Pickled Politics

Comments

RSS feed for comments on this post.

  1. Malkin has been repeatedly publishing personal contact details of uni. students protesting against military recruiters on campuses. Inevitably, that attracted death threats towards the students

    That is pathetic of her…..

    Comment by Geezer — 19th April, 2006 @ 6:35 pm

  2. Unbelievable. Though I’m surprised all these pro-war patriots aren’t too busy fighting in Iraq to bother what a few anti-war students are getting up to.

    Comment by Clairwil — 19th April, 2006 @ 6:46 pm

  3. Jeez, some of these American bloggers are proper mentalists, or eeevil, or a bit of both. I’ve had a beer with our lunatic fringe as represented by Tim Worstall, some of whose views on politics are a bit rum to say the least, but he’s a decent bloke and good company. I’d rather dine on my own excrement than sip cosmos with Michelle, though. The freak.

    Comment by Jarndyce — 19th April, 2006 @ 6:58 pm

  4. I wonder if the GP claiming 270,000 quid who is all over the papers will play the race card.

    Comment by El Cid — 19th April, 2006 @ 7:16 pm

  5. Clairwil those war hungry patriots usually watch the action from their comfort of their own homes or keyboards. If there was a draft I could assure you their enthusiasm would die down pretty quickly once their exposed to those bullets and bombs they wished upon others.

    Comment by Geezer — 19th April, 2006 @ 7:20 pm

  6. Malkin crossed the line with Santa Cruz.
    And the anti-racist One People’s Project website has released her details which the say are publically available on the Internet. Someone took it a step further and used live.windows.com and yahoo maps to do a Graphic.
    Payback’s a bitch eh’ Malkin?
    Her refusal to remove these kids contact information was not from conviction, but from revenue. Every journalist in the world knows that contact information on a press release is for journalists to call for more information or interviews, not to be published (or even pointed out) in the publication itself. If she were any kind of ethical person she would have pulled the information when asked.
    If she were something resembling a human being with “feelings”, she would not have republished the information once the students themselves removed it. Michelle - you are a vicious, vindictive, venomous egoist with no discernible ethics nor even a shred of human decency. If you want to be The Minority Woman Who Believes Minorities and Women Suck, that’s your right. But at least have the integrity to acknowledge that you have done wrong and to stop compounding the wrong. And don’t give us that disingenuous crap about how you don’t condone death threats and nobody should misuse your posting and reposting of personal information.

    Comment by themole — 19th April, 2006 @ 7:37 pm

  7. Pickled Pocket Pickers,

    Yeah she made be stupid but she is a women and threats against her, because she is a woman, and may have children, are particularly wrong. Yes its a double standard. I know. Chop it up to weaker upper body strength.

    Comment by Bikhair — 19th April, 2006 @ 7:42 pm

  8. Bikhair,

    Yeah, two wrongs and all that. However, one of the students was female (going by the name) and it didn’t stop Malkin putting her details on a site noted for rabid, hate-filled macho inadequates.

    Comment by Don — 19th April, 2006 @ 9:31 pm

  9. This death threat morphing into media spillovers is on the make in the USA. Then there is the witchhunt of Left wing academics instigated by Daniel Pipes. Where is this going?

    Comment by Siddhartha Sinatra — 19th April, 2006 @ 10:12 pm

  10. I’ve just been in the group’s site Therein someone made a pretty good point. One that the group seem to have either heeded or arrived at independently. Basically they aren’t going to feed the troll. Much as I’d love to see Malkin screwed over for this, there is a danger that three potless students, in spite of the fact that they have been subjected to threats by this womans readers, will just end up as roadkill for Malkin’s hot-shot lawyers. Their mistake in allowing their details to be published can also be interpreted as a desire for attention, either positive or negative. I know it sounds patronising but they’ll learn from this I think.

    Comment by ill man — 19th April, 2006 @ 11:15 pm

  11. During the interview, Michelle made it clear that the information she published—contact information from a SAW press release—had already been public. In spite of this, retaliation was inflicted on her. MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann designated her as ‘one of the world’s worst people’ because of this incident. Far more sinister ‘revenge’ was inflicted, however: her family’s personal contact information was discovered and made public.

    Musing on the reasons for the existence of such hatred for her, Michelle surmises that the Left feels a sense of betrayal with her; many feel that she should be on their side because they believe that is where all women and non-whites should be.

    Quite frankly the way the lefty little shits act is dispicable. Some choice comments regarding her publishing publicly available information available here

    Comment by j0nz — 19th April, 2006 @ 11:25 pm

  12. Evil Zionist-US-blog-bit-here

    Comment by j0nz — 19th April, 2006 @ 11:27 pm

  13. Sorry that should say some lefty little shits, lest I sound like one of them myself.

    Comment by j0nz — 19th April, 2006 @ 11:29 pm

  14. Rightwing american bint says something stupid

    *shrug*

    infact; american says something stupid

    *shrug*

    Comment by Kulvinder — 19th April, 2006 @ 11:31 pm

  15. Die Hippie Die…

    okie i’m not an MM fan (especially since she hates South Park) but then again those Students Against War are dipshits just like the guy who has been squatting in Parliament squrae in Westminster.

    Comment by Bonnie Prince Vickie — 20th April, 2006 @ 1:40 am

  16. Kulvinder,

    Rightie or a leftie we all know Americans are inherently stupid, arent they?

    Comment by Bonnie Prince Vickie — 20th April, 2006 @ 1:41 am

  17. The information was available for those who thought about looking for it and had the nous to find it. Malkin drew attention to that information and waved it at her readership. She is culpable.

    Disapproving of the retaliation is easy. Of course you don’t use the net and the discourse we have to put someone’s life at risk. Malkin, as several people have said, crossed a line. How could she not have anticipated the consequences? Of course some irresponsible dickhead would go for pay-back.

    I would hate to stereotype anybody, but there’s a lot of armed nutters in the states. Pointing them towards people is a line no-one should cross.

    Comment by Don — 20th April, 2006 @ 1:44 am

  18. j0nz - if you read my post properly, I’ve already linked to the link you provided later, where Ms Malkin tries the “don’t hate me because I’m female and I’m non-white baby”.

    And now she’s trying to play the defense that those contact details where already available. Well, why in that case did she re-publish them after the students asked her to take those contact details down following threats.

    I don’t give a crap whether she’s a woman and an indian, chinese, filipino or martian - she’s still an A grade twat.

    Comment by Sunny — 20th April, 2006 @ 2:22 am

  19. Bonnie Prince Vickie ,

    “Rightie or a leftie we all know Americans are inherently stupid, arent they? ”

    We just happen to be the most productive and the wealthiest too.

    Comment by Bikhair — 20th April, 2006 @ 3:39 am

  20. Ah well. I guess I just feel sorry for her. And of course it depends what end you are on politically. And who you see as the greater threat.

    But those who were against the war have such righteous indignation. Some of them quite openly adovate violence against those that supported the Iraq war.

    Those that supported the Iraq war were on the whole centrists. Centre-left and centre-right. Those that opposed ther war were the far-left (SWP for example) and the far-right (BNP for example). And the setup is pretty much the same on the other side of the pond.

    Ok Malkin has made a mistake here, but those hippies were in no danger!! (”I’m going to kill you in the name of centrism! - If you can’t see how Brutal Saddam was - I’ll show you!”)

    In fact I challenge anybody to find evidence that the pro-Iraq-liberation advocate violence to those who opposed the Iraq war.

    Comment by j0nz — 20th April, 2006 @ 7:45 am

  21. Yes you’re absolutely right j0nz. Publishing names and addresses of students, teaching assistants and professors who are anti-Iraqi Invasion or just simply Left Wing so that they are hounded out of their positions, their jobs and/or threatened with death isn’t “advocating violence”.

    Comment by Sid Singh — 20th April, 2006 @ 10:57 am

  22. ‘Rightie or a leftie we all know Americans are inherently stupid, arent they? ‘

    Not so much, but there are a lot of them, and someone with average views is about as likely to get a job as a political commentator as a person with average looks is to get a job as a TV star.

    Comment by soru — 20th April, 2006 @ 11:14 am

  23. In fact I challenge anybody to find evidence that the pro-Iraq-liberation advocate violence to those who opposed the Iraq war.

    If you read my original post j0nz, that’s exactly what it states. Go to the Daily Kos link, there’s a few links to the ’students against war’ website, where they have all the messages from your friends listed. There’s your evidence.

    Comment by Sunny — 20th April, 2006 @ 12:27 pm

  24. Wtf?

    Has anone actually read Michelle’s original posts?

    She has provided University based email addresses, phone numbers and email addresses for 3 people, who are leading the “Students Against the War” campaign, and the office address of the Chancellor & Assistant.

    Do she they post their home addreses? No
    Did she post their personal email addresses? No
    Did she post their personal telephone numbers? No
    Did she publish maps of their homes? No
    Did she ask people to send death threats? No

    If you get involved politically then you have to expect hate mail.

    The Students Against War have no problem with posting photos and personal details of militray recruiters on Indymedia. But that’s ok I suppose. They’re all part of the Neo-Con-Zionist conspiracy and deserve it.

    Comment by j0nz — 20th April, 2006 @ 1:13 pm

  25. I just don’t get it. All this information was available on a SAW Press Release.

    I don’t recall maps of Michelle’s home address on any of her publications. They made the decision for this information to be publicly available through the internet.

    Oh the righteous left, who hacked Conservative ProtestWarrior and published home addresses and home numbers of members with glee on Indymedia. It was certainly mentioned on the evil conservative blog LGF, but nowhere near the hysteria of the oh so righteous left on this issue.

    But that’s ok to publish personal details of right wingers. They’re all part of the Bushitler Scum crowd, right?

    Comment by j0nz — 20th April, 2006 @ 2:24 pm


  26. “While they whine about the death threats that SAW organizers allegedly received, you should see the filth and threats against my family that their minions are sending.” — Michele Malkin

    If she classes death threats as harrassment she shouldn’t have published the students contact information. If she doesn’t class them as harrassment, what is she complaining about?

    So which is it ?

    Comment by Chris Stiles — 20th April, 2006 @ 3:21 pm

  27. Another take on it:

    http://jonswift.blogspot.com/2006/04/dear-michelle-malkin.html

    Comment by Chris Stiles — 20th April, 2006 @ 3:25 pm

  28. “I’ve had a beer with our lunatic fringe as represented by Tim Worstall, some of whose views on politics are a bit rum to say the least, but he’s a decent bloke and good company. ”

    Lunatic fringe. How kind of your to say so Jarndyce. “Decent bloke” is obviously over-egging the pudding a bit though.

    Comment by Tim Worstall — 20th April, 2006 @ 3:40 pm

  29. Lunatic fringe makes him sound like he’s got a really bad haircut.

    Comment by Jay Singh — 20th April, 2006 @ 3:43 pm

  30. Could this man be on the lunatic fringe?

    Comment by j0nz — 20th April, 2006 @ 4:01 pm

  31. j0nz: Those that supported the Iraq war were on the whole centrists. Centre-left and centre-right. Those that opposed ther war were the far-left (SWP for example) and the far-right (BNP for example).
    Er?

    I know any number of people who opposed the war who are neither. Let’s take the big anti-war march as an example. The police estimated that there were 750,000 there. Are you saying that all these people are supporters of the BNP and the SWP? That’s not credible surely? I’m afraid the claim that only the far-left or right opposed the war is a pretty weak strawman.

    It rather looks to me as if you’ve been seduced by a particularly odious piece of “pro-war” spin. Opposition to the war came from all across the political spectrum.

    I did enjoy the Blair photo though. Definitely lunatic fringe.

    Comment by Garry — 20th April, 2006 @ 5:24 pm

  32. And on topic, MM clearly knew what she was doing when she published those contact details. Not nice. It’s sort of indicative of the way political debate is going in the US at the moment I think (along with the fact that she’s had it done back to her). It’s all extremely confrontational and devisive. Not really what I’d call a healthy democratic debate.

    I think it was al-Zawahiri who articulated that al Qaida would be able to exploit and fuel the divisions which exist in US society. With the US lacking an intelligent leadership which understands terrorist strategies and what to do about them, they seem to be succeeding.

    Comment by Garry — 20th April, 2006 @ 5:38 pm

  33. This whole thing’s bizarre. Obviously anyone who makes death threats is completely out of order and probably criminally culpable. That left wing site shouldn’t have put out Malkin’s details, even if they were publicly available. But it does seem that Malkin kicked the whole thing off with what was at best a mean spirited act of hooliganism.

    j0nz – I’ve already gone on at coma-inducing length in the “Revisiting the Euston Manifesto” thread about how I’ve found pro-war progressives (especially me!) to be (usually) more nuanced in approach than most anti-war colleagues. And knee-jerk anti-Americanism is, to my mind at least, an ugly passion that’s reminiscent of the BNP. But you’re seriously exaggerating if you try to paint the whole pro-war camp as nicey-nice centrists. How about that nice liberal Mr Mark Steyn? or Melanie Phillips…?

    I have read Malkin’s post. I’d never heard of her before Sunny’s piece but what I’ve just seen of her work is definitely not centrist. Nor is it accurate. Were those whining “stewdents” really being “seditious”? Is it “assault” when a trained combat soldier and some Uni security men are surrounded by a bunch of self-righteous girls? The student reports of their protest look laughably self important and naïve to me. But they’re just children – what’s Malkin’s excuse?

    Thank goodness no reputable media outlet over here would publish someone just because they had impressive sounding qualifications, a knack for writing ill considered rhetoric that inflames their readers’ basest instincts, and were physically appealing to some “male members” of the media establishment. Take Madeleine Bunting for example. Er, hang on…

    Comment by Ravi4 — 20th April, 2006 @ 5:40 pm

  34. This whole thing’s bizarre. Obviously anyone who makes death threats is completely out of order and probably criminally culpable. That left wing site shouldn’t have put out Malkin’s details, even if they were publicly available. But it does seem that Malkin kicked the whole thing off with what was at best a mean spirited act of hooliganism.

    j0nz – I’ve already gone on at coma-inducing length in the “Revisiting the Euston Manifesto” thread about how I’ve found pro-war progressives (especially me!) to be (usually) more nuanced in approach than most anti-war colleagues. And knee-jerk anti-Americanism is, to my mind at least, an ugly passion that’s reminiscent of the BNP. But you’re seriously exaggerating if you try to paint the whole pro-war camp as nicey-nice centrists. How about that nice liberal Mr Mark Steyn? or Melanie Phillips…?

    I have read Malkin’s post. I’d never heard of her before Sunny’s piece but what I’ve just seen of her work is definitely not centrist. Nor is it accurate. Were those whining stewdents really being “seditious”? Is it “assault” when a trained combat soldier and some Uni security men are surrounded by a bunch of self-righteous girls? The student reports of their protest look laughably self important and naïve to me. But they’re just children – what’s Malkin’s excuse?

    Thank goodness no reputable media outlet over here would publish someone just because they had impressive sounding qualifications, a knack for writing ill considered rhetoric that inflames their readers’ basest instincts, and were physically appealing to some “male members” of the media establishment. Take Madeleine Bunting for example. Er, hang on…

    Comment by Ravi4 — 20th April, 2006 @ 5:43 pm

  35. Ravi4 you are right, although, Mark Steyn and Melanie Philips, whilst both considered both right-wing, and conservative in their politcs, nobody would desribe them as extremists. (Far-right or Far-left).

    Let’s face it, the fringe of the anti-war crowd includes people who praise Chairman Mao, the Socialist Baathist Regime, and Terrorism - anything in fact that opposes the West.

    Now people who support the war? Centre lefties, centrists, righties (yes that includes Steyn and Phillips). I challange anyone to name some people who are far-left or far-right that supported the Iraq war.

    Suffice to say, ALL the extremists of all pursuasions (Islamic, Lefty, Nationalist) were anti-war!

    Comment by j0nz — 20th April, 2006 @ 7:37 pm

  36. Jonz: I challange anyone to name some people who are far-left or far-right that supported the Iraq war.
    What would this prove exactly?

    Suffice to say, ALL the extremists of all pursuasions (Islamic, Lefty, Nationalist) were anti-war!
    Or indeed this?

    Just to remind you, you said: Those that opposed ther war were the far-left (SWP for example) and the far-right (BNP for example).

    In all fairness, if you’d said “included” rather than “were”, the position you now seem to be trying to defend, I’d have been unable to disagree.

    As is, you just seem to be playing dirty by first stating something which is patently untrue and then continuing to insinuate the same when challenged. It is inaccurate to suggest that all opposition to the war came from the fringes. The numbers tell their own story. The BNP and the SWP between them couldn’t put together more than a few thousands people for a demonstration as I’m sure you’re aware. Most of the 750,000+ people who marched were not extremists of left or right.

    You seem determined to portray anyone who opposed the war as if they ascribed to the most outlandish views you can find. I could similarly claim that the extreme “exterminate the Koranimals” diatribes which sometimes appear in comments on LGF are representative of everyone who supported the war. It would be untrue though. And it’d be rather dishonest to pretend otherwise.

    Comment by Garry — 20th April, 2006 @ 9:17 pm

  37. Not at all Garry, I’m just pointing out that all the lunatics opposed the war. I know there plenty of non-loonies aswell that opposed the war. Like you say 750,000 in the march. Thats a lot of people.

    Comment by j0nz — 20th April, 2006 @ 9:29 pm

  38. The BNP supported the Free Expression march too, does that mean everyone who went there was a far-right fascist? Your reasoning is all over the place j0nz. Stop digging that hole.

    Mark Steyn and Melanie Philips, whilst both considered both right-wing, and conservative in their politcs, nobody would desribe them as extremists.

    No, I’d just describe them as nutcases. I can’t remember the last time either of them wrote anything other than a hysterical rant.

    Comment by Sunny — 20th April, 2006 @ 10:46 pm

  39. Thanks Sunny. Just for fun, I’ve just thought of a bonafide lunatic who supported the war. Pat Robertson, the well known US christian right TV evangelist. He famously suggested that Ariel Sharon’s stroke was a divine punishment from God for giving away holy land. I think that probably qualifies him as a lunatic by most standards. Ergo, all people who supported the war …

    Comment by Garry — 20th April, 2006 @ 11:39 pm

  40. The BNP supported the Free Expression march too, does that mean everyone who went there was a far-right fascist

    No, that didn’t stop many on the left as branding us all as nazis. Anyho, I have already said “I know there plenty of non-loonies aswell that opposed the war”

    I can’t resist but draw this one out. So the loony list looks as follows:

    Pro-Iraq-War:

    Pat Robertson

    Anti-Iraq-War:

    Saddam Hussein, Baathist Officials, Terrorists, Islamists, George Galloway, Socialist Worker Party nutjobs, Nationalist nutjobs, Yvonne Ridley., Madeline Bunting, The French, The Daily Mail… need I go on?!

    Comment by j0nz — 21st April, 2006 @ 2:10 pm

  41. I challenge j0nz (or anyone) to name some people (far left or far right) who support Britain adopting the Euro. Those that oppose it certainly include the SWP (far left), and the BNP (far right), not to mention George Galloway, and the editors of the Sun, Express and the Daily Mail .

    Does this, though, tell us much about either most people who oppose our adopting that currency or about the merits or otherwise of the idea?

    Comment by Stephen G — 21st April, 2006 @ 3:31 pm

  42. j0nz - given that our friend Michelle Malkin has also lent her support to the Euston Manifesto, what does that say about your line of thinking?

    Comment by Sunny — 21st April, 2006 @ 3:47 pm

  43. It means the Euston Manifesto makes sense? That the Euston Manifesto is not for Islamic or Socialist Fundamentalists or National Socialists?

    That essentially the Euston Manifesto is a centrist piece?

    Stephen G I have lost you on that, but it made me laugh anyway. Sounded a bit Pythonesque.

    Comment by j0nz — 21st April, 2006 @ 4:40 pm

  44. It means the Euston Manifesto makes sense? That the Euston Manifesto is not for Islamic or Socialist Fundamentalists or National Socialists?

    Are you asking or stating? You’d be forgiven to confess to being totally flummoxed. ;-)

    Comment by Sid Singh — 21st April, 2006 @ 4:49 pm

  45. Sunny -
    - “she’s still an A grade twat.” -
    Really?
    Wonder how your female readers feel about that classy remark?
    You are becoming so transparent. Seems you will instigate any debate to get the advert $$

    Comment by Expose — 21st April, 2006 @ 5:15 pm

  46. No, MM signing the Euston Manifesto means that the Euston Manifesto is the kind of document that can be signed by a raving advocate of internment and torture.

    Plenty of loonies supported the Iraq War. Bin Laden, on the one hand, certainly wasn’t crying in his cave over the creation of a new playground, and neo-fascists like Douglas Murray on the other hand, are pretty gleeful that they are witnessing a ‘Clash of Civilisation with Barbarism’ and have the chance to spin European countries down the political pathways of radical militaristic nationalism.

    Trying to claim that ALL the loonies were anti-war is, quite simply, barking. It makes you look spectacularly dumb.

    Comment by Andrew Bartlett — 29th April, 2006 @ 6:49 pm

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Close this window.

1.203 Powered by Wordpress