Pam Geller

User avatar
mimi
Posts: 31119
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 12:01 am

Pam Geller

#1

Post by mimi » Sun Jan 23, 2011 8:13 pm

Jumping into Birfer pool again:Sunday, January 23, 2011A New Twist in Obama Birth Certificate MysteryAtlas broke the story of the forgery of Obama's COLB (certification of live birth), a story I covered beginning in May 2008. I never pretended to know what was on the vault copy that Obama spent millions to hide; I just ran the irrefutable analysis that what Obama presented to the American people was a "horrible forgery."We could speculate. Maybe it was the name of his father. His religion. His place of birth. Maybe, maybe, maybe. All speculation.What was most egregious was the propaganda O-media refusing to ask these questions while running with any lie about Bush's documentation. The enemedia went so far as to produce forged documents concerning President Bush's Air National Guard service (Rathergate). Imagine that -- the media's mad obsession with the minutiae of every detail of every document of Bush's life (even the most mundane), but not one mainstream query as to why the good folks of America were forbidden from viewing Obama's birth certificate long form. Astonishing.There is clearly something on that form that Obama does not want the American people to see. Period. Pbama must present if he is to run for re-election, should he now?[/break1]typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2011/01/a-new-twist-in-obama-birth-certificate-mystery.html]http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atla ... stery.htmlIt's kinda long with excerpts from Hillbuzz and quotes from others. and pictures. yay!



Bob Weber
Posts: 686
Joined: Sun Mar 08, 2009 11:26 pm

Pam Geller

#2

Post by Bob Weber » Sun Jan 23, 2011 8:30 pm

Does Pammy really believe that religion is listed on a Hawaiian BC? :shock:



User avatar
verbalobe
Posts: 8511
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 5:27 pm

Pam Geller

#3

Post by verbalobe » Sun Jan 23, 2011 8:36 pm

"You keep using that word ... irrefutable ... I do not think it means what you think it means..."



User avatar
PatGund
Posts: 7764
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 4:41 pm
Location: Edmonds. WA
Contact:

Pam Geller

#4

Post by PatGund » Mon Jan 24, 2011 2:31 am

The very first paragraph has two interesting things of note.The first is that Pam Geller is STILL flogging "TechDude" as a source and expert. Something almost no other birther does.The second is that she claims that she's covered this subject since May 2008. But all she offers is a Technorati tag to ALL articles tagged with "Birth Certificate". I checked all her May 2008 articles, and not a single mention is found.[/break1]typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2008/05/]http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atla ... s/2008/05/This is interesting because the earliest mention I ever found about anything to do with Obama's birth certificate was a 9 June 2008 article in the National Review, and that was due to rumours his middle name was "Muhammed".Geller is flat out lying.



User avatar
kate520
Posts: 15127
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 3:02 pm
Location: Dark side of the Moon
Occupation: servant of cats, chicken wrangler
Contact:

Pam Geller

#5

Post by kate520 » Mon Jan 24, 2011 10:56 am

Geller is flat out lying.Oh, BIG. Surprise.


DEFEND DEMOCRACY

User avatar
PatGund
Posts: 7764
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 4:41 pm
Location: Edmonds. WA
Contact:

Pam Geller

#6

Post by PatGund » Mon Jan 24, 2011 12:51 pm

Geller is flat out lying.Oh, BIG. Surprise.Oh, granted Geller is lying. But this is a very open and blatant lie, based on the hope that nobody will call her on it and her followers will accept it uncritically and absolutely.What's even more funny to me though is the fact she's about the only person still claiming "TechDude" has any validity.



izzybella
Posts: 47
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2009 4:55 pm

Pam Geller

#7

Post by izzybella » Mon Jan 24, 2011 1:13 pm

Does Pammy really believe that religion is listed on a Hawaiian BC? :shock:Even if it did, it would prove nothing. Religion can change on a whim, and a newborn baby certainly cannot be held to a specific religion for his entire life. The idea is absurd.



