The Sphinx writes:
Charles and his Hordes are acting willfully stupid again. There was some accusation on Digg towards LGF that they started to use the "subhuman" label to describe Arabs. Charles - being as sly as he is - claims that this is completely untrue because he has never done that himself.
Here's the post
However, his sheep squad also claim that there was never ANY incident of the term falling on LGF to describe anyone (For example see #10 and #3, who had the brain cells to quickly point out that everyone who said it was banned "instantly")
But whoops, there's one
Oh, here's another
And another
And their profiles are still there. The comments still stand, so these are users that have apparently NOT been banned. So either Charles and his minions are too stupid to figure out what's happening on their site, or they're flat-out lying. Because finding three comments in about 10 minutes only means that there's more where that came from.
And even though Charles might not have personally labeled Arabs as "subhuman", he certainly hasn't prevented himself from using the word on a few occasions
There an important note to add to what the Sphinx said: the fact that Charles doesn't explicitly say "Arabs/Muslims are subhuman," it doesn't mean that this message isn't the subtext of his entire blog. In fact, it was the genius of Dr Spock who many, many moons ago pointed out the striking similarity between LGF's anti-Muslim propaganda and the Nazis' anti-Jewish propaganda. Take The Quiz.
Charles has been trying very hard lately to present himself as the reasonable, non-racist face of Islam hatred. But anyone who reads LGF knows that his denunciations of fascists ring hollow when the message on his website is almost identical to that of the people he condemns: Islam is evil, leftists are traitors, anyone who disagrees with me is wrong.
You've got a long way to go, Charlie-boy. And until then, expect the good folk at Digg to keep pointing out what a blazing hypocrit you are.
45 comments:
Nobody is justifying the actions of whichever criminals Charles was talking about, but the manner of vehemently and hysterically distancing oneself from this term while accepting its usage at the same time is rather laughable, don't you think?
To get to my humble opinion, you'll understand if I hate the word and don't like it being used to describe anyone, no matter how evil or crazy that anyone may be.
You can find even more cries of "subhuman" in the comments section of Daily Kos -- many of them directed not against terrorist murderes, but against commenters with a differing opinion. It's easy: just use their search function.
So when are you going to start a KosWatch?
Rico
Yes Islam is evil, what is the wrong with that? but claiming leftist or even Muslims are traitors of course wrong. on Lgfwatch you fail to point out this kind of thing, so people like Sphinx will get it wrong. I read Sphinx writings, obviously he is one of those who blame Islam faults on the west and the east. and think it is racism to call Islam is evil. yes Islam is evil. this is my free speech, if one says Islam is evil, it does not mean genocide, bigotry, racism or even hatred. I hate communism, does that make me racist.
lgfwatch sometimes you creep in the same way, there are lots of people on the other side of the aisle who portrays conservatives, the right as facists, idiots (they tried to prove it by science), warmongers ...etc So when charles does not post this kind of vile things himself that makes him better than many blogs, writers out there on the left and the right who post such materials themselves.
tell Sphinx to go and read Al-Jazeera forums in Arabic, so instead of he/she bashing over western blogs, let him give sometime to expose Al-Jazeera and criticize them.
I'm Arab, and read Al-Jazeera forums and comments in Arabic, and I can tell you how disgusting and the administrators do nothing.
After looking all these bad examples without criticism from people like Sphinx, we can see that Charles is much more respectful person.
"I read Sphinx writings, obviously he is one of those who blame Islam faults on the west and the east. and think it is racism to call Islam is evil."
Well maybe obvious to you from your flawed standpoint about me. Islam not being a race means that critique towards Islam isn't racist, but it's the manner that people like at LGF practice their mindless bashing and venomous comments is very akin to what is scientifically correctly known as racism. It only requires a substitution of the word "Muslim" with "Black" or even worse, the N word.
And second, what I blame the "West" of (just to play along with your sweeping generalization that's quite far from the truth), is giving in to misinformation and lies, and using these to demonize an entire religion. This - I can prove - is not the fault of the religion itself.
It goes without saying that the only people I have encountered this with are the minority of maniacs on the internet, and not the people I deal with in my daily life here.
And @anonymous at 10:17, criticizing LGF for their usage of the word does not mean that we accept it coming from anywhere else. The term "subhuman" is rubbish if you ask me, and coming from Kos doesn't make it any better than anywhere else. If you believe in consistency, this should've dawned to you by now.
Just stop thinking in terms of: "If you disagree with 'us', you are entirely with 'them' and agree with everything 'they' do"
So back to anonymous at 12:01, by showing what kind of idiots roam LGF, this does not make me a fan of whatever crap is posted on whatever Jazeera forum. LGF's content doesn't make those forums' content any better, and vice versa.
Dealer and Sphinx
Saying terrorists are subhuman has no relation to saying all Muslims are subhuman, unless you somehow identify all Muslims as terrorists.
That's your association and identification, not mine.
Bottom line: terrorists are engaging in barbarism and have sacrificed their humanity.
Stating as much is reflective of reality.
RT.
The subtext of LGF is what is being discussed here, not what is explicitly said.
As was noted above, no-one is claiming Charles personally stated that Arabs/Muslims are subhuman. What is being questioned is his stance on the use of the word in his comments and the way he portrays and propagandises the news on his site. One is reminded of Hal Turners use of any story featuring African Americans to prove his wacko race theories.
Again RT,
The ability to read helps...
you say...
"He never once said all Arabs or all Muslims are subhuman"
LGFW say...
"There an important note to add to what the Sphinx said: the fact that Charles doesn't explicitly say "Arabs/Muslims are subhuman,"
Do you require a big print edition of the internet?
Can't you see the similarity in both statements?
Or are you really that blind/stupid?
MJ, you make no sense at all.
You are claiming Charles is a "hypocrite" by being "cool" with using the word "subhuman" when he only used it to specifically describe terrorists. You have no "point" about Charles being "cool" with the word when he only uses it to describe terrorists. The implication in your post is clear: that Charles says all Muslims are terrorists.
You are being dishonest with your readers and should post a retraction.
Right now, this blog is impliedly libelling Charles Johnson.
Worst part is the hypocrisy; claiming Charles is somehow "bad" for saying terrorists (and ONLY terrorists) are subhuman, but yet linking to those who are cool with Holocaust denial and Jew murder.
You claim to believe in human rights, and it is laughable how exactly opposite that is to the truth.
In short: you claim there is "subtext" that Charles is saying all Muslims are subhuman, and yet the only context in which Charles uses the word "subhuman" refers to terrorists. Such a statement produces no subtext whatsoever, so you are LIBELLING Charles Johnson.
The alternative is that, in your minds, all Muslims are terrorists.
That means you are disgusting racists and Muslimophobes.
And I am deeply offended that you dare speak of such hate.
RT:
Listen, I'll run this through with you one more time. The post above deals with the subtext of LGF as a whole. It points out that whilst Charles has not used the term 'subhuman' to describe Arabs/Muslims as a whole he produces a blog and allows commenters there to promote an image of Islam as somehow 'subhuman'. For him to cry foul that someone on digg claims that fact is a bit rich.
Your logic and your writing style, to say the least is bizarre. So I'll let you be a little crank and annoy someone else.
Perhaps The Sphinx would like to take it up with you, as it was his observations that started this post.
MJ,
You are now LIBELLING Charles Johnson. And you continue to!
Libel right here: It points out that whilst Charles has not used the term 'subhuman' to describe Arabs/Muslims as a whole he produces a blog and allows commenters there to promote an image of Islam as somehow 'subhuman'.
The comments cited in question were from 4-5 YEARS ago and are a few comments out of a million+ left over the years. They are also not Charles Johnson's words.
You state: Charles Johnson actively supports the notion that Arabs/Muslims are subhuman through an alleged "subtext."
WHERE is that subtext? These are heavy words that need evidence to be proven.
The only subtext is in your mind, where you equate all terrorists with all Muslims. (therefore, calling terrorists subhuman is equivalent to calling all Muslims subhuman)
So you have proven who hates Muslims here; it is YOU and not Charles Johnson.
Your Muslimophobia deeply offends and disturbs me.
Frankly I don't think it's worth my time, because RT has the strange habit of throwing completely different contexts together and setting up repetitive strawman arguments.
Once again and for the last time, Charles claimed he never used the word to describe Arabs/Muslims, and his drooling fanbase have also frantically screamed that NEVER has anybody done that on LGF. But the fact is, and it was shown in the three comments that were quoted by some LGF members, that there WERE incidents of such comments that put entire populations under this category, and they were not deleted, and the users were not banned. Moreover, LGF is a safe haven for raging Islamophobes and people who believe in the subhumanity of Muslims.
So the bottom line is: That nobody sweepingly described Muslims and/or Arabs as subhuman on LGF is a lie, and there you have the evidence, which you have not once tried to refute or deny. And if you think those three comments are cool, then there's no use in coming here and yelling around about links to Norman Finkelstein's blog.
MJ is right, you really should read everything more carefully before posting. It's bad enough on has to repeat oneself three times (at best) to get a point through to you.
Carry on raving if you want, I have exams to study for.
MJ:
RT's point stands. You can't find anything in CJ's actual words to criticize, so instead you appeal to a nebulous personal impression which you call a "subtext." Heck, if facts are to be decided by what are opponents claim is present in our "subtexts," none of us could stand. Debate becomes impossible when we are to be judged by imaginary "subtexts" rather than our words and deeds themselves.
This post, like the previous one, is an unsubstantiated smear and ought to be retracted.
Hahahahahaha, RT being an aand vid reader of LGF and a big fan of Charles Johnson suddenly accusing MJ of being an Islamophobe. LOL, how one can really twist things around.
Again, in even more simple words: Charles Johnson and his hordes are lying about the lack of the term "subhuman" being used on their site, as well as this sentiment that goes along with it
GOD, is this so friggin hard to understand?? You people should stop setting up stupid strawman arguments and complaining about others calling a spade "spade".
Claiming there is a "subtext of hate" or a "context of hate" is the most dishonest thing one can do. I can conjure up a "context" of anything!
Yet the 'proof' used for this alleged 'context' is that Charles called TERRORISTS subhuman!! Talk about nonsensical!
The implication is obvious. Calling terrorists subhuman - in your book - provides a 'context' for saying all Muslims are subhuman. This really might be the most ludicrous non-reasoning LGF Watch has ever been graced with posting. (that says something)
The only way one can come to such a conclusion is if you are libelling Charles Johnson from the start (and hence were using those the posts where Charles calls terrorists subhuman as only a pretext for libel), OR, if you honestly believe that all Muslims are terrorists, and hence claiming terrorists are subhuman says all Muslims are subhuman.
So in either case you are defamers or racists.
Retract this post and apologize, or defamers and racists you shall forever be known as.
"So when are you going to start a KosWatch?"
There already is a KosWatch.
"Retract this post and apologize"
No.
V,
Feel free to re-read the citations seen in this post, which point to instances of Charles claiming terrorists are subhuman as proof of the "context" or "subtext" in which Charles "really" means all Muslims are subhuman.
The "proof" given is not that Charles questions the existence of Moderate Muslims - it is that he calls TERRORISTS subhuman.
Sad.
Moreover, Charles never once said there are no "moderate Muslims." Rather, he questions whether many of the SO-CALLED moderates are really moderate. See: Tariq Ramadan.
So again, your point lacks any and all validity.
So sad.
funny all the posts are from the archives in 2003 2004 couldn't find anything more recent.
Your comment has been saved and will be visible after blog owner approval.
censorship
V:
Then do you believe that LGF serves a useful purpose as a "KosWatch?" As equally useful as you perceive the purpose of LGF Watch to be?
Rico
@V If we accept that there is no such thing as a moderate Muslim, we are led to the conclusion that all Muslims are extremist. If one further accepts the proposition that all extremist Muslims are terror sympathizers, then it's not much of a leap to postulate that all Muslims are terrorists.
You see the old Sphinx there. To me epitomizes the so called moderate Muslim. He's great at finding fault with the west, the Charles Johnsons of the world, the Israelis, Bush. However, I seldom see him finding fault on this blog with Hamas, Mahmoud, Hizbu'llah, Osama, or anybody else of the terroristic persuasion. At the very least, Mr. Sphinx seems to fall silent in his critique.
If you were to be fair in your personal assessment, you might be able to see how unbiased people could interpret "The Sphinx" as one who generally lends his tacit support to the bad guys.
What surprises me is how reasonably intelligent people here on LGF Watch somehow seem to overlook that very visible fact.
Charles never once said there are no "moderate Muslims." Rather, he questions whether many of the SO-CALLED moderates are really moderate. See: Tariq Ramadan.
Charles' fellow-travellers, Cox and Forkum, are quite forthright in their opinion, at least.
There already is a KosWatch.
LOL!
Again...
Your comment has been saved and will be visible after blog owner approval.
censorship
Blog moderation is in effect because the last time it wasn't the LGF'ers thought it would be positively witty to flood our comments with links to child porn and the like. No comment within reason (ie no porn, spam) is deleted.
Chenzhen:
If there was something creepy about LGF's "obsession" with Daily Kos, what do you make of this blog, whose SOLE obsession is with LGF?
Chenzhen:
If there was something creepy about LGF's "obsession" with Daily Kos, what do you make of this blog, whose SOLE obsession is with LGF?
I was being sarcastic.
BTW- I assume that by "subtext", what is meant is that LGF is one of the only blogs out there that one could stumble upon a word like, say, "Koranimal".
But since that term would likely be viewed as offensive by just about any Muslim, luckily LGF has the definition handy in their very own dictionary. You know, so no one gets confused.
ChenZen:
LGF'ers require the sarcasm tag...(sarc)....it makes it easier for their little brains. Don't try irony on them either.
If you want more evidence (and so far we're just up to early 2004), visit nodrogsgreatesthits@blogspot.com. One of our most recent posts dredged up Charles' claim that Islam is a religion of human sacrifice comparable to that practiced by the Aztecs. Charles' exact words: It’s a state-sanctioned blood ritual; they’re not putting people on altars and ripping their hearts out like the Aztecs did, but it’s only one step away.
Tex Taylor, I didn't see you criticize the KKK before, so I conclude that you're a white supremacist. <- This statement by the way goes by your logic, and not mine.
Furthermore, when you say you "seldom see me finding fault on this blog with Hamas, Mahmoud, Hizbu'llah, Osama, or anybody else of the terroristic persuasion", you've already shot yourself in the foot. Because this blog is about exposing LGF for what it is, and I prefer to stay on-topic.
Whoever I decide to criticize or not shouldn't be your concern, besides your predictions about my agenda being rather laughable and completely off target.
I'm sorry I couldn't put this into words that would fit into your "black-or-white" and "if-you're-not-with-us-you're-with-them" mentality, but that's not my problem I suppose.
"THE SPHINX",
I haven't seen the KKK flying planes into buildings as of late (did I miss something?), or blowing up hotels as of yesterday, or launching rockets into Israeli schools, or stoning women after they've been gang raped, or trying to institute sharia lite in the west. If they do, count me in for the first to criticize the Klan as a threat.
If you wish to conclude I'm a white supremacist using whatever you call logic, feel free. It doesn't detract from your silence or your lending tacit support against the west, or your one-sidedness and blind eye in debate.
Like I've said before, you're not the first middle eastern student I've met with the same characteristics. Take what the west will offer that your backwards country can't possibly provide, all the while praying for the west's destruction when you're gone. You're no different than the same "good will" ambassadors I met so many moons ago while I was in college and how they blathered about how they love the American people but...
