Thursday, December 13, 2007

Charles Johnson: The Dan Rather of the Blogosphere?

Remember this?

The Dan Rather memo

This is the infamous “Killian Memo”, the blatantly forged document that discredited Dan Rather and CBS News during the height of the 2004 presidential campaign. If this hoax had been deployed prior to the emergence of blogs, it would probably not have been discredited before election day, and might have changed the course of the election.

This image was the iconic representation of the success of bloggers in fighting dishonest smears coming from Big Media. It showed that even the most prominent liberal stars of TV news were vulnerable to an internet investigation involving hundreds or thousands of independent volunteers working and communicating via their computers.

It exposed the arrogance and unaccountability of outfits like CBS, and awakened the hope that they might become answerable for their bias and errors. If newspapers and television could be held to enforceable standards of accuracy — without any dependence on ombudsmen, in-house review boards, peer standards committees, or any of the other devices through which the modern news industry pretends to police itself — then “truth in journalism” might become a real possibility.

The downfall of Dan Rather in the fall of 2004 was brought about by the hard work of a lot of ordinary people, by men and women without any J-school credentials or experience in the field. It was a triumph of a new form of media.

And Charles Johnson of Little Green Footballs was the hero of that triumph.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

Needless to say, Mr. Johnson wasn’t the only star of the show. The initial exposé of the Killian memo came from Free Republic. Other prominent bloggers were in the thick of it doing important work, including Power Line, Michelle Malkin, Roger Simon, and Instapundit. Bill at InDC Journal played a crucial role when he contacted an expert on typewriters who made mincemeat of the CBS in-house expert’s laughable assertions. Many other smaller blogs, commenters, and forum posters contributed to the effort. It truly was “an Army of Davids”.

Here’s how National Review summed it all up the following year, after the founding of Pajamas Media:

Pajama-Clad Revolutionaries

A year ago, Jonathan Klein, current president of CNN, airily dismissed the bloggers who dethroned Dan Rather. “These bloggers have no checks and balances… You couldn’t have a starker contrast between the multiple layers of checks and balances [at 60 Minutes] and a guy sitting in his living room in his pajamas writing.”

Of course, it wasn’t so long ago (25 years, to be exact) that CNN was the new media outlet on the block. And the neighborhood kids turned their noses up at Ted Turner’s brainchild. Broadcast newshound Sam Donaldson derided CNN as the “Chicken Noodle Network.”

Time, you see, not only heals all wounds. It heels all mavericks, making top dogs out of underdogs.

The underdogs of our time, journalistically speaking, are bloggers. And the online unraveling of Rathergate was their first unmitigated triumph.

One of the bloggers who led the charge against Rather is Charles Johnson, proprietor of the curiously named Little Green Footballs. Shortly after this triumph, Johnson joined forces with another popular blogger, Roger L. Simon, to form (thumbing their noses at Klein and all other doubters) Pajamas Media.

[…]

It’s their contention that blogging has demonstrated journalism isn’t rocket science, nor is it even medicine or law, requiring highly specialized training over a long period of time. Rathergate, the Jayson Blair scandal, and other major media slip-ups too numerous to mention revealed that the mainstream media have no magical wardrobe.

[…]

…Johnson and Simon consider the entire blogosphere their fact-checkers. This is a sacred tenet among many bloggers. If a blogger makes a mistake, readers will call him on it right away, either via comment or email. And the blogger is honor-bound to correct it immediately and clearly.

Instead of relying on a few overworked editors to fact-check every story, bloggers count on thousands of other bloggers to, as they like to say, “fact-check their a**.” Bloggers, in other words, lean on the collective knowledge of the entire Internet rather than a handful of elites.

Johnson and Simon claim that, like most bloggers, they will not hesitate to own up to errors. In their view, more established media are too arrogant and hidebound to admit many of their mistakes.

This is the ideal that we all try to live up to. This is what got Dymphna and me into blogging.

Wretchard at the Belmont Club was our primary inspiration, but Charles Johnson was up there at the top of the list of people who set the example.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

What does “fact-checking their a**” mean?

The printing pressDuring Rathergate it meant that an insistent buzz from thousands of small internet sources and several large ones kept CBS from riding out the Killian memo hoax. The blogs got inside CBS’ OODA loop and kept them off-balance, leaving then unable to mount a successful defense.

The blogs had the facts on their side, but the distributed intelligence of the internet was the informational framework that made their efforts successful. The new media changed the communications landscape in the same way that the invention of the printing press did in the 15th century, bypassing an established hierarchy and opening the field to newcomers.

The blogs that emerged in these new media lived or died based on how closely they stuck to the truth. A neophyte blogger quickly discovers — as Dymphna and I did repeatedly — that any errors of fact are punished instantly from multiple sources. Respect and credibility depend on responding promptly to errors and correcting them with updates.

When dealing solely with opinions, none of this matters, but as soon as a blogger drops a factual assertion into his argument, he comes under the scrutiny of knowledgeable readers who are alert, ready to respond, and never seem to sleep.

My first stumbles taught me to check my facts, and my accuracy has improved. But human error always creeps in, especially when I have prejudices and blind spots that predispose me not to see the facts.

Self-correction is difficult. When I say to a commenter or an emailer, “You’re quite right,” and post an update, it’s painful and embarrassing, but it pays off over the long term.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

WoundedSo what has gone wrong with this process as it applies to the conflict with LGF about Vlaams Belang and Sverigedemokraterna?

As mentioned yesterday, Charles Johnson has left standing a number of erroneous posts on these topics, without posting a public retraction or correction. These are not mere opinions, nor interpretations of photos or rat cartoons. These are actual errors of fact, ones that can be easily confirmed as false if anyone bothers to look up the cited sources.

So why has fact-checking failed in this case?
- - - - - - - - -
The evolution of the blogosphere propelled a number of accomplished bloggers to the top of the heap. Thorough coverage of important issues, good writing, and a reputation for being scrupulous with the truth have given the major players their well-deserved traffic and reputations.

However, an unfortunate side effect of blog fame is the potential for the same kind of unaccountability that has become endemic in the mainstream media. If a blogger can count on maintaining his traffic and popularity, at least in the short term, then natural corrective influences become less important.

A smaller blog simply can’t afford these luxuries, but the risk is there for any blog that becomes large enough.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

So how well does the Dan Rather analogy apply to Charles Johnson and Little Green Footballs?

Some aspects of Mr. Rather’s situation seem quite apt. Consider what the The New York Times wrote in the wake of Rathergate, after CBS’ investigative panel issued its report:

Over the next week or so, CBS News issued a number of press statements and “CBS Evening News” reports that staunchly defended the Sept. 8 segment despite increasingly strong indications that the reporting for the segment was flawed. The panel finds that these statements and reports contained numerous misstatements and inaccuracies. Moreover, the panel finds that once serious questions were raised, the defense of the segment became more rigid and emphatic.

But other aspects of the CBS debacle differ from the LGF situation. LGF has no Mary Mapes to take the fall for any errors. There is no corporate board which can ease Mr. Johnson out when he becomes embarrassing. He may suffer an attrition of traffic over the long haul, but it’s also possible that his popularity is independent of any fidelity to the truth, and that he will continue to flourish.

So the analogy, though instructive, is incomplete. This leaves open the possibility of a different denouement than emerged from the whole sordid mess at CBS.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

What are the options for Charles Johnson, or for any other prominent blogger who makes significant factual errors?

I see the same three possibilities that faced Dan Rather when the forged Killian memos were exposed:

1. Acknowledge the errors and accept responsibility for them, even though they were committed by subordinates. This was not the road taken by Mr. Rather.
2. The infamous “fake but accurate” defense, which acknowledges that the “facts” were bogus, but asserts the underlying truth of the accusations. Dan Rather attempted this strategy, but it never gained any real traction, not even in the MSM.
3. Stonewalling. This was the method most favored by Mr. Rather, and which he persists in to this day, as witnessed by his lawsuit against CBS.

So far Charles Johnson has preferred option #3, failing to take up any of the suggested corrections posted here yesterday.

But I’m optimistic that this situation might change. After all, Mr. Johnson gained a well-deserved reputation for ferreting out the truth, and letting the chips fall where they may.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

This is the final wrap-up of the conflict between CVF and LGF over the issues of Counterjihad Brussels 2007, Vlaams Belang, and Sverigedemokraterna. All the research has been done, the refutations have been posted, and the links are collected together in one place for archival purposes. Anyone who is interested can now look at all the information and make up his or her own mind.

Moving past these issues opens up the opportunity to examine the evolution of the blogosphere.

The internet evolves at an astonishing rate and in unpredictable directions. A lot has changed in the last three years. Big blogs are still important, but thousands of small niche blogs (like Gates of Vienna) have emerged, and are following new strategies and employing new modes of organization.

The distributed intelligence of the internet is expanding to include different functions. Blogs and forums emerge out of other kinds of structures, or form independently and become associated with them. Such structures may include activist organizations, non-profit foundations, interest groups, and political parties. On the blogs and the forums talk still rules, but other organizations are engaging in various forms of action.

As the pragmatic and action-oriented forms of organization collide with the more idealistic world of “pure” blogging, conflict becomes inevitable. It is inherent in the tension between maintaining a principled stance and actually taking effective action.

From these conflicts we can learn and grow stronger.

This is what CVF is all about. Times have changed. The blogosphere has moved on. The center of gravity has shifted into different structures, and the changes continue.

Come mothers and fathers
Throughout the land
And don’t criticize
What you can’t understand
Your sons and your daughters
Are beyond your command
Your old road is
Rapidly agin’.
Please get out of the new one
If you can’t lend your hand
For the times they are a-changin’.


— Bob Dylan, from The Times They Are A-Changin’

101 comments:

Ed Mahmoud said...

I, of course, am quite dissapointed in LGF and Chuckles the Dancing Clown.


But I suggest you put th 'suggested correction' thread as a sticky, or in a prominent location, and add to that as LGF posts more factual errors and intentional distortions.


GoV will go off the rails, IMHO, if every third thread is about LGF.

I was banned over there for defending Fjordman, so I have reason not to be pleased with the Johnson, and see his mistakes made large for the world to see, but, in my opinion, it is time to move on.

Darren said...

You sound like you're pretty bitter about this.

Ed Mahmoud said...

Not that bitter.

Time to put LGF in the GoV revriew mirror, and get back to the serious work.


A FAQ or sticky about LGF should be enough, and more threads about the Islamic menace in its many forms (the invasion of Europe, terrorism, Iran and nuclear weapons), and less about Chuckles the Dancing Clown.

Ypp said...

When Charle Johnson criticized mainstream media and was relatively unknown, nobody cared about his attitude towards Europe. But now he became a big player in his nische, and started to express opinions of his own and those opinions are influential. And we noticed that he is as imperfect as any other man. The cause of his criticizm is not knowing or not knowing "facts", but his ideology. Everyone have some kind of ideology, and any facts can be rationalized in various ways. I know it as a former theoretical physicist. So let's look closer at Johnson's ideology. It may well be the ideology of the American mainstream right. Clearly there is some old hatred and contempt to Europe in America, as well as vice versa. Part of it is deserved, but if you want to make friends, you should better pay attention to your friend's advantages and hope that he will improve. That's clearly not the Johnson's attitude.

Queen said...

I agree that it is time to leave LGF behind. The issue has been done to death.

john said...

Well said...well played.
Time to say adios to your primary distraction.
Time to refocus on the real threats to our ways of life.
Is it true the Lisbon Treaty is to be signed today?
According to James Lewis, at American Thinker, it will do the following:
The new Lisbon Treaty will give EU centralized control over:

* civil and criminal law,
* justice and policing,
* immigration,
* public services,
* energy and transportation,
* tourism, space, sport,
* civil rights,
* public health and
* the EU budget


If all that he said is true, the issue of nationalism will soon be mute, for European countries, and represent an enormous threat to America, in the process.
I think those who wish to be alone in a "fox-hole" might do well to re-think their position.

Botte Hond said...

I think Ed Mahmud is right. This thing has gone far enough and there is hardly a point in paying much more attention to the matter. Gates of Vienna is a very important site to every serious islam- watcher. The controversy is clear enough for eveyone, you linked to the whole affair, so everybody can make up their own minds. I do feel there is a lot of misunderstanding in this controversy. This is also due to the fact that the opponents in this matter communicated indirectly and in writing. I am sure this thing would probably never gotten so out of control had the opposing sides in this discussion realised that a conference on the matter should have been organised right after this thing started. I feel much damage has been done to our mutual cause, fighting the death cult. What did strike me as rather painful is the sheer Europe- hate that some air on LGF. I feel this controversy has also risen because of differences on essential (ethical) issues on both sides of the ocean. Therefore I think it is nescesary we start looking for the differences in view on those themes between US and European islam- watchers. If we fail to do so, this controversy will pop up in another form sooner or later. I hardly dare say so, but a conference with Charles and Fjordman and all others attending might just proof to be the right answer.



@ John

Yes it is: the EUSSR was born today. A black day for all Europeans.

TC said...

John

would you care to elaborate, where exactly you see the "enormous threat to America"?

Vergeltung said...

I'd agree with the sentiment it's time to leave the LGF thing behind. there's nothing that's going to change it.

Archonix said...

tc, it's simple. The EU has long set itself up as a "counterbalance" to the United States, and with the new power and funding that the Lisbon consti... sorry, "treaty" gives to it it will finally have the ability to begin fundamentally re-organising everything within its borders - police, military, foreign policy, everything. If you don't see the inherent threat to the US in an increasingly belligerent organisation set up along soviet lines with a primary stated aim of opposing the United States... well, you're blind.

john said...

botte hond
Dang!

tc
I don't have much time, but seeing a form of superpower in an unelected government trying to impact U.S. economic and domestic policy, to me is a real threat.
The Big Green Scare Machine has strong support in the EU, and I could see this entity trying to enforce their Marxist view on the U.S.
no2liberals...over and out!

Botte Hond said...

@ John

What does "dang" mean?


BTW

The EUSSR is a totalitarian and completely undemocratic superstate. You are right in warning against that mostrum.

john said...

botte hond
Dang is an American colloquialism, primarily from the South, of which I am a proud son.
It's a more polite way of swearing, without saying "damn" all the time.

dang
interj.
Used to express dissatisfaction or annoyance.
adv. & adj.
Damn.
tr.v. danged, dang·ing, dangs
To damn.
n.
The least valuable bit; a jot: I don't give a dang.

As to the EUSSR, I have a deep aversion to shadowy groups, headed by self-annointed elites. I view this abomination as an even greater threat than the old Soviet Union. The complacent people of Europe allowed this to happen, while enjoying the freedoms and liberties of the democratic nations they lived in.
They pissed it all away.
How will the European nations ever regain control over their sovereignty now...if ever?

TC said...

Archonix

I find it kind of frustrating to read sentences like "If you don't see the inherent threat to the US in an increasingly belligerent organisation set up along soviet lines with a primary stated aim of opposing the United States... well, you're blind." on a blog like GoV.

I see several threats in the EU but first and formost these are threats to the European indigenous population.

My question was a genuine one and asked for answers that might round out my own points of view and perceptions.

The only medium term threat that I see in a socialist, multicultural EU right now is that it gives islam a new beachhead in the Free World.

Economically and militarily the EU is toothless.

As I am a European living in the US, I am very much concerned with US conservatives and anti-jihadis becoming anti-European.

Do not forget, that the majority of PEOPLE in Europe are against the EU. Remember the referendum attempts in France and the Netherlands?

We have to forge closer ties with European anti-jihadis and anti-communists instead of blowing in the same f*cking horn as the Johnson.

Please read my post about this HERE

Chalons said...

Ed Mahmouh said:

Time to put LGF in the GoV review mirror, and get back to the serious work.

I could not agree more.

Botte Hond said...

@ John


Aha. Nice word to remember and introduce in the Neterlands. At first I thought you were shooting me, haha. The way I was welcomed on LGF by some (Charles never kicked me off, or objected to any of my posts) made me a bit paranoid to enter GoV, hehehehe.

I have done all I could to prevent the treason of my country of my country by our politicians. I have written coulms, warned folks at every weblog, voted NO, talked to family and friends. You should not forget that the founding of the EUSSR was carefully planned decades ago along the line of the "method Monnet". We are witnessing a silky coup d'etat here.

Thomas_Bowdler said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
George Bruce said...

Yes. Move on.

john said...

tc
I am not one of those anti-European types. I am in full support of the people of the various Euro nations. Which is why it is so frustrating for me, to see the creation of an entity that not only disregards the wishes of it's own citizens, but of one of greater strength to impact policies in a nation that has long been the greatest ally of Europe. I see nothing good coming from this power grab, not for Europeans, and not for Americans.
Being an American, I have to look at and consider the ramifications of such a devilish deal.
I would, if needed, gather up my weapons and ammo, and assist Europe in a conflict against this devil, if Europeans were in a fight for freedom. Sadly, I see most Europeans just wringing their hands, and accepting this travesty.

botte hond
Henh. Don't worry, I check fire on friendlies, especially when we are in the same "fox hole."
Having banned myself from lfg, almost two years ago, I know how rough some of the greetings can be for the "newbies" there, so I can understand your query over an unfamiliar term.
I wish I could figure out how to make my innernut nic appear here, which is 'no2liberals.'

TC said...

john

"I see most Europeans just wringing their hands, and accepting this travesty."

That is changing as we speak.

Remember "Radio Free Europe" that used to broadcast into Eastern Europe?

We need to be exactly THAT. All of us here and on other blogs. We cannot afford to lose Europe.

Sarah D. said...

I believe that it was the commenters at LGF and not Mad King Charlie that came up with "We Fact Check Your A$$".

The fact checkers have moved on to other sites now.

OT: John, you can change your "screen name" in your Blogger profile.

Paul Green said...

TC --

The only medium term threat that I see in a socialist, multicultural EU right now is that it gives islam a new beachhead in the Free World.

And that's not an "inherent threat to the U.S.?"

As I am a European living in the US, I am very much concerned with US conservatives and anti-jihadis becoming anti-European.

We are not "anti-European," nor are we likely to become so. But we are resolutely opposed to and utterly revolted by the practices and prattling of the European government, academic and media elites, as reported in Bat Ye'or's "Eurabia" and Bruce Bawer's "While Europe Slept." (And to the extent that our own elites emulate them, by them as well.)

We have to forge closer ties with European anti-jihadis and anti-communists ...

Absolutely.

no2liberals said...

Thanks, Sarah.
That was kind of weird, but it worked.

tc
I'm for European nations retaining their unique identities and sovereignty. I just don't know how that will happen, or what is needed to make it happen, as the ink is drying on that instrument of doom, as we speak.

Sodra Djavul said...

TC wrote:
"As I am a European living in the US, I am very much concerned with US conservatives and anti-jihadis becoming anti-European."

"We have to forge closer ties with European anti-jihadis and anti-communists instead of blowing in the same f*cking horn as the Johnson."

Maybe there is some confusion on this. I think one of the very reasons this whole flap with Charles Johnson originated is because many of us feel he's engaging in "friendly fire" on European anti-jihadists.

I don't think anyone meant to come off as anti-European. However, many of us can and should be considered anti-EU. The policies of the EU are anti-democratic, and conflict with just about every long-held American culturual and political value.

As for Charles Johnson, he's made his bed. The reason you see this drama continously playing out on an American anti-jihadist blog such as Gates of Vienna is because Charles' actions are damaging to the credibility of the entire American anti-jihadist movement, specifically in relation to those occuring in European countries.

My $0.02. How many Euros is that?

- Sodra

MontJoie said...

"Time to put LGF in the GoV review mirror, and get back to the serious work."

That's precisely what I was going to say. Don't turn Gates of Vienna into the "LGF Corrections Section." Let's get back to what you do best. Thanks.

Baron Bodissey said...

Thomas_Bowdler --

Please don't paste long URLs into the comments; they make the post page too wide and mess up the appearance of the permalink page.

Use link tags; the instructions are at the top of the full post's comment section.

--------------------------

Thomas_Bowdler said...

I am not really up on my rascist pagan post-mid-pre-medieval symbology so I have a quick question for the readership. Is everyone who drives a Jeep Compass some form of rascist crypto-fascist? Have you noticed the Hammer of Thor symbol on the bumper of that thing?

link

Jakenheimer said...

"We have to forge closer ties with European anti-jihadis and anti-communists instead of blowing in the same f*cking horn as the Johnson."
Maybe we should try to build ties with the Communists and Socialists and convince them that Islam is incompatible with their systems too. The Communist leaders treated their Muslim minorities like dirt. It seems that people here are preaching to the chorus and no one wants to build some bridges and get most of the non Muslim left to come over. Years ago it was common on the left to disdain Islam, but because of shoddy leadership, they have become their defacto allies.

Sodra Djavul said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
1389 said...

"As for Charles Johnson, he's made his bed. The reason you see this drama continously playing out on an American anti-jihadist blog such as Gates of Vienna is because Charles' actions are damaging to the credibility of the entire American anti-jihadist movement, specifically in relation to those occuring in European countries."

Exactly. We cannot "let go" until we have demolished his credibility to the extent that he will never again be able to harm our cause.

As I have pointed out many times, his actions, and those of his followers, are giving aid and comfort to our al-Qaeda enemies.

Dan said...

"What did strike me as rather painful is the sheer Europe- hate that some air on LGF."

It ain't just LGF. I felt it myself and heard it from a lot of my fellow Americans during Chirac's antics leading up to the Iraq war. I've heard a LOT of contempt toward me and my country, IN my country, from visiting Europeans.

Thing is, I don't feel like that toward Europe very often, and I doubt many Americans do. Many Americans are slavishly worshipful toward anything European (an affliction I thankfully don't share).

For my part, I look mostly at the last few centuries of European history. It's an awful bloody mess, and a LOT of it had to do with racism of various forms. By no stretch am I saying all EUs are racists, any more than all Americans are racist. But there does seem to be something in the general EU character that is essentially warlike, the last couple of decades of peacenik behavior notwithstanding.

I personally like a lot about Europe...but I keep my eye on it as well. It has proven it can bite when it's in the wrong mood, and the mood lately seems to be trending toward ugliness.

Baron Bodissey said...

Sodra,

Please don't paste long URLs into the comments; they make the post page too wide and mess up the appearance of the permalink page.

Use link tags; the instructions are at the top of the full post's comment section.

--------------------------
Sodra Djavul said...

Baron,

The image above has been removed from Chromatism.net "at the request of Charles Johnson."

You can update your link to the Wikipedia source if you wish:

link

- Sodra

Baron Bodissey said...

Sodra,

Charles has claimed a copyright on the image, and I have no interest in a copyright battle.

We can make do without it.

Sodra Djavul said...

Baron,
Feel free to delete that comment due to the inclusion of the URL. I just wanted to make sure you knew what was available as a replacement if you wanted to use it.

Sorry.

- Sodra

no2liberals said...

Holy Guacamole!
It seems we Americans have our own dhimmis in power to deal with.
Ramadan Yea, Christmas Nay.
"Democrats who supported a House resolution to honor Ramadan voted against a similar resolution to honor Christmas and Christianity last night."

Cincinnatus said...

In science, when a criticism falls outside the track of reasonable thinking, the dismissal for it is that it is "not even wrong" - and thus not worthy of detailed analysis. A number of the hysterical Nazi-calling points made at LGF fall under that ægis. They equate to looking for a Nazi under every bed, so are "not even wrong", and that's why nobody is troubled to pick over them, because we have better things (you know, normal things) to do.

Thunder Pig said...

The request of removal of the image is an eloquent statement of his state of mind.
So very sad.
Chin up, Baron and Dymphna, you have proved your quality, and it is the finest.

Jakenheimer said...

All I know is that LGF labels tons of people as anti-Semite, but when Coulter made some pretty snotty remarks about Jews on MSNBC, Charles jumped up like the right wing tool he is and denounced people who called her an antisemite and labeled her Kosher. I don't think she is a Nazi or anything, just a spiteful, bigoted twit, Not even near to Smarter Than Dung's anti-Semitism

no2liberals said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
no2liberals said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Richard said...

I wouldnt call The Claw a "right winged tool", he is just a tool.



Elric66

no2liberals said...

Dang!
Hyperlink code wouldn't take...twice!
Good post at Gateway Pundit about Qaddafi and his virgin guards in Paris.

Mr. Smarterthanyou said...

Wow, I am hated by a Jew who hates Ann Coulter.

As if I give a sh*t. Or Dung, as the case may be.

Jews think they are "the chosen people"

Christians think people should be "saved"

But somehow Christians can be called bigots, while calling a Jew a bigot results in being branded a bigot (I am rubber, you are glue...?) and/or Nazi?

Mackety said...

Charles Johnson is not even trying to make an argument anymore. He just screams and yells like a baby.

Being a dane I used to read his blog a lot together with a few other american blogs like GoV, to get an idea about what americans where thinking in relation to Islam and Europe.

But I am done with Little Green Footballs. The last post from CJ about this story is pure juvenile hysteria. Makes him look dumb and makes me doubt his mental capacities.

One of the reasons I like GoV by the way is exactliy for its well thougt out essays. You dont have to agree on everything on GoV, but at least GoV makes you think.

VinceP1974 said...

I (an American), for one, am not concerned about a threat from the EUSSR.

I dont see the EUSSR as being able to muster any more strength than it already has.. not with a stagnant economy, a crushing Pension-deficit economic crisis on the verge of collapse , shrinking native population, exodus of people with brains , and the inevitable civil war or imposition of Sharia.

If I was in Europe I'd view things differently of course.

TC said...

Wait a minute. I just thought of this:

If the EU in 5 to 10 Years or so closes down the US military bases and the US cannot fly over anymore.

What does that mean for Israel?

Will Iraq be THE fortress of the West (the US) on the Eurasian continent?

Ed Mahmoud said...

