Words can hurt

This just hit me like a kick in the stomach. Wanda Watkin's cousin comments on Big Blue Wave:

I just wanted to thank you for your support....Wanda is my cousin and when my family and I came across CC's blog about her today, I felt sick. I fail to see how crass and hateful comments foster positive dialog and debate about the issues...I only hope that my cousin doesn't come across CC's disgusting rant.

-Monica

Well, Monica. Your cousin may come across that garbage someday, but if she does please let her know that the vast majority of Canadian bloggers support the troops and their families.

Warren Kinsella was outraged too, and said that "just when you think the blogosphere can’t get any more hateful, someone comes along to surprise you" (July 18). However, I believe most bloggers are decent folks. Hate is everywhere; not just on the internet.


Mr. Erl's post, "An End to the Cynical Debate" contains several thoughtful comments (Warning - please don't read anything by 'Ti-guy' or CWTF):

Anonymous said...

As a serving soldier, I find the crass comments of the various lefties like Ti-Guy, cherniak_wtf et al very offensive, seeing as they are coming from individuals who would probably not have the fortitude to join us. But guess what, sunshines - my job is to make sure you can all spout whatever nonsense you like without anyone beating you up or worse. Our job is even to defend the rights of a guy like CC. We can't choose who we defend.

That being said, whether or not you agree with the war, respect for the dead and the grieving is a basic courtesy that should be part and parcel of civilization. To see so many "progressives" act like loud-mouthed, spoiled children makes me wonder whether our progress has reached the downwards slope of the evolutionary curve. In my father's day, people would have shown a modicum of decency, whether they agreed with the politicians or not. Those of you who oppose the war, take your quarrel to the politicians who got us there. Leave our dead and grieving alone.
July 19, 2007 9:08 PM

And Paul makes some great observations 10:14 PM:

I think that my position on some of this is different from most bloggers. Here is my take on the likes of CC:

Blogging is a public forum; in most cases blog posts are published for the general public. In many ways then, blogs are no different than a magazine or newspaper as their words are made available to an unlimited audience. CC denigrated a real person, naming her in print, yet he himself remains anonymous. Not only is this cowardly, but it steps well outside normally expected bounds of free speech. Let me explain.

Imagine if CC's rhetoric and profanity were published openly under his real identity or by a magazine ... there would and could be court action and other forms of counter action, all legal, all based on the rights and freedom of a civil democratic society and laws that govern it.

The only thing, as far as I see it, is that blogging gives people anonymity, and therefore they can behave in ways they never would outside the cyber community. They avoid the repercussions of their words ... repercussions both legal and personal.

So are they really practicing the right of free speech ... they are faceless digital entities who are not even citizens of any country until they have location, name, and number ... they aren’t marching, protesting, singing, or doing anything in the normal sense of things, and I'm not sure that CC, who is no more than a digital entity, has any rights of free speech as a pixel...

Read the whole thing. Paul expands on his thoughts here. And Kate provides the reason why we shouldn't feed the trolls.

Now I'm going to follow my own advice and ignore that particular 'faceless digital entity' and a few others.

* * * *

Final Update: I would just like to address some crazy fabrication out there that I suggested a blogburst. Nothing could be further from the truth, although it is possible that some scatter-brained dipsticks misread my comment here at 7:40 am where I questioned Mr. Erl's call to arms for 'Bloggers of Canada' to all stand together and demand an apology. My comment was:

"As you can see from the link that Mr. Erl provided, I have been a victim of CC's little smear campaigns as well, although this one aimed at Mrs. Watkins is beyond the pale.

The remarks in this post aimed at a woman who lost her son in Afghanistan are just sick. I just wonder if a blogburst against his post might feed his warped little ego though."

So if you read that carefully, you can see that I am questioning the wisdom of a blogburst as an effective way to handle the situation. Some people have taken the whole thing out of context to try to prove... I'm not sure what?

If you're going to go to the bother of starting a flame-war folks, at least get your facts straight.

Pathetic.