Posts Tagged ‘1st amendment’

Gee, If the “FREE SPEECH AREA” for the 2013 Pride Parade is Halfway Down 5th Street, Everywhere Else is the NO FREE SPEECH AREA?

Thursday, June 27th, 2013

Here’s the map from last year and I’m supposing that it’s still good for 2013 seeing as how the Pride website doesn’t seem to have been updated completely.

And I suppose that I mean halfway down the first block of 5th Street, but it hardly matters – those with something to say about Bradley Manning or whathaveyou will be out of sight, out of mind regardless.

Or so it seems:

Oh well.

Here’s the Latest Controversial SFMTA MUNI Bus Ad: “THIS IS ISLAMIC APARTHEID” – Uh, You’re Losing This Game, SFMTA

Wednesday, June 19th, 2013

Via the District 5 Blog comes the news

On It Goes

All the deets:

“After months of procrastination and dhimmitude, the San Francisco MTA finally posted our Islamic apartheid ads on city buses (above are the first of the pics). They have been running the libelous “Israel is an apartheid state” ad without hesitation (or substantiation), mind you. I, on the other hand, had to provide numerous links and references to back up my ads. Why me and not them? Because I was stating fact, but the Jew-haters were merely expressing their opinion. You can’t make this stuff up, folks.

San Francisco turned over the revenue from our ads to Muslim groups to study the effect AFDI ads had on the Muslim community, I kid you not. But they kept the revenue from the Jew-hatred ads.

We will educate the American people despite the difficulty, despite the obstacles.”

Click to expand

Speaking of Offensive MUNI Bus Ads, Check Out This Campaign from San Francisco’s DAVID CLAY JEWELERS

Thursday, March 21st, 2013

Add this one to the list of crimes from DAVID KAY JEWELERS:

“You won’t get jealous when your friend gets the newer smaller version”

Click to expand

(Oh, and BTW, the offensive ad here isn’t “anti-gay” not at all.

To say so is ignorant.

But it is anti other things, I’ll grant you that.)

In closing, diamonds are horrible. Get anything else but a diamond. People will figure this out soon enough and the worthless piece of rock on your finger will be even more worthless a couple decades from now.

And more importantly, it will be seen by others as worthless.

Oh well.

Why is George Gascon the Point Man for Islamophobia, His Afghanistan Yemen Problem? Plus a New LGBT Ad

Monday, March 18th, 2013

Ah, let’s see here, is District Attorney George Gascon going to be on the Today Show like today?

SF District Attorney George Gascon will be on the Today show Monday am re: Islamophobic Ads on MUNI. Stay tuned!… http://fb.me/10hSSRRFR  “

Could be (but I’ll never know ’cause I only have a rabbit ear antenna and, oddly, there’s no NBC affiliate in my tiny town, nor in the county, nor in any of the neighboring counties and I’ll be damned if the Comcast monopoly is going to get $100 per month out of me for basic cable.)

Anyway, leave us review, let’s travel all the way back to ought-ten:

SF Police Chief George Gascon’s HATE CRIME act against Yemenis

OPINION: SFPD Chief’s apology did not address culturally insensitive mentality

So now in 2013, George Gascon sees a chance to make amends with all sorts of different groups by being the point man on SFGov’s anti-MUNI bus ad campaign?

Sure looks that way. See the press release below.

Hey, is George Gascon running for Mayor of San Francisco, you know, down the road?

Maybe. (All he needs to do is clear up his case of foot-in-mouth disease by 2017 or whatever.)

Fin.

New topic.

Are new ads coming to MUNI buses?

Check it:

Is this ad Islamophobic and is the City Family going hold another news conference? I don’t know. You tell me.

What I do know is that maybe the MyJihad campaign isn’t going so hot.

Oh, and the next big terrorism incident we’re going to run into will be due to a white American dude, most likely, just saying, GC. I’m srsly.

On It Goes…

District Attorney, Board President Chiu, and City Leaders Denounce Islamophobic MUNI Ads
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
March 11, 2013

Contact: Stephanie Ong Stillman, DA Gascón’s Office
ADA Alex Bastian, DA Gascón’s Office

SAN FRANCISO – Today, District Attorney George Gascón, Board of Supervisors President David Chiu, and Supervisors John Avalos, London Breed, Malia Cohen, Jane Kim, Scott Wiener, Norman Yee held a press conference to denounce Islamophobic and racist advertisements by the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI) scheduled to run on MUNI buses today.

