Geraldo's (Final) 'Solution'

Class vs Ass

The Moustachioed Ambulance Chaser  Geraldo Rivera soils himself

He should stick with ‘who killed Michael Jackson’ and ‘Anna Nicole’ stories. Even as the court jester at FOX the creep is unbearable.

This imbecile  has the hide  to ask, “why do these ads?” He then follows up with a tirade of insults, culminating with this, “Pamela Geller, you’re part of the problem, not the solution.” (more here)

Pamela Geller defends pro-Israel ads on Geraldo

Listen to this interview to hear Pamela Geller telling the truth while a sneering and willfully blind Geraldo Rivera heaps abuse on her. This interview epitomizes the uphill battle that freedom fighters have to get the truth out against the opposition of a thoroughly corrupt and deeply compromised mainstream media. But try as he might in this shameful performance, Geraldo never succeeds in derailing Geller’s message or putting her on the defensive.

Audio thanks to Big Fur Hat.

Remember this Ground Zero memoriable moment? Geraldo Rivera’s Hit Job on Pamela Geller – September 11, 2010

A poster on Atlas Shrugs made a transcript

I have attempted to very quickly transcribe this convo. Any errors, or ??, others can fill in the gaps and rectify, be my guest. My comments are in [ ]


Right, what do you think of the ads, on the New York City subways, that are due to go up any minute now because of a court order, ordering them, ordering the Transit Authority to put them up. The ad reads: In any war between the civilized man and the savage, support the civilised man. etc

Gentleman: Well, I think you have the right to put them up, whether I agree with them or not, is another story.

Rivera: The woman behind the ad campaign is the same lady who fought tooth and nail to prevent the mosque going up, down near Ground Zero, downtown Manhatten. Pamela Geller joins us. Hi, Pamela. Hello Pamela, you there?

[Fox loses the connection with Pamela Geller]

Rivera: Hello Pamela. I don’t know, you gonna find her? We’re gonna find Pamela Geller. I wanna ask her about the dumb, I mean the ads. So intentionally recklessly provocative. I don’t understand what the real purpose is, other than to cause upset.

Gentleman: Well she’s gonna get a reaction but it won’t be a reaction we are seeing overseas, that is for sure. People will just be talking out, speaking out against it.

Rivera: When we establish or re-establish contact with Pamela Geller. Let me take your calls in the meantime. Oh, she’s ready. Hi Pamela.

PGeller: Hey, how are you?

Rivera: Did you hear the intro?

PGeller: No, I was disconnected. You asked the gentleman what he thought of it, I did not hear his response.

Rivera: His response was that it was a dumb idea….[Gentleman in the background laughs]

Gentleman: I said you had the right to put them up.

Rivera: However ill advised it may be, you have the Constitutional right to do it. But, Pamela, why are you doing it?

PGeller: Well, understand that these ads were submitted in response to anti-Israel ads that were running on the New York subway system. It was a campaign that had been running for a while. There was a different anti-Israel campaign that was running also on New York City Metro North, but when I saw the ads in the subway, I submitted my ads as a response to these vicious anti-Israel ads. Now that was in September 2011. My ad was rejected, which I was taken aback, because a far more vicious ad. I consider my ads not to be controversial, my ad is accurate, any war on ….

Rivera: Calling muslims savage?

PGeller: I was not calling muslims savages in my ad, I said, to defeat Jihad. Any war on innocent civilians, is savagery, tens of thousands of rockets going into Gaza, going from Gaza into Southern Israel, Ashkelon, Sderot, is savagery. The slaughter of the Jewish family, the Fogel family. The entire family in the middle of the night, beheading the child, the 3 year old infant, is savagery. The behading of journalist Nicholas, I mean Daniel Pearl, was savagery. The blowing up of the bus in Bulgaria, with Jewish women and children on holiday, is savagery. I did not say Islam.

Rivera: Pamela Geller, hold on, hold on.

PGeller: Yes, Sir.

