Andrew Breitbart Targets Charles Johnson in Turner Diaries Smear

Shocking news: it appears that Andrew Breitbart continues to be dishonest. Charles Johnson writes:

At one of the blogs dedicated to relentlessly stalking and libeling LGF users and me, [LGF user] Frank discovered that one of the administrators, a vile creature who calls himself “Rodan” (real name: Rick Martinez), had posted a threatening video addressed to me — a video that openly praised Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet, and promoted the ugly white supremacist novel “The Turner Diaries” with images of the Oklahoma City bombing.

… This is where it gets interesting, because Andrew Breitbart and his cohort Dana Loesch have been frequently linking to this stalker blog… when they want to attack me on Twitter.

…So, in a monumentally mendacious smear, [the stalker blog*] went to my custom Amazon store, used the form at the top left of the page to search for “turner diaries,” and promptly posted the search results page all over Twitter and their blogs, claiming that I was deliberately selling this book in my personal Amazon store.

Breitbart followed up with enthusiaism, writing on Twitter:

Charles Johnson of Little Green Footballs is PROFITING from the racist Turner Diaries? How low can the freak go!?

This is an insult to the intelligence: Johnson’s Amazon store brings up any book which is available through Amazon – including Breitbart’s own literary endeavours. Also, Johnson has made it very clear that  he despises The Turner Diaries, so the implied suggestion that the book’s availability somehow reveals some sort of dark truth about him makes no sense.

Of course, this is just a minor incident in Breitbart’s stellar career as a smear-monger, although it’s worth noting as further evidence of why Breitbart is a ludicrous figure who ought to shunned by anyone who cares about honesty and decency in public life. Johnson seems to be a lightning rod for this kind of thing: I recently noted Robert Spencer’s claim that Johnson seeks to justify honour killings.

As is widely known, Breibart, Spencer, and Geller have a particular hatred for Johnson because he used to be a political ally. A few years ago, Little Green Footballs took the same sort of approach as can be found on Jihad Watch: the logo, I recall, was a terrified hippy jumping into the arms of a burka-clad woman at the sight of a green football, and the site hosted a good deal of crude anti-Muslim sentiment among the commentators. Johnson’s targets included the stupidity of Trutherism and elements on the anti-war left that were either pro-Islamist or complacent about the problem, but there was also much that I considered objectionable or unfair.

By his own account, Johnson “left … no, ran away from the right”, and he cites reasons such as the rise of the Christian right in the Republican Party and the willingness of elements of the “counter-jihad” crowd to work with unsavoury groups in Europe. While he sees “the right” as having become more excessive, it’s also apparent that he now has a greater respect for progressive discussion and activism.

Pamela Geller recently wrote to him on Twitter:

On your belly, rotten traitor. Everybody despises you – left and right 

This is an irrelevant jibe – Johnson is running a blog on his own terms, not seeking a position in a political movement. From what I’ve seen of his site over the past couple of years, he writes in good faith, linking to interesting stories and calling things as he sees them. I don’t always agree with his analyses, but he doesn’t pander and he doesn’t seek to distort or manipulate. Whether he ought to be more self-critical about what his blog used to be like is a matter for him (although some former targets may want to press the point), but the blog is today a useful resource. That’s really all that matters.

*Amended for clarity. As seen in the comment below, the author of the “stalker blog” is anxious that we should know that he (or she), rather than Breitbart, is the originator of the smear, which Breitbart has merely promoted and disseminated. Credit where credit is due, as they say. [UPDATE: The author of the first comment below has informed me that, despite giving the “stalker blog” as his url, he is not the author of it. Therefore the previous should read “a fan of the ‘stalker blog'[… etc]”.

UPDATE: The “stalker blog” in question has now shockingly revealed… that Johnson and I have been critical of each other in the past. Back in 2004 I wrote a blog entry about the excessive comments then on the LGF website, and my view that Johnson’s failure to rebuke their authors reflected badly on him. Johnson, noticing this in 2009 (around the time of this), complained on his own site that this was a “smear tactic”.

Naturally, I’m flattered that the past opinions of two bloggers about each other are apparently of sufficient interest to be deemed worth exhibiting several years later. However, I personally remain more concerned to highlight an egregious smear by a national media figure who is a serious player in a political movement.