My challenge to Charles Lemos
I’m used to left-wing bloggers distorting what I write, which is why I rarely respond.
But I was disappointed to read Charles Lemos of MyDD, one of the less crazy of the genre, write the following on Saturday morning:
In fact even before all the facts were established, right wing bloggers like Michelle Malkin and William Jacobsen of Legal Insurrection were doing all they [sic] assign blame on Islam as a whole and engage in willful hateful misinformation.
Michelle Malkin is fully capable of defending herself. As for the attack by Lemos on me, the assertion by Lemos that my linked post (or any of my other posts on the Oslo shooting) “assign blame on Islam as a whole” or contain “misinformation” (whether willful, hateful or otherwise), is flat out untrue.
My post linked by Lemos, written after widespread media reports that an al-Qaeda group had claimed responsibility, quoted a Norwegian blogger and The New York Times on the threats against Norway. In an update to that post I noted that there were reports that al-Qaeda was not responsible and that it might be a “lone wolf style attack and right-wing group targeting the labour party.”
In another post later in the day (and several hours before Lemos wrote his accusation), I reported the arrest of the Norwegian shooter and expressed regret at having not taken the media reports of an al-Qaeda connection with “a grain of salt.” [Added] The information in that latter post addressed pre-existing threats by Islamic radicals, which is a term used by, among others, Barack Obama.
So my challenge to Lemos is to back up your name calling, or issue a retraction of the accusations in your post.
[Note: I have e-mailed this post to Lemos, to make sure he was aware of the challenge. Also, the “added” sentence was corrected to reflect that it was used in my last post on the shootings.]
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
I posted this comment over at Lemos’s article but he was too chicken to keep it up:
Maybe you are. Clearly you are trying to imply that that has been such a call from those you just defamed, none of whom have called for rounding up all the Muslims.
Didn’t happen before so why do you predict it would happen now? Oh, maybe by Muslims you mean “some Muslims” and by right you mean the right to fight the west with terror.
How about you support the claim they were engaging in willful hateful misinformation by pulling out the quotes that represent that misinformation. Just followed the link to Malikin and the article is 100% accurate with regards to information. She willfully provided her readers with the truth. I guess it’s only hateful if you are carrying water for the terrorists.
Where exactly did she assign blame? She was just pointing out the fact that there is far right Islamic activity in Norway. She was pointing out the problem with sharia rape they are having in Norway. Which you are characterizing as misinformation and some kind of attempt to violate Muslim rights. I don’t think objecting to rape is the same as calling for Muslims to be rounded up or in some way violating their rights.
I also see zero of what you call “… assign blame on Islam as a whole …” in fact I have never seen that happen by anyone for actual Islamic terrorism. I’ve seen people blame the violent passages in the Qur’an, the violent acts of Muhammad, the clear advocation of violent Jihad in the religion, etc. I haven’t seen anyone blame it on Islam’s dietary restrictions against eating pork.
Probably nothing that came even close to being twisted to your narrative, since you didn’t link to her, or quote her. You haven’t even quoted the other two. I guess you assume your readers won’t follow the links and actually read what was actually written.
Now there’s a bunch of misinformation. Of the thousands of terrorist bombings of innocent people most were not suicide bombings. In fact, the first attacks on the World Trade Center by Islamic terrorists were not suicide runs. You are just using the suicide bomber stereotype to come to that conclusion.
The 9/11 attack doesn’t even meet your criteria for “assigning blame” as you would call it, [I bet you don’t like that characterization when applied to yourself]. That attack was not even a bombing.
There have been several Islamic terror attacks that have involved shooting, and many involving attacks on children. Mumbai was perpetrated by gunmen not suicide bombers. Besland was an attack by gunman on school children. There have been numerous attacks on schools by Islamists throughout the world.
So the Norway attack fully fits the MO of an Islamic terror attack.
This was a lone gunman. He’s not part of any organization that was calling for terror attacks. He wasn’t recruited by a priest or minister and told to attack non-believers. No Christian minister is calling for suicide runs against Muslims. No country will be paying out martyr payments to his family. He’s not considered a hero by the “religious right”. The bible does not instruct this kind of behavior. Christianity was not founded by a terrorist (and was inspired by a pacifist).
So there is no reason to conclude that this was motivated by Christianity, far right or otherwise. When you think Christian extremist think of the Amish because they are taking Christs pacifism to the extreme. Whereas, the terrorists really aren’t doing anything different than what Mohammad did, or had his direct followers do.
Yet here you are trying to assign blame to the “Right Wing Christians”. Not even the far right wing ones, but the “whole” of the far right. Had Malkin or Jacobson actually done what you just did then you consider it a cardnal sin.
I’ve got no problem blaming Islam for violent behavior precisely because it advocates such. The terrorists aren’t “misinterpreting” the text. The religious texts, plainly read, calls for oppression and violence against non-muslims, calls for not only raping but taking non-muslim women as sex slaves, and all sorts of other behavior that would only be acceptable to a seventh century caravan raider and mass murderer.
I can at least have respect for most criminals in that they know their behavior is wrong and just hope they don’t get caught. Mohammad had the gall to found a religion to justify his criminality, and it shows in the teachings.
The few peaceful sounding passages he has in the Qur’an are surrounded by calls to violence, loopholes, and criteria placed on victims that are impossible to meet. Tell me exactly why I must have a treaty in place with an Islamic warlord before any Muslims are allowed to kill me wherever they find me? Why should I be exterminated on the charge of causing literally translated “mischief”?
As a whole the Qur’an is far more bigoted and prejudist in it’s claims than even Mein Kamfp. It also spells out Mohammad’s final solution with no shame. Hitler didn’t actually call for killing the Jews wherever they were to be found [in Mein Kampf]. Mohammad did so for the Idolaters and was successful in personally overseeing the ethnic cleansing of the Saudi peninsula. An ethnic cleansing that continued throughout the Arab world. You won’t find any Idolators living there any more, and it wasn’t via voluntary conversion.
I think it clear that the King James bibles instruction to no suffer a witch to live caused a lot of suffering. Fortunately no one believes in witches anymore, and especially the “right wing Christians”. They still do burn witches in africa. Look some videos up on youtube.
Unfortunately the Muslims are much more serious about believing the contents of their holy scriptures. Christians recognize the bible was written by men, but according to Islam the Qur’an was written by Allah at the beginning of time.
Is that to blame the “whole of Islam” for the terrorist attacks? No just the violent stuff. Same for my criticism of Christianity.
Leave a Comment