without a bang
BrettIt seems that Tampa Bay’s most controversial blogger has given it up. Right Wing Howler, the conservative bastion created by Vilmar, is no more. And Vilmar himself isn’t coming back to blogging, either.
It seems that the decision was in the works for a while, but was pretty much made final for him when his account was suspended by his hosting provider. Normally, Vilmar fights tooth and nail for his speech rights, but the fight apparently isn’t in him for this.
Personally, I always wondered how someone so completely angry as Vilmar (and he was angry) could keep up that kind of vitriol day after day - whether it was intentional or not. I would have died of an aneurysm long before. But day after day, he posted his opinions. And the man always had an opinion. Some loved him, some hated him. But no matter how you feel about the guy, he was never, ever milquetoast - and how many bloggers around here can say that?
Loading ...
December 18th, 2006 at 10:33 am
Lucky me. They take a screen shot after I had already posted a comment. IMAO is obvious satire. As I said in the comment, “almost got me”.
I hate to do this, but…
Seeing as Vilmar simply added his opinion to an article. And that’s all. I think we should execute all morons, but I don’t go through with it.
If he had said “Let’s kill the towel head kids. And by the way, there’s a Muslim day care at 123 Main Street.” then maybe there’s something there.
Free speech, even if it is unsettling or uncomfortable, is protected. As was said somewhere else around this here blog-o-sphere, where is the incite to violence?
December 18th, 2006 at 10:34 am
What I meant to type… but didn’t because I’m a moron:
“Seeing as Vilmar simply added his opinion to an article. And that’s all. His free speech should be protected. (then the bit about the morons)”
December 18th, 2006 at 12:17 pm
Funny about the free speech thing…….it’s not really protected fully. If Vilmar had said the same thing about the president, I guarantee there would be some repurcussions for him, close surveillance if nothing else.
December 18th, 2006 at 12:33 pm
Up until now, I thought that Vilmar was a brilliant satirist. I didn’t think he was actually serious. I’m kind of freaked out to discover this.
December 18th, 2006 at 1:15 pm
Oh, Tim. I so agree with Permalink. The guy was mad at everyone and everything. Maybe he really quit to start his own jihad.
December 18th, 2006 at 1:19 pm
Kill The President….
Waiting for the USSS to show up. I figure I’ll be waiting a while. Like I said, if he had been more specific, I think he’d have trouble. But given what he actually wrote, AND given that the quoted post was OBVIOUS satire he shouldn’t have had any problems.
His opinion on the subject was reprehensible. But we have to defend all forms of free speech if we want to make sure that we will still be able to voice our particular view of the world.
December 18th, 2006 at 2:16 pm
Hello! This is NOT a free speech issue AT ALL!!
It is the result of actions stemming from a private agreement - that between Vilmar and his hosting service, wherein, by posting, Vilmar agreed to be subject to the terms and conditions of the service, one of which was that the service would remove what they found offensive and do so at their discretion.
Blogging is absolutely protected by free speech. You can blog all day, everyday, and you can blog whatever you like, but assuming that there will be no consequences whatsoever within or amongst all relationships or contracts simply *because* you are exercising your right to speak freely is self-righteous, short-sighted and shows a very limited understanding of what free speech actually protects.
Which is to say, not assh*les. Suck it, Vilmar! Suck it hard!
December 18th, 2006 at 8:05 pm
Actually, if it was just a TOS violation, he would have been canned weeks ago. But it was only until the CAIR raised an issue with his hosting provider that they took any action.
Agreed that Vilmar is a jerk-off. He’s so far out of touch with reality that it (used to) make for good entertainment.
But back to the issue at hand. I hate so much doing this because he’s such a tool…
Most of us have glanced at Vilmar’s “stuff” more times that we’d like to admit. Which means we all know he’s probably violated his hosting provider’s TOS more than once. If the site was still up we could go back through his archives and find offending material. And that also means that he’s probably been reported more than once. I work in hosting. I know that offended parties will report anything they feel is even in the slightest bit, well, offending.
I guess it’s just too easy to defend the “good” suppressed speech. And many of us don’t want to consider that terrible, hateful speech also deserves our defense.
December 19th, 2006 at 9:49 am
I admit, you’re right, Jeff. I struggle with the idea that hatred is considered free speech, but there you are.
I had to re-review a favorite from YouTube to remind myself of what you just reminded us all. It’s Alan Shore from Boston Legal, defending the First Amendment.
December 19th, 2006 at 10:04 am
Basically, the hosting service decided that his words were offensive enough to other people that they didn’t want to host them, so they didn’t.
As much as people love to get up in arms about freedom of expression, those rights are penumbral, which means they are not specifically guaranteed in letter, and, as with all rights and privileges, have specific intentions that must be fulfilled if you want to test them.
We agree - this dude is an idiot assh*le. He has a right to say whatever he wants. *But* not if he contracts away those rights. And he did.
Getting away with violations in the past doesn’t nullify them or void the hosting service of the ability to exercise their contractual right to cancellation later.
We want people to have absolute freedom of expression, but there’s no perfect system and issues can only be decided on their own merits, which, in this case, is what happened.
December 19th, 2006 at 10:22 am
They were so stupid to kick you out of law school, Rach. You cut straight to the point.
December 19th, 2006 at 11:09 am
The fun part is that some anti-Howlers are defending his right to free speech, while Vilmar himself begs people to not vilify HostGator for what happened. He knows full well that he agreed to abide by their rules, he probably understands that HostGator can’t afford any bad press in a business with endless competition; I’m also quite sure his bigotry has only grown more vicious after this, but there’s not a whole lot we can do about that.
December 19th, 2006 at 4:45 pm
Who cares, he’s gone. Good riddance.
I reserve the right not to defend him.
t…
December 19th, 2006 at 6:27 pm
Hey, your local defender of free speech et al here…
I, um, never read a scrap of Vilmar’s blog. Why would I? Maybe if I needed a blood pressure boost?
People love to read things they hate. I don’t know why. But then they get all upset by them and offended and decide they have to go cry to mommy or–much more likely–to their lawyer to justify their own point of view. That’s all this is about, is the Muslim-American whatever-they-call-themselves organization wanting to justify their opinions through the legal system. So they called up the hosting provider and made a threat. And that threat was enough for the provider to pull the plug. Why? Because although I bet they got lots of complaints about the ranting right-wing howler, they hadn’t yet got one that was any more literate or reasonable than the howler himself, or that threatened to sue. The reason why TOS always say that the right is reserved to take action against you is at the sole discretion of the provider is because they know they stand a better chance of getting sued for shutting you down for speaking your mind than for responding to every complaint about your offensive content. But when somebody threatens the provider directly with legal action, they have the TOS to hide behind.
But anyway, my question is, why read the damn thing at all? If you simply have to slow down to look at the horrible accident on the side of road, don’t blame the accident victims if you see something unpleasant. Did Vilmar really have such power in the community that he could encourage violence? Didn’t the group that threatened to sue really just make him out to be much, much more important than he really was? I don’t know, but the whole thing seems like a big fat waste of time.