’)Trumpeted in a press release, the Republican National Committee is quite proud of itself with the launch of its new website at GOP.com. Most notable is that the RNC has joined the blogosphere with the launch of the first official RNC weblog. On the RNC’s list of blogs it recommends reading are some of the usual suspects, including Patrick Ruffini, Powerline, Trey Jackson, Blogs for Bush, and others. But one site sticks out – Little Green Footballs (LGF), operated by Charles Johnson, is notorious for being a promoter of and haven for some of the most virulent anti-Muslim and anti-Islam hate speech on the web.
The RNC’s recommendation of the Little Green Footballs site – one of only fifteen selected – would seem to be in stark contrast to President Bush’s repeated proclamations that “Islam is peace”.
It bears asking – why is the Republican Party’s first step into the world of blogging now tainted by their support of a hate site? Perhaps you should ask the RNC at info@gop.com or Chairman Ken Mehlman at Chairman@gop.com
LGF asserts that all of Islam is evil:
LGF uses racist language talking about Arabs:
“Condoleezza Needles the Oil Ticks” [LGF, 6/21/05]
“Religious Apartheid in the Land of the Oil Ticks” [LGF, 5/29/05]
“Christmas with the Oil Ticks” [LGF, 12/26/04]
“Charles Johnson does Auschwitz — and gets it all wrong” [The Peking Duck, 1/27/05]
LGF allows and encourages racist comments about Arabs:
“How can these vermin [Palestinians] have a country? How can these vermin be allowed to live?” [LGF, 6/20/02]
“Perhaps something more like targetted genocide at the religious muslims will become necesary.” [LGF, 4/30/03]
“They [Palestinians] don’t need statehood; they need sterilization.” [LGF, 2/9/03]
“Forced sterilization, and full occupation to keep them under control until the problem solves itself in about 50 years.” [LGF, 2/27/03]
LGF employs selective editing to promote anti-Arab sentiment:
“10/23/2004: AP Reveals: Arabs Hate America, Israel” [LGF, 10/23/04]
“There is one topic for Little Green Footballs now: The evils of contemporary Islamic society. That’s it.” [Anil Dash, 8/21/02]
LGF encourages violence against liberals:
This is truly a public service. LGF truly is one of the sickest parts of the web. The way LGF portrays Arabs is disturbingly close to how Nazis described Jews in the 30s: filthy, hooknosed, depraved, subhumans who have a mysterious stranglehold over the world economy, and towards whom no amount of violent rhetoric is too extreme. Someone’s got to call these thugs what they are: a discredit to conservatism, to the war on terror, and America.
Shocking that Jay Caruso would yawn at anti-muslim hate. Shocking!
Yawwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwnnnnn…..
Oh please. I’m yawning at your stupid-ass assertion that LGF is a “hate site.” It’s boring.
And coming from somebody that is constantly advocating we attack Saudi Arabia militarily and constantly talking about their oil would somehow equate calling them “oil ticks” to hatred.
This is highly offensive. If the republican party wishes to promote hate sites like LGF, then they prove they are only paying lip service to wanting to be a “big tent” party. Koranimals, ragheads, muzzies, etc. need not apply (side note: apparently the term ‘raghead’ is used so much on the site, LGF uses a filter in comments to make that word appear as ‘Arab’ when one posts the comment).
They caught my eye after the tsunami, when comments like this were the norm:
“Am I the only one wondering how many muslim women drowned in these waters because they were wearing islamic dress and were weighed down by their clothes?”
“I think it WAS punishment for having Sharia law!~
Indonesia is the largest muslim country with 1 billion people.”
“Question to Allah: why did the tsunami not hit the infidels in the US and Europe who are further away from Sharia than Indonesia’s inhabitants? Why did Allah some time ago send an Earthquake to Bam, Iran and to Izmir, Turkey when there live Muslims? Is Allah not feeling well recently?”
“As a Christian I am torn as to whether we really should be helping these peoples of Aceh?”
“Am I the only one who is really conflicted over sending any money to muslimville? I think what happened is terrible but then isn’t sending them money a bit counter-productive to our interests?!”
Keep shining the light on them. Like cockroaches, they’ll scurry for cover.
I’m just sitting here amazed at Jay C.
Saying disparaging things about Saudi Arabia – not because of the people, but because of the massive corruption of the governement that is overlooked by our president – is not hatred.
Blanket remarks about all “Ay-rabs” and calling them all “oil ticks” IS hatred. Jeez, come out of your cave sometime, guy.
Didn’t we go through this a day or so ago? I ended up being falsely accused of being “in favor of genocide against Muslims …” or was it “all Arabs …”?
JadeGold, come a-running… Oliver and TomY need you!
Let the mud – slinging begin!
Wheee!
News flash: Oliver Willis employs selective editing to promote anti-LGF sentiment
7 LGF comments, selectively edited, out of 1.8 million currently archived at his website. Boy, that’s REAL proof!!
There is one topic for Little Green Footballs now: The evils of contemporary Islamic society. That s it.
And frankly, that’s a pretty damn important topic right now, don’t you think?
That is, unless you think that a society which promotes the complete subjugation and brutalization of women, honor killings, executions by beheading and stoning, the killing of homosexuals, and teaching kindergarten-age children that Jews are the descendents of apes and pigs is perfectly harmless and exactly equal to — if not morally superior than — our own.
There is a V A S T difference between racism or hatred based on ethnic origins of a people, and diligently pointing out the true evils of their society. Sure, some commenters go over the top, but Oliver, you can’t call yourself honest if you don’t admit that the same kind of stuff gets posted EVERY DAY at Democratic Underground. Remember those “Kill Bush” shirts that Cafe Press was selling?
LGF has a link in the “Slideshows” section of their left-hand sidebar called Palestinian Child Abuse. I urge everyone who reads this to view the slideshow. Little kids, LITTLE kids, 2-3-4 years old, wearing military uniforms, dressed up like suicide bombers, carrying toy guns, being taught by their parents that some day they may honor Allah by blowing up a bus full of Israeli schoolchildren, or a pizza parlor full of college students and tourists.
This kind of stuff isn’t EVIL? This kind of stuff shouldn’t be outed? This doesn’t bother you at all? You all would pee a ring around yourselves if that kind of stuff were being taught in public schools in this country. What are liberals/progressives doing to stop this over there? Are their children’s lives less important than our own?
(silence)
That’s why we need LGF. You may not agree with any of Charles’ opinions, but at least he is doing something.
Blanket remarks about all Ay-rabs and calling them all oil ticks
The term “oil tick” is reserved specifically for the House of Saud and the people there, so Oliver is being dishonest when he says that LGF is using the term to describe “Arabs.” This is the same people Oliver thinks we should be attacking militarily. It is not used to describe all Arabs. So get your facts straight instead of making an ass of yourself. Plus, somebody please explain how the word “tick” has become a racist slur. Good grief.
In addition, Oliver has cherry picked comments from literally thousands upon thousands as ‘evidence’ that LGF is a “hate site.” Such comments represent an extremely small sample of the overall comments on that site.
Twits.
The majority of the comments on LGF are as noted, but then I wouldn’t want to upset yet another outlet of hate for the right.
The majority of the comments on LGF are as noted
Prove it.
Ironic that a Republican wants proof, when all they ever do with proof is work hard to lie about it.
*sigh*
There’s the boring part.
Hi all,
LGF *is* truly representative of the right wingnuts who have so twisted a mindset that they have come to believe that Hate=God. Jay C has proven over and over here that he is representative of the typical LGF boring, ignorant troll. And not a very good specimen either.
Do yourselves a favor, just ignore it. If you don’t acknowledge it’s existence, and give it the attention it craves, it will go away.
I am sure all good sane people have much better things to do.
Cheers.
Oliver is making a claim that the majority of the comments made at LGF are comprised of th examples that he listed.
I say that it’s a small percentage of the comments made there and that it’s very easy to cherry pick and use it as “proof” of his claim.
He’s making a claim. He should back it up.
Here’s an article from the UK’s Spectator [requires free subscription]:
Cover Story
Just don t call it war
Boris Johnson
As I have said several time already: Prejudice is understandable to those who understand it.
Barack Obama is appearing at the Rainbow/PUSH convention. I guess that means he agrees that NYC is “Hymietown”, or else he wouldn’t associate with Jesse Jackson.
Farrakhan is also there. Why does Barack Obama, the rising star of the Democratic party, endorse the theory that Judaism is a “gutter relgion” and that all Jews are “bloodsuckers”. He has to believe that, or else he wouldn’t be associating with Farrakhan.
Jay C. is parsing for all he’s worth. He’s using the tired, old Repug tactic of trying to claim a site can’t be considered racist unless the vast majority of the content is racist in nature.
This is bit like trying to claim a criminal isn’t really a criminal because that person spends most of his day engaged in lawful activity, with the exception of a few moments of illegality.
Look, if you were to read an article by David Duke, you’d probably find 95% of it to be very inoffensive. It’s just that 5% …………
Oh and it looks like the whole Rove/Treason thing has blown up in your faces. As usual.
The point is, the Republican Party is giving its stamp of approval to the site by linking to them. If the Democrats linked to a site that had even one instance of the terms n**ger or k*ke or w**back or whatever, I would feel the same way (forgetting, for a moment, that the Democratic Party would make damn sure any site they link to have no racist content).