Wow, I am hated by a Jew who hates Ann Coulter.

As if I give a sh*t. Or Dung, as the case may be.

Jews think they are "the chosen people"

Christians think people should be "saved"

But somehow Christians can be called bigots, while calling a Jew a bigot results in being branded a bigot (I am rubber, you are glue...?) and/or Nazi?



Actually, as far as my understanding of 'The Chosen People' thing, as explained by various Jews- Jews generally think that all generally good people are ok, as long as they follow some simple rules, the Noahide laws. People do not have to be Jewish. In fact, unless one is born Jewish, or actively seeks out conversion, Jewish people don't convert Gentiles. As far as the 'Chosen People' thing, while they believe they have been selected to be the path that God demonstrates his power and goodness to all the nations, they aren't supposed to feel self important. And while there is, generally an ethnic component to Judaism, the fact that Gentiles, if they strongly desire to become Jewish, and are willing to study the faith under a rabbi, can, in fact, become Jewish, suggests the 'chosen' part is not ethnic or racially based. Note also that Jews can be found that are European, Middle Eastern and North African, and even dark skinned Ethiopian.


Now, of course, there are certainly Jewish folks who do indeed think they are special because they are Jewish, but it isn't universal.


There are also Jewish folks who, mindful of the Inquisition and Crusades and other pieces of now rather old history, are wary of Christians over-eager to convert them. And, further, Jews are more likely, as compared to most Americans of European descent, to be flaming liberals. However, some of that is 'ethnic'. Other ethnic groups that tended to congregate in the cities, such as those of Irish and Italian ancestry, also leaned towards the flamingly liberal, and there are quite a few leading Jewish conservative leaders today.


Finally, as a Christian, I believe I am on the right path to salvation, better than any other path. Pretty much everyone of every faith believes that, or they would convert. If I thought that Jews or Buddhists had the answers, I'd be Jewish or Buddhist. Not bigoted, to believe your own religion has got it figured out. Christians have a commission to spread the faith, and it is all well and good to talk about the faith to Jewish people. But if they start getting annoyed, persistance will almost certainly just increase the annoyance.


Anyway, that is my opinion on that. And I'd hate to see many well meaning Jewish folks, on the right side of the issues, tarred with a broad brush because Chuckles the Dancing Clown views himself as a Philo-semite.

KGS said...

Jakenheimer: All I know is that LGF labels tons of people as anti-Semite, but when Coulter made some pretty snotty remarks about Jews on MSNBC, Charles jumped up like the right wing tool he is and denounced people who called her an antisemite and labeled her Kosher. I don't think she is a Nazi or anything, just a spiteful, bigoted twit, Not even near to Smarter Than Dung's anti-Semitism.

Jakenheimer, CJ "was right" in sticking up for the philo-Semite Ann Coulter. Let's not make things worse than they are already. Charles Johnson wasmorew than correst in sticking up for Ann Coulter. If ya don't believe me, then go ask my friend Debbie Schlussel.

Kurt Waldheim, The Sequel: Austrian Prez Hangs with HAMAS Terrorist

KGS said...

Lets try it again:

Kurt Waldheim, The Sequel: Austrian Prez Hangs with HAMAS Terrorist

Ed Mahmoud said...

Ann Coulter has a Jewish boyfriend (a lib Democrat at that), so I doubt she is an antisemite.

Ypp said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
The Dread Pirate Gryphon said...

"Jews think they are "the chosen people""

No, they don't, not in the sense you mean it. And this is a perfect example of someone spewing anti-Semitism out of his reeking pie-hole and then screaming "HOW DARE YOU CALL ME AN ANTI-SEMITE?!?!?"

This here Southern Jew-boy sure as hell knows the code for white pride, and all I've seen from this site over the last few months is excuse after excuse for that failed and ignorant weltanschauung.

Baron, Dymphna, you're laying down with dogs. Watch out for the fleas.

Roger said...

@Mr. Smarterthanyou said...Jews think they are "the chosen people"

GOD NAMES NEXT "CHOSEN PEOPLE"; IT'S JEWS AGAIN

//Somehow I doubt your moniker.

Ed Mahmoud said...

Rayra at Gulf Coast Pundit has noted that legally, Chuckles the Dancing Clown doesn't have a leg to stand on as far as whining about copyright infringement:

GoV should tell Chuckles the Clown to read up on the Fair Use doctrine and STFU.

Link to copyright.gov

One of the rights accorded to the owner of copyright is the right to reproduce or to authorize others to reproduce the work in copies or phonorecords. This right is subject to certain limitations found in sections 107 through 118 of the Copyright Act (title 17, U. S. Code). One of the more important limitations is the doctrine of “fair use.” Although fair use was not mentioned in the previous copyright law, the doctrine has developed through a substantial number of court decisions over the years. This doctrine has been codified in section 107 of the copyright law.

Section 107 contains a list of the various purposes for which the reproduction of a particular work may be considered “fair,” such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Section 107 also sets out four factors to be considered in determining whether or not a particular use is fair:

His copyright doesn’t mean s**t. As long as they properly attribute the image to its manufacturer/owner, their inclusion of it in criticism of Charles Johnson looks like a ‘Fair Use’ to me.



I slightly edited Rayra's post for harsh language.




Note Rayra isn't a copyright lawyer, and isn't offering legal advice.

Ed Mahmoud said...

Dread Pirate Gryphon-

I can't dispute that a certain post in question at least has the whiff of antisemitism. I've also seen a few anti-Catholic posters here at GoV.


However, GoV doesn't ban posters/delete comments willy-nilly, even offensive comments, unless obscenity is used, or extreme violence or threatingly language is used.


It should not be considered an endorsement of every commenter that posts here by the Baron or Dymphna.


I'd prefer a blog where a few bad apples post, to the current situation at LGF, where a rating system is installed, but anyone that dings down Charles' comments gets called on it (and probably banned), where people are banned simply for performing searches on banned poster's nics, and where it is made clear that people who don't feel exactly as Charles does is not welcome.


The Charles is rather thin skinned, and the adulation from the 'lizardoids' seem to have gone to his head.

Ed Mahmoud said...

DPG, note also that you can post things critical of the Baron and Dymphna here, and of their blog.


You can visit other blogs, and post opinions that are unfavorable to the Baron and Dymphna, and GoV.


And they won't go off on a childish tantrum, calling you a two headed snake, or a two faced back-stabber, and ban you from their blog.


Just for 'compare and contrast' purposes.

kahaneloyalist said...

MrSmarterthanyou,

Yes, we Jews know we are the Chosen People. Some other people stole the Torah translated it into Latin(poorly) and invented a new religion we dont take very seriously and we mostly ignore except when you try to convert or kill us. After 1800 years we havent converted enmasse and we wont despite being completely under your power for much of that time, you'll be a lot happier if you move on. Now a third party, the Muslims, want to kill or convert us both. Smarter it is clear you are very upset with the Jewish people; I think this letter written by the greatest Jewish leader of modern times can explain our attitudeDear World

I would like to briefly explain the Jewish view towards Goyim, a goy is righteous if he follows the Sheva Mitzvot Benai Noach, pretty much what would be considered basic morality, dont murder, dont commit sexual crimes(incest, adultry) dont be cruel to animals etc. If a Goy becomes a Ger Tzedek he is as Jewish as any other Jew. Israel is ours and ours alone, Goyim may only live there if they accept Jewish sovereignty. But outside of Israel we are required to follow Dinah Malkhutah shel Dinah, the law of the king is the law. That means we are required to follow the laws of the host countries we reside in and be loyal to that nation. So long as it isnt a nation like the Germans.

The Dread Pirate Gryphon said...

Ed:

I'm not holding the proprietors responsible for the comments. That was a clumsy segue and I should have been clearer.

I do, however, hold them responsible for giving their imprimatur to Fjordman's most recent post in which he presumes to lecture Americans about keeping our country ethnically pure.

We got problems, for sure, and a lot of them stem from many groups' refusal to assimilate or acculturate. However, the ethnicity of the Founding Fathers somehow didn't keep them from handing down a Law (the Constitution) that has somehow morphed into an idea that has engendered the greatest and most powerful culture the world has ever known.

America has so far been able to use her varied ethnicities and sub-cultures to shore up her roots. I know I don't need to beat the dead horse of the value of a melting pot (as opposed to a multi-culti "salad") with you, but the idea that "people of European origins" (Fjordman's words) are somehow solely responsible for our greatness is laughable on its face.

Further, my opinion is that Charles is right - I think the F-man has shown his true colors. Are you really going to tell me that by "people of European origins" F-man doesn't mean "white people of European origins"? It's not such a great leap. And I gar-on-tee that there are plenty of people hanging out here that don't think I'm a "white person". Not that I care, but don't try to tell me those people won't ever come after the Jews.

No, I'm afraid that in the rush to defend their new-found allies, the Baron and Dymphna have taken a wrong turn, and it truly saddens me. GOV is a valuable source for anti-jihad info, as is LGF, and I really wish I could come here without the expectation that every time I do, I going to hear code words that, in other circumstances, would mean nothing more nor less than "JUDEN RAUS!"

RISE_UP said...

Dan said:

{What did strike me as rather painful is the sheer Europe- hate that some air on LGF."}


It's not just EUROPE!!
Most of the bunch are hypocrites in some manner or other. For instance, Killgore Trout doesn't like Arkansas and believes them somehow less than....enough said. Hyprocrites.

RISE_UP said...

The Dread Pirate Gryphon:

clap clap...well...nicely said..too bad it doesn't strike home. But it might promote you to operative over on lgf. HEH!!!
"Show me a man whose is ashamed of his skin and I'll show you the laughing stock of the world."

Ed Mahmoud said...

I don't completely agree with Fjordman, as I have non-European family members and neighbors, and they have assimilated quite well.


People who have come here of their own free will, who have been willing to adapt to the laws and customs of this country, from a variety of ethnic and religious backgrounds, have done quite well in the US. I do think the Fjordman is a little pessimistic in that regard.


When the only non-European immigrants they have ever know are Muslims who moved in pursuit of socialist welfare state benefits, who view the natives as infidels, and who refuse to join the mainstream culture, one can see, if not neccesarily approve of, the confusion about non-white immigration some Europeans have.

Marcus said...

"Israel is ours and ours alone".

Hahaha. Give me a break.

"Palestine belongs to the Arabs in the same sense that England belongs to the English, and France to the French".

- Mahatma Gandhi

Ed Mahmoud said...

rise-up


I am quite happy as a person of European ancestry, don't feel any particular guilt over what other white people who weren't my ancestors (and wouldn't even if I was Jefferson Davis' great-grandson) have done to other non-white people many decades ago, but I don't consider myself a white supremacist.


Other than one particularly loony Swede quoted here (and similar thinking fools in most college towns in America), I can't think of too many people ashamed of their skin tone.


Nor do I think DPG was angling for brownie points at LGF.

Marcus said...

"When the only non-European immigrants they have ever know are Muslims who moved in pursuit of socialist welfare state benefits, who view the natives as infidels, and who refuse to join the mainstream culture, one can see, if not neccesarily approve of, the confusion about non-white immigration some Europeans have."

Actually Ed, here is the United States (California) Arab and Muslim immigrants have assimilated quite well.

Some Hispanic Catholics have been less willing to adopt the English language or Anglo cultures.

Although of all groups in the United States, the least assimilated are Hassidic Jews/Orthodox Jews. They do not speak English, do not dress like normal Americans, do not send their kids to mainstream schools. Their neighborhoods are like 18th century czarist Russia in the middle of Los Angeles.

Ed Mahmoud said...

marcus-

Not sure of Gandhi's intent in that, as England and France have had multiple invasions, and their people are more homogenous than you might think.



The UN mandate created both an Arab state in 'Palestine' and a Jewish state, the Jews accepted their state, the Arabs didn't, and then lost more territory to Israel when they attacked the Jewish state and lost.


There are about a dozen Arab countries, and many times more nations than that which are majority Muslim, so it isn't like the presence of Israel is denying any Arabs a place to live.


Can you think of any other people that have been living as 'refugees' without settling down after sixty years?

Marcus said...

Not really.

But the Palestinians can only trully live in Palestine.

They had problems in other Arab countries they lived in, ie Lebanon, Jordan, Tunisia, Kuwait.

And "Arabs" arent as homogenized a people as many would think.

Plus the UN mandate gave away large chunks of Arab owned land to the Jews. Thats not fair.

Lets not forget Jewish terrorist killing UN peace mediator Folke Bernadoutte.

Ed Mahmoud said...

I'm not Jewish, but I believe the Hassidim you talk of are a very small minority of Orthodox Jews, and the vast majority speak English.

They are still 'Chinatowns' in many major American cities, but most people of Chinese ancestry do not live in them.


The answer isn't to end immigration, it is to end illegal immigration, and control the number of people we do welcome to the US, and ensure that they are likely to become good citizens.

I think we should police our Southern border, and treat illegals, the same way Mexico guards its Southern border and treats illegals it catches.

puppetslave said...

Is Chuckles The Dancing Clown your pseudonym, Ed? You're the one dancing from website to website and nic to nic.

Marcus said...

I agree, but I find it disturbing that due to political correctness conservative commentators never speak about the lack of assimilation in the religious Jewish communities.

Additionally a lot of European immigrants to the US have had assimilation problems. Italians and Irish Catholics had formed their own ghettos in the East Coast, accompanied by the Mafia and organized crime.

Ed Mahmoud said...

The Palestinians you speak of are Syrians, Jordanians and Egyptians. Palestine was the name given the land, from the same word as 'Philistine', when they chose to crush Israeli resistance to Roman occupation.


It is in the interest of the Arab states to keep the 'Palestinian' Arabs from settling in their countries, one, because the Palestinians in Jordan have attempted to overthrow the Hashemite monarchy and the Palestinians in other countries, like Kuwait, demonstrated extreme disloyalty to their hosts during Gulf War 1, but also because the Arabs, despite numerical supremacy, have not been able to defeat Israel on the battlefield, and the 'Palestinian' issue is a new way to allow both terrorism, and a possible negotiated settlement, as a way to destroy Israel as a Jewish state.


The West Bank was Jordanian pre-1967, why won't Jordan take it back? The Gaza Strip was Egyptian. They want nothing to do with it.


And I don't see how a reasonable person can blame Israel for being less than eager to negotiate with people who teach their children that Jews are pigs and apes, or whose leaders repeatedly assert their goal of a Jew free Israel.

Ed Mahmoud said...

Is Chuckles The Dancing Clown your pseudonym, Ed? You're the one dancing from website to website and nic to nic.

Nope, for many years, while I have had a few nics/sock puppets, 'Ed Mahmoud' was always featured. Not hard, no matter what blog you visit, spotting me.

Chuckles the Dancing Clown is a happy name I have applied to Charles Johnson, the headmistress at Little Green Footballs.

Ed Mahmoud said...

Is there something wrong, somehow, with posting with the same nic at more than one blog?

Obviously, Chuckles TDC at LGF seems to think so, and the shriekers who worship him no doubt do.


Don't know why 'puppetslave' seems to think I should confine all my blog posting to a single blog.


Unless it is one of CTDC's shrieker/defenders.

kahaneloyalist said...

The "Palestinians", were brought in primarily by the British as a imperialist manuever to maintain British control of the area as Ernst Bevin admitted in 1946. The UN decision was profoundly unjust as it stole the majority of my country to give to a foreign people who were only too happy to engage in Imperialism against all non-Muslims, the British were facilitators of this action.

As for Gandhi he always had a soft spot for the Muzzies, and his comment during the Holocaust that Jews should kill ourselves to prove our choseness shows that he was an evil man all in all.

Marcus said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Roger said...

@Marcus

It is actually you who isn't assimilated. Assimilation is not all about imitating Hollywood and Madonna et al.

Condemning a group over their unintrusive religion, clothes and hairstyle makes you the unassimilated.

Some of the diversity/variety you condemn is what makes America great.

Marcus said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
The Dread Pirate Gryphon said...

"Although of all groups in the United States, the least assimilated are Hassidic Jews/Orthodox Jews. They do not speak English, do not dress like normal Americans, do not send their kids to mainstream schools. Their neighborhoods are like 18th century czarist Russia in the middle of Los Angeles."

Res ipse loquitur.

The Dread Pirate Gryphon said...

"Go to www.jewwatch.com"

This is what the Baron and Dymphna's editorial policies are spawaning - and I'm referring to posts, not comments.

Ed Mahmoud said...

Ariel Sharon was born in Israel.


And, sorry to say, you have revealed yourself as a person not worth the effort to debate with.



Like I say, a few bad apples, but better a wide open debate, even with a few bad apples, than what LGF has become. Of course, I'm giving 'marcus' the benefit of the doubt that he isn't an LGF supporter playing Moby over here.

Marcus said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Ed Mahmoud said...

I do kind of regret that I tried having a reasonable conversation with a Storm Front-er. I gave him too much credit for honorable intent.



But 'marcus' is the exception, not the rule, here.

Roger said...

@Marcus

If there is no such thing as a Jewish people, then why do you want to murder them so? Are you chasing figments of your imagination? You know this makes you stark raving mad?

Marcus said...

Ariel Sharon was born in Palestine in 1928.

There was no such thing as "Israel" until 1948, 20 years later.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ariel_sharon

Plus being born somewhere doesnt make you a native. I was born in England, but that doesnt make me English.

Marcus said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Archonix said...

As I recall the majority of israeli jews are either from the middle east or pre-existing jewish communities within "palestine". European jews make up about... 30% I think.

Marcus said...

You are mistaking Archonix.

Almost all Jews (in Israel or the world) are of European descent.

Even Sephardic Jews of Morocco, Algeria, Egypt, and Iran, are descendents of Jewish refugees from the Spanish Inquisition.

Marcus said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Roger said...

Amazing. Knows all about a people who don't exist.

It truly is a sickness.

Ed Mahmoud said...

Heck Im a vegetarian becuase I dont want animals to die for my meals.



Too easy. Discussing Jew-haters who were also vegetarians.


Quittin' time.

Marcus said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Marcus said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Sarah D. said...

And yet some will persist in their smear campaign against Fjordman?

I think the F-man has shown his true colors. Are you really going to tell me that by "people of European origins" F-man doesn't mean "white people of European origins"? It's not such a great leap

Yeah, I'm really going to tell you that. But I suppose you can read minds? Have some insight that no one else has? Or maybe just pulling things out of your nether regions maybe?

AngleofRepose said...

Baron,

Is there any way you can ban this particularly odious troll? He brings nothing to the discussion whatsoever.

Archonix said...

Oh, Marcus, I have no idea where you get your information...

Lets hazard a guess. You think "goyim" means "cattle", right? Actually it means "nations". The jews call themselves a "goy", a nation.

Enslaving blacks? I'm not even going to touch that one.

The last falls under my forté though. Lets start with Canaan. Canaan was not a "nation", it was more like a territory. IN fact "Canaan" covered most of what is now southern israel and parts of sinai, and was actually part of the greater Egyptian empire. Canaan is often used interchangeably with the Amorites and other tribes who populated the area at that time.

Now the Amorites, as I pointed out in a previous thread are, according to a detailed reading of scripture, punished by God for overthrowing the prior civilisation of Elba in souther syria and the golan etc. Israel was the tool of that punishment. Within the purely historical context this "punishment" did not have to even happen; the Amorites could have simply got out of the way, This was a regular occurance on the ancient middle east and it worked on the principle of comparing stats of your head god against the other guy's head god. There were two ways to do this; you fight, and teh most powerful god wins, or you look at who the other guy has defeated and check the power relationship betwene their head god and your own. That's how these things worked back then - like Pokemon, only... bigger somehow.

