Little Green Footballs

Saturday, February 24, 2007

LGF's remit

A reader of this blog has complained that when we accuse Charles Johnson of deliberately ignoring uncomfortable news items, we're being unfair because LGF is all about Islamic terrorism and therefore Charles need post about nothing else.

Well, that is plain wrong: LGF isn't just about 'Islamic terrorism'. Although that its the main focus, CJ also touches on broader issues, from Internet governance to religious education, from cycling news to US politics, from Latin America to naff guitar solos.

What Charles decides to write about on his blog is entirely up to him to decide, but please don't bother telling us that Charles ignored a front-page news item like this because it doesn't fall into the remit of his blog. That's bollox. Charles knows as well as anyone that the story about the rape and murder of an Iraqi teenager by US soldiers has a direct impact on his 'War on Terror', and he chooses to downplay the story because it undermines his arguments and his sense of moral superiority.

To put it different, for Charles "bad news is no news", something to 'GAZE' at and wished away until such time as there is another flimsy 'fauxtography' scandal to brandish and whine about.

24 comments:

cokane said...

actually Charles hardly reports anything about Iraq. Interesting for a site dedicated to terrorism to have virtually ignored that theater for months.

Infidel & Kafir Watch said...

LGF should start to report on US and UK terror in Iraq, they will get more news and stories about terror executed by US and UK soldiers.

Steven said...

And especially with all the good news coming out from that part of the world....

Anonymous said...

The reason they don't talk about Iraq too much is because:

A) it ain't going quite like they had hoped...

B) they can't quite wrap their mind around the fact that American blood and treasure are being spent to build a country that will wind up allied with Iran and not recognising Israel. I'm sure quite a few heads exploded over there the day those pro-Hezbollah rallies took place in Iraq.

C) By now, they've taken shots at enough 'moonbats' and 'cut and runners' that it's just easier to avoid the subject instead of having to deal with the realization that they were ridiculing people who were right all along

Anonymous said...

Just "follow the MONEY", in case this fact is not obvious...view LGF's Advertisments. Charles is making out like Clinton with a room full of Dancing girls.

yodaking said...

LOL, of course Charles doesn't post negative events in Iraq on his site because it's a partisan site...it's BIASED.

It's Pro-American success in Iraq.

This post is a response when the owner of this site asked why a mall shooting did not get a post in LGF until it was discovered he was Muslim and that he attended a mosque with a previous turncoat.

I said that a running theme in LGF is Islamic Terrorism. A crazed shooter in the mall does not qualify as Islamic Terrorism unless it was motivated my Islam.

Your argument can be turned around, why don't you post stories that are critical of Radical Islam? There are tons on LGF that have merit....because you have a PARTISAN SITE that is not devoted that subject. It's devoted to painting LGF as illegitmate and racist...any story that runs counter to that of course will not be posted.

You get it now?

cokane said...

"I said that a running theme in LGF is Islamic Terrorism."

wait, so why doesn't he report on Iraq then?

Steven said...

LGF is for bigots. A brief examination of the comments on any of its "Islamic" threads will confirm this.

As for LGF being "Pro-American success in Iraq", do you mean LGF wishes for success or endorse the "success" of the invasion?

Anonymous said...

LGF "rabid racists"?

This LGFWatch should be banned, or change its language.

Anonymous said...

Your kidding right? This is on atrocity by the US. The US made of people. We admit mistakes and convict wrong doers. We is your story about Muslims beheading, chopping off hands, whipping infidels and honor killings? You won't protest those actions, because they are being commited by some country other than the US so the are OK by you and your ilke. Well get the F out and leave us to our 'hell.' Please go to a 'wonderful' country like UAE.

Anonymous said...

This article has been up for two days and counting this you've got nine posts.

Good luck on trying to generate traffic. Your efforts are obviously succeeding.

Pim's Ghost said...

Not everyone who is upset with the terrorism and mass immigration of radical Muslims is a racist, you freaks! Wow, I really cannot believe that there is an entire blog devoted to bashing LGF! Why? Did Charles Johnson beat one of you guys up in the first grade?

Plenty of people see the obvious threat from the Wahabi branch of Islam, represented most fervently by the Saudis as well as al Qaida. I know plenty of MUSLIMS who see this threat and complain about these radicals. Plenty of LGF readers don't hate all Muslims, all Arabs, all of any group. Obviously the blow-hards are going to leave their comments. It happens. But it doesn't mean that everyone who's anti-jihadi is a racist or even a "right-winger". Please keep that in mind.

Wow, a whole site devoted to mocking Pamela Geller? Now that's just plain weird, whoever's at that game.

Steven said...

Wow, I really cannot believe that there is an entire blog devoted to bashing LGF!

You must be very new to blogging. There are plenty of "watch" sites on the net. It's a healthy response to those sites like LGF that have closed their comment registration.

yodaking said...

wait, so why doesn't he report on Iraq then?

uhh...he does

Here are 65 stories just in the last month about Iraq

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/lgf-search.php?searchWith=lgf&searchWhat=entries&searchTime=30&searchString=iraq

yodaking said...

LGF is for bigots. A brief examination of the comments on any of its "Islamic" threads will confirm this.

So, I'm a bigot? My friends are bigots? I have friends of every race (including Arab) -

Yet I'm a bigot because I read LGF....Why does the left revel in hurling blanket insults to avoid intellectual debate?

As for LGF being "Pro-American success in Iraq", do you mean LGF wishes for success or endorse the "success" of the invasion?

Both

Steven said...

Yodaking:

I accept that you are not a bigot. So what are you doing on LGF?

My fundamental objection to Charles Johnson is that by linking nearly every act of Arab violence to the Koran, he dispenses with the need to understand the geo-political situation in the Middle East (ie. the brutal Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, the bloody invasion and occupation of Iraq etc.) Islam is a naturally violent religion and therefore Arabs are prone to violence and must be stopped. It's a point of view that is bound to attract people who "know little but want to explain alot".

Secondly, let's be honest: "success" is not the word that springs to mind when you look at how Iraq has unfolded. "Catastrophe" and "quagmire" better describe what has befallen the US.

Anyway this totally avoidable war is lost (as is Afghanistan). The question is how much longer must US soldiers die in vain so that others "won't have died in vain"?

Anonymous said...

Actually, the theme of LGF is the way the news media distort stories about terrorism and Muslims.

Media distortion has been a popular theme on the left as long as I can recall. Chomsky has a stump speech on this subject. While it is true that LGF does not see the distortion in the same way that Chomsky does, I am puzzled about the unquestioning acceptance of the media by many who consider themselves to be on the left. We should all be questioning the stories we're getting.

Anyway, the answer to the question why LGF does not report more about Iraq is simple: the theme of the site is not terrorism, but the media.

Steven said...

I am told that LGF is not a website for bigots. I stand corrected. LGF is more akin to a lynch mob. Anyone in doubt should look at the comments which follow this thread:

Bedouin Gang Rapes Jewish Women As 'Revenge'

CJ says he does not necessarily agree with the comments that appear on his website but nor does he appear to be embarrassed by those posters who demand the extermination of Islam and other drastic actions totally compatible with "our enlightened Western values."

Steven said...

Anyway, the answer to the question why LGF does not report more about Iraq is simple: the theme of the site is not terrorism, but the media.

And of course there is absolutely no evidence that the media in the US is at all sympathetic to Israel which is why CJ never comments on this aspect of media distortion.

Anonymous said...

steven wrote:
"Yodaking:

I accept that you are not a bigot. So what are you doing on LGF?"

Cognitive dissonance at its finest. 1) You claim LGF is for bigots. 2) yodaking isn't a bigot. 3) yodaking goes to LGF. 4) Many many many other people like yodaking go to LGF. 6) Your claim is therefore false. You only call them bigots because A) you project your prejudice against conservatives upon all of them and B) To support your point, you point to various posters at LGF, some of which actually are bigots but most of which you simply don't understand. But even if the folks of B were all bigots (which they obviously aren't), the majority of posters there and Charles himself don't fit into the category in the least. It is cognitive dissonance at its finest that you continue to believe they do, despite the over-abundance of disclaimers provided. (Such disclaimers shouldn't even be required but they are because of true bigots like yourself, who call anyone who questions RADICAL elements of Islam "Islamophobic.")

Steven said...

Anonymous:

You are a blustery fellow with all that "cognitive dissonance" nonsense, which you obviously find so impressive that you feel the need to repeat it. Chuck the psycho-babble and just say that I am confused (which I am not, of course).

Besides, I made it clear that LGF is more like a LYNCH MOB. Exhibit 1: see the LGFers bay for blood on

Bedouin Gang Rapes Jewish Women As 'Revenge'

Any fool can see that CJ's headlines are calculated to stir up hatred for Islam and the Arab world.

Now how about addressing some the meatier issue of selective outrage? Where is the condemnation of Israeli violence?

Anonymous said...

Steven: And of course there is absolutely no evidence that the media in the US is at all sympathetic to Israel which is why CJ never comments on this aspect of media distortion.

That American media is pro-Israel is widely held assumption, but I have yet to see any support for this. It seems rather to based on the fact that European media is extremely anti-Israel and the American media less so. If you have documented evidence of pro-Israel media distortion, I would be happy to see it. Better yet why not send it to CJ and ask him to post it.

I was in Europe during the Israeli operation in Jenin in 2002. There were constant reports of massacre and Israeli brutality. The UN investigation found nothing to corroborate the news reports. (The UN is not exactly a pro-Israel organization.) I gather that news reports about Jenin in the US were not much better.

Why not ask yourself, Steven, how much of your perception of Israel and the middle east is based upon what you have seen in the news. Just how much of the "news" can you really trust?

Steven said...

That American media is pro-Israel is widely held assumption, but I have yet to see any support for this.

You must be joking. The NYT, Washington Post, and LA Times are not pro-Israeli? As I asked elsewhere, where did we learn the names of Ron Arad and Gilad Shalit and why do we not know the name of a single murdered Palestinian? Why do I always see Alan Dershowitz on American talk shows but never Noam Chomsky? Did you see the American media reaction to the Israeli bombardment of Lebanon last summer? Which major newspaper or news channel demanded an end to it?

And you want me to produce documented evidence. Jesus.

Anonymous said...

Steven: The NYT, Washington Post, and LA Times are not pro-Israeli? As I asked elsewhere, where did we learn the names of Ron Arad and Gilad Shalit and why do we not know the name of a single murdered Palestinian? Why do I always see Alan Dershowitz on American talk shows but never Noam Chomsky? Did you see the American media reaction to the Israeli bombardment of Lebanon last summer? Which major newspaper or news channel demanded an end to it?

This is evidence? You should think carefully about what you wrote. I agree that it is significant that Palestinian "martyrs" don't receive as much coverage as kidnapped Israelis. The reason is simple: the Palestinians are celebrating their deaths and that just does not fit with the picture the media would like us to have of suffering Palestinian victims. These people are perpetrators of violence: they prefer to go to their deaths than to recognize the human and civil rights of others. All to crush the Israeli state and prevent a Palestinian state--but you won't get that from the media. Too bad. Check out Al-Jazeera. The English version is sanitized but often more honest about Palestinian aspirations and actions than ours. Of course, there are Palestinian who are ready to live in peace--just not so many, and they have no power. I think that if people good intentions, and I count you among them, knew what was up, there would be a real chance for peace.

Hizbollah is an Islamist organization that serves as a proxy for Syria and Iran in Lebanon--as long as it remains armed, there is no chance for democracy in Lebanon and a real danger of the sort of oppression that exists in Iran. The media should have been supporting Israel. Instead, media sources were manipulated by propagandists. Charles Johnson deserves credit for exposing them. Slanted news that purports to be objective should have no place in the media.