LGF is to Muslims as Stormfront is to Jewish people and the KKK is to African Americans. If the Republicans are going to link to one, they may as well link to them all.
Oh boy. ‘Repug.’ Talk about your juvenille nonsense.
Leave it up to Jadetin to be as intellectually dishonest as always. Comments at a blog are not part of the blog’s ‘content.’ They’re only comments, left by others.
This is bit like trying to claim a criminal isn t really a criminal because that person spends most of his day engaged in lawful activity, with the exception of a few moments of illegality.
Another one of Jadetin’s piss poor and totally irrelevant analogies.
If I am a law abiding citizen and happen to own a place where a few criminals hang out (like a bar for instance), it doesn’t make me a criminal.
Try and get it straight.
What an incredibly stupid statement, even metaphorically. I guess criminals don t drink beer or watch ballgames.
Sure they do, the question is why they all congregate in one place?
As for Jay C never saying he knew they were criminals–baloney. Reread his words; he identified them as such.
Is he supposed to do a background check on everyone that walks through the door
I’d suggest that someone posting racist material on LGF makes it easier to identify the racist than, say, the criminal status of someone walking into a bar. Wouldn’t you agree?
Big Gay Al,
You’re right. I know for a fact that if there was ever a guy who organzied a rally protesting against “white interlopers” (and then caused people at said rally to riot, and then commit arson and murder), and if that same person ever said being in Israel was like being in hell, if THAT guy ever tried to run for President as a Democrat, the Democratic party would shun him and condemn him and get him the hell out of the party.
I mean, it’s a free country and people can run for President if they want to, but even if he did try and run as a Democrat, they CERTAINLY wouldn’t give him a prime speaking slot at their convention, would they?
Oh, that’s right, they did all that. Nevermind.
“Sure they do, the question is why they all congregate in one place?”
Well, this is getting totally off the subject, but I know a guy who’s part-owner of a strip club (I won’t insult anyone’s intelligence by actually calling it a “Gentlemens Club”, because it’s not) and this place is frequented by a lot of members of the Pagans (which is Philly’s equivalent of Hell’s Angels) and it’s not as easy to get rid of them as you might think.
Not if you like having two unbroken legs, anyway.
If I am a law abiding citizen and happen to own a place where a few criminals hang out (like a bar for instance), it doesn t make me a criminal.
If you encouraged and abetted illegal activity, you very likely are liable.
Again, you have to wonder why criminals like to hang out your bar.
Every liberal blog I’ve been on, when a poster posts racist, or homophobic, xenophobic material, they are banned or suspended.
Most con blogs, message boards, like FreakRepublic, LGF, Insannity, ProtestChickenHawkWarriors, racist, homophobic, xenophobic language is condoned, if not encouraged.
I am reminded of Rosalyn Carter’s statement about RayGun “He makes people comfortable with their prejudices”. The haters are a large part of the con base, and to fail to acknowledge this is myopic.
“Again, you have to wonder why criminals like to hang out at your bar.”
What an incredibly stupid statement, even metaphorically. I guess criminals don’t drink beer or watch ballgames.
In Jay’s analogy, he never even said he knew they were criminals. Is he supposed to do a background check on everyone that walks through the door?
How did the Rove thing blow up in our faces? Because an anonymous source says that Rove said he got the info from a reporter? A reporter who the anonymous source says that Rove says he can’t can’t remember?
Does this strike anybody else as high-stakes Telephone Game?
I’ll say for my part that even if Rove hasn’t done anything technically illegal, he still behaved in a dangerously incompetent manner. Which should, if I recall correctly, earn him a Presidential Medal of Freedom. If he was told by a reporter that Wilson’s wife worked for the CIA, he should have taken it upon himself to find out her status and then report to his boss that there was a leak.
On a sidebar, I have to wonder what President Bush’s dad must think of all this. Besides being a man who once praised Joe Wilson’s courage and once fired Karl Rove for, essentially, being Karl Rove, I doubt he was much pleased to discover that operatives at the agency he used to head are now considered fair game for political pointmaking.
JG, Neo: Stop with the nicknames already. We get it, we get it: You don’t like Republicans or Conservatives (a small expression of hate speech, itself, methinks).
The liberal Democrats have room in their tent for Eco – terrorists, animal liberation folks, and the World HQ of anti – semitism, the United Nations.
The Arab world — not Muslims, Arabs — has been trying to “drive Israel into the sea” since the day their country was born, with nary a peep from the UN. Yet who continues to support them as “essential to the peace process in the Middle East”? The Left.
What’s the connection between anti – semitism and the Global War on Terrorism, you ask?
This:
http://www.conceptwizard.com/pipeline_of_hatred.html
The source did not say that Rove could not remember the reporter, but rather:
“Rove told the grand jury that by the time Novak had called him, he believes he had similar information about Wilson’s wife from another member of the news media but he could not recall which reporter had told him about it first, the person said.”
The news reports do not name the other reporter but nowhere do they say that Rove didn’t name the “other” reporter to the Grand Jury.
Could it be Miller? If Miller called Rove and TOLD HIM him that Wilson’s wife was an undercover CIA agent (which the Washington Times rebuts today as being fairly common knowledge that she worked for the CIA, and hadn’t been undercover for years), and not the other way around, then it is no wonder she is refusing to cooperate as she would potentially be the one on the hook, not Rove.
If the reports of the Grand Jury testimony are true, and of course, if Rove’s testimony to the Grand Jury itself was true, then Rove did absolutely nothing wrong.
The grand irony of this is that, in your disapproval of disparaging an entire group (Muslims) based on the actions of a few (terrorists), you are disparaging an entire group (LGF) based on the actions of a few (posters).
[quote]This is bit like trying to claim a criminal isn t really a criminal because that person spends most of his day engaged in lawful activity, with the exception of a few moments of illegality.[/quote]
*pffth* A bogus comparison, and you know it. You can’t say that the actions of a group are parallel to the actions of an individual all the time.
It’s more appropriate to say “it’s a bit like trying to claim that all the people of Group X aren’t criminals because most of them are law-abiding people,” which is of course more accurate (and yet, incidentally, the polar opposite of what you were trying in such a leaden way to say).
BTW, from what I can tell, most of LGF’s beef is with Islam, not Arabs, ergo it’s not “racism.” You can call them Islamophobes or whatever buzzword you like if it makes you feel better about yourselves, but most of them don’t care and some of them even flaunt the word happily.
Furthermore, DNC links to some “hate-filled” blogs, too, like DailyKos, which made the absurd parallel between the Taliban and the GOP. Don’t act all high and mighty.
BTW, from what I can tell, most of LGF s beef is with Islam, not Arabs, ergo it s not racism.
By that rationale, anti-Semitism is no big deal either. A position that Stormfront no doubt agrees with.
There’s also this entry from LGF:
“And the third rail of bias that no one in mainstream media will touch: Amnesty secretary general Irene Khan is a Muslim. Did her religion influence her outrageously intemperate remarks about the Muslim detainees at Guantanamo Bay?”
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=16059_What_Amnesty_International_Bias&only
Note that is an entry on the site, not a comment. In other words, LGF believes the motives of Muslims are suspect because of their religion. Now, where have we heard that before?
Leaden, Evecon12? Chuckle.
Again, if you visit websites like Stormfront, you’ll find most of the content is inocuous silliness. But there is some highly racist content and that what makes it a racist site. So, merely trying to quantify the amount of racism relative to the overall content is plainly goofy.
Switching gears slightly; Jay C:
Plus, somebody please explain how the word tick has become a racist slur.
The same way “vermin” (a word not dissimilar to “tick”) was used by the Nazis to refer to Jews. Unsurprisingly, LGF has also referred to Arabs as “vermin.”
No, Jadegold, Stormfront proudly declares itself a white supremacist site. That’s why it’s considered racist.
What does Bush 41 think, you ask?
At least, that’s what he felt in 1999.
Stormfront proudly declares itself a white supremacist site. That s why it s considered racist.
I see. Racist content means nothing; a site must self-identify as racist.
Hokay.
evecon12
Take note, irony will be wasted here.
This begs an interesting question; if OW were to label his blog as “The World’s Greatest and Most Important Website of All Time”…….
“Note that is an entry on the site, not a comment. In other words, LGF believes the motives of Muslims are suspect because of their religion. Now, where have we heard that before?”
Here, on an almost daily basis when the topic of “Conservative Christians” comes up. Why, “these people are just evil, and are destroying America” is a common sentiment around here, as their motives are automatically suspect based only on their religion. Which, by the way, may make someone a religous bigot, but not a racist. I come to this conclusion applying the same standard to ow.com you are applying to lgf.com.
Again, if you visit websites like Stormfront, you ll find most of the content is inocuous silliness. But there is some highly racist content and that what makes it a racist site. So, merely trying to quantify the amount of racism relative to the overall content is plainly goofy.
Oh for Pete’s sake. Another one of your bogus comparisons. Stormfront is a website devoted to spreading messages about “white pride” whose operators make the content of the site itself racist.
I see. Racist content means nothing; a site must self-identify as racist.
And once again, you dishonestly refer to comments on LGF as part of the site’s ‘content’ and that’s bogus. Can’t you even try to make an honest argument?
The same way vermin (a word not dissimilar to tick ) was used by the Nazis to refer to Jews. Unsurprisingly, LGF has also referred to Arabs as vermin.
Having to explain things over and over to you Jade is really tiring. The term “oil tick” has been used exclusively for the House of Saud. IE, they’re sucking oil from their land and using the profits to hand out cash to terrorists. Comparing it to Nazis calling Jews ‘vermin’ is as ridiculous as silly as your racist/criminal comparison.
And point out where Charles Johnson (not some knucklehead in the comments) referred to Arabs as “vermin.” Let’s see it.
And once again, you dishonestly refer to comments on LGF as part of the site s content and that s bogus
No, it’s not bogus for reasons that have been explained to you. LGF moderates out those comments not in lockstep with the ‘Arab genocide’ theme. OTOH, it permits very racist comments to go unchallenged. You’d have a better argument if LGF allowed each and every comment; then you could legitimately claim LGF has no control over comments. But they don’t and you can’t.
The term oil tick has been used exclusively for the House of Saud.
And the term “vermin” was used by Nazis to describe Jews.
And point out where Charles Johnson (not some knucklehead in the comments) referred to Arabs as vermin.
Nice deflection. In late-October 2004, somebody with a higher tolerance of LGF than I did a search of the site. Here are some interesting results”
Here, on an almost daily basis when the topic of Conservative Christians comes up.
Okay, I’ll bite. LGF made its comment about Muslims (by the way, note the use of the article “a”, as in “Irene Khan is a Muslim” as opposed to “Irene Khan is Muslim.” Those with knowledge of anti-Semitism know the difference between saying “He’s Jewish” as opposed to “He’s a Jew.”).
For your analogy to be correct, people would have to rail against ALL Christians, not just conservative Chrisitans; for your analogy to be correct, LGF would have said “Irene Khan is a fundamentalist Muslim.”
Try again.
I see. Racist content means nothing; a site must self-identify as racist.
No, what I’m saying is that it’s considered racist because it openly calls itself racist. Duh. Therefore, it’s a foregone conclusion that anyone who posts there is likely also a racist.
This begs an interesting question; if OW were to label his blog as The World s Greatest and Most Important Website of All Time & & .
It wouldn’t mean crap, anymore than it means crap if you call LGF racist.
If this is the kind of nonsensical intellectual thuggery you people revert to, using meaningless buzzwords as a political bludgeon with which to beat your opponents, than it’s no wonder your ideology is so marginalized.
nawoods, I believe, as most others do, that its just the fundamentalist conservative Christians who are destroying America- not all Christians (as opposed to LGF’s blanket statements of simply “Muslims”). And nobody here has ever called for their death or sterilization either. Apples and oranges.
“Could any of them walk into a job interview and opine, if the subject was raised, that all Arabs should be victims of genocide?”
That would be pretty funny, actually.
“So, Mr Johnson, where do you see yourself in five years?”
“Hopefully living in an Arab free world because they’ve all been killed”.
that’s about your fifth bad example of the day, Jadegold, but it was pretty funny.
If I could speak for evecon for a moment, I believe he was referring to the intellectual poverty of your left wing ideology, not the fact that you could, without fear, address an Arab audience on the topic, “Genocide against Arabs is a bad thing”.
Having that ability or not having it, is as relevant as your sock color.
Who is marginalized, Evecon12?
I submit I could present my views/opinions on Arabs anywhere, before any audience ans no one would bat an eye. Can those at LGF say the same?
Could any of them walk into a job interview and opine, if the subject was raised, that all Arabs should be victims of genocide? Even the most conservative whacked-out political candidate won’t go near expressing such beliefs.
Again, who is marginalized?
No, it s not bogus for reasons that have been explained to you. LGF moderates out those comments not in lockstep with the Arab genocide theme. OTOH, it permits very racist comments to go unchallenged. You d have a better argument if LGF allowed each and every comment; then you could legitimately claim LGF has no control over comments. But they don t and you can t.
This hasn’t been proven, only alleged. And like I said, you can go there right now and read dissenting opinions in the comments. If they were deleted as you claim, they wouldn’t be there. Therefore, your conclusion is bogus.
And the term vermin was used by Nazis to describe Jews.
Yes. ALL Jews. Not the ruling family of a country that openly supports terror with money made from oil.
Nice deflection. In late-October 2004, somebody with a higher tolerance of LGF than I did a search of the site. Here are some interesting results
And? This proves what? Again, these are comments. Here is a Google search on the word vermin. I did’t have time to check them all, but when I did, it referred to TERRORISTS. Maybe you have a problem with calling people who murder others ‘vermin’, but I don’t. Once again, you raise a completely bogus (and irrelevant to boot) point.
I submit I could present my views/opinions on Arabs anywhere, before any audience ans no one would bat an eye. Can those at LGF say the same?
Could any of them walk into a job interview and opine, if the subject was raised, that all Arabs should be victims of genocide? Even the most conservative whacked-out political candidate won t go near expressing such beliefs.
Again, who is marginalized?
Again, when has Charles Johnson ever said that all Arabs should be victims of genocide?
If this is your logic, than I can take any comment from this weblog, and go somewhere and say, “You know what Oliver Willis is saying?” I could take the many “I hope Bush dies” or veiled threats of violence against the President I have read at other left wing blogs and say, “Atrios and Kos are wishing death upon the President and advocating he be killed.”
You’re the one claiming that the comments section is part and parcel of the weblog content itself and that it is representative of the blog owner. And please don’t raise that bogus “He deletes liberal comments” trope because it’s just that….bogus.
[...]
Good Question
Oliver Willis (yes, we re fans) asks a good question& why is the RNC promoting a [...]
I once posted a comment on LGF asking whether conservatives were against the UN’s current incarnation or the whole idea of a UN (honest question, I still haven’t found the answer) and was banned.
Again, when has Charles Johnson ever said that all Arabs should be victims of genocide?
Again, you’re missing the point of this thread. An official website of the Republican party has linked to LGF. The question of Johnson’s feelings on Muslims is moot (although, with that “Irene Khan is a Muslim” entry, no intelligent person can doubt he is a bigot). They have not just linked to Charles Johnson’s cut and paste “analysis.” They’ve linked to the whole site, comments and all.
What I want to know is if the Republican Party subscribes to the view that Muslims are “vermin,” “subhuman,” and “deserved the tsunami.”
(Note – please don’t turn the thread after this comment into another flame war. If you disagree, give me some evidence, and I’ll check it out. I haven’t been averse to doing that before, with JadeGold.)
A few matters of interest:
I’ve been watching Kos, OW, DNC Blog, TalkLeft, etc., for the past few weeks now, and almost everything has to deal with Rove. What was surprising is that I saw nothing on Theo van Gogh. I don’t know why.
With that in mind, I offer a few observations, in hopes that this won’t turn into another flame war where Jay C spends an inordinate amount of time defending himself against people who (if I had to take a shot in the dark) won’t be convinced.
There are much better ways to fight against racism, and perhaps by extension LGF, and this isn’t one of them.
Debate over who is racist is pointless. I think a far better option is to sit back and see where the hell the sentiments come from, and if they have any grain of truth.
This is where it gets problematic. Observe:
a Gaza mosque has welcomed the London attacks.
Islamic historian claims that there are no such things as “civilians” in Islam.
I don’t know if he’s completely right, but I haven’t heard of any official condemnation of OBL yet by Islam.
People that hang out in LGF are reading these kinds of things all the time. Now, to save my own skin, let me state that I also read things like this:
Muslims protest London attacks.
But to find that, I have to read sites like the Angry Arab – obviously not LGF, and certainly not Kos or OW.
The observation about van Gogh comes into play here – if I didn’t have the balance of pro-Palestine blogs, I’d be a lot more inclined to think Islam was inherently dangerous and should be dealt with as such, but the Left blogs I read are no help whatsoever in that direction.
Point is, OW looks damn near as blind as LGF when the only defense that appears on his site against racism is “my, don’t these comments look like what the Nazis used to say….” And what with items in the news like van Gogh, or the fact that the London bombers were home-grown Brits, and the Left’s relative silence compared to the Right…well, you’re feeding right into their perception.
Then again, I suppose a lot of you would say that you’re not responsible for their perception, and that any mistake they make in judging you is their own fault. In which case, I wonder why you even bother to post comments.
If you really want to defeat racism, a good start would be reporting on something other than where racism in the Right exists.
I believe he was referring to the intellectual poverty of your left wing ideology,
As was I, Frank D. If you’re defending the views Arabs are “subhumans” who should be “exterminated” or that racism is “understandable,” I’d offer the ‘intellectual poverty’ is exponentially greater on the right side of the spectrum.
JayC:
Obviously, you’ve locked into the meme that Johnson isn’t responsible for his website. He just throws crap out there and suddenly racists appear and he can’t do anything about it.
Here’s a suggestion; take a look (or better yet, search on) the regulars (frequent commenters) at LGF. Look at their comments. One such commenter (with over 1200 comments to LGF) commented on the tsunami by speculating about how many Muslims had been killed. So, it’s not exactly that some person wanders into LGF one day, drops a racist comment and moves on.
You’re also locked into denying LGF bans people–it does. And I noted examples previously. In fact, LGF bans those rightwingers who aren’t down with the whole ‘Arabs as subhumans’ theme.
Obviously, you ve locked into the meme that Johnson isn t responsible for his website.
Wrong again. I never said he wasn’t responsible for his website. I said that your accusation that CJ is a racist and that LGF is a “hate site” because of certain comments is nonsense.
He just throws crap out there and suddenly racists appear and he can t do anything about it.
It’s no different than Kos, Atrios, etc. who “throw crap there” and have people appearing that call for Bush to die or say that conservatives should be killed. Again, using your twisted logic, those comments are merely an extension of Duncan and Marcos themselves.
One such commenter (with over 1200 comments to LGF) commented on the tsunami by speculating about how many Muslims had been killed.
What’s his name? I won’t take you at your word since you distort the truth so often.
You re also locked into denying LGF bans people it does. And I noted examples previously. In fact, LGF bans those rightwingers who aren t down with the whole Arabs as subhumans theme.
You didn’t show me examples. You showed me examples of other people making the same accusation. But just to show you how wrong you are, you can go to this thread here. On there is a somebody (name is Tonic) chastizing those who are gloating over the Tsunami’s. No comments deleted. Still a registered user. However, a user by the name of Anonymous Al who is spouting off all kinds of nonsense has been blocked from posting.
NSP:
I don t know if he s completely right, but I haven t heard of any official condemnation of OBL yet by Islam.
Islam, like Christianity or most any faith, isn’t monolithic. That is, there isn’t one go-to guy for all things Islamic; as such, there’s not one “official condemnation” of OBL to be had. Yet, if you’re suggesting that various Muslim leaders haven’t condemned OBL, you’re very much mistaken.
And let’s face it–if someone wanted to set up a hatesite against Christians, it’d be very easy. Just point out the BTK killer in the midwest was a deacon or somesuch in his Christian church. Point out the God Hates Fags crazies. Geez, one could spend days on the Catholic church and the Mormons. The point being it is painfully easy to take a few instances of atrocious behavior and pretend it is representative of an entire faith or race.
Remember the topic of this thread, however. It’s about one of the two major political parties in the US linking to a site where racism and bigotry runs rampant. Why is that?
You wore that one out, JG, time to sing a new tune.
Stand up and take it like a man:If this is the kind of nonsensical intellectual thuggery you people revert to… it s no wonder your ideology is so marginalized.
Plain and simple. Argue the point or don’t. Stop the ad hominem attacks.
Grand Shaykh of Al-Azhar in Egypt denouncing Al-Qaeda:
http://www.usembassyjakarta.org/lawmaker.html
Head of a Pakistani Islamic party denouncing terrorism:
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/10/17/195606.shtml
Muslim Brotherhood’s Qaradawi denounicng Al-Qaeda:
http://www.islamfortoday.com/qaradawi02.htm
List of Prominent Muslims who have condemmed terrorism:
http://www.muhajabah.com/otherscondemn.php
[All above via Juan Cole]
Just curious: were you as adamant that all Catholics denouce the IRA, or that all Buddhists denounce the Tamil Tigers, or all Latinos denounce the ETA. Why, then, is it suddenly relevant that all Muslims condemn what civilized people know already to be barbaric. Your implication is that all Muslims, by default, are not civilized people, and so must explicitly state that they are, in fact, civilized.
Bigotry of this sort weakens our hand in the war on terror. If the LGF mentality prevails, moderate Muslims (i.e., 99.9% of them) will be left to choose between a slow extinction at the hands of the Islamists or the quicker variety espoused by LGF.
NoSea writes:
Please let me help you. The sites you list are all focused, nearly 100 percent, on US domestic politics, and with the effects of US policy abroad. Period. It would be somewhat out of keeping, and inapproproiate considering their audience, for these sites to focus on the year-old Theo Van Gogh story, unless there was a strong American angle. Not all sites obsess over “murderous Muslims” the way Little Green Cesspools does. That is not a mark agaionst them.
By the way, here is some more of the tolerance that LGF is famous for
“It s no different than Kos, Atrios, etc. who throw crap there and have people appearing that call for Bush to die or say that conservatives should be killed. Again, using your twisted logic, those comments are merely an extension of Duncan and Marcos themselves.”
Really? Kos, Atrios posters call on Bush to die or that cons should be killed? Do tell? Where can I find these posts? Not just one or two, but along the lines of these numbers—
Search results for vermin (1333 matches)
Search results for scum (3198 matches)
Search results for nuke them (aka genocide) (146 matches)
Search results for filthy arabs (8 matches)
Search results for kill them all (401 matches)
Search results for wipe them out (109 matches)
Let me know when you find these posts.