BFB
Posts: 5283
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 11:48 pm

Pam Geller

#8

Post by BFB » Tue Sep 20, 2011 5:52 pm

Pammy wants to run an ad on NYC buses and subways, and threatens to sue the MTA if it's not [/break1]nydailynews.com/ny_local/2011/09/20/2011-09-20_blogger_pamela_geller_vows_to_sue_mta_if_subway_ad_calling_israels_enemies_savag.html]approved:An anti-Islam activist is threatening to sue the MTA if it doesn't approve her bus and subway advertisement calling Israel's enemies savages.Pamela Geller submitted the proposed ad to the Metropolitan Transportation Authority's media management company more than a week ago but still hasn't learned if it has been approved or rejected."I will sue," Geller said. "It's a free speech issue."The strongly worded ad states, "In any war between the civilized man and the savage, support the civilized man. Support Israel. Defeat jihad."



User avatar
Highlands
Posts: 3600
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 12:19 am
Location: 3rd Rock From the Sun

Pam Geller

#9

Post by Highlands » Tue Sep 20, 2011 5:55 pm

Pammy wants to run an ad on NYC buses and subways, and threatens to sue the MTA if it's not [/break1]nydailynews.com/ny_local/2011/09/20/2011-09-20_blogger_pamela_geller_vows_to_sue_mta_if_subway_ad_calling_israels_enemies_savag.html]approved:"I will sue," Geller said. "It's a free speech issue."But yet a few Muslim's can't open a mosque in NYC, which is also a First Amendment issue. ](*,) These bigots make my head hurt.


If you took out all of the blood vessels in your body and lined them up, you would be dead. #science

User avatar
mimi
Posts: 31119
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 12:01 am

Pam Geller

#10

Post by mimi » Tue Sep 20, 2011 7:40 pm

i am amazed that they ran some of the ads that they did. The MTA already has accepted counter ads from the pro-Israel group Stand With Us. They will run in the same 18 stations from Sept. 26 to Oct. 23, the authority has said. An MTA spokesman declined to comment Tuesday.Last year, during the debate over plans to build a mosque and cultural center about two blocks from Ground Zero, Geller's group ran controversial bus ads depicting a plane flying toward the burning towers."Why there?," asked the ad, which also displayed the star and crescent moon - symbols of Islam - on a nearby building.In another campaign, the group paid for bus advertisements that read, "Fatwa on your head? Is your community or family threatening you? Leaving Islam?" The ad directed Muslims to a Web site urging them to leave the "falsity of Islam."



User avatar
Highlands
Posts: 3600
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 12:19 am
Location: 3rd Rock From the Sun

Pam Geller

#11

Post by Highlands » Tue Sep 20, 2011 9:52 pm

New York Magazine sued The MTA over this same sort of issue a number of years back and won. The Second Circuit Court of Appeals found that because the NYM ads were commercial in nature, The MTA violated NYM's free speech rights in denying them advertising spots on the buses. The Advertisement featured the New York Magazine logo and read, "Possibly the only good thing in New York Rudy hasn't taken credit for."The reason The MTA rejected this ad in the first place is because it hurt Rudy Guiliani's fee fees. Seriously. Anyhow, I don't think this applies to Geller's issue with The MTA, because her ads are clearly not commercial in nature. [/break1]lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=search&case=/data2/circs/2nd/979511.html]http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/g ... 79511.html


If you took out all of the blood vessels in your body and lined them up, you would be dead. #science

User avatar
raicha
Posts: 7345
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 5:10 pm
Contact:

Pam Geller

#12

Post by raicha » Wed Sep 21, 2011 3:30 am

New York Magazine sued The MTA over this same sort of issue a number of years back and won. The Second Circuit Court of Appeals found that because the NYM ads were commercial in nature, The MTA violated NYM's free speech rights in denying them advertising spots on the buses.





The Advertisement featured the New York Magazine logo and read, "Possibly the only good thing in New York Rudy hasn't taken credit for."The reason The MTA rejected this ad in the first place is because it hurt Rudy Guiliani's fee fees. Seriously.





Anyhow, I don't think this applies to Geller's issue with The MTA, because her ads are clearly not commercial in nature.





