #93