Dan Riehl Tries to Flush Embarrassing Post Down the Memory Hole — And Fails
[UPDATE 6-26-06: Since I first wrote this post, I have read Dan Riehl’s site often. Although you can see from the post below that I was upset at the time, he’s not a bad guy, and he has done some excellent work. Please read the post with that in mind. — Patterico]
[UPDATE 9-14-10: Nah. I was right the first time. — Patterico]
What in the hell is going on at Riehl World View? The proprietor of that blog, Dan Riehl, apparently sent out a mass e-mail soliciting links to a video on his site — and when someone (Michelle Malkin) had the gall to actually use the link he sent her, he got pissy, accused her of stealing his bandwidth, and (to punish her) substituted a link to an offensive video.
Then he bragged about it on a post on his site. When some folks, including myself, called him on it, he deleted the post where he bragged about his offensive behavior.
Now he is lamely pretending that the whole episode is the fault of some hacker who sent out an e-mail under his name. If that explained everything, I would feel sorry for him. But unless the hacker has complete control of his web site — something he has not yet claimed — his explanation makes no sense at all.
What a lunatic.
Here are the details:
Riehl put up a video on his site of the recent ridiculous remarks by rapper Kanye West to the effect that authorities have been given permission to shoot black people in New Orleans. Then he sent an e-mail to numerous bloggers, including Michelle Malkin, asking them to link it. The e-mail contained a link to the video itself.
Once Michelle put up a link to the video, Dan at the Riehl World site objected to her posting the very link that Dan had sent her. I’ll let Michelle take up the explanation:
5pm 9/3 update: A footnote about the “hacked” video. Last night, I linked to the West video at Dan Riehl’s site after he e-mailed me a link to it. I hat-tipped him by name and thanked him by e-mail. He later sent me another e-mail, which I missed and did not find until this afternoon, requesting that I use a link to his post instead of the link to the video that he had sent. In the meantime, Riehl got mad about what he saw as insufficient credit to him, put the porn video up himself to replace the Kayne West video, and now accuses me of stealing his bandwidth. I regret that I missed his e-mail and am sorry he feels I didn’t credit him enough. I’m even sorrier that such an honest misunderstanding exposed my readers to the obscene video.
A note to other bloggers: In the future, if you do not want me to link to something on your site, please do not send me links and e-mails asking me to do so. Thank you.
That is about as polite a denunciation of a complete asshole as you will ever see.
Now: here is the post Dan Riehl put up about all this. It was originally posted at this link — however, he has removed the post from his site, no doubt out of embarrassment. Luckily, I have saved the whole thing (including comments) for posterity:
Saturday, September 03, 2005
Michele Malkin Linked To Male Stripper
Friday night visitors to Social Conservative Michele [sic] Malkin’s web log were in for a shock when they clicked open a link purported to be to a breaking news video of Rapper Kanye West slamming President Bush at a Red Cross Fundraiser recently televised on NBC.The link went to a satirical video of deposed Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein stripping, eventually down to nothing but a G-string with a mouse face covering his genitals.
The mix up came about because Michele [sic] Malkin, known for her strong stands on issues of morals, ethics and values, was, in effect, stealing band width and perceived credit for a news scoop from a fellow blogger.
AT 9:02 PM EST Friday night, soon after airing, a media colleague who was taping the fundraiser emailed me a copy of the video, well before it was even mentioned on breaking news site the Drudge Report, let alone Malkin’s page. The video was posted promptly and a link emailed out to several fellow bloggers. As of now, 15 bloggers have track backed to the video appropriately, but not Michele [sic] Malkin. Also as of now, forty bloggers have tracked back to her original post.
Instead, Malkin gave a text only hat tip by name, not even mentioning the site where the video was breaking and hosted and proceeded to hot-link the 2MB video. Noticing the issue after Malkin sent a thank you saying she had “linked” the post, I immediately sent Malkin a polite email asking that she correct the likely mistake. The email drew no response.
As the evening went on I decided to change the name of the file, assuming a Malkin reader would advise her of the then dead link – which I tested. Instead, Malkin changed the name of the file in her link to the new file name and went right back to hot linking the news video a second time.
