I read the New York Times coverage on the Ground Zero bus campaign and had to laugh. They are so crippled by their liberal bias, they are incapable of reporting a simple story in a responsible, intellectually honest or accurate way. Journalism is dead if these jokers are the template.
Michael Grynbaum writes...........
The group behind the advertisement had sued the authority last week, alleging that the advertisement had initially been rejected as inappropriate.
Wrong. Not "inappropriate." The position was 911 images were banned -- which is shocking. But nowhere in the article do they report that. Do New Yorkers and/or Americans know that 911 images have been embargoed? And it was not alleged, it was rejected, four times.
They run, unchallenged, the MTA's nonsensical position that they never saw the ad until Friday, unchallenged. The ad was rejected four times -- hellooooooo.
And of course I am misquoted. When asked if I was "concerned that the image of the flaming twin towers might upset some New Yorkers," The Times reports
Ms. Geller, in a brief interview on Monday, replied: “Not at all. It’s part of American history.”
This is untrue. Clearly, the reporter with an agenda needed to twist my quote in the hopes of making me seem .......somehow cavalier about the issue. What I said was, "it's part of American history, and not nearly as offensive as a 15-story mega mosque looking down on the cemetery of Ground Zero." Which is what I said earlier that day here.
It's amusing to watch the cold-blooded try and paint the passionate as ............cold-blooded.
They have no shame.
In the suit, the ad’s sponsor, the American Freedom Defense Initiative, which is run by Pamela Geller, a prominent right-wing blogger, claimed that the firm that handles advertising for the transit agency had infringed on its right to free speech by repeatedly requesting changes to the ad, like removing the image of the plane.
In a short statement issued on Monday, a spokesman for the authority, Kevin Ortiz, said the advertisement as originally submitted had been deemed acceptable under the agency’s “advertising guidelines and governing legal standards.”
The authority, which must approve advertising in the transit system, said it had not made a final decision on the advertisement before the lawsuit was filed.
John H. Banks III, a mayoral appointee to the authority’s board, said he supported the decision, despite his personal objection to the advertisement. “The wonderful thing about our country is that people have a right to express themselves, as long as it doesn’t endanger anyone’s life,” Mr. Banks said. “I support it, even though I disagree with it vehemently.”
Whose life is in danger? I mean, really. Who gets the death threats for opposing Islamic supremacism?
The planned mosque, which received final city approval last week, has been at the center of a fierce national debate about religious freedom and the legacy of the Sept. 11 attacks.
Asked if she was concerned that the image of the flaming twin towers might upset some New Yorkers, Ms. Geller, in a brief interview on Monday, replied: “Not at all. It’s part of American history.”
Not what I said.