Over at Atlas Shrugs I discuss one example of the hateful mainstream media demonization of Pamela Geller's pro-Israel ad campaign:
It is good, and rather surprising in today's climate, to see the San Francisco Examiner, in an unsigned editorial, come out for Pamela Geller's free speech rights and say that her pro-Israel ads should be allowed to run. However, the Examiner predictably enough retails Islamic supremacist talking points in branding the ad "offensive," "bigoted," "hateful" and even "repulsive." Even the title of the editorial itself shows how unhappy and even embarrassed the Examiner’s editorial writer is to have to be coming out in favor of these ads running: “Hateful bus ads are free speech."
The ad in question says: “In any war between the civilized man and the savage, support the civilized man. Support Israel. Defeat jihad.” The Examiner notes that “the American Freedom Defense Initiative, an organization so extreme it has been deemed a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center, purchased the ads.” It is no surprise that the Examiner doesn’t bother to tell its luckless readers that the SPLC is a Leftist organization devoted to demonizing conservative individuals and groups by branding them as “hate groups” and lumping them in with the likes of the Ku Klux Klan. It doesn’t specify, of course, what it thinks is hateful about AFDI’s dedication to the defense of the freedom of speech, the freedom of conscience, and equality of rights of all people before the law.
The Examiner also doesn't bother to explain why it thinks the ad is ad "offensive," "bigoted," "hateful" and even "repulsive," but objections to the ad have revolved around two related claims: that it calls everyone who sides with the "Palestinians" against Israel, or every Muslim or every Arab, a "savage," and that the people who are opposed to Israel are not savages. The ad doesn't actually refer to all supporters of the Palestinian jihad, or all Muslims or all Arabs, but that claim has nevertheless been widely repeated in the mainstream media. It actually refers to the Palestinian jihadis who glory in the murders of innocent civilians.
Take, for example, Ahlam Tamimi, who helped murder 16 Israelis in a pizzeria. She recently appeared on al-Aqsa TV and recounted the joy of the "Palestinians" as radio reports on the jihad attack increased the number of dead: "Two minutes later, they said on the radio that the number had increased to five. I wanted to hide my smile, but I just couldn't. Allah be praised, it was great. As the number of dead kept increasing, the passengers were applauding."
Is it savage to take pleasure in the mass murder of innocent civilians? Yes, it is. And it is not actually "hateful," or "bigoted," or "offensive" or "repulsive" to say so. Glorying in the murders of innocent human beings is hateful, offensive, and repulsive, and stems in this case from Islamic bigotry and Jew-hatred. But the Examiner wouldn't dream of upsetting liberal pieties by noting that.