March 4th, 2005
Bill O’Reilly’s clownposse attack Jim Gilliam
Check this link to Jim Gilliam’s site to see how the henchpeople of Bill O’Reilly, the constantly lying newscaster, attacks Jim, as he’s posted a link on his blog that leads to a News Hounds link, which in turn leads to a column by Bill O’Reilly.
The problem is that a legal representative of O’Reilly now tries to say it’s illegal for Jim to post a link to web page, which in turn contains a link to one of O’Reilly’s columns. This is ludicrous, yet fully in line with how O’Reilly and his administration usually behaves. There are over 175 entries on his foul behaviour recorded here also, courtesy of Media Matters.
I’m sure O’Reilly et al will lose, yet this type of battle is so important just because it’s considered to be an easy match. Should O’Reilly win (even though the odds are not at all in his favor), his league of demons will almost certainly beseech the internet, looking for linkers to drag to court. Imagine me being sued by them, acting all behemoth. I love the Bill Hicks-ish term “shriek with laughter”, and that’s exactly what I’d do – if Noam Chomsky would be a witness on my side. Oh, this is me dreaming of great things, but just imagine O’Reilly’s team of tards trying to match the intelligence of Chomsky. This almost inspires me to write a moronic query letter and send it you-know-where.
note: the strike-throughs are made due to my error, see Jim’s comment to this post for a clearer explanation.
March 5th, 2005 at 04:01
Hey Niklas… the situation is confusing (and absurd), but a little different than you mention here.
They want me to take down the actual link to O’Reilly’s column on the News Hounds blog, not the link on my site to the News Hound blog. I operate the technical aspects of their blog (not the content), which, presumably, is why they’ve directed the request toward me. I’ve refused to do it, and the News Hounds have also refused to remove it.
March 5th, 2005 at 09:30
Thanks, Jim! The situation would indeed be less confusing had I not messed up the facts. Thanks for noting this, and for kicking against the pricks. With a (hopefully great) attorney (and the law) on your side you should win.