Free Jill Carroll

January 17, 2006 at 10:24 pm | Posted in Taking Action | Leave a comment

See the Jill Carroll update at the Christian Science Monitor.

The kidnapping of journalists is just one of the travesties occuring in Iraq these days. I am not a naive peacenik, and I know we’re in a war there. But a 28 year old journalist is not a threat to anyone. And she is not some expendable pawn in a “great” game.

Everyone, pray for her release.


Google News

January 17, 2006 at 5:33 am | Posted in Hating Hate | Leave a comment

An article today on Guardian Unlimited discusses the inclusion of the British National party:

“As the leader of the British National party, Nick Griffin, appears on charges of inciting racial hatred after being secretly filmed by a BBC documentary team, the BNP’s news reports are being listed on Google News alongside those from organisations such as the BBC and Reuters.

But a spokeswoman for Google said today that its job was not to act as censor, and that its automated search services could not screen results.

The company acknowledges that a search may result in “link to sites that some people find objectionable, inappropriate, or offensive” but that it assumes no responsibility for the content of any site included in any search results.”

Thoughts? Should Google et al develop a sense of corporate responsibility? Or does anything go?

How to make an impact

January 17, 2006 at 2:36 am | Posted in Taking Action | Leave a comment

I was just reading memeorandum and saw a pointer to the firedoglake blog.

The post talked about how they managed to bring down the sales of a book on Amazon by taking concerted action against it. Quoted in the post is an article from the WSJ’s Opinion Journal:

Amazon itself is another boon to conservatives, since the Internet giant betrays no ideological bias in selling books….”The rise of Amazon and the chain stores has been tremendously liberating for conservatives, because these stores are very much product-oriented businesses,” observes David Horowitz. “The independent bookstores are all controlled by leftists, and they’re totalitarians–they will not display conservative books, or if they do, they’ll hide them in the back.” Says Marji Ross: “We have experienced our books being buried or kept in the back room when a store manager or owner opposed their message.” She’s a big fan of Amazon and the chains.

Amazon’s Reader Reviews feature–where readers can post their opinions on books they’ve read and rate them–has helped diminish the authority of elite cultural guardians, too, by creating a truly democratic marketplace of ideas. “I don’t think there’s ever been a similar review medium–a really broad-based consumers’ guide for culture,” says 2blowhards blogger Michael. “I’ve read some stuff on Amazon that’s been as good as anything I’ve read in the real press.”

This is what we’re striving for – neutralize the elements of the Internet that promotes hate speech. It is possible, if we can build a large enough critical mass. It just requires us to speak up and make our opinions heard!

We can do this for books written by people like Robert Spencer and Serge Trifkovic. We can also write the companies directly and let them know the hate speech contained on the sites that they are funding. But we can only do it if we take action.

JihadWatch bans racists? Another lie exposed!

January 16, 2006 at 11:57 pm | Posted in Hypocracy unmasked | Leave a comment

From my new blog,


Wow, the shameless lies continue.

And the fact checkers at the St. Petersburg Times must be on vacation. See their recent article “Are Bloggers Against Hate, or Feeding It?”. In it, Robert Spencer of JihadWatch is quoted: “Robert Spencer of said his blog sometimes attracts racists. He bans them, he said. But he won’t stop blogging.”

Noble man, that Spencer. Nice to see he won’t stop blogging. But can we at least ask him to tell the truth? Just a little?

Let’s look at the “racists” on his site. It is possible that Spencer is indulging in the sophistry common within the anti-Islam community, that “Muslim isn’t a race”, so the use of “Racist” to describe hateful comments and hostility towards Muslims as a group is incorrect. This is a common issue on the jihadwatch site. For example, this comment on from October 19, 2005: “I think it’s perfectly proper to be anti-muslim. Muslim is not a race, it is not a person, ‘muslim’ is a title taken by people indulging in a certain belief system.”

But, let’s assume for a second that Spencer is actually not being disingenuous in the article. Do we see evidence of the “racists” (let’s say “bigots” to make everyone happy) that he bans? Let’s look at just the past week, shall we? January 15, comments by one Sheik Yer’Mami:

“No Muslims, no Wuslims: Internment and Deportations instead!

No mosques, no madrassahs, no clerics, no Da’wa: No Jiziya. No assistance, financially or otherwise. Why should we be concerned when Muslims get hit with earthquakes and tsunami’s? Do they have any other interest than our destruction?

Disengagement from planet Muslim, that is what’s needed, massive counter-propaganda, exposing and ridiculing this perverse cult, and general, sincere education amongst the infidels as to what Islam is, what it does and how to destroy it.”

In November, we see the “Sheik” again:

“Anyway, its far from over and internment and mass-deportations haven’t even begun.”

Was he banned? Nope… we see him again on December 28, 2005:

“May the “Arab world” suffocate in its own filth: There is always Meccah-cola for you Nasseem, with lots of slaughtered goats and frenzied masses of Mobots who ‘stone Satan’ and trample each other to death while dancing around a monolith…” and, further down in the same post: “Islam is the religion of and for hijackers. You can’t ‘hijack’ Islam.”

Hmm… 2+ weeks not enough to ban someone? Maybe he just missed it?

Well, lest we think this is one isolated case, let’s look at (I’m not kidding) commenter KKK. Yes, KKK – this person chose KKK as a nickname (it is not, as far as he says, his real initials) KKK. He/she has posted comments at least 5 times, starting on September 5, 2005, and as recently as Jan 10 2006. Let’s look at what he said on November 5, 2005:

“Only Muslims can’t, as Quran-thumping groupies have prescribed some 24911 body-related hangups that translate into intellectual backwardness. Small wonder that the Muslim world is essentially a cesspool of mindless backwardness begining and ending with loot, rape, murder, and prayers all offered to a jealous, monochromatic deity called Allah !”

“Islam represents the rigor-mortis of a troglodyte culture system, fabricated by a cave dwelling rabid fanatic, rapist called Mohammed who terrorized Arabia 1400 years ago”, and “why should Muslims be allowed to live in non-Muslim majority lands ?”

On November 5, he unmasks his beliefs a little further:

“If Islam is racist/bigoted and barbaric towards non-Muslims, why can’t non-Muslims act the same way towards Islam/Muslims ?”

Surely, he must talso have been banned, given his expressed “racist/bigoted” views?

Nope. We see him again on Jan 9, 2006. In this classic comment, he calls for the following:

“First, don’t allow any new Muslim immigration to USA. NO, no, no, no ! ”

2. Second, place a technology embargo and no World Bank or humanitarian dollars ($) for these rotten cultures. Don’t give them any chance to get technologically sophisticated. That’s dangerous. Let them revert to ignorant and stupid, as they truly were donkeys some 1400 years ago. Let them reduce themselves to that.”

4… Listen to each and every damn conversation amongst Muslims.” “5. In USA, make constitutional amendments to deny Muslims their right to congregate in mosques… Ban wearing headscarfs and hijab. Declare these are threats to national security. Increase survelliance for bearded men of Islamic devotion.”

“9. Non-Muslim men and women CAN NOT convert to Islam. On the other hand, if non-Muslim and Muslim fall in love, they can marry but in either of the two ways: (a) The Muslim spouse checks out of Islam for good,

(b) they both check out of their respective religions.

Their offsprings CAN NOT convert back to Islam.”

Later on, he says:

“Muslims will live at the mercy of non-Muslims in a secular, sinful country like USA.”

How about “Mahdi Al-Dajjal” – author of the lovely statement, referring to the “followers of Islam” in September 2004.:

“Kill them all and lets finally rid the planet once and for all of this cancerous scourge which has been festering in the gut of civilization for well over 1000 years..”

Clearly, he must have been banned! Advocating mass slaughter (genocide!) of Muslims… clearly racist. And Spencer bans racists! He said so!

What’s that?!? He posted again on December 13, 2005?!? Actually, there are 119 postings by this person, according to Google. Shocking! I mean, Spencer says he bans the racists…
Actually if he did, he would have to ban the majority of people who comment on his website as this behavior constitutes the majority of his comments. People like “Dr. Pepper”, “IsabellaTheCrusader”, “Mr. ApePig”, “Alarmed Pig Farmer”, “Rebecca JW”, “Religion of Peas”, and “Hugh” are all bigots who regularly contribute the the JihadWatch site.

Why? Because JihadWatch itself actually encourages this hatred and bigotry! Want proof? Look at JihadWatch Board Member Hugh Fitzgerald’s (the “Hugh” from above) postings. (Spencer, by the way, calls this person “”one of the most brilliantly insightful commentators on the scene today”). Just a few examples of what he has written:

“…not only should migration be stopped, but life can be made more difficult, if not by the government, then by private individuals, so that Moslems will be discouraged from remaining.

What do I mean? I mean that we, as private citizens, do not have to hire Moslems, we do not have to buy their goods, or make their lives, economically, more rewarding. It may seem mean, and many of you may be offended by it, and I am perfectly aware that there are nice Moslems, that there are those who simply ignore the main tenets of Islam. But as a group, the Moslems are a threat to me and those I love. Even the innocent ones, merely by being here, swell Moslem political power.”

In another posting, he says:

“And the first way is to put a complete stop to Muslim immigration, and to find creative ways to deport all Muslim non-citizens. These two measures would be accompanied by the creation of an environment where the practice of Islam is made not easy but difficult.


“Understand how very useless is the concept of the “moderate” Muslim — because it is impossible to know when someone’s “moderation” is real or feigned.”

So, Hugh admits he views all Muslims as a threat, that he advocates violating their constitutional rights under the First Amendment, and that it is impossible to tell the “good ones” from the “bad ones”. Sounds pretty bigoted to me. Even more, this is not even a casual commenter. This is an actual officer of JihadWatch. Someone Spencer recruited into his organization, someone who speaks for his organization.

How can Spencer possibly expect us to believe that JihadWatch is not a hate site when his very own officers spew hate? He can’t, and we shouldn’t. JihadWatch is a hate site and hate group, plain and simple. We need to start treating them as such.

New blog

January 14, 2006 at 11:47 pm | Posted in Uncategorized | 4 Comments

Hi everyone.

I’ve decided that I will split this blog into two – one focusing just on the hypocracy of JihadWatch, the other (this one!) focused on shutting down support for hate sites.

Please visit my new blog at

This blog will continue. Please keep reading, and taking action. Thank you.

Personal Attacks and JihadWatch

January 14, 2006 at 11:41 pm | Posted in Hypocracy unmasked | Leave a comment

Poor Robert Spencer is always under attack. The “Politically Correct” forces seek to silence him. He NEVER attacks anyone. Why do people pick on him so? (heavy saracasm…)

Mr. Spencer was very kind to point us to an old article in which Stephen Schwartz skewers him. For those interested in the full article, it is here.

Mr. Schwartz says:

First, it is absurd to suggest that there is any effort underway by me to “silence” Robert Spencer, who has a very wide audience in the U.S. for his books and commentaries. Indeed, it may be argued that he has a wider audience than I do.

Second, the argument that in failing to answer his attack on me I was attempting to silence him is either the kind of politically-correct argument typically adopted by Stalinists, who say that if you don’t pay attention to them you are censoring them, or is simply paranoia.

Third, I do not feel compelled to reply to Mr. Spencer’s disquisitions on my religion because I not not consider him in the slightest manner competent to comment on my religion. He has a magpie knowledge of what he imagines Islam to be based on fairy tales and armchair reading. His obvious aim is to instill fear of Islam in Western readers who know even less than he knows about the faith of Muhammad. I do not in general respond to comments on Islam by non-Muslims, except when they are made by apologists for Wahhabism. I am more interested in convincing Muslims of the need for moderation, than in wasting my time trying to persuade biased non-Muslims that moderate Islam exists.

Fourth, I consider that Robert Spencer has disqualified himself from serious consideration on any matters having to do with interfaith relations by publishing the writings of Srdja Trifkovic, the well-known apologist for Serbian war crimes in Bosnia-Hercegovina, whose testimony at the International Criminal Tribunal for Yugoslavia, in the Stakic case, was discredited.

Fifth, I have the right to decide who I reply to in any event, since this is the United States, not Serbia under the rule of Mr. Trifkovic’s friends, or Spain under the kind of inquisition the attitude of which Mr. Spencer exemplifies.”


Oh, the truth…

January 13, 2006 at 10:40 pm | Posted in Hypocracy unmasked | Leave a comment

So much for the truth… 🙂

In her whining article about not being able to get her way on the Robert Spencer article on Wikipedia, JihadWatch volunteer and contributor Anne said: “I myself am no longer involved in the discussion”

I guess she doesn’t count the half dozen or so edits she made since she posted her article? Including yesterday, the day before, the day before that? While her nemesis, Yalto, appears to have not made a single change or contribution since he said he would leave the discussion?
Clearly, she has learned well – lies and posturing are fine so long as they advance your agenda.  Which now apparently includes celebrating the death of 345+ pilgrims on the Hajj…

Yet, Amazon still enables and provides them with funding.

Worth a read

January 13, 2006 at 7:10 am | Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

I just came across James Wolcott’s blog, and saw his recent entry on Pajamas Media. Quote:

“In a feeble attempt to draw attention to itself before it sinks into the briny deep under the dead weight of its founders Charles Johnson and Roger L. Simon and its undistinguished blogroll, Pajamas Media showcases an attack on me by Michael Fumento, and seldom has a writer been more aptly named. Like fellow werewolf David Horowitz, Fumento is always fuming at loud volume in an effort to be heard above the din of his own raging thoughts, which allow him no rest, plaguing his sleep, and making him no fun to be around.”

Great stuff.

Looking at older entries, which also skewer people like LGF, we also find this choice selection:

“But I don’t understand why someone as politically keen as The Nation’s David Corn would lend his name to the editorial board of Pajamas Media, the greatest assembly of conservative deadbeats since Jonah Goldberg’s last fondue party. What an illustrious roster of ideological utensils make up Pajamas’ masthead: Michael Barone…John Podhoretz…Tim Blair…and this inveterate stirpot, whose presence all decent men and women should shun until proper disinfectant can be found. By allowing his name to be slated on the editorial board, Corn is letting himself be used as a figleaf enabling Pajamas to pretend that it’s a bipartisan effort instead of what it so flagrantly is, a neocon popstand.

Does Corn really want to be associated with fun blogs like Little Green Footballs and Gates of Vienna (“At the siege of Vienna in 1683 Islam seemed poised to overrun Christian Europe. We are in a new phase of a very old war”)?”Check it out.

A blog well worth reading

January 11, 2006 at 3:48 am | Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Ok, this is off topic, but I think it is worthwhile.

Michael Totten runs a great blog. He is a freelance journalist operating out of Beirut, and gives a clear picture of what the Middle East is really like. He is about to head off to Iraq to report, and is looking for support. Check him out and consider supporting him if you can afford to. His reporting is too good to lose.

(Before everyone pings me, yes I know that Totten’s blog is part of PajamasMedia, which I blogged about before. The problem with PJ is not that all their blogs are bad, just some of them like LGF and Jawa (BTW, I wrote Lucasfilm alerting them to the trademark infringement in the off chance they didn’t know). The problem is when you support one with advertising, it appears you support them all. But the donations to Michael are actually through Paypal, directly to him).


January 11, 2006 at 3:40 am | Posted in Hypocracy unmasked | Leave a comment

Sorry, can’t help it. An anonymous editor seems to have reinserted the criticisms section of the Spencer page, and Anne, the jihadwatch wikipedia lurker, posted this “Note: Attempts to post responses to these criticisms or to show that they are without substance have been repeatedly removed by Wikipedia “editors,” demonstrating Wikipedia’s lack of objectivity.”

Pretty childish, don’t you think?

Note that the Yalto she singled out in her article at JihadWatch voluntarily removed himself from the article because he thought he was too attacked/close to the article to be objective. Pity Anne doesn’t have the ability to do the same thing and leave it to outsiders.

« Previous PageNext Page »

Create a free website or blog at
Entries and comments feeds.