Second, I did want to give credit where credit is desserved, ecspecially after lampooning abyss2hope in the last entry. Not all people who have taken sides in this debate are complete and utter wankers when it comes to opinions and interpretations they disagree with. One site justice4twosisters, despite the name, has been very open and evenhanded about providing news links to the case and allowing commentary about it. This is despite the fact that some of us there are posting opinions contrary to what the blogger believes as to what happened at Duke.
That's a level of integrity that's not often found on the blogosphere in general, mostly because censorship is sooo easy. Delete a comment and it's as if it never existed at all. Someone posts some information that rebuts your point of view? Click delete and it's gone. Instead you've got an echo chamber where you're preaching to the converted and lapping up the praise. This tendancy is ecspecially great when the case is contraversial and when the blogger has staked out a position right from the beginning.
On March 14, 2006 two African-American women were hired to dance at a party by the Duke University Men's Lacrosse team. One of these African-American women was allegedly raped,sodomized, and racially terrorized by 3 white members of the Duke University Men's Lacrosse team. This site serves as a watchdog, information hub, and activism vehicle to ensure this young woman receives the justice she deserves. (It is our position both women were victims of a hate crime.)
I don't agree with that interpretation and even less now that more information seems to be coming out. That aside though, you have to give credit where credit is due even when (maybe ecspecially when) you disagree with someone's opinion. So a big thumbs up to you, song4assata.