March 13, 2008
Shortly after posting one of today's stories, I realized that remarks attributed to a political figure were actually made by callers to the radio show in question.
I apologize for this mistake. The story has been removed and I'm glad we were able to correct the situation quickly.
-GP
Comments
Yeah, I missed it, too. So can anyone here tell me what this is all about, please?
Thanks for clearing it up for me and Nekowolf. I kinda wish GP would fix the earlier post and re-post it so I could read for myself though... All well I can dream.
Thanks for holding onto that for us. Unlike Jabrwock, I think the comments were just sad, but to each his own.
"Peter acually was qouting an historical event."
Yep, Voltaire.
"In some cases I refuse to defend someone’s right to free speech when its blatantly racist and hate mongering."
Even the founders of the US constitution realized that there were limitations. Otherwise they would have put in stuff like "even if you are slandering, libeling, fraudulently representing yourself, or inciting riot". The trick is unless your speech is violating some criminal law, it's not supposed to be touched.
As you may know, Jack Thompson cannot be bothered with the opinions of the people he thinks aren't human. He's above it all. He doesn't lie. His words, thoughts, and actions lie!
/sarcasm
He wouldn't correct a mistake if he was paid money.
It is scary. It is even scarier when it happens close to home.
A few weeks back I had a "debate" with my cousin about Obama and everything she said was pretty much summed up in that retracted article.
So I take it, that some radio show was discussing Bilal's art project and the debacle that followed it? And apparently some listeners are morons who spout off at the mouth?
Actually, I would say it is nice to see a reported that cares about the truth AS MUCH AS the stories. He has to have a love of this to keep it going, and a respect for it (and all of us) to admit a mistake and fix it. I have enough trouble just keeping my own site running and updated with everything in my life, so I appreciate the work that much more.
THere was a comment that was extremly racist agianst muslims that was attributed to Mirch, apprently it was actually a caller, and so were a few other comments. Was retracted and I guess Dennis is fixing it before it's reposted.
http://www.heyrenn.com/misc/gp-mirch.html
Mirch: No, I have no opinion on that.
...what a load of crap. I'm sure you shed tears, then, as you shut down the Sanctuary for 3 inches of door space, right?
Anytime, thankfully Sam has a copy saved so you can read what it said exactly.
Bob is such a liar, he claims he has no opinion on whether it should be shut down or not, but he is on the record stating that the Sanctuary should cancel the exhibit, and that he feels it's beyond the limits of what free speech should be. Sounds like he only holds an opinion when he's not being confronted directly.
As far as human stupidity goes, people prove there is no such thing as rock bottom. They may hit the bottom, but at that point they start digging.
Gotta disagree with you there. There's a difference between going asking what Muslims think about your game (however misinformed your knowledge of the game is), and starting out your question by telling a story about how an "arab-Christian friend from the Middle East" told you all Muslims are liars. He might as well have just come out and insulted Balil right then and there, instead of hiding being "well someone else said it, not me".
I'm aware of how little regard arab-Christians have for Muslims (I know an arab-Christian myself), but jeeze.
At any rate, no matter who said it, the reference to Bilal's piece as a "board game" makes me wonder if the people complaining about it are lumping it in with tabletop RPGs -- roll a 6, blow up the president. Talk about bonuses to initiative...
6? You missed big time, your shot whent wide to the left and hit a window. Also the secret service now know where you snipe nest is.
You needed to roll 6 20's in a row.
No problem. Been posting here for a while, so I knew you wouldn't attack me over some minor thing like that. I think we both agree that the people who made those comments were ignorant (to me blatant ignorance and ignorance of your ignorance is sad/pathetic). You just laughed at them. That's the difference.
@ Simon Roberts
LOL! Oh my god. I would play that game! I don't even play table top RPGs, but that would be awesome. Er, wait a minute...
Yeah, the people commenting on his game didn't even seem to know what they were calling(?) in about. Its like going in for new tires and having the mechanic look under the hood.
"Yeah, the people commenting on his game didn’t even seem to know what they were calling(?) in about."
Welcome to talk radio. ;)
To quote Peter Griffin on how I feel about the whole thing "I don't like what you have to say but I will defend to the death your right to say it."
Peter acually was qouting an historical event. In some cases I refuse to defend someone's right to free speech when its blatantly racist and hate mongering.
That would meant hat JT has to admit that he is actually wrong, and he is convinced that he can NEVER be wrong. Ergo, no retractions from him ever.
Ahh thank you. I've never been able to remember his name.
Unfortunetly times have changed, it's now "I support freedom of [insert freedom here] unless I disagree there for you don't have the right."
You would think that after years o reporting on pundits and bigots going on rants after hearing partial information, you would have learned that already. ;)
I am glad to see that you are willing to correct yourself. Keep up the good work.
http://blip.tv/file/736718/
The audio is excerpts from the radio show so I don't know if it is representative of the callers or not but the callers in that audio clip are just sad.
http://www.wgy.com/cc-common/podcast/single_podcast.html?podcast=al_rone...
they are listed as "Free Speech or Terrorism" parts 1-4
Loads of other websites would have kept it up for the controversy (i.e hits) and would never have posted again to apologize.