“These offensive ads serve no other purpose than to denigrate our city’s Arab and Muslim communities,” said District Attorney George Gascón. “When any community in San Francisco is attacked, it affects all of us. I and the city leaders standing with me today are exercising our free speech rights in condemning these ads and standing with the Arab and Muslim communities of San Francisco.”

“Hate has no place in our City,” said Mayor Ed Lee. “San Francisco is a city that celebrates its diversity, and hateful speech and discrimination against our Arab and Muslim communities will never be tolerated.”

“Our respect for free speech does not mean we allow hateful speech to go unchallenged,” said Board President David Chiu. “As a former civil rights attorney, I’m proud to stand with our Arab and Muslim American families to send a united message that San Francisco embraces diversity and tolerance, not hate and bigotry.”

AFDI’s founder Pamela Geller has been deemed an anti-Muslim hate extremist by the Southern Poverty Law Center. In August of 2012, San Franciscans were outraged over AFDI advertisements on MUNI that referred to Arabs and Muslims as “savages.” Arab and Muslim community leaders say the new advertisements are even more offensive as they wrongly suggest that all Muslims are defined by extremism and violence, and baselessly target Arab and Muslim San Franciscans who make invaluable contributions to the city’s life and culture.

Supervisor David Chiu is introducing a resolution to condemn the Islamophobic and racist MUNI Ads at Tuesday’s Board of Supervisors meeting. In response, the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Authority will dedicate the proceeds from the offensive advertisements to fund a city-wide study on the impact of discrimination on Arab and Muslim communities. City leaders have met with Council on American-Islamic Relations – San Francisco Bay Area, Asian Law Caucus, the Ramallah Club, the Arab Cultural Center, churches and mosques to discuss targeting of vulnerable communities and the city’s commitment to protecting and standing with those communities.”

The Mobile Billboards of San Francisco – Are They Illegal or Not?

Tuesday, January 5th, 2010

Work with me here – mobile billboards, you know, those trucks that are basically giant rectangular ads, are banned in San Francisco under Section 680 of the Police Code and yet you can see them all over town.

What gives?

Click to expand:

Maybe San Francisco has given up enforcing this regulation? Let’s see what the New York Times had to say back ten years ago:

“Similar disputes are occurring in Boston and in San Francisco, which suspended enforcement of its ban on mobile billboards in June because of a lawsuit, said Nathan Ballard, a deputy city attorney there. But San Francisco recently revised its law to explain the rationale behind it (to cut traffic congestion, truck emissions and assaults on citizens’ aesthetic sensibilities). Unless the billboard company succeeds in persuading a judge to issue a preliminary injunction by Dec. 1, he said, San Francisco will resume enforcing its billboard ban.”

(Nate Ballard was a San Francisco deputy city attorney? Did not know that.) Anywho, it could be that constitutional concerns prevent San Francisco from doing anything about mobile billboards.

Oh well.

That’s just my guess – maybe you can find a loophole here. Enjoy:

SEC. 680. ADVERTISING VEHICLES PROHIBITED ON CITY STREETS.

(a) Findings and Purpose. The inherent primary purpose of commercial advertising vehicles is to display commercial advertising on public streets. By their nature, commercial advertising vehicles are intended to distract, and aim to capture and hold the attention of, members of the public on or adjoining public streets, including drivers, pedestrians, bicyclists, and others. Moreover, such vehicles display commercial advertising from a mobile platform, including while the vehicle is moving within the flow of traffic, potentially stopping, starting, or turning abruptly, accentuating the inherent tendency of such advertising to seize attention and to distract. Additionally, the use of motor vehicles to display commercial advertising creates exhaust emissions. For these reasons, the Board of Supervisors finds that commercial advertising vehicles create aesthetic blight and visual clutter and create potential and actual traffic and health and safety hazards. The purposes of this section are (1) to promote the public health, safety and welfare of motorists, pedestrians, bicyclists, and others using the City’s public streets and roadways and adjoining areas, by eliminating the aesthetic blight and visual clutter and traffic and safety hazards caused by the operation of commercial advertising vehicles on the City’s streets; (2) to reduce congestion on the City’s streets; (3) to reduce exhaust emissions, by eliminating as an emissions source a type of commercial advertising display whose use may require continuous or extensive operation of motor vehicle engines; (4) to protect public investment in and the character and dignity of the City’s streets; and (5) to aid in the attraction of tourists and other visitors who are so important to the economy of the City. This section is not intended to regulate any non-commercial speech, including non-commercial advertising or signage.

