MSNBC has something on their site called Weblog Central by Will Femia. Femia created a "Best Of Blogs" list that included Little Green Footballs which is written by Charles Johnson(a web site developer who I think is in the S.F. Bay Area - which means he's a few hundred miles north of me - I'm in Santa Barbara California if you've ever wondered). I really like LGF and think Charles does the world a great service by searching out and combining so much information about the wonderful (sarcasm alert) activities of Islamic theocrats everywhere.
Well, rather predictably, Femia got lots of complaints about having Footballs on his best-of-the-web list. This resulted in his posting this post and this post. However, as summarized by James Taranto, many good men and women of the Blogosphere (and for the n milliionth time Bill Quick invented the term) rushed to Charles' defense.
Femia responded as follows and still has Footballs on his Best Of Blogs list.
Meanwhile, you can read what Charles and his readers said about this in many posts on Footballs. Read, for example, this post with the Mark Steyn letter defending LGF and this post. Note that not only does Mark Steyn offer a defense of LGF but also the fact that he reads LGF. That is just so cool.
I find something curious about this whole affair: attempts to shut down discussion on an issue by unfairly labelling one side of it (typically the less left-wing side) as hateful and racist have become less effective as a debating strategy when the side being so labelled decides that the stakes in the debate have gotten too damned high. It has become painfully clear that when discussing Muslims and the Middle East we are dealing with issues with a direction connection to our physical safety and our liberty. A frank and no-holds-barred discussion is a necessity. Intimidation and name-calling as a way to stifle debate just isn't going to work. In the Blogosphere we are discussing and linking to information about the nature of Arab and Islamic societies. Charles Johnson has done this more and better than anyone that I'm aware of. We discuss the utterances of the leaders and clerics of those societies and of Muslims living in the West. We discuss their actions and motives. We look at the histories of these societies and form our own opinions about the significance of these histories. We can't afford to be polite and nonjudgmental. The stakes are really too high for that.
On a personal note: Could someone on a really high traffic site please label my low traffic ParaPundit web log as a hate-filled, intolerant, extreme right-wing web site? Oh, and do this every day. Why am I asking for this? Publicity. I could use the boost in traffic this would bring. So bring on the insults. Just include a link to the hateful site when you dump on it. Are you thinking about doing this but can't find enough hard evidence to justify the label? Or are you just too busy or lazy to look in my archives? Okay, I can understand that. So let me make it easy for you: I HATE YOU! I HATE YOU! I HATE YOU! I HATE YOU! Good enough? No? Okay, then how about: I HATE YOUR FRIENDS! I HATE YOUR ENEMIES! I HATE PEOPLE YOU DO NOT EVEN KNOW! Now that covers a lot more people. What? Not inciteful enough? Okay, one last try: HATE OTHER PEOPLE! HATE PEOPLE YOU KNOW! HATE PEOPLE IN OTHER COUNTRIES! HATE YOUR NEIGHBORS! HATE YOUR BOSS! HATE YOUR SUBORDINATES! PRACTICE ACTS OF RANDOM HATEFULNESS! Now I think I've made my case. I'm sure you all agree.
|Share |||By Randall Parker at 2002 October 24 12:43 AM|