Rivera: You want me to start delineating all the civilian casualities, the women and children who have died on the other side, on the Arab side? I mean really, when you start getting involved in these things…

PGeller: No, no, wait a minute. That is not what I am doing…

Rivera: …my question to you is very simple. Why are you doing this?

PGeller: OK, you talk about collateral. The Israelis and the Americans, never ever target civilians. It is not their strategy. This is a war stragety targetting innocent civilians. That is different Geraldo, let’s not be ambiguous about this….

Rivera: They are just as dead.

PGeller: Oh please.

Rivera: Aren’t they just as dead? Why? Why?

[Pamela Geller tries to interject]

PGeller: That is absolutely…..this is a moral..

Rivera: Palestinian civilians have been victimised more than Israeli civilians, that is the truth.

PGeller: This is moral ?? which is beneath you. But, the bottom line is, I am doing it because there is only one narrative out there. You must understand that these anti-Israel ads ran across the country. In every State.

Rivera: I don’t remember it, do you remember the ads? [Rivera asks the Gentleman] What did they do? What did they say?

[How convenient – as always, when people attack Pamela Geller on her ads and when she then refers them to the vicious anti-Israel ads (which no one complained about), which ran ‘across the country’, the dhimmis all go into a convenient amnesia mode – and say they have never seen the anti-Israel ads]

PGeller: The first ad said, and just so that you know, you don’t know it, and all of the Media that I am talking to, you, who don’t know it, which speaks of systemic institutionalized antisemitism. But I go to my ?? rights….

Rivera: Right, because we don’t remember what the ads said? We’re antisemites?

PGeller: I didn’t say you, I said the Media, there is a systemic anti-Israel bias. Why didn’t you do a story on it? Why didn’t every Media, who is doing a story on this, do a story on that? Because….

[Rivera talks over Pamela]

Rivera: I sought of remember we did do a story of the ads

[lots of talking over each other]….

PGeller: It is the imposition of the Sharia..

[talking over Pamela]

Rivera: …of the MTA, New York subway, alright.

PGeller: These are the blasphemy laws….

[Rivera speaks over Pamela, again]

Rivera: Why are you doing it? Pamela, why are you doing it?

PGeller: These are the blasphey laws under the Sharia. Under the Sharia you cannot criticise Islam, Geraldo.

Rivera: Right…

PGeller: …and this attempt to shut these ads down is the imposition of Sharia. Those anti-freedom riots across 50 countries…

[Rivera interjects]

Rivera: What do you get by calling them savage, that is what I want to know?

PGeller: It is accurate. Truth is the recognition of reality. They are savages. Are you doing to, …di you see the Daniel Pearl beheading, did you see it with your own eyes? I am going to ask you a question. Was that savagery?

Rivera: That was savage.

PGeller: Did you see the pictures of the Fogel family? When they were slaughtered, after they were slaughtered, in cold blood, the whole entire family?

Rivera: You know, if you want to talk about the people who killed Daniel Pearl, then put up an ad that says the people who killed Daniel Pearl were savages.

[Pamela tries to interject]

Rivera: Like the people who killed the ‘other’ family, were savages.

[Rivera, the family had a name – the family were the Fogel family]

Rivera: When you start calling an entire ‘race’ …

PGeller: I,

Rivera: of people savage, then

PGeller: Wait a minute…..

Rivera: then you get a problem

PGeller: Islam is not a race, so let’s not buy into that bogus narrative, aye. And second of all, I did not quote ‘all’. There is no islam in that ad, there is no muslims in that ad, and I have got to tell you something, I suspect, because moderate muslims have been the most, the most….

Rivera: Do you mean by savages, the residents of the West Bank? What do you mean?

PGeller: No, I mean…….

Rivera: What do you mean?

PGeller: The war on Israel. The war on Israel has been a war on innocent civilians, listen carefully, read carefully, don’t accuse me of

Rivera: Any war between the civilised man and the savage, support the civilised man – support Israel to defeat Jihad.

PGeller: Israel is not targetting innocent civilians. The war on Israel, from the very first, has been a war on innocent civilians….

[Rivera interjects]

Rivera: What is your real motive Pamela? What is your real motive? To get attention for yourself? What is it really?

PGeller: Oh give me a break. Geraldo, you don’t see the justice in this. I want to speak to Willowbrook Geraldo, because I was in central prop[? sorry, unclear] and I loved that man. I want to talk to that man who understood an anti-life theology versus ??? theology, what do you mean what is my point?

My point is, there is a vicious anti-Israel bias, in the Media, and this just proves it. That my ads have caused such massive consternation. The bottom line it is moderate muslims, who by the way, have suffered more at the hands of Jihad than non-muslims in ??. Infidels should sanction these ads…

[Rivera interjects]

Rivera: So, these ads, to me, is of the sort of the movie, with the innocence of mohammed, movie.

PGeller: What, no, no,

Rivera: Totally unnecessary, totally provocative, totally picking a fight that, you know, trying to piss people off when they get on the subway, many of them are muslims living within Brooklyn going to Manhatten,

Gentleman: Yes, it is uncomfortable…..

Rivera: It makes Jews uncomfortable because they are sitting under this poster and it sounds like they are picking a fight.

PGeller: Actually, no, no one is sitting under it, it is on the platforms. Are you saying to me, that you believe, that all muslims sanctioned Jihad and all muslims hate Israel and that all muslims hate Jews? Is that what you are saying?

Rivera: What I am saying Pamela Geller, is you are absolutely aggravating a difficult situation, and you know you are doing it, you are in the business of doing it, you are a professional provocateur….

PGeller: No, I am not.

Rivera: …I thought the language you used to fight the mosque downtown was really a very offensive, not at all in the spirit of this City. New York City being a place where we welcome everybody, and here you are calling people savages. Come on.

PGeller: You are calling me names. I am not, I am a human rights activist, speaking out for the voiceless. Where are you on the Coptic Christians in Egypt? Where are you on the Christians in Indonesia and Malaysia? Where are you on the Buddhists? ?? Jihadi wars in Thailand? Ethiopia? Somalia? Bangladesh? The Hindus? Where are you on this issue? How dare you call me a deliberate provocateur, only because my message is controversial. And, my message is a pro-human message. We are living in such a cesspool such a low state of the World, that my………

[Rivera interrupts]

Rivera: You are a trouble maker, you are, your, your raison(sp?) [I think this wrinkly bombastic narcissist imbecile meant raison d’être], is to cause attention to yourself…

PGeller: How about this….

Rivera: .when you are separating people, like we need it like a hole in the head.

PGeller: I am separating people? Hundreds of millions that are dying in a….

Rivera: Yes.

PGeller: Jihadi war…..

Rivera: Yes,…

Rivera: You are part of the problem Pamela Geller you are not part of the solution

PGeller: So, the hundreds of millions that have been slaughtered in Jihadi wars, they are not the problem, but me quoting, you are going to kill the messenger. All you have done……

Rivera: I am not killing anyone. You are not helpful.

PGeller: If…..

Rivera: You are not helpful.

PGeller: If anyone was listening to this, all you have done here is call me names, you have not debated me..there has been no intellectual discourse….

Gentleman: Pamela, Pamela Geller, whose paying for these ads?

Rivera: Where’d you get the money for these ads. Yeah who is paying for these ads?

PGeller: All money is raised on my website, Atlas Shrugs and my colleague, Robert Spencer, Jihad Watch, it is all small donations and I am going to tell you something……

Rivera: Don’t tell me anymore, I have heard enough….Pamela Geller, thank you very much. Goodbye. Goodbye Pamela, Goodbye. Oh my goodness. I have a stomach ache, I don’t believe this.

[Rivera and the other guy continue to laugh]

Rivera has stomach ache? More like brainache, being that Rivera is virtually incapable of stringing a decent intelligent sentence together. All he is capable of is spewing profuse abuse, covering up for his huge lack of intellect. Disgusting and ignorant old man.

Robert Spencer: The Suicide of the  (once Free) Press

At Atlas Shrugs I discuss the media’s strange eagerness to endorse restrictions on the freedom of speech.

As the Muhammad movie riots continue to roil the world, prominent Muslim leaders in the U.S. and elsewhere are calling for restrictions on the freedom of speech, including the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar, the Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia, and the Muslim Brotherhood – and in the U.S., Sheikh Husham al-Husainy of the Karbalaa Islamic Education Center in Dearborn, Michigan and Imam Mohammad Qatanani of the Islamic Center of Passaic County, New Jersey. Given Sharia prohibitions on free speech, that is to be expected. What is more surprising – or should be more surprising, if the free press were doing its job — is the alacrity with which the mainstream media has echoed these calls for self-censorship and submission to Islamic blasphemy laws.

In the wake of the worldwide Muhammad movie riots, the Los Angeles Times, for example, published its second op-ed in four weeks calling for restrictions on the freedom of speech. To be sure, the second piece, by Sarah Chayes of the Carnegie Endowment, was far more sophisticated and well reasoned than the crude call for censorship of the first, which was written by the thuggish Nathan Lean. Where Lean had ham-fistedly smeared and demonized those whose speech he hates and then called for them to be silenced, First Amendment be damned, Chayes argued on the basis of a fine distinction that already exists within American free speech law: “U.S. law makes a distinction between speech that is simply offensive and speech that is deliberately tailored to put lives and property at immediate risk.”

Indeed, but as the Wall Street Journal pointed out, the legal distinction to which Chayes was referring was formulated in response to the Ku Klux Klan’s advocacy of violence, and thus did not apply to the Muhammad movie filmmakers, who called for no violence from anyone. The Klan, said the WSJ, “advocated (but did not incite) violence on the part of their own supporters in order to promote their cause of racial supremacy. By contrast, the filmmakers provoked a violent reaction fromthe other side. To prosecute them would be analogous to punishing civil rights activists for inciting white supremacists to commit violent or lawless acts.”

A point well taken. But the larger question is, why is the Los Angeles Times coming down on the side of restrictions on the freedom of speech in the first place? Are they not aware that such restrictions, if implemented, can and probably will be used against them? While the Los Angeles Times editors are no doubt serene in their certainty that they will never print anything that will insult Islam or Muslims, there could all too easily come a time when a governing authority deems something they have published to be “hateful” or even “deliberately tailored to put lives and property at immediate risk,” and – if free speech by then has been restricted – that will be the end of the Times as an outpost of the free press.

5 thoughts on “Geraldo's (Final) 'Solution'”

  1. Keep talking Kassandra, sooner or later what you foretold becomes a reality.

    …and people like Gerlado will be the first to jump on the bandwagon. Just don’t expect an apology. Pompous gits like Geraldo rarely apologize.

  2. I am always perplexed by the fact that Geraldo is on televison at all, let alone FOX Network. Can’t believe he’s employed. The mere site of him irritates me. He thinks that old school teachers molesting school boys is acceptable behavior and doesn’t deserve a jail term. He’s twisted. Not much credibility here. I am just glad you don’t let buffoons like this discourage you!

  3. Geraldo is certainly a waste of oxygen! Caroline is soo right! I sincerely believe he is all about the WOW story he is desperately trying to create, not truth or even real information. If he wrote for a magazine article it would be “The truth about the amazing, fantastic two headed ardvark who ate Michele Obama while she was trying to rearrange her diamond studded hijab, during a speech to the children of Muslim child killers!–gasp, last Tuesday.”

  4. This ‘Geraldo’? Sniggering smirking idiot? How come a total shit like that can get paid to present radio? Let’s not forget this particular performance, or let him forget it either.

Comments are closed.