"Mooooaaaan! LGF watch won't let me write comments on their site."
Little Green Footballs
Wednesday, October 29, 2003
What is a moonbat?
According to Samizdata, which claims to have coined the phrase, a barking moonbat is "[s]omeone on the extreme edge of whatever their -ism happens to be". A moonbat would therefore seem to be a milder version of a barking moonbat, in the same way someone who is mad isn't quite as mad as someone who is barking mad. But they're still mad - or moonbats, as the case may be.
Charles Johnson likes calling people moonbat; Crossfire host Paul Begala, for example (http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=8720_Hope_for_the_Future). Or anyone else whose opinion he disagrees with. The term moonbat produces 642 matches on a site search of LGF. Anyone suggesting Johnson's use of the word is getting slightly inflationary would certainly get slapped down. And called a moonbat.
Barking, if you ask us...
Posted by X at 12:12
LGFers tie themselves in knots
Charles Johnson and his creepy minions are worried that LGF Watch might be distorting what is actually happening on their site (http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=8718#c0028). Nothing could be further from the truth. We are simply picking out the best bits and holding them up to the light for everyone to see. We would also dearly like our readers to be able to visit LGF and see what goes on there for themselves, which is why every item had links, and there was a link to the front page of the LGF weblog in the links section on the right. However, Charles Johnson doesn't seem to want people to read his blog. Why else would he be redirecting all traffic to the Israeli Defence Force website? URLs for LGF are now displayed in full, for you to copy&paste into a new browser window and find out what's happening on LGF.
Tuesday, October 28, 2003
LGF under scrutiny
Charles Johnson can't handle criticism. It's been just under two weeks since this blog was set up and already Johnson is redirecting all traffic (ie all links) from here to LGF onto the Hebrew language version of the Israeli Defence Force website. So, while Johnson is happy to link to other websites and brand them 'idiotarian', 'terror supporting' and hypocritical, he won't let others link to his weblog and criticise him.
Looks like a clear case of double standards to me. What do you say?
To avoid our readers finding themselves on the IDF website every time they click on a link to the Footballs, we have replaced the links with the relevant URLs in bold. Simply copy & paste these URLs into your browser to find out what it is we're commenting about on the LGF website.
LGF hypocrisy: death threats
Charles Johnson doesn't like people who issue death threats (http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=8699_Metafilter_Weenies_Overjoyed). He complains bitterly when someone on Metafilter wishes he were "hit by a bus" (not exactly a death threat, more of a death wish, but semantics never really bother Johnson). What he doesn't seem to have a problem with is people on his own weblog (http://www.littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=6528#c0026) issuing death threats against young Arab women.
Hypocrisy? You be the judge.
Monday, October 27, 2003
Charles Johnson gets libel happy
Charles Johnson, king among the Lizardmen, is contemplating suing Indymedia(http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=8694_Indymedia_Libels_Me_Again) for a satirical article on its open-posting newswire alleging he had been arrested for paedophilia.
The Indymedia article is in bad taste and, depending on the libel law you apply, clearly defames Mr Johnson with the claim that he "was charged with 3 counts of Sexual Interference, 2 counts of Invitatian to Sexual Touching, and 1 count of buggery".
However, while Charles is keen to protect his own reputation against defamatory lies, he apparently has no problem hurling accusations at his own enemy. In his latest outburst (http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=8695_AP_Bias_Gets_Worse_..._Much_Worse), he accuses AP journalist "Charles J. Hanley and his employers at the Associated Press [of being] very clearly, on the side of the jihadis". Basically, he is accusing them of supporting attacks on US troops and international and local civilians in Iraq. One wonders what AP might have to say about this? Or are such accusations protected under the First Amendment...?
Saturday, October 25, 2003
Departing slightly from the usual format, here is an interesting article written by Kurt Nimmo on Counterpuch, in which he argues that while it is OK to defend someone's right to express their Christian fundamentalist opinion in the US, saying anything negative about Zionism will immediately get you branded a racist of the worst kind, to be shunned by all right-thinking people.
Since this is common practice on LGF, I would be interested to know how LGFers respond to the accusation that they are hypocritical with regard to free speech.
Take, for example, Charles "Moonbat" Johnson's regular defamation of peace protesters as terrorism supporters. How does he reconcile this kind of unfounded slander with his vitriolic attack against those who, in much milder terms, criticise the Zionist project?
Friday, October 24, 2003
LGF hate figure: William Arkin
Charles Johnson likes fundamentalist Christians who rant about a holy war against Islam - especially if they are in a position to initiate one, like top US 'terror fighter' Gen. Boykin. As a result. Mr Johnson doesn't like William Arkin (http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=8655_Who_Is_William_Arkin), the man who exposed the little-known fact of Boykin's religious zealotry to the world. And he also doesn't like him because Arkin works for the LA Times. Mr Johnson doesn't like anyone at the LA Times.
According to Johnson, Arkin "is a far left anti-military activist". That description is perhaps a tad uncorrect, in view of the fact that Arkin was himself a soldier and continues to speak to the US military. As for him being far-left, well, anything left of Mussolini seems to be far-left to Johnson, so that ad hominem is kind of superfluous. We know that everyone you don't like is "far-left" Charles. Far, far left. And that is BAD, right? Left is BAD.
The world can be so simple sometimes...
Posted by X at 08:30
Sunday, October 19, 2003
LGF hate figure: Howard Dean
Charles Johnson doesn't like Howard Dean, one of the Democratic candidates for the 2004 US presidential elections. He doesn't like him because Dean is a Democrat, because Dean has some interesting ideas that don't quite fit into Mr Johnson's neatly boxed understanding of politics, and because Dean gets clapped at Arab-American conventions. Quoting an article (http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=8608_Dean_Panders_to_Arabs) from the right-wing Washington Post, Mr Johnson finds that the reason why Dean got clapped at the convention was because he wasn't Jewish. A bit simplistic. But reducing things to the simplest explanation is always a useful way of supporting your own point of view.
Posted by X at 15:38
Friday, October 17, 2003
LGF supporting the unsupportable: Lt. Gen. Boykin
Charles Johnson is convinced (http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=8574_About_General_Boykin) that the media attention given to William "Jihad" Boykin is the result of a loony-left plot. According to him, Boykin never used the term "Jihad", but the LA Times quoted him as having used it. Mr Johnson never offers any explanation for how he knows Boykin didn't use the word. He also fails to mention the fact that Boykin believes God voted in Dubya, not the American people (we'll that explains a lot) and that the crusade against terror is a crusade against "Satan". Find out more about what Boykin said on NBC.
Posted by X at 18:26
Thursday, October 16, 2003
Charles Johnson believes in freedom and justice. He stands up for the oppressed and cheers those who stand up with him. Except, of course, if the oppressed are Palestinian, and those standing up for them have been murdered by the Israeli Defence Force (IDF). For them, Mr Johnson has nothing but contempt ("I hope Corrie’s parents are very proud of their daughter’s evil legacy." http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=8555_The_Rachel_Corrie_Memorial_Massacre), despite never having met them, not understanding what happened, and simply parroting what he read in the Wall Street Journal.
Wednesday, October 15, 2003
LGF hypocrisy: Advocating Murder
Charles Johnson is outraged (http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=8549_Noxious_Hatred_at_Nazimedia) over a discussion on the Guardian's message boards in which someone seems to have asked whether it isn't time to assassinate George II. Apparently such a suggestion is free speech too far for Mr Johnson.
Luckily, he doesn't have to worry about any such ideas being proposed on his website. Or does he? A recent poll (http://www.littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/lgf-poll.php?pollName=what-to-do-with-arafat&PHPSESSID=5297ac447101207c9d2f4c39a335bb3b) on LGF (with the question and answers presumably set by Mr Johnson), seems to suggest that most LGF readers think the way to deal with Yasser Arafat is to kill him.
LGF, the website for hypocrits.
For want of any proper arguments, Johnson attacks Michael Moore (http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=8546_Michael_Moore_is_Insane) by swearing at him: "bloated bestselling author", "keep a vomit bag handy", "bulging, scraggle-bearded conspiracy freak". Funny, that last comment coming from Charles Johnson, conspiracy peddler that he is.