| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: WoT |
| 'WAR IS DECEIT" - Little Green Liars |
| 2009-02-12 |
| Posted by:tipper |
| #14 Guys, you are forgetting one basic thing. The site belongs to Charles and he can do pretty much whatever he wants with it without checking with any of us first. Fred could do the same with Rantburg if he felt like it. I could care less about the whole creationist thing he's gone off on lately. But it is still his blog, not mine. No one is forcing us to read it. Your life will not come to an end if he bans you. I doubt you will get fired, your significant other will leave you, or your mortgage rate will get hiked if you get banned. |
| Posted by: Cornsilk Blondie 2009-02-12 23:18 |
| #13 ROFL |
| Posted by: ryuge 2009-02-12 22:15 |
| #12 tl;dr |
| Posted by: badanov 2009-02-12 18:35 |
| #11 Charles Johnson is a disgusting piece of trash. For one simple reason. If anyone who has a user id and password allowing that individual to post, and that person posts an opposing comment to his positions on creationism, etc., and that individual is posting strong and effective information to support their position, he immediately bans that individual. To which many, many commenters have been banned that have posted strong arguments countering his positions on these issues. That makes Charles Johnson the very type of FACIST he claims to be against.... |
| Posted by: Deadeye Gletch7681 2009-02-12 17:51 |
| #10 What do Charles Johnson and Al Gore have in common? I'll tell you at the end of this post. I find it hard to understand how Charles Johnson, as someone who understands computer programming, can not understand why Darwin's principles and creationism are not mutually exclusive. Does he not think that most computer programs today can not be traced back to their roots in basic and Fortran? Is that not intelligent design and evolution working together? Does not the Roomba "genetically evolve" as each new model comes out? Do the programmers not fix what was wrong with the previous models or adapt the newer models to differing purposes such as the scooba? Each computer program and each robot can trace its beginnings back to the beginning of computer programming...ie: intelligent design and evolution. It just seems to me that a computer programer should be able to grasp the concept that intelligent design and evolution are logical and natural. Those of you who scoff at the idea of creationism as if you have some sort of superior understanding, I would say, Oh really? How do you explain the big bang theory? That there was nothing and then suddenly a spark in a pure vacuum created something? It's laughable on its face. No matter how overeducated you are to THINK you understand it, the fact is that you can't understand what is not comprehensible. So quite pretending that you are somehow more enlightened because you believe in an unprovable theory. It simply is not provable because it is beyond human ability (at least at this point in human history) to understand how nothing became something. To say you understand it is folly. Yes, some of the creationist/intelligent design people may be attempting to get religion in a back door. But that isn't the point, is it? The point is that one side, the Darwin anti-creationist people are attempting, like the Muslims and liberals often do, to silence any discussion of alternative points of view from their own beliefs. It's never good to silence discussion. Why can't the creationists have their ideas discussed in a textbook too? What happened to allowing free speech and open discussion and the pros and cons of those ideas? To me, thos who refuse to allow discussion are the ones crushing scientific discovery. And please don't tell me that some fanatics have some crazy ideas. Sure they do. But why is it that creationism and intelligent design, beliefs held by the majority of people in the world (most people do believe in a higher power) are simply off limits of even DISCUSSION because a number of little science Nazi's have decided that the debate is over and everyone agrees? Is that not exactly the same as the global warming debate? "It's been decided and the debate is over and I can point to a number of scientists who agree with me". That is what Al Gore and Charles Johnson have in common. Their belief that debate is simply over and if you don't agree with them, you are crazy, bad and worthy of contempt. What I don't understand is how Charles Johnson can see this in Al Gore, but not see this in himself. Get a mirror, Charles. |
| Posted by: Gluting Fillmore6653 2009-02-12 15:59 |
