[Dean's World] Ali Eteraz: Why Didn't JihadWatch Cite Me?

[notify at powerblogs.com]

Posted by Ali Eteraz:
Why Didn't JihadWatch Cite Me?
http://www.deanesmay.com/posts/1161419923.shtml


   So, if you note, I made the [1]posting about the Iranian man who
   witnessed his mother stoned to death at 12:18 pm EST. I actually found
   the letter about an hour before that and it took me a while to put it
   up. I cited where I found the letter and then added some of my own
   commentary, as well as the commentary of the Iranian activist to whom
   the website belongs. I then made a [2]posting on my Kos diary at 11:39
   AM PST.

   Now if you go on Jihad Watch at [3]4:45 PM, you see the same letter
   making an appearance. It is linked to the same website that I linked
   to. Except there is no reference to Eteraz, nor a link to my post, nor
   even a hat-tip.

   Instead, one is led to believe that JihadWatch's reader just happened
   to find this letter today -- the same day that I made a posting about
   it in two different places.

   LGF then [4]cited to JihadWatch at 6:02 PM PST.

   I find this weird. I find it impossible to believe that without me
   finding this letter, anyone else would have seen it. Largely because
   the Iranian activist [5]posted the letter on August 19th, 2006. Am I
   to believe that Readers James at JihadWatch finding this letter on the
   same date as me, within a few hours as me, is a coincidence? I don't
   think it is. I think there is an unscrupulous reader at Jihad Watch.

   The other reason I find it particularly troubling is that in my post
   about the letter I added a whole section about how the Iranian
   activist to whom the website belongs to, patently opposes groups that
   favor destabilizing the Iranian Government. I even cited to her
   article in another magazine. These caveats, however, are not present
   in the JihadWatch post, which is probably well for them, because we
   know what JihadWatch think of any Muslim government. What's also
   missing is the discussion about my blog activism on behalf of women to
   be stoned to death in Iran. 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.

   I don't care for a link from JihadWatch or LGF. 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.

   I can easily laugh this off in a huff. In fact, I am writing this post
   more out of the absurdity of it than the calumny of it. After all,
   JihadWatch readers have given me great laughs in the past, especially
   [6]with their amazing facility with sarcasm.

References

   1. http://eteraz.wordpress.com/2006/10/20/letter-from-a-man-whose-mom-was-stoned/
   2. http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/10/20/143952/79
   3. http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/013680.php
   4. http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=23042_The_Human_Cost_of_Sharia&only
   5. http://www.mehrangizkar.com/english/azadeh/archive/000221.html
   6. http://eteraz.wordpress.com/2006/05/19/some-jihadwatch-hilarity/