I just recently saw this video with a friend of mine... I'm curious to hear what other people think...
It's pretty clear that from a purely legal standpoint both parties are in the wrong for various reasons, but I think the more interesting questions the video brings up are about free speech, the role of the police and the nature of these ridiculous awful ads; I mean how do ads like these not constitute hate speech?
Maybe their use of the word savage is an attempt to reclaim history, which hasn't been kind to colonialists and imperialists. Its the same word that was used for Native Americans, Africans and Aboriginal peoples the world over. Maybe its a counter-revisionist history, trying to show us the parallels between the Israelis taking over Palestine and Manifest Destiny. We once believed it was God's mission for us to control North America, and there's a subset of Jews who think its their destiny to control all of Palestine/Israel (and I suppose to subjugate the natives). I think this is not a good way to get their message out, if that's what their message is. Probably more likely this is just more incitement toward hatred. I don't have a problem with the ad as long as there's no restrictions on what anyone can post, so long as they pay the fee. My guess is one couldn't post a picture of two people fucking, which is probably less dangerous than this.
It seems like history, especially religion, repeats itself. I'm learning about the crusades right now and I just see this fundamental hypocrisy in much of religion. People think they are on some divine mission for their religion, that they are the chosen ones that must protest this oppression that God has placed for some test, when that has to be the least important thing mentioned in any doctrine. Too often do people try to change the problems in others when they themselves are blind to their own. If people just "cultivated their own garden" the world would be a much better place. On a side note, Pamela Geller, the woman defending the the poster, is a devout Ayn Rand follower who has a very famous blog called "Atlas Shrugs."
Interesting about the Ayn Rand thing. Rand was Jewish, but I don't know her stance on Israel (can anyone shed some light?). But she was a devout atheist, and thought religion represented weakness. Its funny that her philosophy has morphed into a religion of its own, and is taken most seriously by religious people, whom she detested. Its fun to watch Paul Ryan talk about how he simultaneously loves and hate Rand, doublespeak at its best.
http://www.aynrand.org/site/PageServer?pagename=media_americ... Wow. Pamela Gelleter seems to quote her advertisement from Ayn Rand:" When you have civilized men fighting savages, you support the civilized men." This is actually kind of disturbing. Ayn Rand's influence is way too subtle and prevalent.
Wow, at first I thought this was a skit. I can't quite understand why you would bodily defend an ad from spray paint, especially one as foul as that one. It makes me think that other ads had been defaced, and she was waiting with the camera. IMHO an ad like this is a tough call. It's reasonable to consider it hate speech, but IMO it's just subtle enough to give it cover in the minds of most. The sanctity of the 1st Amendment makes it so very difficult in these instances. We need the freedom to offend. I'd really have to blame whoever owns the space for accepting it. Also, I don't blame Mona at all. If you hang that kind of racist bullshit, you are inviting a response. If it went to trial, and I was a juror, I'd let her walk. What a shitty piece of racist propaganda. Oh, and that police officer should know better.
I get scared when people use the phrases like 'Hate Speech'. It's bad enough that people can be charged with Hate Crimes, adding an additional penalty to the existing crime because a person has a paticular outlook on life. Sure this is some racist speech that degrades a whole race I guess it's just semantics. On another note there is another discussion on Hubski about speech right now. http://hubski.com/pub?id=41948
Yeah, I'm not a fan of the terms either. And still, I wonder if signs that read "Palastinians are savages." or "Jews are dirty." should be allowed as advertisements. I suppose opinions that don't incite violence should be allowed, but at some point the opinion itself is a type of violence. The lynching reference from the hanging chair in the other post borders on inciting violence, IMO. It's especially dangerous since it references a sitting President. Tough issues.
First of all it IS ABSOLUTELY her right to know what she is being arrested for. It's my guess that with good representation she will be exonerated. As for what I think of the video? Fuck the posters painting the non-israeli arabs as somehow less civilized as the Israelis. If the interaction of these two women is any metaphor for the two "states", then I'd say the non-israeli's seem the civilized group. She maintained her composure FAR better than I would have and the woman with the camera seemed nuts.
Thanks cgod. I had thought I remembered reading this as a "right" in the Jay-Z 99 problems post recently. Turns out I misread it.
I'd imagine it's a fantastic education to get and if not, a good friend to have.