[/break1]lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=search&case=/data2/circs/2nd/979511.html]http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/g ... 79511.htmlHmm, not exactly what that case is saying, methinks. The NYM court 1) held that the side of a MTA bus is a public forum as the MTA has opened it up to both commercial and political speech 2) Applied a "strict scrutiny" standard in evaluating the "prior restraint" of refusing to run the ad, 3) found that refusal to run the ad was more extensive than was necessary to protect the government's legitimate interests, 4) opined that this standard should apply to a mixture of both commercial and political speech.





In many settings, commercial speech has less protection from governmental regulation than political speech, which enjoys the greatest protection under the Constitution. But here, the court expressly declined to apply a lesser standard to a message that mixed political and commercial speech. Finding a "skeptical attitude" toward government in the ad, the court applied the higher standard of protection. The court went even further than SCOTUS however, declaring that it could see no reason why it should not "require procedural safeguards for prior restraints even where commercial speech is involved."





Geller's ads are political in nature and the MTA is operating a public forum (as held in this case). To avoid running the ads, the MTA will need to identify one of the "narrowly defined exceptions to the prohibition against prior restraints, and have "procedural safeguards that reduce the danger of suppressing constitutionally protected speech".





That could be a tall order.



User avatar
TollandRCR
Posts: 20722
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 11:17 pm

Pam Geller

#13

Post by TollandRCR » Wed Sep 21, 2011 9:37 am

What Geller proposes comes under my classification as "hate speech." In fact, much of what Geller writes is hate speech. I am slowly being converted to the view that the best remedy for hate speech is more speech. How about a campaign to place counter-advertisements on those MTA buses pointing out the hatred?


“The truth is, we know so little about life, we don’t really know what the good news is and what the bad news is.” Kurt Vonnegut

User avatar
raicha
Posts: 7345
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 5:10 pm
Contact:

Pam Geller

#14

Post by raicha » Wed Sep 21, 2011 10:40 am

What Geller proposes comes under my classification as "hate speech." In fact, much of what Geller writes is hate speech. I am slowly being converted to the view that the best remedy for hate speech is more speech. How about a campaign to place counter-advertisements on those MTA buses pointing out the hatred?That seems to be the plan. See the article at the link at the discussion of 18 anti and 18 pro Israel posters.



A Legal Lohengrin
Posts: 10415
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2010 9:56 pm

Pam Geller

#15

Post by A Legal Lohengrin » Wed Sep 21, 2011 3:46 pm

Geller's ads are political in nature and the MTA is operating a public forum (as held in this case). To avoid running the ads, the MTA will need to identify one of the "narrowly defined exceptions to the prohibition against prior restraints, and have "procedural safeguards that reduce the danger of suppressing constitutionally protected speech".That could be a tall order.I don't think the MTA could be held to the same standards of "clear and present danger" that would be required if one were going to, say, censor someone's picket signs or prevent a newspaper from being published. I seriously doubt the MTA would run afoul of the First Amendment if they were to decline to run ads for a cross-burning from the Ku Klux Klan, or an ad that consisted entirely of clearly libelous material, such as accusing a private person of being a child molester.Geller's ad, like pretty much everything she says, explicitly targets a group with hate speech who is compelled to view it if they use the MTA, a public service. The degree to which speech to a "captive audience" is subject to First Amendment protections is considerably less.



User avatar
TollandRCR
Posts: 20722
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 11:17 pm

Pam Geller

#16

Post by TollandRCR » Wed Sep 21, 2011 4:32 pm

What Geller proposes comes under my classification as "hate speech." In fact, much of what Geller writes is hate speech. I am slowly being converted to the view that the best remedy for hate speech is more speech. How about a campaign to place counter-advertisements on those MTA buses pointing out the hatred?That seems to be the plan. See the article at the link at the discussion of 18 anti and 18 pro Israel posters.It was not anti-Israel ads of which I was thinking. I was thinking of ads that emphasize that Geller's ad is hate speech.


“The truth is, we know so little about life, we don’t really know what the good news is and what the bad news is.” Kurt Vonnegut

BFB
Posts: 5283
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 11:48 pm

Pam Geller

#17

Post by BFB » Mon Sep 26, 2011 4:43 pm

Well, the ball's in [/break1]nydailynews.com/ny_local/2011/09/26/2011-09-26_mta_rejects_proposed_bus_and_subway_ads_calling_the_enemies_of_israel_savages.html]Pammy'scourt"MTA rejects proposed bus and subway ads calling the enemies of Israel 'savages'...CBS Outdoor, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority's media management company, wrote Geller her proposed ad violates authority standards.It's unacceptable because it "demeans an individual or group of individuals," a CBS executive wrote Geller.



User avatar
realist
Posts: 34552
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:33 pm

Pam Geller

#18

Post by realist » Tue Oct 18, 2011 7:47 pm

From [link]chron.com,http://blog.chron.com/believeitornot/20 ... ial-event/[/link]





http://i307.photobucket.com/albums/nn31 ... 00x382.jpg





Tea Party’s event on Islam booted from Sugar Land hotel





Pamela Geller, an activist speaking in Sugar Land Tuesday, has raised controversy over her approach to Islam in America. (AP)





The Sugar Land Tea Party was forced to move an event featuring a prominent critic of radical Islam after Hyatt Place learned of opponents’ plans to protest it.





The hotel, where activist Pamela Geller was going to address the crowd and sign copies of her new book Stop the Islamization of America, cancelled their meeting space, forcing the Tea Party to reserve a nearby community center.





“In light of the business disruptions affiliated with this event, it has been moved to an alternate location,” said a Hyatt Place manager, who declined to give further details on the decision.





[snip]





“Let’s send a message to the fear mongers and haters in Sugar Land and Fort Bend County that the likes of Ms. Pamela Geller and her bigoted ideology are not welcome here in the 4th most racially diverse county in the USA,” residents Deron Patterson and Q Imam said in a press release.





full (and long) article at link


ImageX 4 ImageX36
Image

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 43902
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Pam Geller

#19

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Tue Oct 18, 2011 8:09 pm

:shock: If the face is the window to the soul, ice cold harridan.



User avatar
kate520
Posts: 15127
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 3:02 pm
Location: Dark side of the Moon
Occupation: servant of cats, chicken wrangler
Contact:

Pam Geller

#20

Post by kate520 » Tue Oct 18, 2011 8:13 pm

You should see that face in motion. It becomes a shrieking harpy.


DEFEND DEMOCRACY

Shagnastie
Posts: 550
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2011 7:37 pm

Pam Geller

#21

Post by Shagnastie » Tue Oct 18, 2011 8:25 pm

Actually, there are three ugly things Pam never misses a chance to get before the public ... her face and her titz.



A Legal Lohengrin
Posts: 10415
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2010 9:56 pm

Pam Geller

#22

Post by A Legal Lohengrin » Tue Oct 18, 2011 10:47 pm

Actually, there are three ugly things Pam never misses a chance to get before the public ... her face and her titz.The ugliest thing she shows the public is her mind.



Somerset
Posts: 3758
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2009 5:52 am
Location: Silicon Valley
Occupation: Lab rat

Pam Geller

#23

Post by Somerset » Wed Oct 19, 2011 12:14 am

You should see that face in motion. It becomes a shrieking harpy.But but but, she's wearing a necklace that says, "LOVE." How can she not be a nice person?



User avatar
June bug
Posts: 6098
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 3:29 pm
Location: Northern San Diego County

Pam Geller

#24

Post by June bug » Wed Oct 19, 2011 2:32 am

Actually, there are three ugly things Pam never misses a chance to get before the public ... her face and her titz.The ugliest thing she shows the public is her mindsoul.FIFY.



Lola_Getz
Posts: 2757
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 5:40 am

Pam Geller

#25

Post by Lola_Getz » Wed Oct 19, 2011 2:35 am

The ugliest thing she shows the public is her mindsoul.Pam Geller has a soul?



Post Reply

Return to “Miscellaneous”