Thursday, February 21, 2008
Lawhawk describes the media and CAIR's current war against Charles Johnson's LGF:
How is it that media outlets (and here) in St. Louis can run stories about comments left on those websites without actually interviewing any of the principles involved? Is this the face of the media in 2008? Charles Johnson is rightfully pissed off about this. I can't blame him one bit.His website is being smeared by CAIR. CAIR is hoping to get the FBI investigating the site for four comments made yesterday (and subsequently deleted by Charles after he was made aware of them). CAIR never once tried to contact Charles directly. That's bad enough.
Even worse, none of the media outlets attempted to contact Charles, despite the fact that Charles has been interviewed by media outlets in the past (for his exposure of the Rathergate fraud), has a handy-dandy contact form on every page, and openly reminds all posters that comments are subject to deletion and posters banned for threatening violence. All four of the posts have been subsequently deleted.
The email conversation between Charles and Tim Townsend, who works the religion beat for the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, is posted here:
From: Charles Johnson
Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2008 12:22 PM
To: Tim Townsend
Subject: Re: A very irresponsible report
And I'll take your unwillingness to address a single other point in my email as evidence that you know you're in the wrong.
CJ
----------------
On Feb 20, 2008, at 10:25 AM, Tim Townsend wrote:
Oooohh. You're like a master of logic. So smart.
----------------
From: Charles Johnson
Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2008 12:28 PM
To: Tim Townsend
Subject: Re: A very irresponsible report
This little thread of emails will be forwarded to your editors, by the way.
You may want to brush up on reading comprehension as well, because I did not say you wrote "anti-Muslim". If you had bothered to read my post on the matter, you would know where that comes from.
CJ
----------------
On Feb 20, 2008, at 10:42 AM, Tim Townsend wrote:
Wow, you're going to TELL on me?
You ranted to a reporter, demanding an apology for his story, and wrote "LGF is a highly reputable blog, and we are NOT 'anti-Muslim.'" How could you possibly think I would not take that as directed at the story?
----------------
It's not clear if the report was intentionally biased or just sloppy reporting, but it is clear that some in the mass media are not fans of blogs.
But they're also not fans of getting angry letters from lawyers. Neither is CAIR. Many bloggers are lawyers.
A fact which may have prompted this retraction from the St. Louis Post-Dispatch?
What goes around comes around.
First off, I wrote an email to the newspaper complaining about their joke a story.
But I take a certain glee from the fact that what LGF has been doing to people all over to Europe (smearing them.. not contacting them for thier side of hte story before he publishes his attack.. acting immature when people want him to correct his oinfo) is now happening to him.
Good..
How's it feel ??
LGF has been doing to people all over to Europe (smearing them.. not contacting them for thier side of hte story before he publishes his attack.. acting immature when people want him to correct his oinfo) is now happening to him
Did Charles of LGF print, verbatim, a press release from a terrorist-linked group like CAIR? I didn't know that he did that. Please let me know the details.
He did in spirit. He carried thier message to everyone with eyes to see.
"To be against Muslims is to be Nazi-like.. just like this folks in Europe"
How much more CAIR-like can you get, sychophant?
"To be against Muslims is to be Nazi-like.. just like this folks in Europe"
How much more CAIR-like can you get, sychophant?
CAIR doesn't represent Muslims, CAIR just represents the few Saudis who send them large sums of money.
If someone is biased against a group of people, not for what they do, but for what they are (or for what they were born as), then they are opposed to the American ideal of regarding all individuals as being created equal, and worthy of equal consideration and equal rights.
Supporting these American ideals is not CAIR-like, as far as I know.
I think this all goes back to the spat last year between Gates of Vienna and LGF.
Dr Sanity was even involved and it's worthwhile reading her post ( a fairly long read)
http://drsanity.blogspot.com/2007_11_01_archive.html
to bring things into perspective.
And after reading this:
http://eye-on-the-world.blogspot.com/2008/02/waiter-at-belgian-restaurant-we-are-not.html
well maybe Johnson was not quite so "incorrect".