Spencer upset Muslims take on extremists

Robert Spencer is miffed. There has just been too much good press for those pesky Moozlims. Writers of late have pointed out that the mainstream Muslim community is at the forefront of combating terrorism and extremism; such as the Muslims who prevented the recent Yemen mail bomb plot or Muslims who have prevented numerous other cases of terrorism. If Spencer’s goal was to prevent terrorism, one would think these news stories are cause for celebration. But if the goal is to tar all of Islam in a fear-for-profit holy war racket, eh, not so much.

For Spencer, highlighting anything positive Muslims do in the fight against violent extremism just doesn’t jive with his lop-sided cherry-picked contextless narrative that Islam is the root cause of all evil. He says,

There is a counterproductive aspect to this kind of publicity for the Muslim community in America: that these stories would be considered newsworthy at all is due to their unusual, man-bites-dog aspect.

It bewilders those of us not indoctrinated with prejudiced anti-Muslim hostility to see how stories about ordinary Muslims thwarting terrorist attacks are “counter-productive.” These stories are positive reminders that our fight is against violent extremism, not the religion of Islam or all Muslims. But Spencer’s transparent goal is not to prevent terrorism as much as it is to profit by demonizing all of Islam and its adherents. He continues,

If the teachings of Islam and the sentiments of the Muslim community in the U.S. really were the way they are ordinarily represented by the mainstream media and assumed to be by the U.S. Government, then there ought to be a concerted, organized, ongoing effort among Muslims in the U.S. not only to foil jihad terror plots, but also to eradicate the Islamic teachings that inspire and encourage such plots.

Here Spencer fumes with conspiracy-mongering indignation as he decries how the mainstream media and the U.S. government fail to smear the entire religion of Islam and its 1.5 billion followers. Then he demands that Muslims “eradicate the Islamic teachings” that inspire terrorists while he ignores the mountains of empirical research which demonstrate that military occupations are the root cause of terrorism, not the religion of Islam, or that alienation

from the mainstream Muslim community leads to terrorism, not engagement with it. But he continues,

Also, these writers and others generally assume that the Muslims who foiled these jihad plots did so out of Islamic conviction, and that they therefore represent an alternative perspective on Islamic teaching, one that opposes and counters that of the jihadists. Unfortunately, that is not established.

This sentence explicates Spencerian Islamophobic doctrine: when a Muslim commits a criminal act, that is “true Islam,” but when a Muslim does a good deed, he is somehow acting against the teachings of Islam. Of course, this non-terrorist “alternative perspective on Islamic teaching,” which those of us in the real world call “mainstream Islam” is in fact well-established not only in countless scholarly books, organizations, and websites, but also by scientific polling of global Muslim attitudes. Unsurprisingly, Spencer has been unable to publish any of his Muslim-bashing conspiracy theories in a single academic peer-reviewed journal. No need for balance, scholarship, or polling; mere speculation and “truthiness” are good enough for Spencer.

Mr. Spencer, your stubborn self-serving denial of reality obscures our country’s ability to tell the good guys from the bad guys. As Jon Stewart recently said, “…the inability to distinguish terrorists from Muslims makes us less safe, not more.”

Mr. Spencer, you are making us less safe, not more.

86 thoughts on “Spencer upset Muslims take on extremists

      • There’s no profit in telling the truth about Muslims, unless, you know, you have your PhD. But that’s way too much work for Spencer.

      • Maybe if Muslims stopped acting like demons, he wouldn’t have any reason to complain. Beheading people on the internet, slaughtering Christians, stoning women for adultery, trying to restrict the freedom of speech, suicide bombing, etc. You know, the usual.

        It’s very telling that all of you are so concerned about the made up word “Islamophobia”, but you really don’t seem to concerned about when your fellow coreligionists do something bad. I see no mention of the church slaughter that happened just a few days ago. Not important enough to report? Or do you just want it swept under the rug as quick as possible?

  1. An epic failure in basic reading comprehension.

    I can’t say I blame anyone if they decide not to waste their time engaging in a fruitless debate.

    Hint: Spencer doesn’t actually say that he’s upset at Muslims who ‘take on extremists’.

    For Spencer, highlighting anything positive Muslims do in the fight against violent extremism just doesn’t jive with his lop-sided cherry-picked contextless narrative that Islam is the root cause of all evil. He says,

    Woah, that was impressive.

    If you need help in basic reading comprehension, just ask.

    Seriously, if you’re having trouble understanding the written English language, just ask someone else for help.

    It would save you a bit of time before you go on your next tangent if you actually understand and are properly responding to what someone has written.

    • Really? Spencer isn’t upset at Muslims who take on extremists? That sound like the biggest load of BS I’ve ever heard.

      What about Reza Aslan? Edina Lekovic? What about a whole menagerie of Muslims condemning terrorism?

      http://www.jihadwatch.org/2010/08/new-york-times-touts-muslim-video-rebutting-militants-and-featuring-rogues-gallery-of-islamic-suprem.html

      The fact is, you’re delusional Bob. Spencer is mad when Muslims do good, and he gets giddy when they do bad. Anything that doesn’t conform to his world-view angers him, which is why he’s furious when Muslims are praised for stopping terrorism…

      There is a counterproductive aspect to this kind of publicity for the Muslim community in America: that these stories would be considered newsworthy at all is due to their unusual, man-bites-dog aspect.

      • See, WhatAboutBob is trying to say that Spencer is only upset with the writers and the news orgs who are publicizing muslims that are fighting terrorists. They’re blowing it out of proportion and thats wrong, unless of course the story involves a bunch of extremists burning an american flag then that’s okay because it fails within Spencer’s narrative.

        Spencer isn’t upset that muslims are doing good things. He’s upset that the media is reporting it. Reading comprehension people!.

    • Bobby, do you really think Spencer is interested in reforming Islamic teachings? He himself said that it is not possible in many of his earlier rants then he goes on and says :” … then there ought to be a concerted, organized, ongoing effort among Muslims in the U.S. not only to foil jihad terror plots, but also to eradicate the Islamic teachings that inspire and encourage such plots.” Spencer doesn’t want to just eradicate some Islamic teachings he wants to eradicate Islam itself which wouldn’t be good for his wallet since then his books won’t sell anymore. Spencer attacks these writers who say Muslims are taking on extremists since they don’t mention his second favorite word, behind Jihad, and that is Taqiyyah. I gaurantee you that even those people who follow his advice and eradicate Islamic teachings of Jihad, such as the Ahmadayyah, will still be accused of Taqiyyah.

      Moreover, ‘eradicating the Islamic teaching that inspire and encourage such plots’ won’t solve the problem because violence will be committed in the name of even the most benign beliefs, that’s why violence has been even committed in the name of Buddhism which is supposedly a pacifist religion.

      Lastly, partially justifying 9/11 doesn’t mean you support it. Many conservatives including Pat Buchanan and Ron Paul say that 9/11 happened as a response to our foreign policy and even 25% of American actually believe it is an inside job(count me out). So does that mean 25% of all Americans are extremists?

  2. This sentence explicates Spencerian Islamophobic doctrine: when a Muslim commits a criminal act, that is “true Islam,”

    Err, no. That’s actually the mantra of Muslim apologists.

    Al-Qaeda, the Taliban, the Wahhabis, etc., etc., are not *real* Muslims.

    However, real Muslims, whatever that means, are those who happen to do something good.

    Hey, what’s good for the goose is good for the gander.

    well-established not only in countless scholarly books, organizations, and websites, but also by scientific polling of global Muslim attitudes.

    Why slay the dead when it’s already been done the first time?

    http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/templateC06.php?CID=1154

    As usual, it is loons such as yourself who want to shout every one done and aren’t interested in dialogue.

    I can’t belief after this many years that you’re unaware that the Esposito/Mogahed book has been heavily criticized for its shifty tactics in assigning Muslims who mostly or partially justify the 9/11 attacks as moderates when the same Gallup poll in previous years classified support for the 9/11 attacks as an extremist view.

    Of course, that was done to fit their 9% figure. If they Mogahed/Esposito used the same classifications as Gallup did in previous years, their % of Muslim extremists would be much higher.

    But again, you’re not interested in the truth. You’re interested in The Truth. And if facts need to be left out to fit your crazed world-view, then so be it.

    • Actually, it’s Spencer that is interested in propaganda without the use of polling or peer-reviewed scholarship. Why is he unable to publish his conspiracy theories in an academic journal?

    • “This sentence explicates Spencerian Islamophobic doctrine: when a Muslim commits a criminal act, that is “true Islam,””

      Here’s what Spencer wrote in his review of Gregory M Davis’ book “Religion of Peace: Islam’s War against the World”.

      “A valuable well-argued contribution to the public understanding of Islam….it manages to convey in a short space what the West needs to know about Islam: That its violent aspects are not the result of deviance but orthodoxy”

      Basically, he’s saying that to be a good Muslim you have to kill people. And if you decide spread peace instead, you are going against your religion and should thus burn in hell.

  3. Here’s how Robert Satloff summed up the issue of radicalism regarding Esposito and Mogahed’s book:

    And then there is the more fundamental fraud of using the 9/11 question as the measure of “who is a radical.” Amazing as it sounds, according to Esposito and Mogahed, the proper term for a Muslim who hates America, wants to impose Sharia law, supports suicide bombing, and opposes equal rights for women but does not “completely” justify 9/11 is . . . “moderate.”

    How do you spell smoke screen, again?

    http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/templateC06.php?CID=1154

    • LoL. Are you kidding me? WINEP? A silly group that is known for its anti-Muslim and anti-Arab bias.

      You might as well cite the neo-confederates at the Canada Free Press (which you actually did once).

      Now do you realize why you’re not taken seriously?

    • Robert Satloff also wrote “Among the Righteous: Lost Stories from the Holocaust’s Long Reach into Arab Lands”, in which he discovers how many Arabs saved the Jews from the Holocaust. But I suppose he’s just being a dhimmi. All you need is his negative comments on Islam and ignore anything positive.

        • That’s not the full story JB.

          He’s only interested in what he found so he can show it to Arabs and they can then stop bullying those poor poor Israelis 🙂

          He’s still a loon. Even when faced with striking evidence that Muslims can be good, they choose to look away. Reminds of someone…

        • In the book, he also argues that Muslims were involved in the Holocaust as both “rescuers and perpetrators”. He hopes to focus on the rescue stories so Arabs play nice with Israel. Typical Zionist loon.

  4. I like the fact JB uses the Washington Institute in order to give a “balanced” counter-view to that cited in the article. Good for laughs if nothing else!

  5. What is worrying is how these bigots are taken seriously. I think you guys should start a campaign so your readers could help to send mass emails to anyone who uses Spencer/Pam references in their news reports or articles and inform them of their biased non-expert views.

  6. Whats especially funny is that one of Spencer’s five points to end islamophobia is:

    “5. Actively work with Western law enforcement officials to identify and apprehend jihadists within Western Muslim communities..”

    Of course everyone, inluding jihadbob, knows that Spencer doesnt care how much Muslims fight terrorism. In fact, it does him absolutely no good that they do because it may convince the undecided that not all Muslims are evil (thus delaying his ultimate goal of cleansing the west of the muslim presence as articulated so many time by hugh fitzgerald with the support of Robert Spencer).

    This is why Robert will always move the goalpost, this is why he will always always either reject any condemnation, fatwa against Islamic terrorism or use the taqqiya libel. This is usually followed by a few words from hugh on Muslims being ordered to lie to infidels (in case the slower jihadwatchers dont get the message. When the free Muslims coalition supported the spanish fatwa against Ben Ladin, this is what Robert Spencer had to say:

    “the Qur’an allows for religious deception (see 3:28 and 16:101). Is FMCAT trying to deceive? I doubt it – but it cannot be dismissed as a possibility. They would allay all such suspicions by producing proof, or at least viable support, of what they say, if they be truthful. But this Spanish fatwa, at least as published so far, contains no such proof.”

    http://www.jihadwatch.org/2005/03/moderate-muslims-use-quran-against-jihad.html

    How can anyone ever to convince this monster of anything? It would be like trying to convince a Nazi that a jews are not evil .

    The only good Muslim for jihadwatchers is an ex-Muslims who actively fights Islam and Muslims…and even those may eventually become suspect.

    Thats it

  7. No he does not directly say it but that is his point… Please stop making excuses for him. Any person with the basic understanding of the “English language” can see that. Big woop you stopped the terrorist attacks who cares maybe you should work on the reason behind them “ all of Islam and its teaching” which is a false statement. The apologist of Robert Spencer complaining about apologists that is rich JB maybe we all should go back to LoonWatch and read your comments for the past 1000000000 articles when a Muslim commits a criminal act, that is “true Islam,” was your point for the past 10 months I been reading loonwatch .please drop the Angel hypocritical bs .

  8. “the Qur’an allows for religious deception (see 3:28 and 16:101).

    Quran ” [3:28] The believers never ally themselves with the disbelievers, instead of the believers. Whoever does this is exiled from GOD. Exempted are those who are forced to do this to avoid persecution. GOD alerts you that you shall reverence Him alone. To GOD is the ultimate destiny.”

    So is Spencer suggesting America is indeed in war against Muslims and Muslims are in fact persecuted? The verse clearly says “to avoid persecution”

    Quran “[16:101] When we substitute one revelation in place of another, and GOD is fully aware of what He reveals, they say, “You made this up!” Indeed, most of them do not know.”

    what does the above verse has to do with deception??

      • I can’t believe you’re still playing the signs game. That’s kind of immature, even for you Ahni. Meh, if it helps you sleep at night, go ahead and generalize 1.5 billion people based on a couple of signs

        • Can I generalize 1.5 billion people based on what millions of them believe and do in the name of their religion?

          You Muslims don’t seem to have a problem condemning Christians based on the actions of a few hundred priest incidents. Or Jews for…. oh wait, I shouldn’t mention them, bloodlust might ensue.

          • Nice strawman, but no you can’t because unless you’re JihadBob (who can magically tap into the Muslim psyche), you haven’t the slightest clue what Muslims actually believe. But hey, what do I know…I’m just a taqiyya slinging Muslim amirite?

          • You have the right to condemn, as we all do, but you don’t have the right to generalise.

        • I fail to see how Hitler was a Christian. Blaming Christianity for Hitler is about as baseless as blaming atheism for Stalin, but have fun just the same.

          If anything, Hitler got a few helpful Jew hating hints from his Muslim pal, the Mufti. I’d put my money on that scenario. Nobody hates the Jews quite like the Muslims!

          • I think hypocrisy runs in your veins..BTW going by your logic isn’t it unfair and bigotry to blame all muslims for crime of few ..”i feel to see ”
            “muslim” terrorists.

          • By choosing to single out a mufti ,and calling him Hitler’s Pal doesn’t that make muslims as well as christians the holocaust perpetrators…Oh wait i also fail to see how the mufti was a muslim!

          • For the record ,we here at loonwatch make a clear distinction between muslims and the “muslim”terrorists,christian and the “christian”terrorists …jews and the “jews”terrorists and fight collectively against thugs like you..Making a whole community guilty for the crimes of few is what ppl like you do at Jihadwatch and atlas shrugs..just like Hitler used to do..

          • lol how about Blaming Islam for Bin Laden is about as baseless as blaming atheism for Stalin, but have fun just the same.

          • “I say: my Christian feeling tells me that my lord and savior is a warrior. … I am convinced that I am really a devil and not a Christian if I do not feel compassion and do not wage war, as Christ did two thousand years ago, against those who are steeling and exploiting these poverty-stricken people.

            ( Adolf Hitler, in a speech delivered on April 12, 1922; from Charles Bracelen Flood, Hitler: The Path to Power, Boston, Mass: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1989, pp. 261-262. )

        • Hitler attended regular mass until he was 18. During this time he must have ingested the Eucharist. This means that according to Catholic belief, he has the spirit of Jesus within him, to guide him.

          He also called Christiniaty the “unshakeable foundations of Germany”. The Nazis also founded their own Church and a few bishops joined.

          Bishop Burger once said “The aims of the Reich government have long
          been the same as those of the Catholic Church”

  9. JihadBob: If Spencer wasn’t upset at ordinary Muslims combating terrorism and the media attention, then what is he referring to as a “counterproductive aspect?”

    • That media is now being used to promote unremarkable stories to make an underlying point.

      Sorry, that’s not the media’s job. They’re not run as a propaganda arm to reinforce or attack views the journalists agree or disagree with.

  10. So guys(On the debate)!Does Spencer’s silence suggests he has accepted defeat(btw he has not responded to any of the rebuttals,which also leads us to assume he’s a falure)or should we wait for a response…I guess that’s not coming anytime soon..

  11. you haven’t the slightest clue what Muslims actually believe. But hey, what do I know…I’m just a taqiyya slinging Muslim amirite?

    Right, right, because only a Muslim can possibly understand the immensely complex religion of Islam. And not only do you have to be a Muslim, you have to understand Arabic to truly understand. Because Arabic is such a special language, it can’t be adequately translated (unlike every other language out there), and it’s the only language that the all-knowing, all-powerful God understands, apparently.