Now the Amorites knew their god wasn't as powerful as the god of Egypt, because Egypt ruled over them. The god of Egypt wasn't as powerfuyl as the god of Israel because Israel managed to have the entire Egyptian army drowned. This meant that the Amorites could simply have migrated north and left the land to the Israelites. It was quite common in the ANE at the time for entire nations to move a thousand miles simply because they believed their god wasn't powerful enough. Often they'd do this with just a years warning. The Amorites and their neighbours had 40 years warning.
The irony is, they didn't even have to move. They just had to let israel pass through them into Canaan (where other tribes did have to move, and in fact did in several cases). They refused, and marched out to meet Israel when Israel was trying to use a neutral highway called the Kings highway. Of course they lost the fight...

Same goes for Esau and the Amelakites. They had plenty of warning. This entire theatre played out within the boundaries of the Egyptian empire, where communication between the various nations involved was surprisingly fast given the methods of travel at their disposal.

Of course this is all ancient history. We're talking about events that happened thousands of years ago which only has relevance in a historical context. Name one modern nation that Israel has tried to genocide and I may well consider your arguments on this matter.

And no, the "palestinians" don't count. For one thing they aren't being genocided... for another they're a fiction.

Amillennialist said...

kahaneloyalist,

Ancient Israel was chosen by YHWH to be the people through whom the Messiah would come.

Jesus of Nazareth is that Messiah.

Those who witnessed His words and actions recorded them, they didn't "steal the Torah."

Except for some direct quotations and possibly an early version of Matthew's Gospel, the New Testament was written in Greek.

Since Christ came to "fulfill the Law" and did, it can hardly be said He "created a new religion."

"Christian anti-Semitism" is immoral, ridiculous, and oxymoronic.

Jesus was a Jewish rabbi, the Apostles were all Jews, the first Christians were Jews, the entire Christian Bible (Law, Prophets, Gospels, and Epistles) is Jewish, and much of traditional, Christian liturgical practice (even Gregorian chant) is Jewish in origin.

The Apostle Paul -- a Pharisee who persecuted Christians before his conversion -- called himself a "Hebrew of Hebrews." When proving to his fellow Jews that Jesus was the promised Messiah, he argued from the Law and Prophets.

How can one hate Jews when one's religion is Jewish and the focus of his worship, Jesus, is Himself the Anointed One?

Fjordman said...

To the Baron: I recommend deleting the comments by Marcus, which are totally unacceptable. I take personal offense from seeing them here. I also recommend, although this isn't my blog, that all comments should be turned off at the GoV until further notice.

I regret that it has come to this, as GoV has so far been a blog where the comments, by and large, have added to the quality of the website. However, since the recent public fight with LGF started, the quantity of comments has increased substantially while the quality has declined, as some of the newcomers have brought with them bad habits from other blogs. Many major blogs do not have comments at their posts, and some of those that do allow comments are bothered by a lot of "noise."

Whether this closing of comments should become permanent or last just a few weeks, until the present situation has cooled down, I do not know, but right now, the comments put together do not add to the quality of this blog, and that has to be our primary concern.

Fjordman.

Yashmak said...

We cannot "let go" until we have demolished his credibility to the extent that he will never again be able to harm our cause.

Not likely, since he's the one arguing caution about the background of certain organizations (which if he's right, would do far more damage to the cause than Charles ever could), and this site is the one attempting to rationalize away his findings, excuse them any way possible, or outright ignoring them.

PRCalDude said...

Is it right to hate a religion that believes all non-Jews are lower than cattle?

Is it right to hate a relgion that advocates the enslavement of blacks?

Is it right to hate a religion that advocates the genocide of other nations (Cannan, Phillistine, Median, etc.)


I'm going to wade in here on this one.

The clear teaching of the Old Testament is to "love your neighbor as yourself." (Leviticus 19)

In the case of the genocide of the peoples above, teh Bible frames it as divinely-sanctioned capital punishment of these peoples on account of their wickedness (Gen 15:16, Dt. 9:4). God flooded the Earth and destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah for the same reasons he commanded the Israelites to wipe out the CAnaanites. It's the same thing: divine judmgent.

As far as enslaving blacks, I don't know how you got that idea. Moses' wife was a Cushite' (Numbers 12:1-3) Cushites were sub-Saharan Africans (Nubian or black).

kepiblanc said...

.
The Dread Pirate Gryphon said..."No, I'm afraid that in the rush to defend their new-found allies, the Baron and Dymphna have taken a wrong turn, and it truly saddens me. GOV is a valuable source for anti-jihad info, as is LGF, and I really wish I could come here without the expectation that every time I do, I going to hear code words that, in other circumstances, would mean nothing more nor less than "JUDEN RAUS!"
Now, that is some shocking statement to read for a simple-minded Dane, soldier and long-time reader of GoV, like me. I will not - and can not - go into all this sophisticated, religious stuff, gobbledygook and idiocy about skin color, race or whatever. I'm too ignorant and it doesn't interest me one bit. But I happen to know the Baron personally, I've enjoyed his company here in Denmark and in Brussels and I have the greatest respect for him and his moral integrity. I am proud to be his friend (OK, here I sound exactly like the typical Charles-cannot-be-wrong-and-he-likes-brown-noses-around-him lizard over at LGF, but allow me to do so - for once.) And then: GoV has a much shorter acquaintance with Belgium and Vlaams Belang than with Scandinavia and especially Denmark. Never - ever - have I seen the slightest hint of anti-semitism here. To the contrary: whenever the Muslims in Denmark so much as tries to harass Jewish Danes, we're all up in arms - including the Danish blogs, strongly supported from across the pond by "Gates of Vienna". I will not hesitate to say that Denmark and Denmark's best friend in America - Baron Bodissey - are the most dedicated supporters of Israel this side of the galaxy.
And that I feel my nation deeply insulted by the above quoted statement.
Thatisall.

Amillennialist said...

Do not follow Fjordman's suggestion, just ban the offender.

Amillennialist said...

Nice post, PRCalDude.

PRCalDude said...

This is what the Baron and Dymphna's editorial policies are spawaning - and I'm referring to posts, not comments.

They've done nothing of the sort other than allow this antisemite speak his mind. Sooner or later, he'll go away on his own, or he'll just be a troll everyone will batter. Either way, the slope of banning speech is slippery, whether it's offensive or not. As Robert Spencer is fond of saying, the solution to bad speech is more free speech.