Little Green Footballs

Tuesday, January 16, 2007

About those 'Dhimmi' media

The next time Charles complains about how the media are supporting terrorists and cowing to radical Islam, remind him that it was the UK's 'lefty' Channel 4 which sent undercover reporters into mosques to uncover the fact that some of them allow extremists to preach (

Remind him that it was the 'Dhimmi' London Times which revealed the rantings of Anjem Choudry (

And it's The Guardian, otherwise known as Moonbat Central to the Lizards, whose reporter went deep into the Iraqi insurgency to reveal the changes that have taken place there over the past few years (,,1989390,00.html).

Without the work of these journalists, Charles Johnson would be nothing. His minions would be reduced to reading about cheesy 1980s guitarists. Yet Charles continues to throw mud at the very people he relies on to provide him with the basis for his rants, the raw material that he then twists into an ugly and distorted version of reality.

It's not the ingratitude of the man that's surprising: it's the sheer hypocrisy.


Anonymous said...

So LGF uses left sources to expose dangerous mosques. Are you arguing that he should only use right sources?

this makes no sense.

merkur said...

No, I think the point LGFwatch is making is that Charles simultaneously denigrates the accuracy, reliability and patriotism of the "MSM" while relying on them as a primary source when it suits him.

Of course, he's not alone in this. Malkin and Preston recently came back from a week in Iraq to tell us the obvious. By "the obvious", I mean things that the "MSM" has been telling us for the last three years:

There was no plan for the post war period? Iran is supporting parts of the insurgency? Abu Ghraib was a public relations disaster? The US has failed to understand Islamic culture?

It was a series of revelations, I tell you, revelations. Unless, of course, you had been reading any of the reports and books that have been published on Iraq, or watched the television at any point in the last three years.

Anonymous said...

This site is a paradox!

It keeps arguing against itself. I do not know much about the LGF site, and have only recently looked at it, but this website seems desparate to prove them wrong. They also accuse them of "bias." There is certainly an anti-islam slant at LGF, but this website is INCREDIBLY biased in its efforts to put Charles Johnson down.

Anonymous said...

There is certainly an anti-islam slant at LGF

A bit like saying there's an "anti-Jewish bias" at Stormfront.

Anonymous said...

It would help if you knew what a 'paradox' was before you went down that route. LGF Watch is anti-LGF? Who knew? You were the brightest star in your special school weren't you?

Anonymous said...

merkur: yes, Charles does criticize the MSM at large. However, one's disagreement with the macro institution at large, does not logically conclude that one cannot agree with a micro point within that institution.

Here is an example. Democrats by and large disagree with the GOP. However, if a Democrat would bring up Giuliani's points for supportting pro-choice, it would still be intellectually consistent.

Now if Charles said that ALL MSM is biased 100% of the time, then you have something….