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=16673_Islamic_Converts_Had_Jihadist_Materials#comments
richardphx (and later, Big Gay Al, and a quick concession to JadeGold at the end) -
It would be somewhat out of keeping, and inapproproiate considering their audience, for these sites to focus on the year-old Theo Van Gogh story, unless there was a strong American angle. Not all sites obsess over murderous Muslims the way Little Green Cesspools does. That is not a mark agaionst them.
Though I appreciate the help, two things strike me right off the bat. The first is your last sentence – you totally misunderstood me. Nothing I said comes anywhere close to implying that obsessing over “murderous Muslims” is equivalent to what I was advocating, which was a much better way to combat racism (accurate coverage of pertinent facts). The second is this:
…strong American angle.
I recall almost every site posting something about the London bombings. Fine, obvious American angle, if we’re working under the assumption that our foreign policy prompted the Muslim Brits to bomb the stations. But no one said a word when it was discovered that these people were attacking for Islam, that their motivation wasn’t purely hatred of American imperialism.
I don’t find your claim that the sites are focused, nearly 100 percent, on US domestic politics, and with the effects of US policy abroad. Period, believable at all. I can find oodles of posts about Jeb Bush and Tom Coburn being dicks about Terri Schiavo, which isn’t anywhere close to domestic or foreign policy. I can find all sorts of rants about conservative bias in the media. And I cannot find anything that admits, “Hey, maybe the problem is bigger than just the US pissing people off,” even though a good deal of evidence points in that direction.
Kos et. al. are staunch liberals, and they are concerned with US policy, domestic and foreign, as it is damaged by conservatives and the Republican party (and occasionally Democrats). And though I happen to agree with them, the fact remains that they often make the serious mistake that Big Gay Al just made, and which I think is a very serious mistake.
So, Big Gay Al (for the record, I’m a fan of the screenname)…I’m a tad peeved.
Your implication is that all Muslims, by default, are not civilized people, and so must explicitly state that they are, in fact, civilized.
(The voice of Brian Griffin, speaking to Peter): No (as he whacks him with a rolled-up newspaper).
Read my post again, Big Gay Al. You’ll notice that I mentioned Muslims protesting against terror, something I discovered while reading a site written by an actual Muslim professor, and not the further-removed Juan Cole. I’ve no idea where you got the idea that I was implying that Muslims are not civilized people, and I’m hoping to god you didn’t just assume it because I was suggesting that a great deal of Muslims are not moderate.
You obviously believe that most are, however, since you used the percentage “99.9.” I realize the number is there to make a point, not as an actual percentage. But you have no good evidence for a percentage anywhere close to 99.9 – many prominent Muslims are praising terrorists, just as many are denouncing them. And depending on where you look, the percentage slips much more in favor of praise. Calling the radicals 0.1 percent doesn’t make you tolerant; it makes you wrong.
You can’t fight racism with more ignorance.
And JadeGold -
Islam, like Christianity or most any faith, isn t monolithic.
Touche. I can’t believe I missed that. My apologies.
Mike Says:
7 LGF comments, selectively edited, out of 1.8 million currently archived at his website. Boy, that s REAL proof!!
I’m tempted to bet you $10 (by Paypal) that I can find enough to convince you. How many would it take? 100? 200? 1,000? I’d even let you define what (minimum) constitutes a racist comment, and what constitutes “out of context” or “selective editing”. What do you say? Put up or shut up?
Most comments on LGF are vitriolically anti-Muslim. Some try to shroud themselves in a tone of academia, but the veneer is thin, hatred bubbling right below the surface. One need not be a seer to detect this. But in some ways this is a good thing. Any objective person, liberal or conservative, can see there is something “off” about this cesspool. That means any attempts by Johnson and partner-in-crime Roger Simon to profit via their pajama media scheme are bound to fail. Johnson recently met with some of the leading venture capitalists on Sand Hill Road in Palo Alto and they are extremely wary of LGF’s racist underbelly and understand the risks to their own reputation in being associated with such blatant racism.
richardphx -
Any objective person, liberal or conservative, can see there is something off about this cesspool.
True. I like that way of putting it much better, and I think you’re right.
[...] that we ve linked to out of appreciation more than coalition), but Oliver regardless asks an interesting question. [...]
Even more tolerance at LGF
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=16688_Bomber_Had_Guided_Tour_of_Parliament#comments
#21, 34, 46, 72 are great demonstrations of the reaching out to Muslims that LGF is famous for.
[...] y life, ever voted Democratic. That might change as a result of this& ] See more at http://www.oliverwillis.com/2005/07/14/why-is-the-republican [...]
qmlratgp ogitw ghei znxptauyj vsht vzixoap sqmp