RSS Feed
Loading ...
Via Michelle Malkin’s link to KGO
New York said “yes,” but we said “no.” Why were the U.S. Marines denied permission to film a recruiting commercial on the streets of San Francisco? San Francisco is, once again, the center of a controversy over how city leaders treat the U.S. military. This time, it involves an elite group of Marines who wanted to film a recruitment commercial in San Francisco on the anniversary of 9/11.
The tension has been building in the two weeks since the city turned away members of the Silent Drill Platoon, and it boiled over Monday afternoon at a meeting of the San Francisco Film Commission. The U.S. Marine Silent Drill Platoon performed Monday morning in New York’s Times Square. They filmed part of a recruitment commercial through the start of the morning rush hour — something they could not do in San Francisco on the anniversary of 9/11. “It’s insulting, it’s demeaning. This woman is going to insult these young heroes by just arbitrarily saying, ‘no, you’re not going to film any Marines on California Street,” said Captain Greg Corrales of the SFPD Traffic Bureau.
Captain Greg Corrales commands the police traffic bureau that works with crews shooting commercials, TV shows and movies in the city. He’s also a Marine veteran and his son is serving his third tour of duty in Iraq. He says Film Commission Executive Director Stefanie Coyote would only allow the Marine’s production crew to film on California Street if there were no Marines in the picture. They wound up filming the empty street and will have to superimpose the Marines later.
“Ms. Coyote’s politics blinded her to her duty as the director of the Film Commission and as a responsible citizen,” said Captain Corrales.
As pointed out, the city is trying to use traffic concerns as an excuse
Captain Corrales and several other Marine veterans came to the Film Commission Monday afternoon. They see this as just the latest insult along with the city blocking the USS Iowa from docking here, banning the junior ROTC from high schools, and trying to ban the yearly Blue Angels air show.
“This — a slap in the face of every veteran and every parent of men and women who are doing their duty — is shameful,” said Captain Corrales.
The Marines we spoke with also make the point that the city allows street demonstrations, anti-war protests and other events which snarl traffic, such as Critical Mass. They still don’t understand why the Marines got turned away.
Here is an example of Critical Mass. A family is terrorized by the peaceniks
September 25, 2007 - 07:52 AM on September 25th, 2007
President Bush must veto any legislation that contains any funding for San Francisco in any way shape or form. Let SF deal with the consequences of being defunded. Being anti-American traitors should have a cost and San Francisco should be the first to pay it.
September 25, 2007 - 08:04 AM on September 25th, 2007
Boycott SAN FRANCISCO and that means everything about this place its no longer part of the US of A lets just have nothing more to do with HANOI ON THE BAY and that means we even boycott RICE A RONI
September 25, 2007 - 08:52 AM on September 25th, 2007
PCD raises a good point…perhaps Frisco should have all Homeland Security funding cut off.
September 25, 2007 - 09:15 AM on September 25th, 2007
I think one of the best solutions would be to cut federal funding for many different cases. For universities and schools who don’t allow the military, cut funding. For cities that refuse to obey immigration laws, cut funding.
I would bet that two things would occur. A balanced budget with more funds available for fighting terror, etc. and a safer America. Do you think we can get the congress to do this?
September 25, 2007 - 09:58 AM on September 25th, 2007
“…an elite group of Marines who wanted to film a recruitment commercial in San Francisco on the anniversary of 9/11″
——————————-
No thanks…
Film it elsewhere.
(Besides, SF LIberal lives on California St.)
September 25, 2007 - 10:11 AM on September 25th, 2007
Yeah, we’ll film it elsewhere and you of course will approve forfeiting federal funds?
September 25, 2007 - 10:47 AM on September 25th, 2007
You would approve of taking money away from San Francisco children, the elderly, and those in need because some people disagree with your political ideology?
Real nice.
Try running for office on that. We’ll see how far you get.
September 25, 2007 - 11:18 AM on September 25th, 2007
7, Nice try to tug on the heart strings, but SFL you just demonstrate how craven you are. You can’t confront the issue, so you deflect to an emotional tangent.
Well, BF, without those Marines you so dispize and hate, you wouldn’t be so comfy and have the goodies from the US that you believe are an entitlement. You’d probably be part of Mexico and battling to have the basics not stolen from you by people from the Mexican government abusing their authority and offices.
September 25, 2007 - 01:00 PM on September 25th, 2007
“Nice try to tug on the heart strings, but SFL you just demonstrate how craven you are. You can’t confront the issue, so you deflect to an emotional tangent.”
———————-
BZZZZZ…wrong again, PCD.
When freaks like you talk about removing federal funding from SF, you are forgetting where federal aid goes and who benefits from it.
Don’t blame me that you’re so freakin’ childish and immature to not think through the consequences of your lame-brained thoughts and ideas.
It would be a fact that removing federal funding from SF would leave seniors, children and the poor without any assistance.
So, that said, I have to again ask you to PLEASE run for office on that. Am sure you’d get real far.
(snicker)
September 25, 2007 - 01:06 PM on September 25th, 2007
9, again, SFL, you sick person, if your city is that dependant on Federal funds, you shouldn’t break the law concerning Federal funding. But, again, Liberals in SF breaking the law is nothing new.
Now, To start tearing your fallacious position apart, just what programs are Federally funded that SF would lose?
But, to get at the heart of the issue, you have one little harpy who decided all on her own that you won’t let the Marines film in SF. Because you freaks won’t do what’s right, you freaks are screaming about the harm losing Federal funds will cause you. UH, look to your own actions for the cause.
September 25, 2007 - 01:12 PM on September 25th, 2007
LOL…what planet do you post from, man?!?
YOU (or someone you agree with here) brought up the whole revoking federal funding issue.
I merely pointed out how FUCKING STUPID such an idea is, because of the harm it would cause innocent people.
Don’t blame me that your argument feel to pieces after just one reply from me.
Try THINKING before posting next time, and maybe you’ll do better up against me.
September 25, 2007 - 01:15 PM on September 25th, 2007
11, it is the law, fool. You are the one trying emotional counters to a legal argument. You are the one without a leg to stand on. You are the fool daring the Feds to cut off the funds.
September 25, 2007 - 03:11 PM on September 25th, 2007
7- The city is in violation of Federal law with its sanctuary policies. Taking Federal money is what should be happening…I guess it is up to the elected officials that chose to break the law, to woory about the elderly, poor, etc…There isn’t anything lame brained about it, nor would it be necessary for anyone to run on the platform..that is how the law is written.
September 25, 2007 - 03:25 PM on September 25th, 2007
“You are the one trying emotional counters to a legal argument.”
———-
Emotional counters? It’s the truth, man. Where does the majority of federal funding go to? Social Safety Net programs. Kids and old people
Thems the facts, sorry you don’t like them.
—————–
“You are the one without a leg to stand on.”
——————
No, actually that is you. I knocked over your argument with ONE post. Get some thicker skin, kid.
———————-
“You are the fool daring the Feds to cut off the funds.”
—————–
Wrong again! I didn’t bring up slashing SFs Federal Funds. Put your glasses on and re-read each post above.
September 25, 2007 - 03:28 PM on September 25th, 2007
Pam, you’re wrong. it would wrong of the government to punish the SF elected officals stance on whatever you disagree with them on by removing funding that helps poor people, old people and kids.
There is no way around that.
If the feds don’t like SF policy, don’t punish kids and old people…do something less harmful to innocent people.
Of course, this is all hypothetical…there is NO WAY IN HELL that the feds would stop funding to SF.
You wanna know why? Because it’s wrong, and it would unfairly punish innocent people.
Yet another reason why you people shouldn’t EVER be allowed back into power.
You guys are sick! You want to punish kids and old people.
tsk-tsk.
September 25, 2007 - 03:43 PM on September 25th, 2007
15- No SFL, it is you that is wrong. It is up to the elected officials to follow the law and not break it because of a policy they disagree with.
September 25, 2007 - 04:08 PM on September 25th, 2007
Long ago I would have cut of all Federal funds to San Fran because of their Sanctuary City self-designation. Then the folks of San Fran would have to choose between “kids and old people” and ilegals. That would serve them right…
September 25, 2007 - 04:11 PM on September 25th, 2007
#2 Snowy, no, not a boycott of Rice-a-Roni!
That would deal a blow to San Francisco from which it might never recover! Tens of thousands of tourists may never again come to SF and leave their money without the powerful draw from the Rice-a-Roni commericals! 
September 25, 2007 - 04:29 PM on September 25th, 2007
…pity of it all is think of all the good head they’ll miss and goodness knows we need to help our fellas in uniform in any way we can.
September 25, 2007 - 06:50 PM on September 25th, 2007
Pam, yes or no question:
Would it be wrong of ANY government, American or otherwise, to punish its poor, old and young citizens by witholding money for their programs because the local government disagrees with the federal policy?
yes, and you prove me right.
no, and you are a bully.
please answer “yes” or “no”.
September 25, 2007 - 06:52 PM on September 25th, 2007
Boycott San Francisco?
Ha.
You DO realize that SF is one of the major toourist destinations of the world, let alone the US, don’t you?
What shitty ass podunk town do YOU live in?
ten dollars says it doesn’t even come close to the beauty of the Bay Area.
Back me up, Robert.
You couldn’t stop people from coming here if you tried.
September 25, 2007 - 07:11 PM on September 25th, 2007
20-YES
SFL, take a moment to read what you are saying here. It is your elected officials that don’t like the laws that are on the books, so they break the laws knowing that the result could be that funding is cut off, therefore hurting the elderly etc…that isn’t the governments,nor myself that would put these people in this position. Yes it is right to knowingly cut off all funding to any city/state in violation of our federal laws.
So the answer is yes.
September 25, 2007 - 07:14 PM on September 25th, 2007
Sorry, can’t help you there. I have de facto been boycotting SF since the early 90s.
My wife and I used to love to go to the City and have a nice dinner at Ft. Mason. Take in a play. Visit the museums. Enjoy the architecture.
But it isn’t a fun place to visit anymore. Bums, degenerates, freaks, trash. Frankly I won’t go there without being armed.
September 25, 2007 - 07:40 PM on September 25th, 2007
The Degenerates in charge of the Once-Great City of San Francisco have yet once again showed that:
1. They loathe the military that gives them the freedom to indulge their degeneracy.
2. They despise traditional America.
3. They are detestable vermin.
September 26, 2007 - 12:03 AM on September 26th, 2007
“Would it be wrong of ANY government, American or otherwise, to punish its poor, old and young citizens by witholding money for their programs because the local government disagrees with the federal policy?”
Wow…what an absolutely stupid straw man argument. To me it would be the local government (San Fransisco) who are punishing the poor, old and young citizens. It was the local government who made the decisions and must live with the consequences of those decisions.
September 26, 2007 - 06:03 AM on September 26th, 2007
15,20,21, SFL you are a spoiled rotten punk. You have everything backwards, but then again you are a brain dead liberal who won’t accept any consequences of your actions.
September 26, 2007 - 06:05 AM on September 26th, 2007
19, Eben, you flatter yourself too much. Other than a desperate man, do you think a Marine would want you?
September 26, 2007 - 09:27 PM on September 26th, 2007
I just don’t understand why the government of SF would object to the Marines being in town. They both are looking for a few good men. Maybe the SF crowd is just jealous because the Marines get to spend so much time in tight quarters with a bunch of sailors.
