www.Usenet.com
www.Usenet.com
| <-- __Chronological__ --> | <-- __Thread__ --> |
I too went to the site and tried to post some even handed lets-try-to-see-what-the-courts-say stuff; most of it was deleted.
So I posted what I really felt - the site is a whorehouse pandering to emotional cripples who can't see any difference between accusation and conviction. I suspect that posting won't last long either.
i'm sure some of you have seen this site, it's basically a "let's rally behind the accuser" type site that someone put up:
www.webelieveher.com
i should have known better, but i actually took the time to post an even-handed, "why don't we wait until we have all the facts in this case before we go around calling anyone a 'liar,' 'rapist,' or 'victim'" entry in their public forum. within a matter of hours, it was deleted--only blind support of the 'victim' is welcome, thank you very much.
so i posted a couple of totally ridiculous, unbelievably biased, over-the-top rants -- this time slanted to favor the accuser -- just to see if they'd pass muster. well, golly gee whiz, will you look at that? those are apparently just fine. as long as you agree with the basic premise that kobe is guilty and the accuser is a "victim," lies, wishes of violence, prejudice, and complete bias are just fine.
just to clarify--i have no way of knowing at this point if kobe is guilty. we just don't have enough information at this point to make a decision with certainty. and i feel that people outside the case who go around claiming 100% certainty that he's guilty or she's lying are full of crap.
so here's my open letter to the site's editor:
------------------
Hello Miriam,
I wanted to comment on the irony of you editing my post in the forum of webelieveher.com.
Early this week, after discovering your site, I took a moment to post a comment in your forum. Basically something along the lines of "I am skeptical of both the accuser and the accused in this case because we do not have enough information at this point to corroborate either of their stories beyond doubt. I'm sorry, but I find that any site that assumes that she is telling the truth to be just as disgusting as a site that assumes she is lying. Please understand, I believe that she is entitled to a basic level of support (she is a human being and deserves respect), but referring to her as a "victim" is an assumption that the accused is guilty of an as yet unproven crime."
Well, this post was deleted within a day, I suppose because it wasn't blindly "supportive" enough of the accuser. Whatever.
So just for kicks, I thought I'd test your editorial standards. Would you let a post suggesting that "it's about time somebody did the right thing and CASTRATED these woman-hating, abusive rapists like Kobe Bryant" stay up? Yep. It's still there several days later.
How about one that uses made up statistics like "Studies have shown that in 98 percent of these cases the man is guilty! And I think in the other 2 percent he's probably guilty too! "? Check. Still there a couple days later.
And how about false, irrational man-hating statements like "Women simply DO NOT lie about things like this. Studies have shown that women CAN be relied upon to tell the truth while MEN cannot be believed." Apparently, this is condoned by the site as it too has remained in place for several days.
I have to give you props, you *did* edit some of the content of my posts. Apparently the lines "It's yet another example of how the system favors people of color over whites. Just look at OJ--he was guilty! And if he was guilty, then you KNOW Kobe Bryant is guilty! Studies prove this!" were just too incendiary for a forum with such high standards, and those lines were erased from one of my posts.
Hey, it's your right to put whatever you want on your site. Edit, delete, and editorialize to your heart's content. Just don't fool yourself into thinking you're any better than the "Katelyn's a slut!" websites out there--you're just the other side of the same coin.
| <-- __Chronological__ --> | <-- __Thread__ --> |