| #9 Wilders does not want Islam or the Koran banned if the coercive verses are excised from the Koran or declared abrogated. Likewise he feels Islam can stay if it isn't coercive. If we substitute the words "National Socialism" and "Mein Kaumf", you can see the issue more clearly. |
| Posted by: mhw 2009-02-12 15:53 |
| #8 LGF is still the best. I'll tell you why Charles refers to Wilders as fascist. It's Wilders desire to see both the Koran and Islam banned. That is fascism plain and simple. As for the creationist/intelligent design crap, I'm with him 100%. If that crap ever got put in a school my kids were in I'd sue. I believe in God and I believe he created the universe, but if you are a young earther or other assorted looney you can respectfully keep that crap out of the class room thank you very much. Most of his heat on that issue is fundamentalist Christian nitwads thinking he's bashing Christianity when in reality it is very specific, backwards strain that he's against. God gave us gifts and you truly have turn away from the gifts God gave us to believe any of that creationist horseshit. |
| Posted by: AllahHateMe 2009-02-12 14:18 |
| #7 FWIW, Charles lost me when he insisted he knew more about European politics, based on a tour or two there as a musician, than people like Bat Y'eor, more about Islam than Robert Spencer etc. He's a blow hard whose ego expands every time he's proven wrong or ill-informed. This particular dead horse started when Europeans began meeting to try to figure out a political solution to the rapid suppression of all but pro-Islamicist opinions on the Continent. He was a) not invited and b) annoyed that they had the audacity to take the advice of speakers with PhDs in recent European history, those who grew up under Islam, etc. rather than his own, obviously more enlightened, insights. Pfeh. And no, I'm not exactly in the Adam-and-Eve-played-with-dinosaurs camp either. But Johnson has just gone way beyond his expertise on most of these issues, while growing more and more strident and hostile to critics. |
| Posted by: lotp 2009-02-12 10:32 |
| #6 I'm not sure that I agree with the people siding with Charles on this one. It seems to me that calling Wilders a fascist is over the top and smacks of Bush fascist. Nationalists are not necessarily fascist and many of those currently tagged with the F word aren't. The tag was put on by the LLLs and I think it would behoove us to be careful lest we fall for the left wing "conventional wisdom". In the particular case of Wilders what are his fascist positions? Is he a fascist because he wants to cut down/out Muslim immigration? because he wants to ban the Koran? If the latter, does that make those who have banned Mein Kampf fascist too? |
| Posted by: AlanC 2009-02-12 10:19 |
| #5 I also agree with Charles and applaud his principled stand. We do indeed all reject any association with fascists: they're just the other side of the coin from the communists and progressives. Nationalism and progressivism are dead-end ideologies. Charles sees the creationist nonsense as just another type of fascist nonsense. He might be right or wrong, but here again, I agree with his stand: intelligent design is nonsense if considered as science. I might also note that Charles, with all his other skills, is very shrewd in the building and marketing of his blog. He's figured out how to bang a drum loudly on a few key subjects and he's very good at it. |
| Posted by: Steve White 2009-02-12 10:02 |
| #4 Scooter, everyone rejects any association with Fascists, neo or otherwise, but methinks Charles is showing signs of mental disorder, witness his obsession with evolutionary theory and creationist. Personally when I find people carrying on about issues like that in a monomaniacal manner, I just sigh and think how sad, another cost to the mental health care system coming up. |
| Posted by: tipper 2009-02-12 09:46 |
| #3 In a nutshell, LGF rejects any association with neo-Fascist parties in the war against Radical Islam. (A position I agree with, BTW). The neo-Fascist sympathizers see Charles as "soft on Radical Islam" for his outspoken stance on the issue. |
| Posted by: Scooter McGruder 2009-02-12 08:21 |
| #2 Mike, there appears to be a war amongst the right wing bloggers, at this stage it appears to be Charles Johnson V's the rest. See this post on LGF as an example |
| Posted by: tipper 2009-02-12 08:05 |
| #1 I clicked through, and as far as I can tell he's bashing LGF for how LGF covered the Geert Wilders matter. Whiskey Tango Foxtrot? |
| Posted by: Mike 2009-02-12 07:16 |