    • Not so, but when you simply ignore established scholarly opinions published in peer review by those who have spent their lives academically studying this stuff – and I’m meaning non-Muslim academics here – in favour of blogs regurgitating the same old stuff, then I think it’s pretty fair for him to call your knowledge of Islam and what Muslims think into question.

    • And a further irony is that some a minority of scholars in the Islamic tradition actually believe the language of both questioning in the grave and heaven is Syriac. 😀

    • That’s not what I meant O Master of the Strawman. Here’s a hint; I said Muslims, not Islam. In any case, I was referring to you specifically. The same idiot who sheepishly admitted that he doesn’t know jack shit about Muslims and Islam apart from what Robert Spencer and co. defecate down his throat…all the while retorting with the most pathetic ad hominem attack I have ever witnessed. So don’t give me that bullshit about Arabic; the ultimate intellectual copout for pseudoscholars.

  12. Hi
    Long time reader, first time ….erm…..replier? I guess that’s the right word.

    Anyway, I understand you guys get frustrated when JihadBob spews constant anti-muslim rhetoric but really is there any point in debating him? He’s going to remain an anti-muslim bigot no matter how many facts or logical arguments he is presented with.

    I say just ignore him, like a bad rash, it only gets worse the more you itch.

    Once starved for attention, he’ll shut up.

    PS. You guys are doing a splendid job!

    • “Robert Spencer…[a] canny operative who likely has the inside track on the State Department’s Middle East affairs desk should the tea party win the White House in 2012”–NY Mag.

      Like all cancers, this one needs to be cut out before it spreads.

      • I’m going to clarify something here. Over at JihadWatch, Robert Spencer is going crazy because apparently my comment is evidence that this is a “hate site”.

        1.) I don’t represent this site. Is it not the great Spencer himself who attacked CAIR for using JihadWatch comments as evidence of JihadWatch being a hate site? Is it not true that other hate sites such as religionofpeace.com don’t allow comments because they are afraid that CAIR will take them out of context? Why is that Islamophobes partake in the same activities that they accuse Muslims of?

        2.) That was IN NO WAY, a death threat, or an encouragment for someone to kill him. The point I was making was in response to the commenter above, who asked if there is any point in debating him. I replied, implying that if he was allowed i

      • …I replied, implying that if he was allowed
        any position in the White House that would be disastrous for all Muslims. Like many things in life it is better to take pre-emptive action (Israel is a country noted for its successful pre-emptive strikes) and here I used the example of cancer. In this context, the “cutting out” of the cancer refers to ending Spencer’s hate, not his life, by having more discussions about his lies.

        3.)I’m sorry if Mr.Spencer interpreted the comment negatively and he should know that I have no intention to kill him. I am sorry if he genuinely thought that I was going to kill him. Also, for the record, I disagree with the death penalty for blasphemy. But what do I know? Its all taqiyya! Mwahahah!

        4.)I apologise to this site because it has been attacked because of me 🙁

        5.) “They are a failed civilisation and have contributed nothing significant in over 700+ years. Islam is like a cancer and a cancer you either cut out or die.”

        Oops! Was that me? Nein. It was “I’m no Dhimmy Dummy” (No doubt one of Spencer’s crew) from the article http://www.loonwatch.com/2010/04/robert-spencer-downplays-right-wing-extremist-threat/

        Note how the cancer metaphor is used to attack Islam. Should I now interpret that as a death threat towards the world’s 1.5 billion Muslims?

      • Also!

        LOL, Check out the commenter above:

        “I say just ignore him, like a bad rash, it only gets worse the more you itch.”

        So Spencer is a “bad rash” and he doesn’t become front-page news on JihadWatch. Cos I’m Brown innit?

  13. As always, we can count on Spencer to provide us with a disturbing amount of projection. Oh, and apparently he’s still scared of mentioning Loonwatch.com by name.

  14. He has already been exposed by loonwatch.But he is scared of being exposed in a big way.He knows well he doesn’t wanna be another Ali Sina.

  15. Doesn’t it say on Spencer’s site that comments therein don’t represent the site? Wasn’t his site the one that had a real death threat that was even brought to his attention. Don’t seem to remember him caring all too much. And the hypocrisy to use his favorite fallacy of all; guilt by association (or was it ad hominem attacks?)…is quite laughable.

    Anyway, I think it’s safe to say that he’s in dire need of some reading comprehension skills…and some counselling on his frequent projection.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *