JihadWatch

A reply to Ali's post.

I find it impossible to believe that the human race may ever be free from prejudicial and biased thinking.

But why would JihadWatch (or a reader of it) be interested in Muslim activism against Muslim oppression — that would destroy the entire (weak) thesis on which Jihad Watch rests, namely, that all or most Muslims are dangerous.

That is only one of the examples of things humans continue to do.

I simply think that people should follow proper blogging protocol. It's possible that Reader James doesn't know such protocol (which is the most likely excuse forthcoming). That's fine Reader James, I let you off the hook. I am not blaming JihadWatch, however, they couldn't have known the link was jacked.

Look. If you care about blogging protocol, why are you letting people who you think violated it, off the hook? And why do you ask questions about why JihadWatch didn't cite you when you already know the answer to that question? And if you aren't blaming JihadWatch, why are you using a post titled with a question you already knew the answer to, as a vehicle to cast aspersions and accussations on JihadWatch?

This does remind me of the Iraqi bloggers attacking Iraq the Model for their post on the Lancet Study. Instead of combining and uniting against a common foe, they would rather have an internecine war. Instead of finding commonality against Iran, I find people more eager to pick apart the differences and enlarge them beyond reason.