[Guest post by Aaron Worthing; if you have tips, please send them here.]
Clip this away, folks, for this will prove once and for all that Johnson is actually a liar.
Just today The Other McCain noted how easy it is to ignore Charles Johnson. But since Patterico stirred things up, I came across this astonishing item from Johnson.
Apparently he has written at least one piece in the UK’s Guardian about the “haters” in America like Pam Geller. Yeah, you read that right, the Guardian, which he used to refer to as the al Guardian (although to his credit he owns up to that comment). So a few commenters with long memories brought up Johnson’s own use of the term “pancake” when mocking the death of Rachel Corrie. Bear in mind, back in the day he used to make jokes like that all the time. When I made some kind of joke about memorializing her with a breakfast at the International House of Pancakes, I was ripping off borrowing Johnson’s jokes. So a few people brought up those kinds of comments. For instance:
Charles used to refer to Rachel Corrie, a pro-Palestinian “activist” who was crushed by a bulldozer, as “Saint Pancake.” Google for “rachel corrie pancake breakfast.” For him to try to characterize the former tone of his site as the result of too-loose moderation is simply disingenuous.
But Johnson selectively chooses to respond only to Joey100’s comment:
Some of the rhetoric – al Guardian, St. Pancake – has been brought up in this thread to embarass CJ. Maybe he should speak to that.
To which Johnson responded:
First, about the term “St. Pancake” — the simple fact is that I never used this term at LGF, and in fact I have told people many times, when I saw them using it, that I didn’t like it. I even warned some people that continuing to use it would get their accounts blocked. This is a case in which the smear is absolutely, 100% due to the very people you see posting hateful comments directed me in this thread.
Which was appallingly deceptive. I didn’t personally remember the man ever saying those exact words, but to deny one insult and pretend he made no other Rachel Corrie/pancake references was just bull. It was pulling a Bill Clinton, making a statement so deceptive it is in practicality a lie. He apparently has vigorously scrubbed his site of these jokes that used to come all the time, but, um, he missed a spot:
(Note: the highlighting effect there is the result of me selecting words to copy and forgetting to turn that off when I made the screencap.)
Notice the wording: “Indymedia unwittingly imitates Little Green Footballs: Rachel Corrie Pancake Breakfast” (emphasis added). Now how could they be imitating anything, if LGF had never made Rachel Corrie “pancake” jokes in the first place? Johnson was challenged on this point and he responds:
I made an ironic reference to the use of the term by LGF readers. I didn’t use it myself.
Mmm, yeah, except he didn’t say “our readers.” He said “Little Green Footballs.” And further in the past when other bloggers tried to hold the behavior of his commenters against him, he regularly denied responsibility for his commenters—he claimed he was not responsible for what they say. To this day his site contains this disclaimer:
Comments are open and unmoderated, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Little Green Footballs.
So which is it, Chuckie boy? But it gets even worse. Let’s remember that he considered the phrase to be so offensive that he claimed that he threatened to ban accounts of people who used that term when he was aware of them. Oh, except he didn’t. For years there was a commenter on his site that went by the handle “St. Pancake.” And Johnson even gave him a hat tip in this post (don’t bother deleting, Chuckie, we have the screen shot). So the claim that he deleted that term was a lie.
But it gets even worse. The Diary of Daedalus catches an example of Johnson apparently scrubbing a comment where he did actually personally use that term and not in reference to a commenter. If you go to this thread (and its still there, as of now) you will see a third comment that was deleted. With a little digging, Daedalus showed that it was a comment that Charles had made. And what, pray tell, did that comment say? Well, look down the thread. Charles scrubbed his comment but he failed to scrub the comments of others quoting his comment. “NC” coyly suggested something was missing from the original post, meaning a famous photo of Corrie burning a (bad) drawing of a United States flag in the first comment in this thread. Johnson apparently responded to him, quoted in the sixth comment as follows:
Well, since this one doesn’t mention Saint Pancake, I didn’t think it necessary to include her photo this time.
And incidentally, in the comments he eventually announces that he changed his mind and thus the current version of the post includes the picture. So let’s review. He made similar jokes all the time. He allowed commenters to make that joke, including allowing a person to register and comment on his site with that joke as his handle. And he himself made it.
And in line with Patterico’s “stupid or lying” query in the last post, no, this can’t be credited as amnesia. The fact he deleted an otherwise innocuous comment including the term means that he intentionally scrubbed it from his site to cover the evidence. You lied, Chucky.
Oh and for extra hypocrisy we have two items. Here we have Charles Johnson denouncing Sarah Palin’s “extreme and violent rhetoric” and here is Johnson denouncing Palin for “scrubbing” her facebook page by deleting comments she didn’t like.
Months ago, I called Johnson out for his dishonesty in dealing with Obama’s bow to the King of Saudi Arabia. For this he called me a liar. Hopefully this will clear up who exactly can be trusted in this dispute.
But in the interest of fairness, a correction is needed. As IMAO points out, I was wrong to say that Obama bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia. The video clearly shows that the President bent his knee, so technically that was a curtsy.
[Posted and authored by Aaron Worthing.]
Return to main page.