Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

My challenge to Charles Lemos

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.]

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

Kerrvillian | July 24, 2011 at 8:17 pm

I predict the coward will not respond.

See, this is where you lose me, Professor Jacobson. A lefty blogger has written lies about a Righty Blogger. Dog bites man.

And to expect a retraction? To even CALL for one as if you expected one?

I really DO hope this is thinly disguised satire. One of the reasons that they ARE lefty bloggers is because they don’t have to be reasonable in tone, in words, or in practice. I know nothing about Sr. Lemos, but if he is indeed part of the proud Left online, you can expect no retraction, expect him to double down with more accusations that cannot be substantiated.

Professor, I bet you a lunch on me if you get to SoCal he will ignore you. The Left hasn’t been this giddy since Rep. Giffords was shot.

The “Breivik is a Tea Party Terrorist” has no reason behind it except to do what the LEft always does … demonizes and demagogues any person that dare questions their Revealed Truth(tm).

It’s pretty sad, but we aren’t dealing with people who debate in good faith. We keep thinking they are mistaken and can be reasoned with, they consider us evil and worthy of destruction.

Asymmetrical warfare.

Gayle Spencer | July 24, 2011 at 8:22 pm

Like it’s an incredible, out-of-this-world assumption to believe that Muslims, inspired by the koran’s infamous Verses of the Sword (Sura 9:5, 9:29), plus numerous other Mohammed-authored verses directing violence upon non-Muslims, might be behind such an attack, particularly in light how Muslims have for years been rubbing raw the sensibilities of the native Norse.

Gayle Spencer | July 24, 2011 at 8:34 pm

Yeah, yeah, I know the claim. Mohammed didn’t write the koran; he only received the words of allah (inside of caves no less) as brought to the Earth by “Gabriel.” Mohammed remembered every precisely word spoken to him, and these in turn were transcribed exactly by Mohammed’s fellow thieves from Mo’s dictation.

Yeah, sure.

Ever notice the number of times that “allah” gives an “instruction” and it just so happens to favor Mohammed?

Aw, geez, Professor. Calling him out means he’d have to admit he might have a reading comprehension problem. You wouldn’t want to bruise his ego, would you? Warm fuzzies are so very important to the Lefties. You meany!

From the AP, a potential motive:

The blast comes as the Scandinavian country has grappled with a series of homegrown terror plots linked to al-Qaida, and six years after an uproar over cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad in neighboring Denmark.

Last week, a Norwegian prosecutor filed terror charges against an Iraqi-born cleric for threatening Norwegian politicians with death if he’s deported from the Nordic country.

The indictment centered on statements that Mullah Krekar — the founder of the Kurdish Islamist group Ansar al-Islam — made to various media,
including American network NBC.

If you followed the Telegraph, the Guardian, etc. THEY ALL had stories up suggesting Islamist ties.

That ain’t hate-speech. It is connecting great big dots.

Even if he does respond, he will probably take issue with your “grain of salt” comment and start pushing for salt to be regulated by the FDA.

LukeHandCool | July 24, 2011 at 9:42 pm

“It was fairly evident to me from the start that the bombing in Oslo was not the work of Islamist jihadis, notwithstanding a claim of responsibility by a group called Ansar al Jihad al Asam.”

Uh-huh. Any details why this was fairly evident?

Let’s see … car bomb goes off … can’t possibly be Islamist jihadis. Then … a group called Ansar al Jihad al Asam claims responsibility … can’t be Islamist jihadis.

Amazing that a blogger … who sees as fairly evident just the opposite of what almost every other media outlet suspects at the time … doesn’t have the time and/or desire to scoop the world with this news.

LukeHandCool | July 25, 2011 at 1:19 am

Ugly fingers are being pointed at Jennifer Rubin, too.

What kind of crazy, mass-delusional world are we living in?

It’s like you’re living in London early in 1941 during the period of the Blitz and you hear explosions one night and a large group of your fellow countrymen think you’re crazy and dangerous because you stop what you’re doing and utter the words, “I wonder if those explosions are being caused by the Nazis. I think, chances are, it’s the Luftwaffe.”

Well, the next day when the sun comes up, it turns out that some bombs accidentally went off at a nearby munitions factory. But … you … you jumped to the conclusion that it just had to be the Nazis, you dangerous, hateful person, you.

LukeHandCool (who wonders why Sarah Palin’s infamous map had crosshairs over Oslo).

The mere fact El Profesor is seeking validation or a retraction from a lefty blogger proves Jacobson is racist. There is no need for me to explain how racism is determined by these posts because those who readily understand racism see it, while inferior folk simply have no clue.

As I remember, when initial reports were first coming out AQ did claim responsibility. All muslims may not be terrorists, but in the last 40 years, the overwhelming majority of terrorist acts against western interests have been committed by muslims. It wasn’t a stretch to speculate this was an AQ operation given the recent events in Oslo, the MO, plus the AQ claim. It’s not racism when you take available facts that match previous incidents and speculate. Some people really need to understand what racism/bigotry really is and stop applying it to anything that hurts their wittle feelwings. One thing that’s a big difference in how those who were incorrect in their initial analysis is the retractions and condemnation of this sick individual’s actions. Contrast that with the continuing narrative by those on the left that Loughner was a crazed right-winger–even when those who were familiar with him had come forward with information that he was a left-wing moonbat. Liberals never let facts get in the way of their political agenda.

Useless partisan diatribe. Anyone who argues this didn’t look like Islamic extremist terrorism at first is either a liar or a fool. I hate the vitriolic language against Islam as much as anyone, too me it absolutely seems racist, but this really did look like Islamic terror. How many other major rightwing attacks have included multiple separate incidences in the same day? Unlike Islamic terror, rightwing terrorists tend to be lone wolfs, because the right wing ideology doesn’t readily lend itself to violence. One crazy person has trouble finding others that are willing to give their lives for the cause, and even fewer who are willing to kill their own countrymen in the name of it. That is not the case with Islamic terror, as is well documented.
So considering the circumstances, and that the professor posted an update essentially retracting the earlier post and admitting he’d gone to fast before the liberal posted, this seems to me just another useless partisan attack.

TheLastBrainLeft | July 25, 2011 at 1:47 pm

Notice that the ability to post comments to that article has been disabled. What a coward.

BrianMacker | July 25, 2011 at 7:11 pm

I posted this comment over at Lemos’s article but he was too chicken to keep it up:

“It’s Time to Round Up All the Right Wing Christians”
“Thus, it’s time to round up all the right wing Christians… Clearly, I’m not serious”

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.

“Clearly, I’m not serious but had yesterday’s attacks been perpetuated by Islamists there would have been incessant calls from the right, here and abroad, to deprive Muslims of their rights.”

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.

“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 assign blame on Islam as a whole and engage in willful hateful misinformation.”

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.

“I can only imagine what the vile Pamela Geller had to say.”

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.

“However, Islamist jihadis tend to blow themselves up in executing their perverse acts of terror. They also tend to attack civilian transportation targets. Neither was the case in Oslo.”

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.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend