JihadWatch turning good works into evil

Marisol, who presumably posts when Spencer is not around, blogged about a Muslim women’s shelter in Tulsa that she titled, Shelter helps abused women in Kabul? No. In Riyadh? No. Where? In Tulsa.

You can’t win with these Islamophobes. First they complain about the domestic violence in the Muslim world and how women have no recourse to shelters, and then they complain about the existence of such shelters arguing that they are indicative of inherent misogyny and violence in Islam and amongst Muslim males. Continue reading

Silencing Spencer: Taqiyya and Kitman are part of Judeo-Christian Belief

What follows is a refutation of “Lying: It’s wrong–except when it isn’t”, found in Chapter 6 (“Islamic Law: Lie, Steal, and Kill) of Robert Spencer’s book, The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades).

Part of the grandiose anti-Muslim conspiracy theory espoused by Islamophobes today includes the idea that Muslims are, in the words of Robert Spencer, involved in “large scale deception campaigns today.” [1] Spencer dedicates chapter 6 of his book The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) to convince his readers that Islamic law allows for and even encourages lying “if it fosters the growth of Islam.” [2] In this manner, moderate Muslim-Americans are cast away as “stealth jihadists”, who are simply using deception to further their belligerent faith.  Any Muslim who says otherwise is accused of lying.  When moderate Muslims express their peaceful views, these are dismissed as “deception campaigns.”  On the other hand, when extremist and fundamentalist Muslims express their belligerent views, these are accepted as being “real Islam.”

Is Lying Acceptable in Certain Circumstances?

Continue reading

Another case of Spenceritis: “Cleric’s view represents all of Islam”

“Acclaimed scholar” on Islam (chuckle…chuckle), Robert Spencer is at it again using his pseudo-scholarly approach when it comes to Islam. In a recent post on his website, Robert Spencer wrote:

Muhammad Al-Arifi is an Islamic cleric. He has devoted his life to studying the Qur’an and Islam. And somehow he has gotten the crazy idea that the Qur’an says that Muslims should fight against unbelievers, subjugate them, and make them pay the jizya. Now, whenever non-Muslims point this out, they’re called bigoted, hateful, and ignorant of Islam. So is Muhammad Al-Arifi a self-hating Muslim who Misunderstands Islam and just narrowly avoided flunking out of his seminary? Or could it be that the “bigotry,” “hate” and “ignorance” charges are just smokescreens designed to bamboozle the unwary into not realizing that the truth is being told?

He then goes on to quote this heretofore unknown Muslim cleric’s views on “killing the infidels” and projects them upon all of Islam. It is exactly as Ahmed Rehab in his piece about Spencer said:

The Set Up: Spencer and his associates scour the web for the most sensational and extreme expressions within the Muslim world. They may be related to a certain extremist interpretation of Islam, or may not even have anything to do with Islam altogether, but that won’t matter, so long as the perpetrator is a Muslim, it will do.

The Performance: Spencer then supplants his own commentary on the story which he meticulously crafts with the ultimate goal of convincing his readers that the bizarre incident in question is representative of the faith of Islam and Muslims at large. This subtle leap of faith that he hopes no one notices is the key to his magic act.

The Prestige: He can then rightly claim, with the innocence of a schoolboy, that he does not make up the material he produces, that he is merely quoting things as is, hoping no one notices that he uses the aberrant to define the normative.

So, just because this one cleric believes that Muslims should “fight the unbelievers,” that is the truth, and all the evidence in Islam to the contrary is just a “smokescreen.” Continue reading

Robert Spencer Calls “nuke the Muslims” Crazy Lady a Heroine

What does the great “scholar” Robert Spencer call a Muslim leader who runs pro-democracy leadership programs among other civic projects to help integrate young Muslims?

An “Islamic Supremacist.

And what does he call an ex-Muslim, now anti-Muslim bigot who wants to “nuke the Muslims” and “crush Islam.”

A “heroine.

Yet another exhibit A example of Spencer’s “scholarly” ways.

In a JihadWatch post by the title “Dialogue: Daisy Khan, Islamic supremacist mega-mosque imam’s wife, lies about and defames ex-Muslim heroine Wafa Sultan,” Spencer shows his true colors. For him, an effective Muslim leader who serves her community and country is a supremacist, and one that leaves her faith and turns against it in full venom is a heroine.

That sums up his most carnal desire: that all Muslims stop being relevant, stop being effective, and for that matter, stop being Muslim – and instead, turn against their own faith and people in a rage of blind hatred – that’s the only way you could get a “good, heroic” Muslim in his eyes.

Spencer’s heroine, Wafa Sultan, previously stated the following at a synagogue speech:

“I believe King Abdullah can change Islam overnight, but you need to put pressure on him to do it, and the same kind of pressure you put on Japan, you might need it at that moment someone from the audience interjects and asks, “atom bombs?” Wafa Sultan replies, “Yes. At some point the West will need to do it.” This statement is quite revealing considering how in 2007, at a right-wing David Horowitz funded conference called “Restoration Weekend,” Wafa Sultan said, “I will change 1.3 billion Muslims…they have to realize they have only two choices: to change or to be crushed.”

Care to explain your support for a pro-genocide wacko, O’ “Scholar”? Will you now recant your support for Stalin Sultan? Will the mysterious Hugh Fitzgerald? Will your boss, David Horowitz?

Is Robert Spencer a Scholar? On Spencer’s Credentials and Methodology

Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting (FAIR) ranked Robert Spencer as the second leading Islamophobe in the country, losing out the number one position to his boss and financier David Horowitz.  Former Nixon advisor Robert Crane calls out Spencer as “the principal leader…in the new academic field of Islam-bashing.”  Even though Horowitz can be credited with funding the modern day online Crusade against Islam, it is Robert Spencer who fights on the online battlefield, attacking his Muslim foes and their liberal dhimmi allies.  In order to bolster his credibility, Spencer and his allies not only claim that he is a scholar, but his own website touts him as “the acclaimed scholar of Islam”.  Because these words are boldly emblazoned on his own site, we can only assume that he takes such claims seriously.  It is thus fair game to call him to task for this.

His claims notwithstanding, Robert Spencer simply does not possess any scholarly credentials.  To be seriously considered a scholar in the academic world in this day and age, one must at minimum possess some rudimentary academic education in the field in which one is claiming scholarship. In order to be considered a scholar, one must have published numerous peer-reviewed articles in reputable journals, the articles being subjected to rigorous critique by established authorities before being accepted.  First year students in Ph.D. programs have published far more of such articles than Robert Spencer ever has.  There is good reason for that: Spencer has published no such articles, contenting  himself with reproducing work in non-academic and populist publications.  Spencer does not even possess a Master’s Degree in anything related to Islam, let alone a Ph.D. and post-doctoral fellowship.  Spencer does have in M.A. in the field of early Christian studies; does that make him a scholar of Christianity?  If not, then why is he considered a scholar of Islam without even an M.A. in Islamic studies? Continue reading

Spencer Contradicts SIOA Board Member John “Genocidal” Jay

Another instance of Robert Spencer stepping into a pool of lies, something that is as commonplace these days as Pamela Geller “hating Muslims on her blog and then claiming she loves Muslims on TV.”

This time it is in relation to a post, originally from Daisy Cutter at the DailyKos who exposed John Jay, founding member of FDI and a board member of SIOA for his genocidal predilections. Loonwatch posted the piece on its site and after that it was in the news with various Dutch websites (Krapuul foremost) and papers picking up on it, as well as the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Spencer claims John Jay has no role in FDI or SIOA, and that he doesn’t advocate “carte blanche” murder of all liberals and Muslims. Thanks Spencer, at least his advocacy isn’t “carte blanche.” Is that supposed to make us feel better?

Jay is, contrary to the hysterical claims that are circulating now, not a founder or co-founder of SIOA. He has no role in the running of the organization. And he does not advocate carte blanche killing of one’s liberal relatives, nor of Muslims.

Yet he contradicts himself in the very same post,

Hamas-linked CAIR and dhimmi Leftist jihad-enablers such as the Daily Kos, longtime CAIR tool Charles Johnson of Little Green Footballs, and the Southern Poverty Law Center have been in a tizzy the last few days over some rather outlandish misrepresentations of some writings by John Jay, a member of the SIOA Board.


Spencer says John Jay is on the Board and then wants us to believe that he has nothing to do with the organization. Strange isn’t it?

John Jay wrote this before Spencer’s most recent blog,

i was not  and am not either a founder or a co-founder of s.i.o.a., that sort of thing being entirely beyond my reach. and i am not an officer or employee or even a member of s.i.o.a, though i am an enthusiastic proponent and supporter of its actions and goals. i consider pamela geller, founder and executive director, and, robert spencer, co-founder and associate director my mentors and champions of the anti-jihad movement, and so, therefore, it is with regret that i say i have no association in running s.i.o.a.

See the contradiction? Spencer admits Jay is a board member where as Jay scrambles to try to clear SIOA of any affiliations to him and his genocidal rantings.

Even more proof of John Jay’s involvement is the document that has John Jay’s signature on it along with Spencer, Pamela Geller, Anders Gravers and Rich Davis as the “persons associating together to form the corporation.”

The corporation in question is FDI which is the parent organization of SIOA. The document is no longer online but we have a copy.

Spencer Waxes Conspiracy about Treatment of Mosque vs. Church

While Robert Spencer tries hard to play the role of “the cool objective scholar,” it doesn’t take much for him to break out of character to reveal his true identity: an emotional religious ideologue. Many of his articles implicitly or directly impugn events as being tainted by some diabolical conspiracy or double standards, this is particularly true when it comes to issues regarding his religion, Christianity such as in this particular case:

Spencer posted an article titled, “Ground Zero mosque moves forward, Ground Zero church in limbo” by Mark Impomeni for the right-wing website Human Events.

Spencer comments,

“Why is New York City throwing roadblocks in front of the rebuilding of a church that stood for decades at the site now known as Ground Zero, while moving heaven and earth to clear away all obstacles to building an Islamic supremacist mega-mosque there?”

A week ago Spencer also posted an article about this Church, “Nine years later church at Ground Zero still not built, but mad rush to build Islamic Supremacist mega-mosque.” In it he reveals that his mother was “baptized at the Church” and the New York Times article he quotes states,

Last July, the Port Authority and the Greek Orthodox Church announced a tentative plan to rebuild the church just east of its original site, at Liberty and Greenwich Streets. The authority agreed to provide the church with land for a 24,000-square-foot house of worship, far larger than the original, and $20 million. Since the church would be built in a park over the bomb-screening center, the authority also agreed to pay up to $40 million for a blast-proof platform and foundation.

In recent negotiations, the authority cut the size of the church slightly and told church officials that its dome could not rise higher than the trade center memorial.

The bold portion is from Robert Spencer, who seems to think that there is some conspiracy to deny the building of the Church. However, this made up grievance overlooks the previous paragraph which states,

Last July, the Port Authority and the Greek Orthodox Church announced a tentative plan to rebuild the church just east of its original site, at Liberty and Greenwich Streets. The authority agreed to provide the church with land for a 24,000-square-foot house of worship, far larger than the original, and $20 million.

That’s right, the Church is going to be bigger than it was before, it is going to get money from the Port Authority, but Spencer overlooks all of that. For him, the fact that the Port Authority has said that it does not want the dome to rise higher than the memorial (a construction/zoning issue) is a slap in the face and reaks of “double standards.” Imagine if there was a mosque in the place of a Church, what tune do you think Spencer would be singing then?

SIOA Co-Founder: Kill Your Liberal Relatives and All Muslims

A great post by Daisy Cutter over at Daily Kos. It exposes one of the co-founders of SIOA, John Joseph Jay, who if I am not mistaken is also a frequent commenter on AtlasShrugs.

Daisy Cutter’s article would have been bolstered if he/she used our article, SIOA is an anti-Muslim Hate Group.

SIOA co-founder: kill your liberal relatives and all Muslims

by Daisy Cutter

The recent nontroversy over the not-actually-”at”-Ground-Zero not-actually-a-mosque is sure to heat up now that the first piece of red tape was shredded away. One of the key leaders of the movement to demonize the project, along with every other mosque being constructed in the country, is well-known wingnut blogger Pamela Geller. Along with Robert Spencer, she incorporated a nonprofit known as the American Freedom Defense Initiative. This organization seems to be the umbrella group that operates the more familiarly known SIOA (Stop the Islamisation of America). It is this group that provided the funding for legal counsel in its lawsuit to allow for anti-Islamic bus ads. Continue reading

Robert Spencer Watch: Elena Kagan Ignorantly Promoting Shariah Law

Robert Spencer next to his Perpetual Serf Pamela Geller

Robert Spencer contradicts himself once again. In a recent article in the Daily Caller, Spencer is quoted as saying,

“[Kagan] would knowingly and wittingly abet the advance of Sharia, but she wouldn’t do it understanding anything about Sharia. She would do it out of her ignorance.”

Yes, because the only one who understands Sharia is Robert Spencer.

What a convoluted way of saying what he really wants to say, “Kagan will ‘advance Shariah.’”

So will she “knowingly” or “ignorantly” advance Sharia?

Spencer attributes Kagan’s fondness for Sharia to naïveté and liberalism. “There is a general tendency on the part of political liberals in the United States today to take a benign view of Islam and Islamic law,” he said. “They are generally uninformed and share a hatred of the West and Western civilization.”

Essentially, if someone disagrees with Spencer they are cast as either “ignorant” or “taking a benign view of Islam and Islamic law.” This woman has devoted her whole life to the study of law, does he not think for a second that Kagan might know more about Islamic law than himself?

Spencer’s wild-eyed conspiracy theories are then exposed,
According to Spencer, Kagan will be a willing accomplice in the ongoing stealth jihad — or the institution of Sharia into non-Muslim societies via non-violent means, such as the courts and mainstreaming Islamic customs — currently underway against the West. “The goal of the jihad is to assert the primacy of Islamic law over non-Muslim society and over Muslim societies where it is not fully enforced, and that can take place either through violent or non-violent means and the goal is the same,” he said.

More of the same old conspiracies. On Spencer’s hate blog, he posted this article with the comment, “Ignorance and naivete, mixed in with the fashionable Leftist contempt for America.” Is he referring to the reporter or to Kagan? He doesn’t dispute anything the reporter wrote and instead finds it fit to criticize liberals as being “accomplices in the ongoing stealth jihad.”