Advertise here: Contact FM.


The Final Touchdown.
April 11, 2004 3:56 AM   RSS feed for this thread Subscribe

The LGF Quiz- test your ability to distinguish the folks at Little Green Footballs from the more overt. Via dr. menlo.
posted by iamck (52 comments total)

This post was deleted for the following reason: not another pissing match, sheesh.



Too extreme. Another op-ed piece.
posted by Keyser Soze at 4:30 AM on April 11, 2004


I suspect Matt will delete this. He doesn't much care for pissing matches between sites.

Until that happens, though (or our traffic nukes that Geocities site): I got 92%. Hooray!

Quite the revealing little set of quotes.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:33 AM on April 11, 2004


Well yeah, obviously.

Hitler really, really hated Jews. LGF has a similar hatred for Muslims. The ironic part, of course, is that a large number of readers and posters on LGF are Jewish and/or strong supporters of Israel, and would probably call me anti-semitic just for pointing that out -- yet they're willing to refer to "Islamofascists" as subhuman vermin who should be exterminated.

Even those who've been directly affected by recent history don't realise when they're repeating it. Sad.
posted by reklaw at 4:47 AM on April 11, 2004


43% :(

I like lgf. It helps me reaffirm my own humanity.
posted by Mossy at 4:56 AM on April 11, 2004


LGF has a similar hatred for Muslims.

LGF points out that extremist Muslims hate us all. Big difference.
posted by hama7 at 5:17 AM on April 11, 2004


Yeah, hama7, just like Hitler pointed out that Jews were conspiring against us! Obviously.
posted by reklaw at 5:20 AM on April 11, 2004


Yeah, hama7, just like Hitler pointed out that Jews were conspiring against us!

It's not imagination to say that Islamists are attacking the civilized world, and have been attacking for years. Obviously.

Yet be satisfied with comparing those who point out that fact, instead of hiding their heads in the sand, to "Nazis".

Ridiculous. Obviously.
posted by hama7 at 5:23 AM on April 11, 2004


So, according to you, "Islamists" are attacking the "civilized world" (what horrible colonial language). Which ones, exactly? A tiny minority, perhaps, although that's more linked to their political views than to the fact that they are Muslims. All of them, no. You don't seem to be making much of a distinction.

To say things like "extremist Muslims hate us all" is an absolutely stupid generalisation of opinions, and nothing more than a classic bigoted attempt to create an us vs. them situation. Despicable, and completely comparable to Nazi logic -- a few Jews are rich, so they must all be rich, and such.
posted by reklaw at 5:28 AM on April 11, 2004


Feeding time at the troll enclosure.

Hama7 is it imagination to say that the US has been attacking civilisation in the form of democracy, and has been for years?

Yet be satisfied with comparing those who point out that fact, instead of hiding their heads in the sand, to 'communists'.

Ridiculous, obviously.

Grammar.

reklaw has to go and spoil it all with a reasoned argument. ; )
posted by asok at 5:34 AM on April 11, 2004


Which ones, exactly? A tiny minority, perhaps, although that's more linked to their political views than to the fact that they are Muslims.

Speaking of quizzes, why not take a more accurate one? A tiny minority? Political views? Where have you been?

To say things like "extremist Muslims hate us all" is an absolutely stupid generalisation of opinions, and nothing more than a classic bigoted attempt to create an us vs. them situation.

Too late. They've already created that situation themselves all too willingly. To point out a fact is no more "bigoted" than pointing out that the sky is blue, (though of course relativists might disagree).
posted by hama7 at 5:36 AM on April 11, 2004


Hitler really, really hated Jews.

I invoke Godwins law!! Everybody shutup already!!
posted by SpaceCadet at 5:36 AM on April 11, 2004


Just so we know what hama7 is defending (and in case the site goes bye-bye), here are a few quotes [spoilers for the quiz, if you care] from those who he suggests are 'pointing out facts'.

Lovely stuff. Real civilized American values, hama7-style.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 5:40 AM on April 11, 2004


hama7: That a few people who happen to be Muslims do bad things does not mean that all Muslims hate us (or even that all "extremist Muslims" hate us). I don't imagine it'd be too hard to compile a similar list of crimes against the US committed by Christians.

To point out a fact is no more "bigoted" than pointing out that the sky is blue

"[E]xtremist Muslims hate us all" is not a fact, or even a justifiable opinion. It's an utter over-generalisation, but you refuse to accept this.

As stavrosthewonderchicken points out, the rhetoric you're defending is nothing more than dehumanisation. Or do you actually agree that Muslims are vermin?
posted by reklaw at 5:45 AM on April 11, 2004


My favourite Charles Johnson moment was when he claimed to have designed a site for one of his readers, which then - and still does - use what looks an awful lot like the default movable type template with a graphic stuck on at the top of the page. I never thought about telling Ben and Mena Trott about how they've shamelessly ripped-off Johnson's hard work for cash, but maybe I might now.
posted by tapeguy at 5:57 AM on April 11, 2004


"[E]xtremist Muslims hate us all" is not a fact, or even a justifiable opinion. It's an utter over-generalisation, but you refuse to accept this.

Who do they hate then, Santa Claus? You refuse to observe facts.

Is this what you are defending?

Lovely stuff. Real civilized American values, hama7-style.

I don't know what anti-speech edicts have been passed in Zoviet Canuckistan lately, but one of those "Civilized American Values" that you so disdainfully deride, is in fact one of the most valued and protected rights that Americans enjoy: Freedom of Speech.

I may not agree with you, but your right to speak shall not be impeded.
posted by hama7 at 6:02 AM on April 11, 2004


"Who do they hate then, Santa Claus? You refuse to observe facts."

"They" don't hate anyone. Your inability to see Muslims as a collection of individuals instead of a great single-opinion mass disturbs me.

As for freedom of speech, sure, but that doesn't mean we don't also have the freedom to think that speech is offensive and disgusting.
posted by reklaw at 6:07 AM on April 11, 2004


92%

Not too hard, once you remember that their was no Jewish state in Hitler's time and that Hitler made a passing effort at hiding the Holocaust from the public.

And Dr. Menlo, why the split with Postroad? Are I/P politics so divisive as to overcome even the power of boobies?
posted by NortonDC at 6:10 AM on April 11, 2004


I don't know what anti-speech edicts have been passed in Zoviet Canuckistan lately, but one of those "Civilized American Values" that you so disdainfully deride, is in fact one of the most valued and protected rights that Americans enjoy: Freedom of Speech. I may not agree with you, but your right to speak shall not be impeded.

There's a difference, my freedom-loving friend, between recognizing a right to the performance of free speech (even in cases where the intent of that speech (ie. "How can these vermin be allowed to live?") is contrary to what anyone would reasonably consider to be a reflection of the values our various civilizations hold dear) and defending the content of that speech.

You have been doing the latter here. I was not deriding the right to free speech, I was deriding the kind of vicious killer monkey thuggery that is displayed in those quotes I offered, thuggery that you see fit to defend as 'pointing out facts'.

But nice attempt at erecting a strawman, there.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 6:13 AM on April 11, 2004


though of course relativists might disagree

I love that type of arrogance. "I'm so smart. My opinion stands as objective proof without further evidence!"
posted by Mayor Curley at 6:17 AM on April 11, 2004


"They" don't hate anyone. Your inability to see Muslims as a collection of individuals instead of a great single-opinion mass disturbs me.

"They" are the Islamists, who do in fact hate anyone that is not them. Likewise, your inability to recognize as fact who is attacking, and has been doing so 100% of the time for the past two decades or more, is equally disturbing.

I was not deriding the right to free speech

Yes you were, and speaking of "strawmen", you tried to imply that I was "defending" your little bulleted list above. Nice try, but to compare LGF website with the National Socialist Party of Germany is moonbat monkeyshines.
posted by hama7 at 6:22 AM on April 11, 2004


Fair enough. I think your words speak clearly enough for themselves, as do mine, and those of the LGF posters quoted above.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 6:26 AM on April 11, 2004


"They" are the Islamists, who do in fact hate anyone that is not them.

Yes, hama7. All the "Islamists" have the exact same opinion, and they all act the same way. They're not like "us". They're an "other". Of course, hama7.

There's just no talking to you, is there? It'd be interesting to know whether you do actually endorse the opinion that Muslims are subhuman vermin, though, or whether you'd like to publicly condemn it as disgusting (while still, of course, defending the right of others to say it).
posted by reklaw at 6:28 AM on April 11, 2004


There's just no talking to you, is there?