Remembering an incident where The Huffington Post had hot-linked a photo posted by Mike Krempasky at RedState.org. Krempasky’s comments at the time:
Arianna, Arianna — we’re so glad you’re here. But if you want to become the celebrity darling of the InterWeb — how about not stealing and taking credit for the creative, investigative, and deliberative work from other, legitimate bloggers? Better yet, how about this: once you’ve taken an image and given no credit, why not rub salt in the wound and just go right ahead and hotlink it?
That’s right, just steal bandwidth from the little guys. We’ll roll over for you just like we were the California electorate. Just because you reportedly throw one heck of a cocktail party doesn’t mean you’ve got this Internet thing licked.
I followed Mike’s example. Krempasky altered the photo when the unethical practice went uncorrected, so I decided to do the same and changed relevant file names to send the link to the dancing Saddam video. The original breaking video is now entitled: “Please don’t hotlink my video.”
Rather than acknowledge the error, Michale [sic] Malkin chose to remove all mention of “Dan Riehl” and opted to link to CrooksandLiars, whose servers are now, in their words “maxed,” perhaps in part due to the video posted well-after my breaking story, perhaps obtained from another source.
When Arianna Huffington perpetrated what is considered to be a serious ethical error among well-known bloggers she was reproached by many fellow bloggers on the center and right side of the blogosphere. What remains to be seen is if bloggers will stand on principle, or if the highly ranked Michele [sic, dumbass] Malkin blog can dance away from its unethical practices unscathed.
At this point, in my view, Malkin has robbed a fellow blogger of credit and bandwidth associated with a breaking news event, since covered by almost every television network. And she did it to a previously absolutely collegial blogger who has linked her site, as well as her Immigration blog repeatedly.
Update: I’ve since been informed of the comment below posted by her on her website.
9:50am 9/3 update: The Kayne West video I originally linked to got hacked. Sincere apologies to everyone who got tricked into watching the wrong video. The link has now been corrected; the new video is courtesy of Crooks and Liars.
Posted by Dan in Web Blogs | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/3116509Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Michele Malkin Linked To Male Stripper :
» KANYE WEST: BUSH-BASHING FOR $$$ from Michelle Malkin
Just watch this. Poor Mike Myers. Look at his face. He looks like he’s gonna hurl. News coverage of the celebrity Katrina telethon fiasco: – Kanye West Slams Bush In Live Telethon – Kanye West Ruins Relief Show – Video… [Read More]Tracked on Sep 3, 2005 5:37:42 PM
Comments
Gee…that is not fair….maybe we should all alert her…i’m sure she doesn’t realize why everyone would be so concerned…
the laws pertaining to the interet are still being scoped out…once more discussion takes place we will know the parameters better…
Posted by: xoxoxoxoxoxoxo | Sep 3, 2005 2:42:10 PM
Good God.
Posted by: JK | Sep 3, 2005 2:45:18 PM
I really doubt Michelle Malkin is into stealing bandwidth. How about giving her time to correct the error. Perhaps she has not even been back on her blog today. Love her articles.
Posted by: Anna | Sep 3, 2005 3:04:01 PM
Anna – You really need to lay off the cool aid. ; ) Read the post – she updated ber blog several times. And also ignored two emails.
Posted by: Dan | Sep 3, 2005 3:26:59 PM
Why do that, when you can humiliate her.
Good Job Dan, rub her nose it it. Don’t take no crap from anyone, you rock. If you let the Michelle Malkins walk over you, you are dirt.
I bet that you taught her a great lesson. She will never think to mess with you again.
Keep it up. A Big fan.
Posted by: Samuel | Sep 3, 2005 3:30:16 PM
RE: And also ignored two emails.
Posted by: Dan | Sep 3, 2005 3:26:59 PM
That should infringe on your copywright laws but I guess we have not put them onto paper yet. Congress must become aware that legislation needs to be enacted to keep title where it belongs.
Good work as always, Dan.Posted by: George T. | Sep 3, 2005 3:34:42 PM
Dan,
I have just learned about your post from your trackback on my site. Please see the email I sent you and feel free to publish it. In the meantime, I will add this comment to my site as well and hope your readers will take the time to consider the facts.
I did not hotlink your video. I received the original email you sent me with the link to your video, which I promptly thanked you for and linked directly as you were requesting.
The only other email I received from you last night was this one:
From: “Its Just Dan”
To: “Its Just Dan”
Subject: Overtaken by Events Blog Finds Mother Through Another Blog Post
Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2005 01:43:15 -0400
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180What can you say but WOW! Thank God. I’ve had so many emails over missing people, I am sure you all have, too. This is incredibly rewarding. – Dan
http://www.riehlworldview.com/carnivorous_conservative/2005/09/why_blog_hurric.html
…
Soon after I linked your video with credit to you, I received this message from someone named John Stringer:
X-Originating-IP: [68.230.240.34]
From:
Sender: “John Stringer”To:
Subject: Kanye West Link
Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2005 00:24:30 -0500
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510
Thread-Index: AcWwR5FmCbnTyj6SSg2oA1UFOsk03A==Your link is broken to Kanye West… try this one:
http://www.riehlworldview.com/carnivorous_conservative/files/wnbc_telethon.wmv
John
http://www.killrighty.netWhen I clicked on the link I had up, it was broken. So I replaced it with the link that this guy sent. Now I know I was duped. Someone hacked your site and intended to embarrass me in the process by changing the video to a porn movie.
I have always strived to give credit where it is due, and abide by the spirit of cooperation in the blogosphere. Someone tried to sabotage both your and my efforts, and I don’t appreciate being blamed for unethical behavior in the process.
Best,
MichellePosted by: Michelle Malkin | Sep 3, 2005 4:17:20 PM
I have always strived to give credit where it is due, and abide by the spirit of cooperation in the blogosphere. Someone tried to sabotage both your and my efforts, and I don’t appreciate being blamed for unethical behavior in the process.
Best,
MichelleDan, What Say You?
Posted by: JK | Sep 3, 2005 4:42:23 PM
UPDATE:
I searched my e-mail box, and found one e-mail from you that I had missed alerting me to your request to change the link. My box has been overflowing the past week, and I missed this one. So, now I understand. YOU changed it to a porn movie because you were mad that I didn’t give you enough credit. I tipped you by name and linked directly to your video, as you asked me to do in your e-mail. If you look at the trackbacks of countless other bloggers, they linked to your video without even crediting you by name at all.
I’m sorry I missed your e-mail and sorry I didn’t see it before commenting here.
Best,
MichellePosted by: Michelle Malkin | Sep 3, 2005 5:01:38 PM
I have added this update to my blog post:
http://michellemalkin.com/archives/003454.htm
5pm 9/3 update: A footnote about the “hacked” video. Last night, I linked to the West video at Dan Riehl’s site [hyperlinked to your blogpost] after he e-mailed me a link the video. I hat-tipped him by name and thanked him by e-mail. He later sent me another e-mail, which I missed and did not find until this afternoon, requesting that I use a link to his post instead of the link to the video that he had sent. In the meantime, Riehl got mad about what he saw as insufficient credit to him, put the porn video up himself to replace the Kayne West video, and now accuses me of stealing his bandwidth. I regret that I missed his e-mail and am sorry he feels I didn’t credit him enough. I’m even sorrier that such an honest misunderstanding exposed my readers to the obscene video.
A note to other bloggers: In the future, if you do not want me to link to something on your site, please do not send me links and e-mails asking me to do so. Thank you.
Posted by: Michelle Malkin | Sep 3, 2005 5:26:26 PM
Ya whatever. Quit wasting cycles on crap. You could have done SOMETHING more constructive with your time. Looser.
Posted by: Ray | Sep 3, 2005 6:04:20 PM
Dan,
Is it true that Michelle simply used the link that you sent her by e-mail? If so, you owe her a big apology, in my view.
Posted by: Patterico | Sep 3, 2005 7:00:09 PM
You are a dick head…. I will be fisking you until hell freezes over.
You sent the damn link DICK.
Posted by: XXUpYours | Sep 3, 2005 7:01:20 PM
Kevin Aylward was kind enough to pass along a .pdf file of this post (made before all of the above comments were left). Kevin has posted that and some related comments here.
Riehl is apparently now trying to blame this all on someone else: a troll who supposedly sent an e-mail out under his name. Here is his latest post trying to explain it all away:
Saturday, September 03, 2005
Michele Malkin: Correction
Michele Malkin was not "Linked to A Male Stripper" as previous posted. Well, technically speaking, she was, but it was simply a purient juvenile fantasy I thought I had gotten past. ; )
Okay, not really – but it did turn out to be a misunderstanding facilitated by an IHWOAL – Internet Hack Without A Life … real fat individual, I hear. And I doubt they are done. They have been reported to authorities before for worse behavior – including gaining personal information from posters on my site and making threatening phone calls, etc. Most likely they are using Internet cloaking services to conceal their identity and location.
Developing … as they say.
In the interest of fairness, Malkin describes the video Riehl substituted as a “porn video.” I have no reason to doubt that it was merely as Riehl described it in his braggart and now deleted post: a video of someone pretending to be Saddam Hussein in a G-string. My guess: numerous readers complained to Malkin, and she never saw the offensive video.
That hardly makes this juvenile prank defensible. Riehl owes Malkin an apology — big-time. He sent her the link and she used it. Then he got pissed off about it — but she used the link he sent her. Then he substituted an offensive video to punish her, and bragged about it. The fact that he has removed his post boasting about this doesn’t mean it never happened.
Dan: did you think you could just make this go away? Did you think you could pretend it never happened? Did you think you could deep-six your own post, blame it all on a hacker, and hope we’d all believe it?
Throughout the night, I have repeatedly encouraged you to simply apologize to Michelle (she spells her name with two l’s, dumbass). You have repeatedly ignored me, making it clear that you have no intention of setting this right — even insinuating that *I* might be a troll who sent her an e-mail pretending to be you.
It’s too bad that I now have to expose you as a clueless jackass, but I gave you a chance to escape it, and you blew it.
Why anyone would ever link to this guy again, I have no idea.
UPDATE: If anyone is following the details of this, you should know that the e-mail that Riehl claims the “hacker” sent was not an e-mail by someone purporting to be Riehl, as Riehl suggests. Riehl quoted this e-mail in an e-mail to me and cc’d to Malkin, and it was from someone who called himself John Stringer, not Dan Riehl. Stringer was simply telling Malkin that the link to the video was broken. Which it was — because Riehl had broken it, in his pique over the hotlinking that he invited by sending Malkin the direct link.
The fact that Riehl sent Malkin the link to the video directly is clear. Another e-mail that Riehl sent to me is a forwarded version of something he sent her, thanking her for the link. Attached to that e-mail, you can see his original e-mail and her response. It contains a link to his post, and this direct link to the video:
http://www.riehlworldview.com/carnivorous_conservative/files/wnbc_katrina_telethon.wmv
All of this is corroborated by his post I quote above, including the comments he left in that post. I see no evidence of any hacker being responsible for anything.
The Kanye West Video Controversy
And I’m not even talking about the ludicrous content of the video… In this post [*** Post deleted, shown in the extended entry and as a PDF] Dan Riehl notes that Michelle Malkin linked to a video of a male…
Wizbang (d13dcd) — 9/4/2005 @ 12:44 amThe guy blew whatever credibility he had out of the water. Another example of checks and balances in the blogosphere.
A nice courtesy on your part — sticking up for the wronged party.
Randy P.
Randy P. (fd99d0) — 9/4/2005 @ 12:48 amI actually saw the Saddam video when it was linked from Michelle’s site. It wasn’t pornographic, unless you think Tom Cruise in Risky Business is porn. It was just some dude prancing around in tighty whities with Saddam’s head photoshopped on.
It made me feel kinda funny–like when you climb the rope in gym class.
But then I figured out what happened and went to Riehl World View and clicked on the link there, and saw the correct file had been renamed something like “please don’t hotlink”. Does he mean to tell me a hacker did that? A hacker who is so concerned about Dan Riehl’s I-property rights that he breaks in, renames the correct file, and then uploads a retaliatory video file just to embarrass Michelle Malkin?
Weird. That would be a stalker, not just a hacker. But don’t sell me the hacker with a heart of gold.
Or, applying Occam’s razor…it would be Dan Riehl.
See, if this happens to you, Patterico, you should blame it on the guest bloggers. Say that the Angry Clam did it.
See Dubya (793cf4) — 9/4/2005 @ 1:32 amI didn’t say it was pornographic. In fact, I said I assumed it wasn’t.
I don’t think he’s even *trying* to claim that a hacker did the video substitution. I think he’s just hoping nobody will notice that bit — even though that’s the part that he is getting (justly) criticized for.
It goes without saying that the Angry Clam is responsible for all screw-ups on this site — *especially* the ones that go out under the name “Patterico.”
Patterico (756436) — 9/4/2005 @ 1:38 amThat was a hacker impersonating me who accused you of saying the video was pornographic.
I think it was the Angry Clam.
See Dubya (793cf4) — 9/4/2005 @ 1:42 amI posted a comment on Riehl’s site — to the effect that his tactics will convince no one but himself — if he tries really, really hard, pulls the covers up over his head, and keeps repeating his “story” to himself. It was a rather benign post. He deleted it and banned me from further posts.
I hadn’t visited his blog before yesterday, so I’m not familiar with his postings, but this episode has me wondering just how old he is.
Randy P.
Randy P. (fd99d0) — 9/4/2005 @ 1:54 amThat part about the “hacker” compounded the offense to the nth degree. Otherwise, even the redirecting of the link and the bragging could have been shrugged off as just hair pulling between two feuding bloggers. Could it be that he is not basically an a______e — that it is the astrological configuration of the planets or the phase of the moon that caused him to do this?
nk (8214ee) — 9/4/2005 @ 2:29 amDoes this mean that I’m actually lucky that my blog isn’t all that popular (yet), because if’n I put up something that utterly stupid, no one will see it?
Dana R. Pico (1d6514) — 9/4/2005 @ 3:57 amI was the one who hacked Riehl’s site, too, See Dubya.
Angry Clam (a7c6b1) — 9/4/2005 @ 5:59 amDoes this mean that I’m actually lucky that my blog isn’t all that popular (yet), because if’n I put up something that utterly stupid, no one will see it?
No. Because if you work to deliberately piss off Michelle Malkin, people will pay attention no matter how inconsequential you may otherwise be.
Patterico (756436) — 9/4/2005 @ 7:40 amI contacted Dan after I read his post bragging about his handling of the Malkin fiasco. He replied to my email and indicated I was “ridiculous” and “didnt understand the complexities” of what had occurred. Thankfully Patterico had saved the initial post so now we can all understand the “complexities” of this hack. Good work here!
JB (e4a637) — 9/4/2005 @ 8:26 amCripes, since he used me as an example, I ought to speak up: 1) I didn’t solicit a link out of the Huffington Post. I made a graphic that they then used. 2) I emailed them to tell them about it. 3) *then* when I changed the photo, I made it a nice, polite, but teasing note about being neighborly in the blogosphere.
This guy took…a different path.
Krempasky (2b66c9) — 9/4/2005 @ 8:41 amI think he’s just mad because Katrina has driven Aruba off of cable shows. The destruction of a major city makes his Natalie obsession seem kind of pathetic.
craig henry (c2df4e) — 9/4/2005 @ 8:54 amHow juvenile of Riehl. And how classy of Michelle. I admire how Michelle has been able to stay adult given all the abuse she’s taken.
Robin Roberts (56a273) — 9/4/2005 @ 8:56 amDan
Poof!
You are off my list of favorites.
One thing I require is intellectual honesty. Let’s face it: Michele has it, you don’t.
AGS (888c6d) — 9/4/2005 @ 11:25 amDan Riehl seemed ike a great guy when I first started reading his blog…that’s because he deleted comments from people who already knew otherwise and bragged on himself constantly. What I have learned from several months of reading there: he’s 48, never been married, appears very angry, alone, argumentative, mean, vindictive, paranoid, ego maniac, and not a nice person, IMO. He seems to frequently assume the worst about others and their intentions and comments. He has several readers who think he’s wonderful, but they haven’t seen enough of the “real” Dan Riehl yet. So until he finally completely loses it on his blog ( and he’s come close several times already ) or forgets to delete enough of his hateful diatribes before all his readers see them, he’ll have a few fans, but probably not for long. Michelle Malkin is a class act all the way, and 100% better journalist than Dan Riehl could ever hope to be. He can’t even dream of being in her league.
searching (03a3ec) — 9/4/2005 @ 11:31 amOne of the links from a Dan article posted over at Wizbang references his feuds with another site called Scared Monkeys which was also covering the Natalee Holloway tragedy extensively. Dan wrote an article about how unethical it was to post stats taken from chat room visits because they did not contain any original writing by the bloggers themselves, just comments by posters.
If you go on Dan’s site meter and click on the graph for the year, you will see his stats are just about all for the Holloway time period. Further if you click on any normal day, the vast majority of visitors go directly or indirectly to the discussion forum where we posters normally post and not to his “original articles.” Is this not the same as what he accused SM of doing?
What is the difference in going to a chat room or going directly to a discussion forum comprised solely of comments from discussion participants and not the blog owner?
Anna, former Riehl poster.
Anna (d5ea50) — 9/4/2005 @ 12:59 pmI started posting on Dan’s site at the beginning of the Holloway case. There was a nice group of concerned people posting information. In August Dan became increasing petty (fights with other bloggers, search groups, reporters, private investigators, etc) and WEIRD. Finally on August 13th, Dan posted this (I kid you not): “Some close to the investigation, as they say, thinks it was the boys but they did not kill her – she died. A strong assumption is that she died possibly during orgasm from a combination of things – perhaps not eating great then drinkin heavily that night – a drug or drugs could be invovled – without an autopsy that can’t be substantiated”. I no longer post or read the man’s site, I doubt that any of his information or sources are real. The man has problems.
M (c6d5cb) — 9/4/2005 @ 3:49 pmhey am i glad i found you!! mr riehl has done some numbers to me and my friends as well. for some reason though he isn’t pulling YOUR posts when you expose him. first, he has posted countless times under my former moniker and would NOT remove the posts, making it look like i was attacking other posters. then he asked me to form a blog for him to circumvent the “excess noise” at his blog. when i did and it generated traffic AWAY from him, he got MAD.
so what did he do? my blog, which was set up to compliment his, by the way, was password protected. he went into it and started posting under the posters’ names. then cut and pasted stuff and posted it at HIS blog, MAKING IT LOOK LIKE WE WERE PLOTTING AGAINST HIM!!
when me and my posters went over there to defend ourselves, HE BANNED US!! AND REMOVED OUR POSTS.
lastly, I believed he was helping this case,, so like and idiot, I donated money to help him via paypal. Yes, $400!! Yes I am stupid for it. I told him I wanted my money back. Listen to this:
WHEN I WENT TO PAYPAL TO GET IT BACK THEY TOLD ME I IMMEDIATELY NEEDED TO CHANGE MY PASSWORD BECAUSE SOMEONE HAD BEEN ATTEMPTING TO HACK MY ACCOUNT THE NIGHT BEFORE……………THE IP MATCHED MR RIEHL’S EMAIL
YOU THINK IT WAS THE SAME HACKER?????????
THANK YOU FOR SPEAKING OUT. I WOULD LIKE TO TALK TO YOU MORE PRIVATELY
youarecorrectpaterico (f8ce3f) — 9/4/2005 @ 4:24 pmLord. I don’t think I want to get in the middle of something like that.
Look, I think the guy did something slimy and hasn’t been honest about it. I tried to get him to correct it, he refused, and I whacked him as promised. But now I’m done. I’m moving on. Thanks for your post, but I don’t think I want to pursue it further.
Patterico (756436) — 9/4/2005 @ 4:32 pmthank you just the same and thank you for not pulling the post!
youarecorrectpaterico (f8ce3f) — 9/4/2005 @ 4:36 pmFor future reference… if you accidentally give people a direct link to a video, and then later decide that you want them to go to the post, try putting this in the .htaccess file in your site’s root folder:
Oh, and also: don’t be a dishonest a-hole.
Mark J (568cd5) — 9/4/2005 @ 6:01 pmFYI, I updated my post about this:
http://michellemalkin.com/archives/003454.htm
Michelle Malkin (55b07b) — 9/5/2005 @ 8:11 am[…] Recently, Kanye West, who doesn’t read damnum absque injuria or even Snopes, famously embarassed NBC (not to mention Dan “Get” Riehl) by declaring that “George Bush doesn’t care about black people.” Now, just three days later, Presidrent Bush has gone out and proved it. […]
damnum absque injuria » How Kanye West Was Won (38c04c) — 9/5/2005 @ 11:23 amI have a dream… a dream of equality. I hope Kanye West and Diddly Combs and Jesse Jackson all open their hearts and mansions to those in need.
I have a dream:
REUTERS – As previously reported, national relief for victims of Hurricane Katrina is on the way in the form of shelter, food and counseling provided by a Chicago businesswoman.
Oprah Winfrey has dedicated portions of her 1,000,000,000 acre ranch in Montecito, California to house the victims. “I have total compassion for the recent disaster in New Orleans and am prepared to aid the victims with free housing in my sprawling estate.” With several dozen bedrooms and porches available, Ms. Winfrey plans to house the victims for as long as they need in order to give back to the country which has provided her so much. “It’s the least I can do,” Winfrey stated at a recent gathering of Megalomaniacs, INC.
In addition to housing and extended accommodations, free counseling will be provided each afternoon by Dr. Phil. Autographed books will be on sale following each day’s session with a 10% discount available to anyone showing a soggy drivers’ license.
Vermont Neighbor (e9fcbc) — 9/5/2005 @ 3:24 pm~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Well, it’s all of a piece isn’t it?
I first became a regular reader and poster on RWV shortly after the Natalee Holloway dissapearance. I found a community of others who were equally drawn to that story and shared my outrage over how the case was handled.
In the first flush of finding that community, I overlooked the politics and the attitudes of the site’s owner, Dan Riehl. As time went on, however, that became impossible to ignore. I began to notice that Dan was posting on his forums more and more, often late at night, when he would seem to undergo a personality change and actually ridicule and belittle posters on his blog. I also noticed a strange assortment of other posters with odd nicknames, who seemed to echo and support his attcks on other posters. I began to suspect that some of these were actually Dan posting as “alter egos”.
One of the most striking things I noticed about his blog as compared to so many others, was that there was a strong atmosphere of hostility between the people posting. There were always people attacking each other. After a while, a group of us who were like minded about wanting to avoid this constant hostility decided to create a web space where we could assemble and chat without interference. Dan posted his support of this idea, and we invited him as a member of this private space.
After we had created our space and were chatting for a few days, we began to debate the subject of Dan’s increasingly starnge and inconsistent attitudes and point of view. We felt that there was a strong anti Holloway and even anti Natalee bias becoming evident.
This strangeness peaked with his infamous post suggesting that Natalee was not raped and murdered, but died wjhile having an orgasm during consensual group sex. Our outrage was not as private as we believed, and certainly, according to Mr Riehl’s POV, not privileged. The following day, our emotional posts back and forth with each other on our private blog were copied and pasted on RWV, along with comments which basically incited the attacks of other long time posters on his forum. We were reviled and subsequently banned from RWV. In the days which followed, Dan and various “alter egos” blamed nearly everything which happened to snyone’s computer on us, whom he characterized as a group of poisonous hackers out to destroy the computers of innocents on his forum.
Sheesh. Why go on. Suffice it to say that I am not surprised at the mess he has gotten himself into with Michelle Malkin, only surprised that his instinct for self-preservation has so completely deserted him.
iremember (0720bc) — 9/5/2005 @ 5:48 pmThank you for this coverage of the ‘story within the story.’ I actually saw that broadcast as it was happening (but didn’t know who the guy was standing next to Mike Myers); I saw that the Federalist Journal had posted an entry about this… and that the great YoungNationalist.com site had posted the video… But I wasn’t aware that this had been discussed so much in the Blogosphere already, and had even morphed into an intra-Sphere dispute, amongst popular bloggers.
Things happen very fast in the Blogosphere… And this past week, they’ve been going overwhelmingly fast in real life, as well.
Aakash (11a114) — 9/5/2005 @ 5:55 pmI am not a hacker, thank you very much
Somehow, I have been dragged into the middle of a blogosphere soap-opera spat, been called an “internet hack without a life”, “probably fat”, “troublesome troll”, been accused of hacking someone’s weblog and …
killrighty.net (0c6a63) — 9/7/2005 @ 1:13 am[…] and from his post “Michelle Malkin links to male stripper“: As the evening went on I decided to change the name of the file, assuming a Malkin reader would advise her of the then dead link – which I tested. Instead, Malkin changed the name of the file in her link to the new file name and went right back to hot linking the news video a second time. […]
killrighty.net » I am not a hacker, thank you very much (0c6a63) — 9/7/2005 @ 1:40 ammr kilrighty
i have a feeling you are not the one he thinks is the hacker.
there is a poster he used to be really close friends with and they has some sort of falling out. now everytime there is a troll (?) at his site he alleges it is her. I am willing to be he thinks this is her too.
of course, no one believes that but him, but that is another story altogether!
Mommy (c50e62) — 9/13/2005 @ 6:09 pmDan weird? it just took you a while to figure it out; he may have multiple personalities. He is a me, me, me person. I think he went anit-Holloway because his readership fell and he could not handle that form of rejection. He may be on the news one day himself committing one of the crimes he writes about.
randy (f1e424) — 10/16/2005 @ 6:15 am[…] What’s to condemn? Riehl’s post was in response to the same indviduals having done the same to Karl Rove and other Washington operatives who, unlike NYT staff, might actually pose some interest to terrorists. Goose, gander, etc. Besides, it’s not as though the bloggers Greenwald called out are afraid to attack Riehl when they feel it is warranted. For better or for owrse, it’s been known to happen before. (unsurprisingly, Riehl himself, along with Misha, was among the right-wing bloggers sermonizing this weekend about the terrible comments made to Goldstein). […]
damnum absque injuria » Weekend Doucheblogging (38c04c) — 7/15/2006 @ 8:31 am[…] Now, Dan Riehl ain’t no spring chicken himself (nor is he in the running for any sort of IQ-related prize, although he does brave carpal tunnel syndrome and raging hemorrhoids as he tirelessly toils for the 101st Fighting Keyboarders). Let’s be honest, most of us don’t look like we belong on a runway during Fashion Week. Which is why we call people out for being tremendous assholes, unwaivering morons, and general embarrassments to the human race. Not for their position on our personal attractiveness scale. Because it’s not a particularly compelling argument, and it’s too easy to turn it back around. […]
Feministe » Don’t Fuck with the Pink Mafia (2711a8) — 2/5/2007 @ 2:05 pm[…] got pissy, accused her of stealing his … Poof! you are off my list of favorites. One thing I …https://patterico.com/2005/09/04/dan-riehl-tries-to-flush-embarrassing-post-down-the-memory-hole-and-…William the Conqueror grants "ye lands in ye swarde of Macc’s feldMr Git is accused of stealing […]
can you be accused of stealing with no poof (7cebdb) — 6/1/2008 @ 3:47 amsuperregistration furnitureless unled antiseptical unevenly dengue iritic undefaceable
Silvia Villarreal (9cfdd3) — 6/21/2008 @ 2:21 pmCodeism
http://www.turnkeyops.biz