May 05, 2015

They call themselves "feminists," but media hacks treat Pamela Geller like she "asked for it" (Plus EXCLUSIVE VIDEO from the scene)

Ezra LevantRebel Commander

First Pamela Geller was attacked by terrorists for holding a free speech event. Then she was attacked by the media for the same reason.

Look at the media's twisted treatment of Geller after the foiled shooting in Garland, Texas.

If she had just survived a rape attempt, he asks, would they accuse her of "asking for it"?

The Toronto Sun in particular printed a insulting "profile" of Geller, who the "feminist" writer called a "housewife turned activist."

That writer can only dream about having a career as illustrious as Geller's -- who was formerly a financial analyst at the New York Daily News and the associate publisher of the New York Observer.

Of course, the Sun didn't all mention that in their takedown article.

PS: My video report features EXCLUSIVE FOOTAGE of Geller's event and the aftermath, inside and out, including the suspects' torn apart car, and event attendees singing "The Star Spangled Banner."

You won't see this anywhere else but at The Rebel!


JOIN for more fearless news and commentary you won’t find anywhere else.

VISIT our NEW group blog The Megaphone!
It’s your one-stop shop for rebellious commentary from independent and fearless readers and writers.

READ Ezra Levant's book about the Canadian Human Rights Commissions, censorship and the Mohammed cartoons --
Shakedown: How Our Government is Undermining Democracy in the Name of Human Rights
It was voted "the best political book of the last 25 years."

You must be logged in to comment. Click here to log in.
commented 2015-05-06 23:42:06 -0400
@ Julie Keshiro…when you say “I dont (sic) think if 200 Muslims were to hold an event for the purpose of sharing funny drawings of Jesus bleeding on the cross…” (etc.) Julie…here you completely misconstrue the event…you may not realize how useful you are being to your enemy, but this comment of yours is, perhaps inadvertently, more of the ongoing deceit, deception and craftiness we see around us…these were not cartoons ridiculing the suffering of Mohammed…in fact Mohammed’s life work was to cause suffering, TAKE CAPTIVE OTHERS TO HIS WILL BY FORCE OF ARMS, and not to suffer himself…HE WAS A WARRIOR: AN AGGRESSOR AND AN OPPRESSOR…Jesus, on the other hand gave his life for others and NEVER led people into battle…he even rebuked Peter for taking a sword to his enemies and declared ‘MY KINGDOM IS NOT OF THIS WORLD else would my servants fight’…there couldn’t be more OPPOSITE rivals for our hearts and minds. Mohammed’s power was earthly and devilish, full of hatred, rage, violence and fleshly passion and ambition for power, while Jesus’ power is eternal, Almighty, Heavenly and overwhelmingly loving and gracious…Divine.

Not only was there nothing funny about Jesus bleeding on the cross, but what is funny is how people have made it a RELIGIOUS RULE that didn’t exist in the past, that Mohammed can not be pictured….that is what is not only unconventional, but peculiar and manipulatively MANUFACTURED by modern autocrats who seek to use Mohammed as a PAWN, a useful TOOL, to help them to control the lives of others and PUT THEM INTO CHAINS AND SLAVERY…a very good reason for Ms. Geller and the other brave souls, (good artists too!) to DELIBERATELY PROVOKE these deceivers.

Consider how much effort our countries’ media and politicians spend attacking those who rebuke and provoke Islam’s DETERMINATION to take away YOUR freedom! Do you really approve of Islam’s treatment of women, children, gays, Jews, Christians, artists and others?…if not, then you owe it to YOURSELF to stand against every move they make to steal, kill and destroy…and if necessary to provoke them until they back down from their agenda of totalitarianism: for ever…..THEY ARE BEGINNING TO SEE THAT THEY HAVE WOKEN THE SLEEPING GIANT and they cannot now win. But you must be brave and strong, Julia…never give in to evil and promise yourself never to be tricked into attacking the brave people who defend your freedom by risking their own lives.

@ George Macel…yeah crazy people will attack, but look how it ended although they were heavily armed…and we still have free speech and our numbers ARE GROWING.
commented 2015-05-06 14:29:51 -0400
I still think people that attended this event could have been added to the list of Darwin Award winners.
commented 2015-05-06 14:12:23 -0400
Thank you ALEX PILMEISTER for that link to The Glazov Gang – Geert Wilders on “The West’s Battle for Freedom.”
Profoundly insightful (and incite-full), intelligent, sage, measured and informed, and dire in it’s warning! No wonder Mr. Wilders is so horribly torn at and battered by the sociopathic elite chattering classes – they’re afraid of his truths getting out!
Anybody know how to get a transcript of the interview, there are lots of words, phrases and concepts I would like to copy/paste, use and cite in future?
commented 2015-05-06 13:10:18 -0400
Best part about this is that the security guards did not take them alive but simply pimped them their platoon of virgins…..:-)

It gives me growing concern the number of terrorists we are incarcerating because they are actively proselytizing their fellow inmates and awaiting the day their numbers reach critical mass for the inevitable mass hostage taking to demand the release of these “political prisoners”……that is what happened everywhere else….that is what is bound to happen here.

Another bonus is that this way we do not have to put up with the MSM depicting them as doe eyed children begging for mercy when they are taken alive no matter how cold and brutal their karma.
commented 2015-05-05 20:58:04 -0400
This terror attack has exposed more about the MSM and social justice wankers loyalties than anything – well, they said the same after 9-11 that was our fault too. These people are dangerously confused – Pam Geller said it – they have inverse morality – they will embrace their nation’s enemies and slag its heroes – - so sick.
commented 2015-05-05 20:56:21 -0400
Bang on Maurice. You and the other rebel followers gives me hope. Thank you all.
commented 2015-05-05 20:26:02 -0400
Not a day goes by where I don’t come across a cartoon of God up on a cloud lecturing a politician, or a pic of Jesus wearing a habs jersey. There is something along these lines in news papers and magazines so often I don’t even think about it anymore. All these main stream news paper’s and magazines, are they all hate groups spreading hate. Where’s the common sense, why can’t people see the double standards, sheep being led to the slaughter !
commented 2015-05-05 20:15:32 -0400
Excellent piece, Ezra. These media hacks, along with most other “liberal” media commentators are woefully clueless about the principles of free speech and about the threat of radical Islam. They should be embarrassed, but instead they are smug.
And, Julie Kashiro’s plainly ridiculous comment below is a reflection of this troubling mindset.
commented 2015-05-05 19:35:28 -0400
Peter, agreed. That piece (by Maurice) was well written. I especially like the part about responding to offensive ideas being presenting more and better ideas, not silencing those we disagree with.
commented 2015-05-05 19:30:22 -0400
If free speech is curtailed in any way, restricted in any way, it is no longer free speech.

As Maurice said, “There is no such thing as free speech without the freedom to offend, and being offended is a personal choice.”

Actually Maurice, I had a hard time choosing one phrase to quote. It’s all good.
commented 2015-05-05 18:40:27 -0400
Julie Keshiro, the event was not “fuelled by hate” as you say, but by a refusal to relinquish ground to those who would impose their ideology on a democratic nation founded on the principles of freedom, foremost of these being fee speech; a freedom on which every other freedom hangs. Personally, I think Charlie Hebdo is a thoroughly vile and disgusting publication, and further more I don’t find it the least bit funny. I wouldn’t use it to line the bottom of a bird cage. Yet I would defend to the death their right to publish, and proclaim from the roof tops that those who were shot by the Islamist radicals were martyrs in the cause of freedom, my freedom and yours. It isn’t agreeable speech that requires protection, but speech that some would find offensive. There is no such thing as free speech without the freedom to offend, and being offended is a personal choice. The answer to offensive ideas is more and better ideas, not the silencing of opinions that we don’t agree with. And Pamela Geller wasn’t criticizing individual Muslims, the event was a thumb in the nose of “Islamism”. Name me one predominantly Islamic country where freedom of speech prevails, particularly for non-Muslims. You can’t. Name me one European or Western Democracy with an increasing Muslim population where freedom of speech isn’t slowly being eroded. You can’t, and if you think you can, you’re self-deluded.
commented 2015-05-05 18:37:25 -0400
“If the Muslims would have stayed away from the event Geller looks like a fool.” Possibly. However, past actions have shown “Muslims” to be easily offended (at anything they think is offensive). Like wishing for the deaths of “infidels” in the Koran is not offensive? Apparently not. Additionally, like school yard bullies, they are becoming somewhat predictable in their responses. Kill, Kill, Kill and kill some more. Religion of Peace? Not a hope in hell (which I hope these thugs are headed for).
commented 2015-05-05 18:30:57 -0400
Geller just set up some live target practice for the local enforcement. These two islamic terrorists were probably in the “cross hairs” long before any shots were fired.

Nicely baited Geller. And the socialist/communist/liberal terrorist loving reprobates (includes you too troodo), will have to find some other gullible islamic pawns to keep things rolling.
commented 2015-05-05 18:29:51 -0400
JULIE KESHIRO, not so. An event emphasizing the importance of free speech and how it is being assaulted, in your eyes, is “fueled by hate”? Let’s see, I understand that Pamela Geller stands against and speaks against violent jihad, the imposition of sharia law, amputations, female genital mutilation, honour violence, gender apartheid, misogyny, Jew hatred, the wholesale slaughter of Christians, supremacism and racism (all central to Islam). Tell me, are you in favour of these? Lot of incidents of the mocking of Christians and Jesus, some of it done by Charlie Hebdo, which was attacked for the printing of a cartoon of Muhammad. For example, the ‘artwork’ depicting a small plastic crucifix of Jesus submerged in a glass of the artist’s urine. Did Christians like it? Of course not. Did they slaughter people for this offense or burn embassies? You know the answer. The CBC, by the way, posted this image on their ‘arts page’. I don’t recall any Christian terrorists attacking the CBC in response. However, hypocritically, the CBC, refused to print any images of Muhammad. Abridging our free speech – really, language of the conquered – so as not to offend, emboldens the terrorists by giving them the sanction as the victim.
Just wondering. Do you work for a Human Rights Commission?
commented 2015-05-05 18:28:49 -0400
Julie, I wish I could say I hated your comment, but I can’t now can I? That would make both our comments illegal.
commented 2015-05-05 18:23:46 -0400
If the Muslims would have stayed away from the event Geller looks like a fool.
commented 2015-05-05 18:12:13 -0400
“This event was fuelled by hate” Really, how? Did anyone there call for the extermination of Muslims as they do for us, the infidels? Islam, and the Koran are quite specific in that regard. As for the Socialist Media and their minions, they are a disgrace to truth, and immoral in their actions and words. I fear the Sun Media Group may be headed down the same path now that they have been bought out by Post Media.
commented 2015-05-05 17:48:46 -0400
This event was fuelled by hate and the gunmens’ actions were also fuelled by hate so nobody wins. I dont think if 200 Muslims were to hold an event for the purpose of sharing funny drawings of Jesus bleeding on the cross, and other depictions, that I would call that free speech. Rather it would be hate speech.