(b) Prohibition. No person may operate any commercial advertising vehicle in or on any public street in the City and County of San Francisco.

(c) Definitions. As used in this Section, the following terms shall have the following meanings:

(1) “City” means the City and County of San Francisco.

(2) “Commercial advertising vehicle” means a motor vehicle that is carrying, towing, or otherwise displaying any commercial advertising sign, unless the vehicle is used primarily to transport passengers or goods.

(3) “Commercial advertising sign” means a banner, placard, poster, card, picture, sign or display that does no more than propose a commercial transaction.

(d) Enforcement.

(1) The Police Department shall issue a written notice of violation concerning, and requiring the immediate correction of, any violation of this Section to the driver of any commercial advertising vehicle that is being driven or used in violation of this Section, as well as to the owner or other person responsible for the vehicle, if the identity of that owner or other person is known or readily ascertainable. If issued to the driver of a commercial advertising vehicle, the notice shall require the driver to inform the owner or other person responsible for the operation of the commercial advertising vehicle of the notice and of the violation to which it relates. Notice to the driver of a commercial advertising vehicle under this subsection shall be deemed notice to the owner or other person responsible for the operation of the vehicle.

(2) The City Attorney is authorized to enforce this Section by appropriate civil action. No such action shall be commenced against any person unless and until the Police Department has issued a notice of violation requiring correction to that person, as specified above, and that person has failed to comply with this Section and with that notice. In any civil action brought to enforce this Section, the City Attorney may pursue the remedies set forth in this Section for the violation of this Section that is subject of the notice, as well as for any subsequent violations of this Section that have occurred within one year after the issuance of the notice without regard to whether the Police Department issued subsequent notices concerning those subsequent violations.

(3) Violation of this Section shall constitute grounds for injunctive relief. In addition, any person who violates or refuses to comply with the provisions of this Section shall be liable for a civil penalty which shall be assessed and recovered in a civil action brought in the name of the People of the City and County of San Francisco in any court of competent jurisdiction. Each separate display of commercial advertising prohibited by this Section, and each day that a violation of this Section is committed or permitted to continue, shall constitute a separate violation. The amount of such civil penalty shall be $250 for the first violation, $350 for the second violation, and $500 for each subsequent violation of this Section. Any penalty assessed and recovered in an action brought pursuant to this paragraph shall be paid to the Treasurer of the City and County of San Francisco. The person against whom a penalty is assessed, or against whom an injunction is obtained, also shall be liable for the costs and attorney’s fees incurred by the City and County of San Francisco in bringing any civil action to enforce the provisions of this Section.

(4) Violation of this Section shall not constitute a criminal offense.

(5) In any action brought to enforce this Section, the City Attorney may also seek any remedies available under state or federal law.

(Added by Ord. 70-92, App. 3/4/92; amended by Ord. 234-00, File No. 001261, App. 10/13/00)

Just How Many Giant Advertising Trucks Are Circling Around SoMA These Days?

Tuesday, October 27th, 2009

You know, it used to be that you’d see these empty advertising trucks driving about town, you know like in the congested part of Fillmore in the Western Addition, but then they seemed to disappear from the Streets of San Francisco about a year ago.

But now, they are back, and with a vengeance. Is it possible to have four of these things on the same block in the SoMA? That’s the report I got. Here’s two recent sightings in one photo.

Fourth Street near Mission. Click to expand:

IMG_9477 copy

And leave us not forget this other truck, the one with Nevada plates (no, that doesn’t raise any issues at all!).

Is there no limit to these advertising trucks clogging Yerba Buena Gardens?

Even Las Vagas (Vegas, baby!) wants to regulate these things.