You took the words right off my keyboard.
posted by hama7 at 6:30 AM on April 11, 2004


Then let's just quit. I have better things to do.
posted by reklaw at 6:32 AM on April 11, 2004


Well, all are agreed on the power of boobies, one assumes ?
posted by y2karl at 6:37 AM on April 11, 2004


"If every subhuman piece of excrement in the... camp dies slowly and painfully of starvation, I'll have a great [holiday]!"
Happy Easter!
posted by skallas at 6:44 AM on April 11, 2004


"They" are the Islamists, who do in fact hate anyone that is not them.

They! Them! Us!

Nice way to group all "Islamists." Give it a few posts, and hama7 drops previously attempted subtlety and reveals bigotry.
posted by adampsyche at 7:01 AM on April 11, 2004


Nice way to group all "Islamists."

Oh right, I forgot; the "Religion of Peace". There are no extremists, right?

I have better things to do.

Fine. The problem here is a refusal to acknowledge the existence of good and evil, but ethics aren't reklaw's strong point judging by recent activities.

I was deriding the kind of vicious killer monkey thuggery that is displayed in those quotes I offered

I'd like to make the rather obvious point that those bulleted quotes you presented are out of context. If they are referring to those who have, or intend to threaten or murder innocent civilians, or fund activities designed to harm or kill innocent people, then we have another kettle of fish, and the quotes above take on a different tone, one that is completely, totally removed from Hitler's Teutonic mysticism and blustering demonization of Jews.
posted by hama7 at 7:37 AM on April 11, 2004


Now now everyone, let's all calm down and have a happy and peaceful easter/passover/relaxing Sunday afternoon ^_^

The problem with any sort of hate, justified or not, is that it tends to obfuscate any objectivity that one would otherwise apply to a situation/group. It becomes too easy to attach labels and thereby further dehumanise those that one despises - once one lacks recognition of common humanity, empathy becomes decidedly hard to apply, no matter what the circumstance. Indeed, it's application becomes deemed unecessary and completely irrevelant in ones eyes.

The fact of the matter is that not all "Islamists" share the same "we hate everyone who isn't us and want to kill them" approach - each group is individual and has it's own political aspirations, just as with any other ideology - indeed, some are actively areligious in some aspects, as in Israel, but are still branded as "Islamists" due to their effective "race". It's just as bad as bringing out the "Zionist" brush.

On preview to hama7, not all of those comments are in fact taken out of context unfortunately - the fact that they are considered as acceptable within any community (ie the lgf one) is the cause for worry. There are some pretty nasty generalisations that fly around from some members of that site.
posted by Mossy at 7:49 AM on April 11, 2004


How long do we have Hama7 on loan from LGF anyway?
posted by sic at 7:54 AM on April 11, 2004


What is a little green football? mine is tan. What kind of a doctor is Doc Menlo? mine is an intern.
posted by Postroad at 7:55 AM on April 11, 2004


hama7 - I'd like to make the rather obvious point that those bulleted quotes you presented are out of context.

Well then let's add a little context. Here's one of the bullets you're referring to: "Forced sterilization, and full occupation to keep them under control until the problem solves itself in about 50 years."

And to contextualize it, here's the preceding sentence: "Elimination is the only solution; I know that sounds bad, but that's the way it is."

Ahh, that clears it right up, doesn't it, hama7?
posted by NortonDC at 7:58 AM on April 11, 2004


This should be fun for everyone.
posted by the fire you left me at 8:01 AM on April 11, 2004


Is anyone else disturbed about this thread? It disappoints me that MeFi is being used for this kind of (as Stavros said) "pissing match". The beauty of the internet is that you can choose what to read and what not to read. If you find LGF offensive, don't go there. I do read it, and while I don't agree with everyone there, the number of thoughtful and insightful comments does outweigh the not so thoughtful and insightful. The point is, I choose to read it.

For me it's like the violence on television argument. If you don't like it, turn it off. If I remember correctly, this country has an amendment that guarantees us free speech, even if others don't like what we have to say. Even if some find it offensive. There are other sites on the web that have some equally offensive comments on them, at least they're offensive to me. Do I want them shut down, do I piss and moan about them? No.

Charles Johnson is not responsible for the comments on his blog any more than Matt is responsible for the comments here. I find what Charles posts to be interesting. If you don't, then don't go there. If you're so incensed by the place, why are you giving it free publicity?

Garbage like this doesn't belong on MeFi. I thought this site had better things to talk about.
posted by greengrl at 8:06 AM on April 11, 2004


Ahh, that clears it right up, doesn't it, hama7?

Clears what up? To whom are the quotes directed? Unrepentant Hezbollah killers? Japanese kamikazes? The Dutch? Paul McCartney? Kittens? et cetera?
posted by hama7 at 8:08 AM on April 11, 2004


It seems that people who are attacking Hama7 are ignoring his qualifier in the phrase 'extremist Muslims hate us all'.

I would think that in his personal relations with muslims, hama7 is no more suspicious or offensive than I am with fundemaentalist christians.

If hama7 is saying 'all' muslims are extremists, please point that out. Where he refers to Islamists, he is clearly assuming the meaning 'Islamists = extremists', not 'muslims = islamists'.

BTW, SCORED 85% - MEANING i CAN TELL NAZIS FROM LGF'ERS QUITE EASILY.

THIS MESSAGE BROUGHT TO YOU BY THE DEPT. OF UNEXPECTED ALLIES
posted by dash_slot- at 8:09 AM on April 11, 2004


Oh right, I forgot; the "Religion of Peace". There are no extremists, right?

Oh, there you go again. No one in this thread, including myself, has said that there are no extremists. However, your statement was

"They are the Islamists, who do in fact hate anyone that is not them."

You did not include the necessary descriptor onto that sentence that would indicate that you are able to separate most Muslims from the fringe extremists. In fact, when confronted on it, you seem to suggest that I was denying that there are extremists, and summarily lump all Muslims together, representing a group of people by their most undesirable segment.

Bigot, indeed.

There are extremists everywhere, hama7, in all walks of life. That you happen to have a particular distaste for Islamic extremists does not give you an excuse to lump individuals from a single group together.

Where he refers to Islamists, he is clearly assuming the meaning 'Islamists = extremists', not 'muslims = islamists'.

It's not that clear, dash_slot. In fact, when conftonted, his exact words mock not the extremists, but the religion itself.

If hama7 has a problem with extremists, then perhaps he would like to bring forth a more targetted argument instead of mocking an entire religion.
posted by adampsyche at 8:23 AM on April 11, 2004


It seems that people who are attacking Hama7 are ignoring his qualifier in the phrase 'extremist Muslims hate us all'.

No one ignored the qualifier. Like I said, hama7 starts out carefully, but can't seem to hide his bigotry for long.
posted by adampsyche at 8:25 AM on April 11, 2004


Woot! They know about this post now.
posted by Stynxno at 8:26 AM on April 11, 2004


greengrl - That's a point for MetaTalk, not the blue.

hama7 - You could have located it with a cursory examination of that which you defend. The quiz provides complete source citations.

dash_slot - hama7's comments include a blanket defense of the comments bulleted above, a defense they do not deserve. That last comment's author comes back for more with this little nugget: "It's just that Germans and Japanese didn't have a culture rotten to the core like muslims do."

hama7 should realize that, yeah, there really are statements over there that are as loathsome as they look when held up to the light of day.
posted by NortonDC at 8:30 AM on April 11, 2004


Yeah really folks. The phrase "extremist muslims" seems to me a pretty clear label for, you kow, EXTREMIST MUSLIMS. Like the kinds working off a mind-bendingly strict interpretation of quranic law? The kinds that shoot women caught without a burqa? Yeah, those are "extremist muslims". This is not Joe Muhammed down the road in Skokie IL whose daughter wears a headscarf to express her connection with her faith. These are the guys running AQ.

His other objection to the light the quotes are cast in seems valid to me. Well, sort of. I still find the "exterminate the vermin" attitude to be morally suspect at the least. I don't think it's possible to wander into a foreign country and pick out just those who are of the opinion that the more dead westerners the better, and as such there's no way to implement the, ah, "suggestions" outlined in the quotes without committing unspeakable monstrosity. But to deny that there's a powerful, broad-based, well-funded movement in the Arab world, and to further deny that this movement draws alot of its persuasive power from Islam, is just incorrect. There are muslims who would very much like it if we were all dead or subjugated under sha'ria, and they have a literally worldwide network of agents.

I also don't think their recruitment base is as limited as some her suppose - there are alot of poor, angry young men in Iran, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and so on. There's no better population from which to recruit people willing to throw their lives away to get a chance at heaven.

On preview: what norton said. hama, it's true that there's a little RAINBOWS AND UNICORNS ARE FULL OF LOVE AND WE SHOULD BE TOO reaction in this thread, but the quotes from LGF really are pretty loathsome.
posted by kavasa at 8:31 AM on April 11, 2004


The problem as I see it seems to be one of using the term Islamist. Which I have tried and tried to get folks to see that THAT is like saying All Fundies are of the Eric Roberts ilk. Who happen to hate pretty much everyone including their own countrymen. If you don't want to be misunderstood...don't use that term as shorthand for terrorists. It paints with a pretty wide brush.
posted by SweetIceT at 8:32 AM on April 11, 2004


Make that Eric Rudolph....apologies to Eric Roberts!
posted by SweetIceT at 8:35 AM on April 11, 2004


Cross-site pissing matches are definitely stupid, but trying to read that LGF thread.. Christ it doesn't take those monsters long to show their true colours, does it?
posted by Space Coyote at 8:48 AM on April 11, 2004


Coyote: Nope.

I remember a poster here said that fundamentalists need other fundamentalists to gain power, relevance and legitimacy. Those posters at LGF give the islamic extremists legitimacy and power.
posted by Stynxno at 8:53 AM on April 11, 2004


Any LGFers going to the Rundgren show at the House of Blues Tonight?

Utterly indefensible.
posted by trondant at 8:55 AM on April 11, 2004


trondant: X'D
posted by Stynxno at 8:56 AM on April 11, 2004


Cross-site pissing matches are definitely stupid, but trying to read that LGF thread.. Christ it doesn't take those monsters long to show their true colours, does it?
posted by Space Coyote at 8:48 AM PST on April 11

Irony knows no bounds...
posted by dash_slot- at 9:17 AM on April 11, 2004


It's true, I'm prejudiced against all racists.
posted by Space Coyote at 9:23 AM on April 11, 2004


This post and the subsequent thread is wrong on so very many levels (too many to count).

First and foremost, we don't do this. Matt has made it very clear that silly little internecine blog battles are not acceptable.

Secondly, how can some off-the-cuff page intended solely to attack another site possibly be defined as "the best of the web"?

Also, it's pretty fucking lame to take Matt's absence (I assume it has something to do with, you know, having a life business) as an opportunity to post blatantly inflammatory crap to the front page. If you want to fight with extremists (pick a flavor of extremism, I don't care) at least have the courtesy to do it with your own bandwidth.

Yeah, I know this would be better in MeTa, but I already posted there today -- pointing out something actually worth reading -- unlike this thread or LGF.
posted by cedar at 9:26 AM on April 11, 2004


A: A large number of bigoted posts on LGF are made by trolls who manage to slip by the (arguably selective) policing by the administrator. The forums warn that they are for the most part unmoderated, and the site sometimes gets as many as 3000 comments a day. There are no exclusive memberships like here, so the whole self-policing thing is not working out well.

B: Just as MeFi has some bigoted leftists, so does LGF has its bigoted righties (the latter group just expresses itself more poorly). When I brought up the point about MeFi's bias, I was told to ignore the rude and the bigoted and to concentrate on the reasonable posters. Likewise, if one ignores the trolls and unproductive extremists on LGF, some interesting information can be gleaned.

C: It's sad to note that only a site frequented by bigots dares to touch upon the inexplicably "taboo" subject of Muslim extremists and fundamentalists, at a time when anywhere else, even the slightest attempts attempts are shouted down with accusations of racism (cue in matteo).

D: This thread is nothing but a pissing match indeed, and I heartily vote for its deletion. Mathowie?
posted by Krrrlson at 9:31 AM on April 11, 2004


Two threads enter! One thread leaves! Delete! Delete! Delete!
posted by swerdloff at 9:44 AM on April 11, 2004


« Older Definitely Not Your Mom's Cooking, But Comfort Foo...   |   Remixing Bush's tasteless joke... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments