I've participated in and watched from the sidelines plenty of "blog swarms" in my time.

Bloggers on the political side of the blogosphere constantly swarm around issues important and trivial. On the business side, bloggers can get pretty nasty with the flaming, if you can believe it (Business blogging seems so benign, doesn't it?).

There's one currently brewing in, for lack of a better word, the literary side of the blogosphere. Some college kid writing for The Stanford Daily Online tried to be clever with a malicious, un-funny bit of satire titled, A guide to effective terrorism?, written by Christopher Lin, who must be regretting his decision to write it by now.

The site will probably be slow-loading because Melissa Anelli at The Leaky Cauldron (impressive stats) got wind of it, wrote an excellent response, and linked. Here's an excerpt of Child Christopher's piece:

Just when international tension is running at fever pitch, the terrorists should move in with their piece de resistance — kidnap J.K. Rowling and hold her hostage. It’s the perfect climax for this unfortunate series of events. The world has gradually nursed a cancerous addiction to Harry Potter over the last decade, and tension is running high as the entire world awaits the seventh chronicle with bated breath. When the terrorists release footage of Rowling gagged and tied to a chair, surrounded by vaguely Middle Eastern-looking men carrying large firearms, blood will run in the streets as Potter fans accidentally stab each other while waving plastic wands in an attempt to curse the terrorists to death. Meanwhile, soldiers at the front, terrified that they’ll die before Ron gets a chance to pork Hermione, will lay down their arms, and fighting will come to a standstill until Rowling is safely recovered. Angry citizens throughout the United States and the United Kingdom will rally at their capitals, demanding concessions to all terrorist demands.

Pretty offensive stuff (the part about JKR, not Middle Eastern-looking men). Here's an excerpt of Melissa's response (wait for the jump):

It is highly inflammatory, vivid and at times grotesque, and purports to give ideas to terrorists who wish to run effective terror campaigns. Press being (thankfully) free, it does of course have every right to exist and be published - but that precious, sacred right does not exempt anyone from responsibility for what they pen.
…

I was a college journalist, and so I know where Mr. Lin is coming from; it's an exciting thing, to get your first taste of free speech, to test the boundaries with your audience, to be inflammatory because you can be, and not because it contributes something intelligent and worthwhile to the national debate. In our college newsroom we were as arrogant as any other college newsroom - we were right, the world was wrong, and why could no one see that? That time is important - it's an exhilarating and crucial pressure cooker, during which many journalists develop their tone and sense of responsibility.
…

You don't like Harry Potter? Fine, that's your right, and your right to say. You think a Harry Potter love is something to be called cancerous? Fine, that's your right, and your right to say. No one is asking everyone in the world to understand why this series has such an avid following - no one is making apologies for loving it, either. But to use such a love, such an example of fun and goodness in literature, a worldwide community who are rarely anything but understanding and loving, and the figure who means the most to them, as a reason to will violence, is horrendous.

Are HP fans too sensitive? Perhaps. To understand the weight of it all, read Melissa's entire post.

With a high-profile and beloved site like Leaky blogging about the article, I predict the mainstream media will get in on the action by tomorrow morning.