JihadWatch Calls For Tienanmen Square Option in Egypt

(Hat tip: Mp11)

Looks like the genocidal goons over at JihadWatch are super upset that freedom is on the march in the Middle East. They hate freedom and Democracy because it destroys their pre-conceived notions about Islam, Muslims and Arabs.

For a long time they received succor in the despotism and dictatorships that prevailed in these countries but now the Islamophobes are scared silly.

So scared that wacky genocidal maniac Roland Shirk wants to advise (deposed) dictator Hosni Mubarak:

“If I could have Mubarak’s ear, I would whisper just two words of wisdom: Tienanmen Square. ”

There you have it folks JihadWatch’s true agenda.

60 thoughts on “JihadWatch Calls For Tienanmen Square Option in Egypt

  1. Looks like the genocidal goons over at JihadWatch are super upset that freedom is on the march in the Middle East. They hate freedom and Democracy because it destroys their pre-conceived notions about Islam, Muslims and Arabs.

    So freedom is allowing the Islamic nuts in Egypt to implement Sharia and help usher in a new caliphate?

    • So no comment on Shirk’s call for Mubarak to trample on innocent Egyptians with tanks.

      Thought not.

      “So freedom is allowing the Islamic nuts in Egypt to implement Sharia and help usher in a new caliphate?”

      If you’re scared of Mooslims *gasp* making their own decision rather than permanently living as a colony of some other country, then go run back to your mother’s basement. Hide there until the big bad Mooslims are gone.

      About your little rant about the Muslim Brotherhood taking over and imposing the global Caliphate, something Glenn Beck has been pushing recently:

      http://spencerwatch.com/2011/02/03/robert-spencer-opposes-egyptian-democracy-smears-obama/

      • Loons generally seem to love hating China, since they are competition with the USA but on this point, Shirk is quite happy to borrow from their cruel tactics.

        I still cannot understand why Roland Shirk would support the use of tanks against unarmed protesters and then turn around to moan and whine about the cruelty of Sharia Law.

      • Indeed, the loons have nothing to say about real atrocities but love to rant about conspiracy theories. Our friend Quiad here seems to believe in a a lot of them, including the taqiyya libel and the Moozlim Brotherhood Caliphate nonsense (genius, the Ikhwan has said that it doesn’t want to have the power of president in Egypt). I wouldn’t be surprised if he thinks Obama is a Moozlim.

    • Squid/Ahninny,

      You, once again, show that you know nothing about Egypt, nor its citizens. You are wrong (as you always are), because:

      1 – You exaggerate and sensationalize the facts well beyond their scope of reality

      2 – You socialize responsibility beyond where it actually belongs.

      3 – You make blanket generalizations, without substantiating any of them.

      4 – You regurgitate nonsense you hear from others, simply because it’s either anti-Muslim or anti-Islam

      5 – You either use faulty logic when challenged or confronted by the facts or you shift focus, and move the goal posts when busted

      That is your M.O., and as long as it is your M.O., you’ll continue to be proven wrong for everyone to see.

    • So you support their freedom to choose their own government?

      And I think you mean the “They hate our freedoms” card played by George Bush.

      And any comment on the recommendation by your newest JW writer to use Chinese style brutality to crush the protests? No? Will you distance yourself from this loon and condemn this extremist from your side as we condemn the extremists on our side?

    • Bob, you seem to get more bigoted every day. I do hope that you get help someday and eventually distance yourself from the genocidal bigots at JihadWatch. Then again, you’re quite open about your own hateful sentiments.

  2. Wait what? Our resident trolls would actually support the Egyptian military to open fire on the thousands of peaceful pro democracy protesters in Tahrir? Good grief, I didn’t know you hated Muslims that much.

  3. http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:x7zJ6782sD0J:www.jihadwatch.org/2011/01/a-whiff-of-grapeshot.html+%22whiff+of+grapeshot%22+jihadwatch&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&source=www.google.com

    JihadWatch writer Roland Shirk has the following to say.

    “The best hope for Egypt would be a TOUGH crackdown, followed by a relentless purge that targeted the Muslim Brotherhood. It might end up being as ugly as Suharto’s war against the Communists in Indonesia. But the alternatives are all even worse. “

  4. Well seeing as Mubarak is an allie with the western world it is critical for ?Isreal our 52 state that they keep protests down. Love jews. Hate Isreal

  5. Looking at the website, I find it amazing how everyday JihadWatch fans fill the threads with dozens of genocidal and bigoted comments. One would be hard pressed to find any JihadWatch comment or article that’s not full of hatred and vitriol. However, there’s good news, because at least one JihadWatch reader seems to have finally gotten it.

    Courage | February 11, 2011 10:10 AM | Reply

    “A long time ago, JW stopped being against just Jihadists but against all of Islam and all Muslims. It has become a mirror image of the ideology it seeks to confront. Now JW posters who sought violence against Egyptians for freedom. For shame.”

    http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/02/mubarak-steps-down.html#comment-757448

    I probably disagree with a lot of what he has to say on other issues, but I commend him for his courage.

    • Here’s some more of his comments:

      As you can see, peaceful protests against a dictator had different results. Yet JW and Robert Spencer has kept this posting up from Roland Shirk without any denunciation. That speaks volumes.

      Apparently when Islamists make extremist calls for violence it is wrong, but when JW makes extremist calls for violence, people think well – that’s OK. No, it’s not.

      But why can’t we find it in our hearts to show enough American compassion for freedom – even if just for ONE day – to sympathize with the men, women, and children, Muslim AND Christian, young and old, who had the COURAGE to stand up for freedom in Egypt?

      I know that I can. But I think JW has gone in a direction that no longer is about Jihad anymore – if anyone didn’t know before, a JW WRITER calling for another Tienanmen Square type massacre against the Egyptian protesters says it all.

      It seems like Robert Spencer got rid of Fitzgerald only to replace him with a truly genocidal fear-monger. Where Fitzgerald was advising readers to be “secretly rejoiced” when Muslims are massacred…Shirk wants to whisper in Mubarak’s ear to actually do it. I just can’t believe how people can be so hateful.

      • Their own malformed and distorted thinking will be their ultimate downfall – it’s already alienated what seems to be a regular reader/commenter there.

        The thought espoused on that site gets more and more vile by the day!

        • I’m not sure if you’ve read further down the comments, but the level of naivety is astounding. One guy actually said that Islam is a monolith…and ridiculed the other poster for thinking otherwise.

          I just don’t know how you can possibly defend the will to massacre peaceful protester as has been done there, and here by JihadBob and Ahni. It’s incredible really.

          • Well, we do know that historical and intellectual accuracy is not their strong point, so that doesn’t surprise me in the least.

            Though the fact none of the posters here from that ‘camp’ (for want of a better word) have spoken out against Roland Shirk’s statement is astounding. Courage really had courage, at least!

            Get on chat or something sometime if you’re around. 😀

        • “experience shows that Arab Muslims are most peaceful and reasonable precisely when what they feel is humility–enforced by the display of vastly superior firepower”

          “if we had to invade Iraq and Afghanistan, the first thing we should have done was to reestablish those countries’ monarchies”

          http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/01/the-madonna-in-the-tortilla.html

          Democracy? He says the monarchies were “peaceful”. Nothing is better than letting the people decide.

      • “It has become a mirror image of the ideology it seeks to confront.”

        This pretty much sums up the islamophobe ideology.

        Thanks to the user ‘courage’ who had the conviction to stand up to these extremists. They’ve become so bad that they even drove charles johnson away.

        • If courage is a regular reader, and so condemns ‘Islamic’ terrorism but also rejects Spencer’s hate against all Muslims and his writers’ violent suggestions, then he is definitely a JWer that I can approve of.

          If that is the case, that he only has a problem with terrorism, but overall understands that not all Muslims are bad, then he should be welcome here.

          • Alas, he doesn’t seem that he is.

            But he did seem to backtrack on his comments after Wellington had a few words with him.

            Now I guess he’s vanished to crop up on another thread after he was mopped up in that one.

          • “Now I guess he’s vanished to crop up on another thread after he was mopped up in that one.”

            Seems like he’s taken inspiration from you.

          • At the end of the day, that guy’s against the mass-murder of protesters and you’re not JB. Mopped up? If anything, he showed you and your buddies over there up as the genocidal lowlifes that you are.

          • LOL JihadBob, Wellington came off as a grade-A moron. Courage didn’t really seem to backtrack either, he just stopped posting, and this part of his last post speaks volumes about JihadWatch’s fanbase.

            “Racialist Lawrence Auster does the same thing. He thinks that black Americans don’t deserve the 1964 Civil Rights Act writing that “Whites’ mistake is that they think blacks are rational, and so they admit them as equal participants in discussion.” If people with anti-identity group or extremist views demonize someone else enough, it simply follows such people believe others don’t deserve freedom or human rights – or they can’t even have rational minds.

            “By the way, racialist Lawrence Auster is also a big fan of JW’s Roland Shirk. You know the same Roland Shirk who wrote on January 28 here calling for shooting Egyptian protesters, seeking a Tienanmen Square type massacre, and calling for Suharto style genocide.”

            Oh, and some of the other JihadWatch luminaries stared calling two other posters Mooslims (*gasp*). On other threads, *surprise*surprise*, you can find you genocidal buddies fantasizing about genocide on Muslims (which is something the sites authors sometimes do).

            And you say JihadWatch isn’t a hate site! LOL!

          • Lol. Lawrence Auster, is loving Roland Shirk. Not surprising considering that Auster is a racist maniac.

            “Shirk represents a new kind of voice at Jihad Watch–more realistic and outspoken about the Islam threat, about what we need to do about it, and about the West’s own suicidal ideology which prohibits any rational act of self-defense.”

          • More on Auster: He thinks Spencer is a liberal for being too soft on Islam and trying to distance himself from Auster’s white supremacism and he feels that Ayaan Hirsi Ali is not a good representative of the West (cos she’s Black), and believes that as well as defending the West from Mooslims we should defend it from Blacks.

            This man supports Roland Shirk.

    • I read that link and horay there is a person who has probably said the most sane thing on that website I can ever hear on it, not only does it seem like he is calling out the site on its bigotry but also telling roland “not spencer” shirk the tienimen square “suggestion” is going too far on people who want a genuine democracy.

  6. This should also be on Loonwatch. A lot of people over there who don’t read Spencerwatch would definitely benefit from knowing about Roland Shirk’s horrible suggestions that sound like those that come from the very “mullahs” that he hates.

  7. Who are my buddies at JihadWatch?

    I currently only post at SpencerWatch, though I attempted to post a quick comment over at LoonWatch.

    • Are they not your buddies then? You still share their hatred of Islam and all things Mooslim, and actually approve of JihadWatch and hence its community, and you read the hateful articles at JW.

      Regardless of whether you post there or not, you are still a JWer and your fellow JWers are your buddies, for better or worse. That is not to say that you are responsible for your buddies hateful comments, but that you do share the same goal and are loyal followers of His Highness Robert Spencer.

      But if they are not your buddies, then why have you not been able to condemn their genocidal suggestions?

    • “I currently only post at SpencerWatch,”

      I guess you never feel the need to object to Hugh’s genocidal ramblings or Shirk’s open call for violence, but only object to Loonwatch fighting against anti-Muslim hate and Islamophobia or Spencerwatch spilling the beans on Sheikh Spencer’s unscholarly ways.

      But that is a good question, why do you feel so compelled to defend his honour? Isn’t he tough enough to deal with it himself? Obviously not, since he can’t muster up enough courage to debate Danios, and stopped responding after he sent his “bumbling reply” to the Dhimmitude article, and has instead taken to misrepresenting a random commenter’s supposed death threat in order to dismiss this site entirely.

      Why can’t he take a look at some of the stuff that is written by Danios as Spencerwatch has done with Shirk in this article?

    • What’s the point of arguing semantics anyway? Fine they’re not your buddies. You’re still a genocidal fucker…deal with it.

    • They are your “buddies” because you agree with their views 100% of the time (at least that’s what you’ve shown). Even when the authors and posters become genocidal, you feel no compunction in defending them.

    • Wow! Truly outstanding fail. I caught you posting today on JihadWatch:

      “JihadBob | February 13, 2011 1:19 PM | Reply
      Well, I guess the jig is up.

      It was good while it lasted, but I’ll also admit to being Robert Spencer as well.

      In all fairness, many at the other site began to suspect as much after a few quaint exchanges with posters over there.

      I still have never figured out how I was outed. The Brain Trust is impressive.

      VERY impressive.”

      Lovely to see that you’re still encouraging your genocidal maniac Roland Shirk.

      • Impressive how JihadBob says he doesn’t post on the hate site JihadWatch but on the same day goes and posts on the hate site JihadWatch.

        VERY impressive.

          • Doesn’t that defeat the purpose of your original comment where you tried to distance yourself from loons even more bigoted than yourself?

          • No, since I was correct in saying that I hadn’t posted on JW at the time of my posting that comment on SW.

            I had no intention of posting on JW, but the article was about paranoid loons who think everyone is Spencer.

            Couldn’t resist.

          • You still haven’t distanced yourself from your genocidal buddies. No doubt you agree with their views.

          • Obviously you saw the article that Shirk was hinting to, which was about his suggestion about how Western governments should deal with us pesky Mooslims, yet you were noticeably silent on the fact that Shirk was too scared to link to the article.

            And the fact that he ignored most of the article, including its main conclusion, and focused only on one part of it.

            But, I suppose it’s our fault. We expected JihadWatch to display some professionalism, after all it is owned by a scholar of Islam of “25 years”.

  8. Robert Spencer has accepted to debate Danios, it was Danios who declined the invite to a public debate.

    Just like the Egyptian Islamic supremacist Spencer debated the last time, Danios knows he would be eviscerated in any debate with Spencer on the topic of Jihad warfare and Islamic supremacism.

    • Robert Spencer has accepted to debate Danios, it was Danios who declined the invite to a public debate

      LOL—that claim is laughable at best. Danios was the first to accept Spencer’s challenge to a debate but Spencer backed down. Don’t worry though, Danios will eventually rip Spencer again when it’s he’s done with his college stuff. Unlike Spencer, Danios has a life and a real job. Also, apart from running away from Danios, Spencer ran away from a Muslim cleric named Jalal Abualrub.

      Danios knows he would be eviscerated in any debate with Spencer on the topic of Jihad warfare and Islamic supremacism.

      Again, another laughable claim. Spencer responses to all of Danios’ refutations are pathetic. Debating via blog posts, Spencer lost consistently. The man can’t even defend what’s written in his own book, no doubt he will lose in a live debate.

    • “Robert Spencer has accepted to debate Danios, it was Danios who declined the invite to a public debate.”

      No . That wasn’t an acceptance. He added to unnecessary conditions that he knew Danios couldn’t fulfil in order to buy time. Spencer might just as well have said “Yes, I’ll debate you if you can organise on the moon”.

      All Danios asked for was a Radio debate, and Spencer has had radio debates in the past, and Spencer declined that debate proposal.

      “Danios knows he would be eviscerated in any debate with Spencer on the topic of Jihad warfare and Islamic supremacism.”

      I think you’ll find it was Spencer who crapped his pants when Danios’ refutation of Dhimmitude was released. He tried to defend himself by responding on JihadWatch (again he was too scared to take his name) but when Danios counter-replied, Spencer got cold feet. If you have a reason why Spencer was unable to continue this exchange (in which he was too afraid to even mention Danios or even link to Loonwatch), then please tell me,

      But because Robert Spencer did not accept the conditions of the original debate, he declined that debate. Bare in mind this was after about 3 months of silence after Danios’ proposal.

      http://www.loonwatch.com/2010/10/internet-sociopath-robert-spencer-scared-of-debate/

      It’s all explained there. I also note your mysterious absence from that article. Hmmm….

        • Uber-lol!!!!

          Check out Spencer’s defence of joining a genocidal hate group:

          “I have just learned that Charles Johnson has put up a post entitled “Robert Spencer Joins Genocidal Facebook Group” (no link because Johnson some time ago, in a display of immaturity, barred links from this site). Tonight’s attack revolves around a Facebook group called “Campaign for the Reconquest in Anatolia,” which I joined while sitting in an airport today around 2:30PM. I joined Facebook altogether a few months ago and haven’t spent much time with it, and accept friends and join groups as a matter of course, since the whole idea seems to be to expand one’s reach and get the word out about what one is doing — in my case warning about the global jihad.

          But in this case I have fallen victim to an Internet prank. Johnson’s response to my joining this group was so swift that I suspect that the group itself, and its invitation that I join it, was a hoax and a setup, but in any case I freely acknowledge my mistake: I was working through a number of such requests hurriedly, and joined the group without looking further at what it was all about. I didn’t read any of the material the group had posted, which Johnson says advocates genocide and ethnic cleansing and even links to the Aryan Nations.”

          So apparently it was a prank and Spencer “didn’t know” what it was about. You’d have thought the title “Campaign for the Re-Conquest of Anatolia” might have given him a little hint.

          Lovely attempt at damage control by the way, it will be keep me laughing for a few days.

          And Johnson has counter-replied to Spencer’s wild assertion that this was a “prank”.

          Let’s not forget that Spencer also wrote an article with the same message, in which he referred to the Conquest of Constantinople as the real “Nakba”.

          http://www.loonwatch.com/2009/04/robert-spencer-wanna-be-conquistador/

  9. What are the chances Egypt will continue its peace treaty with Israel? The removal of any corrupt government is good news but why didm’t the Iranian protesters receive as much support, especially from Obama. I noticed how the mainstream media have not reported on the execution of some of the protesters in Iran,

Leave a Reply

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