As for shooting myself in the foot, the defense of the so called religion of peace is every bit as much a part of this site as any other subject...I find very few topics here where LGF's condemnation and a defense of the ROP is not the topic at hand. In fact, I find you the ultimate one trick pony.
You should note that I don't believe everyone that frequents LGFwatch to be in the us vs. them crowd, nor am I one of C.J.'s lackeys because I don't care for the man either. There are a certain number of posts worth debating here, some I can actually nod mostly in agreement. Unfortunately, none of those are yours.
And even if I'm the only one here that recognizes you're a Jew hating, terrorist enabling windbag, it doesn't change the fact you are.
Unfortunately for you, the fact that I don't hate Jews or Judaism, and have nothing to do with terrorism pretty much shows which one of us is the windbag.
A word of slight defense of Sphinx...
I do not believe Sphinx hates Jews. I do believe he is willfully blind and, through his approach to the problems with the world at large, tacitly supporting terrorists.
Seldom if ever do you see Sphinx - on this blog or his blog or anywhere - condemn terrorists/terrorism. 99.9% of the time, you see him condemn "the West" or LGF or someone else for being "Islamophobic."
Simply put: where does "Islamophobia" start? Through the actions of terrorists.
Unless and until intelligent Muslims like Sphinx (and others like him) start decrying the actions of the terrorists in large numbers, and stop citing to known antisemites and antisemitic sources such as Electronic Intifada, Sabbah, Norm Finkelstein, Counterpunch, etc., and start engaging in real introspection and non-denial of the problems of the world...
Then naturally the so-called "Islamophobia" will continue.
In short, Sphinx is actually contributing to "Islamophobia," rather than doing his part to stem its tide.
Sad.
Sphinx,
That commentator is willfully violating LGF rules (of citing to a deleted comment), and so I am sure that the only reason the comment remains is that Charles has not noticed the comment and deleted it.
In the meantime, you continue to ignore the fact that, despite the vast contributions you *could* be making to the cause of humanity, you remain part of the problem.
Unless and until intelligent Muslims like Sphinx (and others like him) start decrying the actions of the terrorists in large numbers ...
[t]hen naturally the so-called "Islamophobia" will continue.
Sort of like this?
It's also interesting how freely you bandy about a term like antisemimtism and yet refer to 'so-called "Islamophobia"' when they are two sides of the same coin.
How typical, Chenzhen. A person says something that paints him in a corner, and he pulls a just kidding.
"Uhh.. I was being ironic."
"I was being sarcastic"
"I was writing fiction with my mouth"
"You're just too stupid to appreciate the subtleties of my complexities and the complexities of my subtleties."
I guess the same magic glasses that enable a person to elevate subtexts over actual words also enable a person to paint anything they say in as many layers of sarcasm and irony as is convenient.
Anonymous 9:14 am:
The "subtext" of your remark about "small brains" obviously shows that you believe conservatives are inferior beings who should be marched off a cliff. What sort of monster are you?
But there's no subtext in what I'm saying because it's as ironic and sarcastic as I want it to be.
(Gee, this IS fun!)
@red tulips, "I do not believe Sphinx hates Jews. I do believe he is willfully blind and, through his approach to the problems with the world at large, tacitly supporting terrorists."
I disagree Red Tulips. You poke a practicing Muslim long enough and the Jew hatred is right below the surface ready to spring forth at a moment's notice. I've had former Muslims tell me this is true. They are taught to hate at an early age. The only moderate Muslims are secular Muslims, Muslim only in name.
I should add that former Muslims that have converted to Christianity are some of the finest, truest Christians I've met. And they are persecuted for it. Their families disown them, their former friends disdain them, former members of their clan threaten to kill them given a chance.
So I ask myself, well it is obviously not something genetic as many former Muslims are now wonderful citizens and members of my church. I love them. So what is it? And the only answer I can arrive at is the practice, the doctrine, and the mindset of the Islamic faith itself.
I have absolutely no doubt that the practice of Islam is sheer evil. And with that practice comes a hatred of anything Jewish.
I want to add that it also is horrible to say Islam is evil to the core.
All you and I are equipped to say is Sharia law, as practiced in the world today, is repressive and horrible. And the face of Islam today, as reflected by mainstream organizations such as CAIR and MPCUK, is part of the problem. In the case of CAIR and MPCUK, you have open terrorists and terror supporters on their boards.
We cannot say that the core of the religion of Islam is itself evil. We haven't the knowledge nor understanding of the religion to make such a pronouncement. And doing so only alienates those who otherwise would fight for the cause of humanity.
So I hearby state my wholesale condemnation of such a statement.
anon-
How typical, Chenzhen. A person says something that paints him in a corner, and he pulls a just kidding.
Well I thought it was obvious that I was mocking the "stalker" label, so yea, "creepy" was sarcasm. In fact, the "stalker" thing is even mocked here at this site.
Sorry if it went over your head.
RT:
I'd save your breathe with Tex, didn't you know Islamz tis evilz to teh corz, an dem arabz is de devilz.
Red Tulips We cannot say that the core of the religion of Islam is itself evil. We haven't the knowledge nor understanding of the religion to make such a pronouncement. And doing so only alienates those who otherwise would fight for the cause of humanity.
Sorry Red Tulips...any Christian or religious Jew worth his salt should know better, assuming they profess what their faith teaches. I don't agree with you anymore than I do the Sphinx, though I certainly don't put you two in the same camp. The Sphinx is woefully blind and your straddling the fence with semantic word games hoping for a peace that will never come, only will bring more of the same hardship and delay the inevitable war of culture. The Islamic record speaks for itself.
Does this mean I think all Muslims inherently evil? I am sure there are many Muslims as charitable, honest, and loving as any Christian or Jew. But are the basic tenets of Islam evil? You bet. History will require a repeat, much as the Japanese were forced to abandon the Shinto religion as state sponsored after WWII. I'm surprised after reading your posts you don't realize that.
Your approach reminds me of the U.S. trying to pacify communism by refusing to call the old USSR evil. Reagan finally said what any sane American citizen already knew.
If telling the truth is needless provocation, consider yourself provoked. But I am glad that I could bring you and the Sphinx together, if only briefly. However, I can promise you beyond a shadow of a doubt, there will come a time each of you will be pitted against the other. And the battle will not be about opinion.
All very amusing how I'm being (mis)analyzed here. Go on if you want..
Red Tulips,
I like your posts. You're both witty and generally right on. But on this account, I don't think you could be more wrong. I'm sure I sound radical to most on the board - you included.
I could quote literally hundreds of scriptures from the Old Testament alone never mentioning what you call the Torah stating anything or anyone that is considered divine, differing from THE ONE who instructed your ancestors at Mt. Sinai, is evil. However, I appreciate most here do not wish this blog delve into the theological realm so I'll pass except to say this from Genesis 16:
11 The angel of the LORD also said to her (that would be Hagar): "You are now with child and you will have a son. You shall name him Ishmael, for the LORD has heard of your misery.
12 He will be a wild donkey of a man; his hand will be against everyone and everyone's hand against him, and he will live in hostility toward all his brothers."
My purpose concerning you is not to pick a fight. In fact, I would not have made mention of your name except with respect to your comment concerning mine. After this, I will do LGF Watch a favor and leave it alone.
And again to the moderator, I appreciate that you allow the diversity of viewpoints, including those you disagree. Whether you think it or not, I admire you for that. And that has surprised me of LGF Watch - to the point of moderating my opinion of the value of your site. Because of that, I will make a valid attempt to smooth the emotional content of my posts. In that case, RT is right. There is nothing to be gained by what is clearly an insult.
Everyone enjoy their day.
Quite the contrary cokane, I think that Red Tulips is spot on accurate and you have failed to show otherwise.
FYI: Here is a little more perspective
Post a Comment