Reza Aslan, a Typo, and the Petty Vindictiveness of Robert Spencer

Reza

Reza Aslan, a Typo, and the Petty Vindictiveness of Robert Spencer

by Ilisha

As we’ve noted before, Robert Spencer seems to have an unhealthy obsession with Reza Aslan. Sadly for Spencer, his interest is not reciprocated.

In this case, serious engagement would elevate Spencer and give him a veneer or credibility he does not deserve. The best response to irredeemable loons is laughter and ridicule. Aslan has responded by teasing Spencer about a man crush:

1. You don’t actually think I read the drivel you send me do you? You’re a clown and the only proper response to clowns is laughter. Unless of course your obsession with me is motivated by something else. In that case, I must tell you that I’m flattered but you’re really not my type.

2. I don’t know how else to tell that I’m just not attracted to you. You and I are never going to get together Robert. You should stick to men your own age and weight.

3. I told you. I’m into women not walruses.

4. Ok. Fine. I’ll think about it. But first you have to shave and lose some weight.

5. If I send you a picture will that satisfy your lust for a while?

Undeterred, it seems Spencer continued, and received this response:

Dear Mr. Spencer. This is Mr. Aslan’s assistant. You seem to be under the impression that Mr. Aslan is actually opening, reading, and responding to your emails. I assure you he is not. The email responses you are receiving are automated responses set to respond to your emails indefinitely. You can’t actually think he is interested in reading anything you have to say. Mr. Aslan is a world renowned, best selling scholar. There is nothing about you or your “work” that would interest him in the slightest. Still, we hope that you will keep up your writings about him. Not only does everything you say validate Mr. Aslan’s importance. But you are a source of immense amusement for our team. Thank you.

Roshi

Spencer actually posts these responses on his website, apparently proud he managed to get a response at all. Undeterred, he recently attempted once again to engage Aslan.

His latest onslaught was sparked by an interview with Sarah Harvard in DL Magazine. Spenceraccused Aslan of being an “Islamic supremacist” who thinks Christianity teaches reincarnation:

ASLAN: It has to do with the symbolism and metaphors that Islam provides to think about God. All of that actually made more sense to me. When I think of God, I think about it in the terms of radical unity, which Islam talks about, and less in the terms of the trinity and reincarnation, which Christianity talks about. That’s it. My faith hasn’t changed. The language in which I use my faith has changed.

Reza Aslan responded to Spencer’s accusation on Twitter:

Twitter Aslan

In turn, Spencer described Aslan as an “immature, foul-mouthed creep,” and wrote [emphasis mine]:

Stung by my noticing that he thinks Christianity teaches reincarnation, Islamic supremacist Christianity-debunker Reza Aslan is claiming that it was just a typo and slinging his usual invective. Only an imbecile, apparently, would be fool enough to believe that Reza Aslan would be fool enough to believe that Christianity teaches reincarnation.

This is at least the second time Spencer has made this accusation, having devoted a previous articleto the topic of Aslan’s alleged belief that Christianity teaches reincarnation.

Reza Aslan wrote an entire book devoted to the life and times of Jesus. If he believes that Christianity teaches reincarnation, it seems likely he would have said so in his book. A search on Kindle reveals his book mentions the word “reincarnation” only once, and the reference is not literal:

Malachi’s prophecy explains why the courtiers at Tiberias see in Jesus thereincarnation of Israel’s quintessential end-times prophet. Zealot, The Life and Times of Jesus of Nazareth, p.130

In contrast, the word “incarnation” is mentioned six times, on pages 12, 36, 105, 138, 170, and 213. In reference to the trinity, Aslan mentions the notion of Jesus as God “incarnate,” which in fact is a widespread Christian teaching:

The Incarnation in traditional Christianity is the belief that the second person of the Trinity, also known as God the Son or the Logos (Word), “became flesh” by being conceived in the womb of a woman, the Virgin Mary, also known as the Theotokos (God-bearer). The incarnation, then, is the God-Man ‘Jesus Christ’.

If Aslan really “thinks” Christianity teaches reincarnation, why did he neglect to mention this throughout his entire book? The word “incarnation” is clearly more consistent with his work. Still, could it be that Aslan is lying about the typo?

In fact, Reza Aslan was clearly vindicated when DL Magazine has posted a correction [emphasis mine]:

CORRECTION 12/29/13: The original published version of this interview stated that Reza Aslan rejected “reincarnation”. That is incorrect; he states that he rejected “incarnation”. DL Magazine regrets the transcribing error. Thank you.

Spencer also tried to take a swipe at Aslan’s best-selling book, Zealot, The Life and Times of Jesus of Nazareth. Rather than challenging the content, he suggested the book was ghost written because:

…so obvious is Aslan’s abysmal ignorance of the subject matter and only dim awareness of how to write a grammatically correct sentence.

Is that the best he can do? Instead of offering a substantive critique of Aslan’s work, Spencer has now devoted two articles to huffing and puffing about something spectacularly petty.

At the time of this writing, Spencer has not updated his article. If the past is any indication, he will not post a correction. He will let his false accusation stand, and when the mood strikes, he will no doubt challenge Aslan again–and invite another round of ridicule.

Related:

Exclusive Loonwatch Interview with Reza Aslan

Robert Spencer: “I have exactly the same credentials as [Reza] Aslan”; Oh, Really?

“Henry Jackson Society” Associate Director Douglas Murray & “Daily Mail” journalist Melanie Phillips exposed: The facts

Robert Spencer and Douglas Murray photo

“Henry Jackson Society” Associate Director Douglas Murray & “Daily Mail” journalist Melanie Phillips exposed: The facts

Original guest contribution

by Jai Singh

Regular readers will be aware that the United Kingdom’s Home Secretary recently banned the American anti-Muslim propagandists Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller from the UK (details here,hereherehere, and here). Spencer and Geller had intended to speak at the Far-Right English Defence League’s demonstration in London on 29 June 2013.

Several very high-profile British figures subsequently published articles objecting to the ban and defending Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller:

Exhibiting a clear case of double-standards himself, “Henry Jackson Society” Associate Director (and contributing editor to The Spectator magazine) Douglas Murray promptly complained about alleged “double-standards over hate speech”, despite the fact that he had certainly not objected to the Home Secretary previously banning an extremist Muslim individual. (Note: The Spectator also recently published an article defending & whitewashing the explicitly racist, anti-Semitic, neo-Nazi Golden Dawn party, titled “A fascist takeover of Greece ? We should be so lucky”.)

Daily Mail journalist Melanie Phillips similarly rushed to Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller’s defence after the banning. Although Phillips claims she “does not support the approach taken by either Geller or Spencer to the problem of Islamic extremism. Both have endorsed groups such as the EDL and others which at best do not deal with the thuggish elements in their ranks and at worst are truly racist or xenophobic”, in the same article Phillips defends Spencer and Geller, claiming that they “don’t go around…..spreading conspiracy theories and lies to foment hysteria and hatred”, and describing the banning as “a serious blow to the credibility of these two writers, with particular damage being done to Spencer”. Phillips goes on to praise Spencer’s so-called “scholarship”.

In the same article, Melanie Phillips also claims that “the reason for the ban is that the British government is now telling people that certain interpretations of Islam are to be proscribed, even if they may be true”. Considering the fact that, in the same paragraph, Phillips explicitly states that she is basing this claim on the text of the Home Secretary’s letter to Robert Spencer, it is worth noting that Phillips is actually referring to Spencer’s own statements about Islam and claiming that Spencer’s “interpretation” is the “true” version of the religion.

Robert Spencer himself has responded to Melanie Phillips’ piece by writing a rambling articlecriticising Phillips and defending the EDL.

However, there is much more to this story. Considering the information detailed below, it is astonishing that Douglas Murray and Melanie Phillips are regularly invited as guests on various high-profile BBC debate programmes here in the UK, especially Question Time; most recently, Murray and Phillips were part of the Question Time debate panel in July and June 2013 respectively. Murray has also repeatedly been a guest on the BBC’s Sunday Morning Live discussion programme (most recently on 28 July 2013, on the subject “Are Muslims being demonised ?” Full video footage and revealing further details below). These prestigious programmes have millions of British viewers.

Not only are Douglas Murray’s real views on Muslims & Islam far, far more extreme than is generally known by the British public (especially Murray’s statements when the audience is not the mainstream British media), but it also turns out that both Douglas Murray and Melanie Phillips have actually been heavily involved with the Robert Spencer-David Horowitz cabal. In 2009, Murray even stated “I happen to know Robert Spencer; I respect him; he is a very brilliant scholar and writer”.

********************************************************************************************************

ROBERT SPENCER’S INNER CIRCLE

Before I address the issue of Douglas Murray, the Henry Jackson Society, and Melanie Phillips, for the public record it is worth reiterating the following relevant facts about Robert Spencer and a number of key members of his inner circle:

Robert Spencer:

1. Robert Spencer is the author of the virulently anti-Muslim website “JihadWatch”; he is also co-head of the “Stop Islamization of Nations”, “Stop Islamization of America”, and “American Freedom Defence Initiative” organisations. Spencer’s pivotal role in the multimillion-dollar international anti-Muslim propaganda network has been heavily documented. An extensive and fully-referenced list of examples of Spencer’s statements (a) demonising the entire Muslim population and (b) demonising the religion of Islam as a whole is available here.

2. Robert Spencer and “JihadWatch” were the most heavily cited sources of propaganda in the terrorist Anders Breivik’s manifesto; in fact, Breivik explicitly stated “About Islam, I recommend essentially everything written by Robert Spencer”.

3. Robert Spencer is formally allied with racist white supremacists and European neo-Nazis, and has even organised joint public demonstrations with them.

4. Robert Spencer is an ordained Catholic deacon (also see here) who has repeatedly made demonstrably false statements about Islam & Muslims (eg: see hereherehereherehere andhere) and repeatedly tried to hide the evidence when his misinformation was exposed. Spencer haspublicly admitted that his actions are heavily motivated by his [unilateral] agenda for the dominance of the Catholic Church.

5. Robert Spencer’s actions are in direct violation of official Vatican policy towards Islam and Muslims. Spencer’s actions also directly undermine the extensive Christian-Muslim interfaith bridge-building efforts of his own Catholic sect’s global leadership (see here and here) and indeed the admirable message promoted by Pope Francis himself (see herehere, and here).

6. Robert Spencer is now being publicly supported by Father C.J. McCloskey, a senior priest in the controversial Catholic organisation “Opus Dei” which is notoriously secretive about revealing the identities of its members. McCloskey has been described as “priest to Washington’s conservative establishment” and “the Catholic Church’s K Street lobbyist”. Promoting Spencer’s latest book in anarticle for the National Catholic Register, McCloskey made a series of extremely bigoted and derogatory statements about Islam and “the Muslims”. His actions are in direct violation of official Vatican policy along with the message promoted by Pope Francis.

7. In 2002-2003, Robert Spencer was an Adjunct Fellow at the Free Congress Foundation, an arm of the Heritage Foundation. Both organisations were founded by Paul Weyrich, a convert to the Melkite Greek Catholic Church, which is the same Catholic sect that Spencer belongs to; Weyrich was ordained as a protodeacon in this sect. The Anti-Defamation League identified the Free Congress Foundation and Weyrich himself as closely affiliated with “Dominionism”; furthermore, the ADL identified the FCF and Weyrich as part of an alliance of more than 50 of the most prominent conservative Christian leaders and organizations that threaten the separation of church and state in the US. The FCF’s strategic plan, whose authorship was guided by Weyrich and which was published in 2001, has been described as calling “for the use of deception, misinformation and divisiveness to allow conservative evangelical Christian Republicans to gain and keep control of seats of power in the government of the United States.” (Note: Dominionism is an extreme interpretation of Christian fundamentalism deriving from “Christian Reconstructionism”, which involves the belief that rule by non-Christians anywhere in the world is sacrilege, explicitly approves of the historical slavery of African-Americans, and openly advocates the replacement of American law with Old Testament injunctions including the death penalty for apostasy and homosexuality; Dominionism also claims that its adherents have a God-given mandate to infiltrate the highest echelons of power and subsequently impose their beliefs on the entire world).

8. Furthermore, Robert Spencer is on record as stating “Paul Weyrich taught me a great deal, by word and by example, about how to deal both personally and professionally with the slanders and smears that are a daily aspect of this work”. Spencer also named Weyrich as a mentor of his writings on Islam. Spencer’s first book on Islam was published in 2002. Weyrich himself is on record as making the following extremely anti-Semitic statements on his website shortly before Easter in 2001, in which he directly blamed “the Jews” for the death of Jesus: “Christ was crucified by the Jews…..He was not what the Jews had expected so they considered Him a threat. Thus He was put to death.” During the subsequent outrage (particularly from Jewish organisations) at Weyrich’s statements, he was defended by David Horowitz, Spencer’s boss.

9. Robert Spencer has been proven to have made completely false statements about historical Popes and major Jewish figures, and to have subsequently tried to conceal the evidence when his actions were exposed. Full details here and here.

10. Robert Spencer is not actually a “scholar of Islam” in any credible sense of the term; he has precisely zero academic, professional or linguistic qualifications in this subject, and therefore cannot credibly be described as a “scholar” or an “expert” in the matter at all. In fact, Spencer’s own alma mater, the University of North Carolina, have publicly described Spencer’s writings as “perpetuating a type of bigotry similar to anti-Semitism and racial prejudice. They are to be viewed with great suspicion by anyone who wishes to find reliable and scholarly information on the subject of Islam.”Full details here

11. Robert Spencer’s anti-Muslim propaganda has been proven to be identical to the anti-Semitic propaganda of Julius Streicher, a Third Reich-era Nazi whom the US subsequently prosecuted at the Nuremberg Trials and convicted on the charge of crimes against humanity; even Spencer’s arguments in his own defence are identical to Streicher’s statements at the time.

12. Robert Spencer is on record as claiming that there is “no distinction in the American Muslim community between peaceful Muslims and jihadists”.

13. Robert Spencer is on record as denying the Srebrenica genocide, explicitly describing it as “the-genocide-that-never-was” and proposing “the possibility that Muslims could have carried out any deceptive atrocity-manufacturing in the Balkans”.

14. Robert Spencer is on record as repeatedly promoting the work and writings of Serge Trifkovic (also see here), the former spokesman for Radovan Karadzic, one of Serbian war criminals charged with genocide during the ethnic cleansing of Muslims in Bosnia; Spencer and Trifkovic have even held joint interviews and collaborated on an anti-Islam documentary film. Trifkovic is on record as making the following extremely anti-Semitic statements: “Since the late 1800’s the Jews have had a disproportionate impact on a host of intellectual trends and political movements which have fundamentally altered the civilization of Europe and its overseas offspring in a manner deeply detrimental to the family, nation, culture, racial solidarity, social coherence, tradition, morality and faith.”

15. Furthermore, Serge Trifkovic openly supports and defends Ratko Mladic, whom the United Nations Tribunal has indicted on 16 counts of genocide and war crimes. In 2003, Trifkovic appeared as a defence witness during the trial of Milomir Stakic at the Hague Tribunal; Stakic was subsequently found guilty of multiple counts of murder along with crimes against humanity such as extermination, persecutions and deportations. In 2008, Trifkovic appeared as a defence witness during the trial of Ljubisa Beara, who was subsequently convicted of genocide, extermination, murder and persecution. Trifkovic was also cited by Anders Breivik in his manifesto.

16. In 2009, Robert Spencer publicly admitted to having joined a genocidal white nationalist Facebook group titled “Campaign for the Reconquest in Anatolia”, whose mission statement openly advocates the ethnic cleansing, mass sterilisation and euthanasia of Turkey’s entire Muslim population, targeting “up to 150 million people”. Readers can draw their own conclusions about Spencer’s convoluted explanation after his actions were exposed. Full details here. Spencer’s own website has also promoted the aim of “freeing Constantinople from Muslim occupation” (eg: see this article written by Spencer).

17. Robert Spencer has made extremely disparaging statements about the prestigious West Point military institution and has described Far-Right terrorists in the United States as “ordinary Americans who believe in individual rights”. Full details here..

18. When the Washington Post asked Robert Spencer if he was being deliberately combative and provocative, Spencer chuckled and said “Why not ? It’s fun”.

Pamela Geller:

1. The Board of Deputies of British Jews recently released a lengthy statement supporting Pamela Geller’s banning from the UK. Full details here. The article includes Geller’s own response to the Board’s statement, including the fact that Geller appears to blame Jews for the Holocaust.

2. Pamela Geller is the author of the virulently anti-Muslim website “Atlas Shrugs”; she is also co-head of the “Stop Islamization of Nations”, “Stop Islamization of America”, and “American Freedom Defence Initiative” organisations. An extensive and fully-referenced list of examples of Geller’s statements (a) demonising the entire Muslim population and (b) demonising the religion of Islam as a whole is available here.

3. Pamela Geller has repeatedly made demonstrably false statements about Islam & Muslims, and repeatedly tried to hide the evidence when her misinformation was exposed.

4. Pamela Geller has repeatedly made false statements about her own actions, despite the fact that her extensive anti-Islam/anti-Muslim writings are a matter of public record.

5. Pamela Geller was repeatedly cited by Anders Breivik in his manifesto.

6. After Breivik’s terrorist attack in Norway, Pamela Geller wrote an article claiming that the victims (predominantly children) were not innocent; she also included a photograph with the caption “Note the faces which are more Middle Eastern or mixed than pure Norwegian”. Full details here.

7. Pamela Geller is formally allied with racist white supremacists and European neo-Nazis; she has even organised joint public demonstrations with them, and then tried to hide the evidence when her allies’ explicitly Nazi sympathies were publicly exposed.

8. Pamela Geller is now on record as publicly advocating what is effectively a “Final Solution” targeting British Muslims, including mass-murder.

9. Pamela Geller is on record as insisting “There are no moderates. There are no extremists. There are only Muslims”.

10. Pamela Geller is on record as denying the Srebrenica genocide, describing it as a “fabricated narrative”, a “lie”, and a “manufactured genocide” that is part of a “classic Islamic modus operandi of self-killing and manipulating media coverage”. Geller is also on record as defending the Serbian war criminal Radovan Karadzic. Extensive details here.

David Yerushalmi:

1. David Yerushalmi is Robert Spencer & Pamela Geller’s lawyer. He has been directly involved in supporting the SION/SIOA/AFDI leadership.

2. David Yerushalmi heads an organisation whose mission statement explicitly declares that its [currently unidentified] members are “dedicated to the rejection of democracy” in the United States.

3. David Yerushalmi believes that American women shouldn’t even have the right to vote.

4. David Yerushalmi is on record as claiming that there is a racial hierarchy of intelligence, with black people at the bottom.

5. David Yerushalmi is General Counsel for Frank Gaffney’s Center for Security Policy, an extreme right-wing organisation actively trying to infiltrate & influence US domestic, foreign and (particularly) military policy; the CSP’s financiers include a number of the largest weapons manufacturers in the world.

6. The Center for Security Policy is also the main source of the ridiculous conspiracy theories about “Muslim Brotherhood infiltration” of the Obama Administration.

7. Frank Gaffney himself was recently exposed as having attended networking events organised by David Cole (aka “David Stein”), a high-profile (and unrepentant) Holocaust revisionist. Commenting on Cole’s views on the Holocaust, Rabbi Abraham Cooper, associate dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Centre, stated “I’m very disappointed that someone who abused his Jewishness to get his five minutes of notoriety still stands by his lies. It’s disgusting and puts him in the camp of bigotry.”

8. According to the New York Times, Frank Gaffney is David “Yerushalmi’s primary link to a network of former and current government officials, security analysts and grass-roots political organizations” and is also able to tap “a network of Tea Party and Christian groups as well as ACT! for America, which has 170,000 members”.

9. Despite the fact that David Yerushalmi, Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer publicly claim to be staunch supporters of the concept of “freedom of speech” and refer to this concept when justifying their own actions, they keep threatening to sue people who exercise their own freedom of speech against them.

English Defence League:

1. On a personal note, as a Sikh I’d like to mention that the EDL have been forcefully condemned in ajoint statement by a very long list of British Sikh temples and organisations, including the two largest Sikh temples outside India. The signatories also include the most senior Sikh religious leader outside India; he is (a) closely linked to the global Sikh authorities at the Golden Temple complex in Amritsar, and personally represents the global Sikh community at the Parliament of the World’s Religions, (b) the recipient of an award from England’s Queen Elizabeth II due to his Guru Nanak Nishkam Sewak Jatha organisation’s humanitarian activities, and (c) the recipient of the rare honour of being one of the few non-Catholics whom the Vatican has formally declared a Knight of the Papal Order of St Gregory, due to his exemplary efforts to promote peace between people of all religions.

2. The EDL have also been publicly condemned by the Israeli Embassy and more than a dozen major Jewish organisations in the UK, including the Board of Deputies of British Jews, the Jewish Council for Racial Equality, the Community Security Trust, and Jews for Justice for Palestinians. (Alsosee here.)

3. The EDL leadership are members of the “Stop Islamization of Nations (“SION”) Presidents Council”.

4. The EDL leadership are formally allied with racist white supremacists and European neo-Nazis; they have also organised joint public demonstrations with the aforementioned neo-Nazis, in conjunction with Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller (who were also present).

5. The EDL leadership are on record as repeatedly admitting that their agenda is racially-motivated; EDL leader Stephen Yaxley (aka “Tommy Robinson/Stephen Yaxley-Lennon/Stephen Lennon/Paul Harris) himself is also on record as repeatedly making public statements clearly demonstrating that he is using the terms “Muslim” and “Islam/Islamic” as codewords for “South Asian”; furthermore, Stephen Yaxley is on record as publicly accusing “every single Muslim” of collective guilt and simultaneously threatening the entire “Islamic community” with retribution involving “the full force of the English Defence League”. Further details hereherehereherehereherehereherehere,here, and here. (Also refer to this article.)

6. Stephen Yaxley is on record as publicly promoting neo-Nazi, anti-Semitic, white supremacist websites and organisations, in one instance citing defamatory material from such websites live on the BBC in front of millions of British viewers, and subsequently promoting the same neo-Nazi website online; further details of such incidents are available here and here. (Also see here andhere.)

7. During an EDL demonstration in London in May 2013, a major British news channel photographedmultiple EDL members openly doing Nazi salutes in Stephen Yaxley’s immediate vicinity; Yaxley is the man in the brown army/camouflage jacket surrounded by EDL members.

8. Stephen Yaxley is on record as giving an interview to the Norwegian media in which he publicly praised Anders Breivik, promoted Breivik’s manifesto, and claimed Breivik’s mass-murdering terrorist attack would have been “easier to justify” if the people killed had been Muslims. Full detailshere and here.

9. Stephen Yaxley has been prosecuted and convicted for illegally travelling to the US using a false passport in order to attend an anti-Muslim conference hosted by Robert Spencer, Pamela Geller and David Yerushalmi in New York in September 2012. Full details herehereherehere, and here.

10. EDL co-founder Kevin Carroll is on record as ranting about non-Christians being “pagans” whom he will “never bend or bow to”; Pamela Geller, David Yerushalmi and David Horowitz are of course non-Christians themselves. Kevin Carroll also gave a speech at the aforementioned anti-Muslim conference in New York, a fact that Geller enthusiastically publicised on her own website.

11. EDL co-founder Richard Price is a convicted criminal on multiple counts of downloading child pornography; at the time, Stephen Yaxley first tried to cover this up, and then launched a campaign to try to free Price from prison. Details here and here. The EDL leadership also released an official statement defending Price, written by Yaxley (screenshot here).

12. The EDL leadership were deputy leaders of the now-defunct “British Freedom Party”, a white supremacist Far-Right political party in the UK whose extremely discriminatory religious policies targeted everyone who was not a Christian (including Jews, Hindus and Sikhs) and their respective places of worship. Furthermore, BFP chairman Paul Weston is on record as revealing his real views in an article titled “Ethnically Cleansing the English”, published on the extremely anti-Muslim websiteGates of Vienna in March 2010; Weston’s article is openly racist. The article also repeatedly implies that non-white people are automatically “Muslim”, whom Weston proceeds to stereotype and demonise in the worst terms. (Also see here). Weston was present alongside the EDL leadership, Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller when they hosted a demonstration in Europe which they had organised in conjunction with European neo-Nazis.

13. An extensive list of the criminal records of EDL members is available here, including details of the criminal convictions of the EDL leadership themselves (especially Stephen Yaxley). Members of the EDL have been prosecuted and convicted for murder, arson, assault, human trafficking, child abuse, and child pornography.

14. Robert Spencer is on record as claiming that “the EDL deserves the support of all free people”.

15. The EDL’s allies and apologists claim that it is a “working class” organisation; Robert Spencer is even on record as recently describing the EDL as “made up of people from a lower social class” and claiming that opposition to the EDL is therefore based on “class” issues. Douglas Murray is on record as previously commending some aspects of the EDL, stating “If you’re ever going to have a grassroots response for non-Muslims to Islamism, that would be how you’d want it, surely.” However, a Sunday Times investigation exposed some very revealing facts about several of the EDL leadership’s wealthy British backers, particularly Alan Ayling (aka “Alan Lake”) and Ann Marchini. Furthermore, despite Stephen Yaxley’s efforts to portray himself as “working class”, along with his claims that he “has no money”, during a televised BBC debate in June 2013 Yaxley publicly admitted that one of his businesses turns over £300,000/year (video footage here; see 22m onwards); on 1 July 2013, Yaxley also admitted online that he actually “owns 7 properties which are all rented out”, with “taxable income”.

“Ali Sina”:

1. “Ali Sina” is currently unidentified.

2. “Ali Sina” is named as a Board member of Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller’s “Stop Islamization of Nations” and “Stop Islamization of America” organisations.

3. “Ali Sina” was cited by Anders Breivik in his manifesto.

4. “Ali Sina” claims to be an “atheist”, but his own writings expose him as a fanatical Christian extremist; he also bizarrely keeps comparing his own experiences to those of Jesus.

5. “Ali Sina” is repeatedly on record as promoting the genocide of Muslims, claiming that Muslims are “diseased”, “infected”, bereft of “every trace of humanity”, “all guilty as sin”, and must be “amputated”.

6. “Ali Sina” is on record as claiming that the Prophet Mohammad was “an instrument of Satan” and that it is a “demonic plot to end humanity”.

7. “Ali Sina” is on record as exhibiting extremely anti-Semitic attitudes, claiming that the Prophet Mohammad “copied his religion from what he learned from the Jews”, “The similarity between Islamic thinking and Judaic thinking is not a coincidence”, “Islam and Judaism have a lot in common…..the main common feature between these two faiths is their intolerance”, “This intolerance in Judaic texts gave the narcissist Muhammad the power to do as he pleased…..How could he get away with that ? The answer lies in Judaism…..The reason Arabs fell into his [Mohammad’s] trap was because of the groundwork laid by the Rabbis in Arabia”.

Considering the fact that this irrefutable information about Robert Spencer and his inner circle is a heavily-documented matter of public record, it raises the question of whether (1) Douglas Murray and Melanie Phillips have been shockingly incompetent about researching their allies, (2) Murray and Phillips have been tricked by these allies, or (3) Murray and Phillips are perfectly aware of these damning facts but are still supporting and defending Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller nevertheless.

The first option, as I said, suggests gross incompetence. The second option perhaps reflects worse on Robert Spencer and his inner circle, including the David Horowitz Freedom Center. The third option, however, reflects extremely badly on Douglas Murray and Melanie Phillips themselves. Either way, Murray and Phillips clearly have some explaining to do.

*********************************************************************************************************

DOUGLAS MURRAY:

1. From Douglas Murray’s Wikipedia profile:

Douglas Kear Murray (born 16 July 1979) is a British neoconservative writer and commentator. He was the director of the Centre for Social Cohesion from 2007 until 2011, and is currently an associate director of the Henry Jackson Society.

Kingston University’s Dr Marko Hoare, formerly a senior member of the Henry Jackson Society, writes on his own website:

The HJS is a UK think-tank frequently described as ‘neoconservative’. It includes among its Trustees Michael Gove, the current Secretary of State for Education, and it is alleged to have influenced the foreign policy of David Cameron and William Hague. It currently serves as a secretariat, at the House of Commons, to the All-Party Parliamentary Groups for Transatlantic and International Security and for Homeland Security.

From a Guardian article written during the launch of the Henry Jackson Society in 2005:

Richard Perle, one of the Pentagon advisers credited with persuading George Bush of the case for invading Iraq, worked for [Henry] Jackson and is one of the Society’s patrons. The list of patrons reads like a roll call of hawks: William Kristol of the rightwing Weekly Standard, the former Nato commander General Jack Sheehan and the ex-CIA director James Woolsey, among others. The supporters include a smattering of spooks, diplomats, Times journalists and grandees whom recent events have treated badly: David Trimble, Colonel Tim Collins, Irwin Stelzer (another Cameron fan) and the former head of MI6, Sir Richard Dearlove.

From a Guardian article in 2013:

When it was first created in 2005, the London-based Henry Jackson Society (HJS) appeared to offer a base for those on the centre-left and right who believed in a variant of “muscular liberalism”. Much like the senator after whom it was named, the HJS sought to fuse a concern for social justice at home with a hardline approach to totalitarianism and autocracy abroad.

As a result the organisation attracted broad parliamentary support, including 11 Labour MPs, who continue to sit on the organisation’s advisory council to this day.

In February, Labour’s shadow secretary for defence, Jim Murphy, even gave a speech on policy at an event organised by the HJS.

According to those who’ve worked behind the scenes at the HJS, however, in recent years the organisation has degenerated into something that is anything but liberal.

…..The spirit of intolerance at the HJS appears also to extend to those who have taken issue with Murray’s rhetoric.

Marko Attila Hoare, a former senior member of the Henry Jackson Society who left the organisation in 2012, told me that his opposition to Murray’s anti-Muslim and anti-immigration views saw him driven out of the organisation.

“It rapidly became clear that Murray had not tamed his politics, and that actually they were becoming the politics of the whole organisation,” Hoare told me.

Murray’s boss, HJS executive director Alan Mendoza, has form too. In March of this year he claimed that the increasing European Muslim population was to blame for Europe’s “anti-Israel feelings”, adding that the voices of Muslims “are heard well above the average Europeans”.

Eleven Labour MPs are still associated with this organisation. How, one wonders, do the views of the Henry Jackson Society sit with one-nation Labour?

I wrote to all 11 Labour MPs with my concerns about the Henry Jackson Society but none were available for comment.

2. Tom Brake, a senior British MP who is also Deputy Leader of the House of Commons, hasrecently resigned from the Henry Jackson Society after questions were raised about disturbing comments from a number of the controversial think-tank’s senior executives, including Douglas Murray.

3. Douglas Murray is the author of “Neoconservatism: Why We Need It – A Talk to the Manhattan Institute”. Full text available here.

4. Douglas Murray is also on the international advisory board of NGO Monitor, a Jerusalem-based organisation which prominent Jewish figures and organisations such as a member of the International Council of the New Israel Fund and former Deputy Attorney General of Israel, a former New Israel Fund president, the New Israel Fund itself, a Managing Editor of the Jewish Telegraphic Agency and a senior reporter for the Jerusalem Post, have all accused of promoting false information.. NGO Monitor has also been forcefully criticised by prominent figures and organisations including Human Rights Watch, journalists at The Jerusalem Post, and a former professor of Politics and Klutznick Professor of Contemporary Jewish Studies at Brandeis University. Furthermore, in January 2010, thirteen Israeli human rights organizations released a common statement which described NGO Monitor as “extremist” and accused the organisation as engaging in an “unbridled and incendiary attack” against human rights groups.

5. A rare example of Douglas Murray’s “moderate” mask dropping in front of the mainstream British media was one particularly notable incident on the BBC’s Question Time on 5 May 2011. Murray was subsequently confronted and demolished by the veteran British politician (and former special forces soldier) Paddy Ashdown. Full video footage here.

6. Douglas Murray has publicly made extremely defamatory statements about the British anti-racism organisation Hope Not Hate. Murray specifically blamed HnH for the attempted shooting of the EDL-and-Anders Breivik-linked Danish anti-Muslim propagandist Lars Hedegaard. Murray also made some further dubious statements about the Far-Right and Breivik. Full details here. (Note: HnH of course subsequently played a key role in facilitating Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller’s banning from the UK).

7. Douglas Murray has subsequently published a follow-up article in support of Lars Hedegaard and his organisation. Extensive details here, including information on Hedegaard’s own actions & extremely anti-Muslim statements.

8. Douglas Murray definitely has direct links to Robert Spencer, going back a number of years. Initial details in this excellent article by Richard Bartholomew.

9. Douglas Murray has repeatedly appeared as a guest on Frank Gaffney’s radio show, including this interview in 2011 when Murray defended Lars Hedegaard.

10. Video footage of Douglas Murray and Robert Spencer giving anti-Muslim speeches at a joint conference in West Palm Beach, Florida. According to the explanatory information attached to the video, the conference was hosted by a member of the David Horowitz Freedom Center. As mentioned previously, Horowitz is of course Spencer’s “boss”.

(Melanie Phillips was also one of the three main speakers at the conference, alongside Spencer and Murray. Video footage in the next section further below).

11. Douglas Murray has participated in other anti-Muslim conferences organised by the David Horowitz Freedom Center in the US, alongside Robert Spencer and Frank Gaffney. For example, seehere and here. American readers in particular will recognise the senior Republican politicians and other public figures also present at these annual events (also see here and here).

12. An article was published on Robert Spencer’s “JihadWatch” website proving that Spencer’s direct links to Douglas Murray go back to 2006 at the very least (includes photographic evidence).

13. The following articles from 2010 and 2011 briefly mention Douglas Murray’s links to Robert Spencer, although it’s unclear if the Guardian authors were aware of the full scale of Murray’s direct involvement with the Spencer cabal: See herehere and here.

14. It also turns out that (a) Douglas Murray has appeared on a high-profile “Intelligence Squared” debate alongside Ayaan Hirsi Ali, where both presented anti-Muslim propaganda [see the information at the end of the “Views on Islamic fundamentalism” section on this webpage], and (b) Murray has published an article defending Hirsi Ali. Note that Hirsi Ali (whose background story has been exposed as falsified) is now on record as giving a speech in Germany in which she publicly sympathised with Anders Breivik and blamed so-called “advocates of silence” for Breivik’s mass-murdering terrorist attack. As that Loonwatch article detailing the incident also highlights, this is just the tip of the iceberg, considering an earlier interview in which Hirsi Ali revealed the full scale of her shocking beliefs — which are far more extreme than is generally known.

15. Dr Marko Hoare, a former founding member of Douglas Murray’s Henry Jackson Society, has published a considerable amount of “inside information” on the HJS leadership, including matters pertaining to Murray himself. Marko Hoare has resigned from the HJS, basically due to his disgust at (a) the organisation’s shift to the extreme Right, (b) the organisation’s hiring of Douglas Murray, (c) Murray’s extreme anti-Muslim views and his close alliance with Robert Spencer [including Spencer’s denial of the Srebrenica genocide], and (d) what appears to be the organisation’s systematic “conspiracy of silence” regarding Anders Breivik.

Marko Hoare has written very detailed articles on these issues:

—- Article focusing on Douglas Murray. It includes lengthy quotes providing a range of examples of Murray’s anti-Muslim propaganda.

—- Article detailing the aforementioned “inside information” on the Henry Jackson Society leadership, including details on Marko Hoare’s clashes with Douglas Murray, the issues involving Anders Breivik, and full details of Marko Hoare’s reasons for subsequently resigning.

I will also provide some extracts from the first article, specifically quotes of Douglas Murray’s statements that Marko Hoare has highlighted (the original article includes embedded URL links to the primary sources of information, including embedded video footage where applicable). Readers will notice that a lot of Murray’s rhetoric about Muslims sounds disturbingly familiar:

Douglas Murray: “In the middle of the last century, there was an almost negligible Muslim presence in Europe [sic !] At the turn of the twenty-first, in Western Europe alone, there were 15-17 million Muslims – that’s a very fast migration, ladies and gentlemen; one of the fastest in human history, and no society would find it easy to deal with that kind of migration. As it happens, European societies, Western European societies, have, I think, dealt with this, much better than some would. Certainly, Muslims coming to live in Britain and in Western Europe enjoy more rights and better rights, among them freedom of worship, than they do in any Islamic country on the Earth here today. We do have a problem; we have a problem when the failures of Islam throughout the world; the failures of all Islamic societies come here into Britain. Their intolerance of freedom of conscience; their intolerance of apostates; their intolerance of freedom of expression and freedom of speech; their intolerance of minorities, other religious minorities, sexual minorities; their intolerance of gays; their dislike and distrust of half of the population – women; and many, many other things. And they call, what is more, for a parallel legal system within Britain and European societies. This is monstrous; no other group behaves like this – asks for parallel laws. This is a fundamental problem, and it’s one we’re going to have to deal with. It’s a problem between a society – Western Europe – that believes that laws are based on reason, and Islam that believes that they are based on revelation. Between these two ideas, I’m not sure there is very much compromise for Europe. It is not Europe that has let down its Muslims, but the Muslims of Europe that have let down Europe. … It is not Europe that has failed its Muslims; it is Islam that has failed Europe. I’d argue, Islam has failed its Muslims”.

Douglas Murray: “It is late in the day, but Europe still has time to turn around the demographic time-bomb which will soon see a number of our largest cities fall to Muslim majorities. It has to. All immigration into Europe from Muslim countries must stop. In the case of a further genocide such as that in the Balkans, sanctuary would be given on a strictly temporary basis. This should also be enacted retrospectively. Those who are currently in Europe having fled tyrannies should be persuaded back to the countries which they fled from once the tyrannies that were the cause of their flight have been removed.”

[Jai’s note: Regular readers will notice that Murray’s speech immediately above, along with a speech by Murray in 2006 quoted immediately below, sound strikingly similar to the following statements by the currently-unidentified anti-Muslim propagandist who has used the online alias “Hugh Fitzgerald” and is named as Vice-President of Robert Spencer’s “JihadWatch” website. Details on “Hugh Fitzgerald” here; the information in the subsequent comments thread is also important. Anders Breivik cited “Hugh Fitzgerald” more than a dozen times in his manifesto.

“Hugh Fitzgerald” in 2005“A complete ban on Muslim migration to the Western world (which needs to be undertaken in any case), and limits put on any contact between Muslims living in the West, who may already have obtained citizenship and — unless they are native-born converts – their countries of origin.….No, there is another way, or many other ways. And the first way is to put a complete stop to Muslim immigration, and to find creative ways to deport all Muslim non-citizens. These two measures would be accompanied by the creation of an environment where the practice of Islam is made not easy but difficult.….An end to all outward and visible signs of rhetorical “respect” for Islam…..Stop all attempts at verbal escamotage, where the listener is left, puzzled, dissatisfied with the deliberate vagueness…..Clean out the taxpayer-funded government radio and televisions stations of those who have so misled us about Islam over the past 20-30 years. Begin, possibly, by firing John Simpson, the deeply, even conspiratorially, anti-Israel and islamophilic head of the BBC World Affairs broadcasting…..What will it take for the long-suffering British license-payers to demand a change in the BBC coverage and, even before that, in the personnel in charge of reporting on the Middle East and Islam?”

Douglas Murray in 2006: ”Conditions for Muslims in Europe must be made harder across the board: Europe must look like a less attractive proposition. We in Europe owe – after all – no special dues to Islam. We owe them no religious holidays, special rights or privileges. From long before we were first attacked it should have been made plain that people who come into Europe are here under our rules and not theirs. There is not an inch of ground to give on this one. Where a mosque has become a centre of hate it should be closed and pulled down. If that means that some Muslims don’t have a mosque to go to, then they’ll just have to realise that they aren’t owed one. Grievances become ever-more pronounced the more they are flattered and the more they are paid attention to. So don’t flatter them.”

[Jai’s note 1: On 28 July 2013, Murray appeared on the BBC’s Sunday Morning Livedebate programme, opposite Huffington Post UK Political Director Mehdi Hasan, debating the subject “Are Muslims being demonised ?”. Full video footage here. During the discussion, Fiyaz Mughal, director of the “Faith Matters” think-tank and the “TellMAMA” project, quoted some of Murray’s speech above and also mentioned that Murray had advocated that mosques should be “demolished in some circumstances” in the same speech. As can be seen at 10m 50s – 11m 00s, Murray subsequently accused Fiyaz Mughal of misquoting him, claiming that he had merely advocated that mosques should be “shut down” in some circumstances, not “demolished”. However, as can be seen in the original text of Murray’s speech above, he had indeed advocated that mosques should be “pulled down”. There are only two plausible explanations: (a) Murray does not accurately remember his own statements in that speech, despite the fact that video footage and full transcripts are widely available online, or (b) Murray was deliberately lying during his “rebuttal” to Fiyaz Mughal onSunday Morning Live. Readers are also strongly advised to observe Murray’s reaction and comments when Mehdi Hasan mentioned Anders Breivik (see 6m 15s – 6m 35s).

Jai’s note 2: In October 2011, Murray wrote an article for the ConservativeHomewebsite in which he claimed to have disowned this speech a long time ago. However,as documented by Paul Goodman, the timeframe does not even remotely match the actual sequence of events involving Murray’s own public statements and actions.

Paul Goodman writes: “Murray claims to have realised that the speech was poorly expressed “some years ago”. But as I pointed out earlier, he defended it in print only last October: “I refused to change my opinions”, he wrote. Furthermore, he cited the support of others for them. “What I advocated had been argued by members of the conservative party of Holland and was, and is, being argued by mainstream politicians across Europe”. Readers will scour the piece in vain for the slightest hint that the views of the speech are “not opinions I hold”, or for the faintest indication that he considered his words “poorly expressed”. In short, Murray praised a speech twelve months ago that he now claims to have disowned for years.

Furthermore, I can find no previous record of him renouncing his Amsterdam speech – the course that I recommended to him when we met before the election. It is thus reasonable to ask whether he would have done so had I not raised the matter recently. Readers must decide for themselves whether first surreptitiously to remove a speech from a website, then laud it in print without direct quotation, and finally disown it under pressure – while claiming to have done so long ago – is decent or not. I believe it is part of a pattern of disingenuousness.”].

Douglas Murray: ”If there were one thing I would wish Muslims in Europe could learn today, as fast as possible, it would be this: you have no right, in this society, not to be offended. You have no right to say that because you don’t like something, you would use violence or you would like something to be stopped or censored…”

[Jai’s note: Murray has also spoken at conferences dedicated to attacking Muslims for employing libel “lawfare” to silence criticism of Islam (video footage here and here. However, as documented here, ironically Murray himself has an extensive history of accusing his critics of “libel” and threatening to sue them; Murray’s targets so far have included the Huffington Post, Marko Hoare, and Guardian political journalist Sunny Hundal].

[Marko Hoare writes]:Murray has denounced the idea of the ‘Ground Zero mosque’ as a ’sick joke’. He has written passionately in defence of Geert Wilders, a Dutch far-right populist politician who believes that the Koran should be banned. He hasdescribed Islam as a ‘very backward ideology’, and complains that ‘Britain has already gone too far in accommodating Islamic ideology into our culture’. He hasaccused the Pope of having been ‘forced to pacify the Islamic beast’, and spoken of ‘the laughable, ahistorical and uniquely retrospective form of religious imperialism that Islam is’. In March of this year – immediately prior to the merger of the CSC with the HJS – Murray travelled to Athens to argue, alongside Melanie Phillips, against the opening of a mosque in that city, on the grounds that such a mosque could become a centre for Islamic extremism, and that ’Islam when it is in a minority, is extremely good at talking about tolerance. In a minority, Islam loves to talk about the tolerance that people must show towards minorities [but] whenever Islam is in a majority, minority rights are nowhere to be seen. It’s a one-directional talk of minority rights… You better hope, ladies and gentlemen, that your mosque here is a first internationally, and that nobody with any unpleasant statements, any unpleasant ideas could possibly come to it’, before issuing further lurid warnings of the Islamic danger to his Greek audience, including a reference to the Islamism of the current Turkish prime minister. Murray said these things in Greece, a country where the Orthodox Christian nationalist right is extremely powerful, aggressive, intolerant and Islamophobic, while the Muslim Turkish minority is denied basic democratic rights.

[Jai’s note: Readers will notice that Murray bizarrely referred to Islam (a religious belief system) as though it were a conscious, sentient entity. The nature of those statements suggests that Murray was actually referring to Muslims. Murray has a history of making similar statements, eg. “Islam is not violent per se, though they’re quite good at it when they’re in charge”. Murray’s own statements also contradict thefollowing assertion he made in 2007 (in which Murray also refuses to describe Islam as a religion): “Islam is not a race, it’s an ideology. It’s not bad to dislike someone for their ideology. That is not racism.” Murray made that assertion after a Jewish community leader commented that British Jews should be aware of the existence of Islamophobia as well as anti-Semitism.]

16. In May 2013, the Guardian published a revealing article by James Bloodworth, highlighting some new incriminating facts about Douglas Murray, the Henry Jackson Society and the Labour party. The HJS leadership are proven to be racially-motivated (eg. note Murray’s claims about white Britons “abolishing themselves” etc):

[James Bloodworth writes]: In March, Murray wrote an article following the release of the results of the 2011 census in which he bemoaned the fact that in “23 of London’s 33 boroughs ‘white Britons’ are now in a minority”. It wasn’t so much integration that Murray wanted to talk about, however, but skin colour:

“We long ago reached the point where the only thing white Britons can do is to remain silent about the change in their country. Ignored for a generation, they are expected to get on, silently but happily, with abolishing themselves, accepting the knocks and respecting the loss of their country. ‘Get over it. It’s nothing new. You’re terrible. You’re nothing’.”

[Jai’s note: Murray subsequently wrote an article making a series of demonstrably false allegations against Marko Hoare, including (a) the specific reasons for Dr Hoare’s objections to Murray’s statements quoted above, (b) grossly exaggerating the frequency of Dr Hoare’s tweets and blogs referring to Murray, (c) falsely claiming that Dr Hoare “frequently abuses” Murray, (d) grossly downplaying and distorting the nature and extent of Dr Hoare’s previous involvement with the Henry Jackson Society, and (e) falsely claiming that “It is no-one’s fault if they have not heard of Hoare. His opinions are largely self-published”, despite the fact that Dr Hoare is actually an academic at Kingston University who is well-known as a historian of the former Yugoslavia and whose work has been published by Oxford University Press.]

17. Marco Hoare has claimed that “Alan Mendoza and Douglas Murray, respectively Executive Director and Associate Director of the Henry Jackson Society, have been attempting systematically to falsify the history of the organisation they run”. Dr Hoare provides evidence supporting his claim, including screenshots of documents detailing the organisation’s founding (along with further information),here and here. Furthermore, Dr Hoare states in the second article: “Despite his spurious claim to have a ‘well-established track record of support for the Bosnian Muslim population’, Mendoza was removed a year ago from the International Expert Team of the Institute for the Research of Genocide Canada, which fights genocide denial over Bosnia, Srebrenica and the Holocaust. The IRGC’s director, Professor Emir Ramic, and its Governing Board were rather quicker than I was myself in correctly understanding him and taking appropriate action.”

18. Soon after the murder of Lee Rigby in London in May 2013, Douglas Murray published an e-booksarcastically titled “Islamophilia”. The book is published on Melanie Phillips’ new e-book company, which is also geared towards targeting audiences in the US.

19. Douglas Murray has promoted his e-book “Islamophilia” on the extremely anti-Muslim ”Sun News Network” Canadian news channel. Video footage here. The channel has previously given a platform to Robert Spencer and other members of his inner circle, including Pamela Geller, David Yerushalmi, David Horowitz, and EDL leader Stephen Yaxley.

20. Douglas Murray has publicly claimed that the prominent British atheist scientist Richard Dawkins criticises Christianity and Judaism but “avoids” Islam. As extensively documented here, in reality Dawkins has a lengthy history of writing extremely anti-Muslim/anti-Islam propaganda, and he has even been exposed as citing & promoting material from hate websites run by none other than Robert Spencer’s extremist inner circle, specifically “Ali Sina”. Furthermore, it turns out that Murray and Dawkins know each other; for example, they recently took part in a public debate at Cambridge, albeit ostensibly on opposing sides (details here and here.). On his own Youtube channel, Murray has also repeatedly promoted videos of televised BBC debates where Murray and Dawkins have appeared together (eg. see here and here). Dawkins himself recently approvingly re-tweeted the aforementioned Spectator article Murray wrote after Spencer and Geller’s banning from the UK, claiming “Douglas Murray exposes “A gross double standard over hate speech”; UK Government’s gross favouritism of Islam again”.

21. The Times and Jewish Chronicle columnist David Aaronovitch wrote an excellent article about Douglas Murray on 7 July 2013. The article is worth reading in full, but some key extracts are as follows:

“Two weeks ago in the JC the writer Douglas Murray described the idea of Islamophobia as “a crock”. Douglas and I have shared a few platforms over the years…..So it is with disappointment and trepidation that I take issue with him here. He is, I think, completely wrong. And here’s why…..[…]…..

Some of this is, whatever Douglas says, very familiar. Before the race theories of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, antisemitism (or Jew hatred) was not racial. The problem wasn’t with the Jews themselves but with what they obstinately believed. If they abandoned Judaism they could become good people. So it is quite possible to posit an Islamophobia which corresponds to pre-racial antisemitism. The fact that, in this society, most Muslims are brown, can give this hatred a racial dimension…..

As to “they bring it on themselves”, well maybe some few do. But the people who then do the supplying of “it”: the attacking and scaring and intimidation of ordinary Muslims for being Muslims – the EDL foot-soldiers and the BNP and the rhetorical fringes of UKIP – well, we’ve seen them before. We see them now. We understand their atavistic urge. Whatever we call it, we who think about it know what it is.”

22. It is presently unclear if the BBC are aware of the full scale of Douglas Murray’s views, activities and affiliations.

23. Extensive further information about Douglas Murray is available hereherehereherehere, andhere. Readers are advised to familiarise themselves with the material in all of these articles.

*********************************************************************************************************

MELANIE PHILLIPS:

1. Melanie Phillips is currently primarily known as a journalist for the Daily Mail. On her own website, Phillips describes herself as a journalist and writer who moved from “darling of the left” to “champion” of what Phillips describes as “the moral high ground”; readers can draw their own conclusions about the accuracy of the latter statement, considering the facts highlighted in this article.

2. Melanie Phillips was cited by Anders Breivik in his manifesto; he even quoted an entire article Phillips had written for the Daily Mail.

3. Like Douglas Murray, it turns out that Melanie Phillips is also much more closely involved in joint activities with the David Horowitz Freedom Center and Robert Spencer than is publicly known here in the UK. Page after page of information is available online via Google, including sources associated with the DHFC itself.

4. Video footage of Melanie Phillips giving an anti-Muslim speech alongside Robert Spencer and Douglas Murray at the aforementioned DHFC-hosted conference in West Palm Beach is availablehere and here.

5. An “insider’s account” of a DHFC-hosted anti-Muslim conference involving Melanie Phillips, Robert Spencer and Douglas Murray is available here. According to that article, the conference was held at West Palm Beach in the US.

6. As mentioned at the start of this article, Melanie Phillips has repeatedly appeared as a panellist on the BBC’s high-profile Question Time political debate programme in the UK. Her most recent appearance was in June 2013, when she bizarrely claimed that Syria and Iran are part of a proxy war currently involving “the Soviet Union”, a nation-state that actually hasn’t existed for decades (video footage here; see 1m 08s onwards).

7. Furthermore, even though the main topic of discussion during that episode of Question Time was actually Syria, Phillips then started ranting about Iran, Shia Muslims and “the apocalypse”, including claiming that Iran cannot be negotiated with and therefore needs to be “neutralised”. Phillips’ statements triggered a vocal backlash from the audience; this resulted in further strange behaviour from Phillips, in which she insultingly shouted at audience members and accused them of being “ignorant”. Full video footage here.

8. Writing in the Daily Mail in 2009, Melanie Phillips made the following statements in an article criticising the Far-Right BNP (British National Party):

“Such distinctions [between Islamic extremists and ordinary Muslims] should fool no one. The BNP is hostile not merely to Islamic supremacists but to all Muslims, including those who threaten no one’s way of life.”

However, Phillips herself is also on record as making the following statements:

“The problem, however, is that it doesn’t understand what Muslim extremism is. Believing that Islamic terrorism is motivated by an ideology which has ‘hijacked’ and distorted Islam, it will not acknowledge the extremism within mainstream Islam itself.”

9. From LeftFootForward:

Left Foot Forward has learned that [Pamela] Geller’s inspiration is none other than the British Daily Mail and Spectator columnist, Melanie Phillips.

On her blog, Geller describes Phillips as “a great intellect and truth teller, a woman I greatly admire” and says that Phillips’ book, ‘Londonistan’, is “the most compelling book on Islamic fundamentalism, violence and intimidation in the West.”

Geller has posted videos of a talk by Phillips, and quotes Phillips as telling a US audience:

“There has been over the past 20 to 30 years an evisceration of British National identity and values which has created a cultural and moral vacuum being exploited by Radical Islamism which has come to fill that vacuum.”

Phillips has written defensively of the English Defense League in the past, writing of one clash between EDL and anti-fascist protesters:

“In any street altercation like this, the anti-Islamist demonstrators must be aggressors and those who confront them must be either their victims or heroic anti-fascists.”

“The Islamists have an incentive to provoke a violent reaction by white groups calling themselves names like English Defence League — simply in order to produce yet more demonisation of the anti-Islamists.”

She has criticised former Communities Secretary John Denham for not ‘critically engaging’ with the EDL, and called his comparison of the EDL to Mosley’s Blackshirts “absurd” and “offensive.” Phillips continued:

“The label of the ‘far right’ toxifies everything it touches. There is now a real danger than anyone who opposes Islamic supremacism will find themselves vilified not only as ‘Islamophobes’ but also as BNP fellow-travellers.”

10. Melanie Phillips is now targeting the United States via her new e-publishing company. As mentioned above, Phillips’ company has recently published an e-book titled “Islamophilia”, written by Douglas Murray. The Independent has a fairly detailed article on Phillips’ plans; some key extracts are as follows:

“Yesterday she launched a US-focused ebook publishing company called emBooks, a branch of of Melanie Phillips Electric Media LLC, which will provide a platform for a range of authors,…..

“What you’re getting is not just a set of books, you’re getting a particular viewpoint that is associated with me,” she told The Independent yesterday. Phillips, who recently described Barack Obama as a “sulky narcissist with close links to people with a history of thuggish, far-left, black-power, Jew-bashing, west-hating politics”, may hope to find a receptive audience among America’s Tea Party-aligned conservatives.

…..Phillips said that her goal was to open up public debate “with a different set of voices and a different set of attitudes”……“I do think that western society is in quite a lot of serious trouble and I want to forge a way of addressing these problems that brings people together rather than pushing people apart,” Phillips said. Although she will continue to write for the Daily Mail and appear as a panellist on BBC Radio 4’s Moral Maze, Phillips said that along with setting up the company in America, she would be engaging more closely with US politics.

“I’ve always looked further than Britain,” she said. “This is not an ordinary e-publishing company, I’m not simply publishing books, as any ebook company would, just because they’re interesting and I think they’re going to sell. That’s part of it, but that’s not all of it. It’s very much to do with putting across my general take on the world.”

11. From Melanie Phillips’ Wikipedia profile:

Phillips’s criticisms of liberal Jews who disagree with her positions on Israel have been condemned by Jewish writers such as Jonathan Freedland, Alan Dershowitz, and Rabbi David Goldberg. Freedland criticised Phillips’s labelling Independent Jewish Voices, a group of liberal Jews, as “Jews For Genocide”. He wrote in The Jewish Chronicle: “Now, as it happens, I have multiple criticisms of IJV […] but even their most trenchant opponents must surely blanch at the notion that these critics of Israel and of Anglo-Jewish officialdom are somehow in favour of genocide—literally, eager to see the murder and eradication of the Jewish people […] it is an absurdity, one that drains the word ‘genocide’ of any meaning.”

Jonathan Freedland continues (from the Jewish Chronicle):

“But it was a sentence in Melanie’s January JC column that really got me going. “Individual Palestinians may deserve compassion,” she wrote, “but their cause amounts to Holocaust denial as a national project.” Read that line again. I have, along with the entire piece that preceded it. Think about what it means: that the Palestinian urge for national self-determination — their desire to have what we Jews yearned for so long, a homeland of our own where we might govern ourselves — is nothing more than a collective plot to deny Jewish suffering. So those Palestinians living under curfew and hemmed in by checkpoints aren’t angry about this hardship or desperate to throw off a 40-year occupation. No. Their shared desire, their national project, is to join David Irving in pretending that Hitler did not murder six million Jews. Of course, it follows that such people — a nation of neo-Nazis — deserve nothing, let alone a state of their own.

Some will tell me there is no point getting agitated by such sentiments, that newspaper columns are merely tomorrow’s fish-and-chip wrap. That may be true of what most of us in the column business churn out. But Melanie Phillips is different. She has acquired a particularly devoted audience — far beyond these shores.

In the United States, Melanie has a substantial following, with thousands logging on daily to her website or lining up to hear her lectures — several of the leading lights of American Jewry among them. They snap up copies of her book Londonistan, in which Britain — a rotting, decayed island awash with amorality — is on the brink of an Islamist takeover. Above all, they swallow whole her insistence that Europe is back in the 1930s, and that Britain now seethes with Jew-hatred.

I hear this from several well-placed leaders of Britain’s Jewish organisations, who have had to hose down their American counterparts……In response, no less than the Chief Rabbi has had to join other British communal leaders to tell these visiting donors — associated with Aipac and the Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organisations, among others — that London is not the Warsaw ghetto, that Europe is not an inferno and that there is no need for the big US bodies to come to Anglo-Jewry’s rescue. They have also had to explain that the US method of doing business — offering heavy financial help to pro-Israel MPs, for example — would not play well here.

Of course, it is mad to blame one person for shaping this distorted world view. But when asked where they had picked up this apocalyptic impression of the state of British Jewry, the Americans apparently cited one name again and again. Melanie will doubtless be heartened by that — but it might not be so good for the rest of us.”

12. Melanie Phillips is also on record as making the following statements about Israel, Jews, Palestine and Palestinians:

“To repeat for the nth time: Israel was never the Palestinians’ ‘homeland’. It was never taken from them ‘by force’. On the contrary, they tried to take the Jews’ homeland from them by force – and are still trying. It was the Jews alone for whom historically ‘Palestine’ was ever their national homeland.”

13. Since the election of US President Barack Obama, Melanie Phillips has accused him of “adopting the agenda of the Islamists” and of being “firmly in the Islamists camp”. Phillips is also on record as making the following statements:

“We are entitled to ask precisely when [Barack Obama] stopped being a Muslim, and why. Did Obama embrace Christianity as a tactical manoeuvre to get himself elected?”

14. Melanie Phillips also used to write for The Spectator (as mentioned above, Douglas Murray is currently contributing editor for this magazine), but she resigned in June 2011. Further details in theGuardian and the New Statesman.

Extract from the Guardian article:

Melanie Phillips claims that she resigned from The Spectator because it published an apology for one of her blog items. She writes – on her own blog – that the apology “misrepresented my post” and has given rise to “false assumptions.”

The apology, shown here, is to a former MI6 operative, Alastair Crooke, who heads the Conflicts Forum, a body that “aims to open a new relationship between the West and the Muslim world.”

The apology states: “A blog by Melanie Phillips posted on 28 January 2011 reported an allegation that Alastair Crooke, director of Conflicts Forum, had been expelled from Israel and dismissed for misconduct from government service or the EU after threatening a journalist whose email he had unlawfully intercepted. We accept that this allegation is completely false and we apologise to Mr Crooke.”

But Phillips has distanced herself from the apology.

….In a January Spectator blog posting, Phillips described [Baroness Sayeeda] Warsi as “a stupid mouthpiece of those who are bamboozling Britain into Islamisation.”

[Jai’s note: As discussed in the aforementioned article on Richard Dawkins,Baroness Sayeeda Warsi is the target of similar extreme hostility from Dawkins and the EDL leadership. Baroness Warsi is a British Muslim Member of Parliament who is currently the Senior Minister of State at the Foreign & Commonwealth Office and Minister for Faith and Communities; she has also repeatedly spoken out against the increasing mainstreaming of anti-Muslim bigotry in the UK].

Extract from the New Statesman article:

…..a well-connected source tells me that the payout to Crooke cost the Spectator“tens of thousands of pounds” and left Fraser Nelson and Andrew Neil “furious” with her.

15. From Melanie Phillips’ Powerbase profile, specifically the section on Neoconservatism:

In an article published shortly before the US-led invasion of Iraq Phillips told theGuardian’s Andy Beckett: ‘I’ve been very influenced by what’s called the neo-con movement’…..Three years later she posted a review of Douglas Murray’s bookNeoconservatism: Why We Need It. She praised the book and described neoconservatism as ‘the only truly moral response to the times in which we live’.

16. From Melanie Phillips’ Powerbase profile, specifically the section on Londonistan:

In 2006, Phillips published Londonistan: How Britain Has Created a Terror State Within. Londonistan is Phillips’s variation on the Eurabia theme. In a 2008 foreword, she wrote that “Britain is even now sleepwalking into Islamisation……Some people will read that sentence and think this is mere hyperbole. That’s the problem. Britain still doesn’t grasp that it is facing a pincer attack from both terrorism and cultural infiltration and usurpation. The former is understood; the latter is generally not acknowledged or is even denied, and those who call attention to it are pilloried either as ‘Islamophobes’ or alarmists who have taken up residence on Planet Paranoia.”

17. From Melanie Phillips’ Powerbase profile, quoting Phillips’ statements on multiculturalism and minority rights:

“The doctrines of multiculturalism and minority rights, themselves the outcome of a systematic onslaught by the British elite against the country’s own identity and values, have paralysed the establishment, which accordingly shies away from criticising any minority for fear of being labelled as bigoted…Britain effectively allowed itself to be taken hostage by militant gays, feminists or “anti-racists” who used weapons such as public vilification, moral blackmail and threats to people’s livelihoods to force the majority to give in to their demands.”

From Melanie Phillips’ speech at the IAB anti-boycott conference in Israel in 2006:

“Multiculturalism and anti-racism were the weapons the minorities were handed to beat the majority [in the UK]……Anyone from the third world, however, was suitably powerless and therefore their values had to trump those of the majority……The Palestinians are the epitome of victim culture. So the cause of those who wage genocidal jihad is regarded with indifference or even supported in Britain while its victims are now excoriated as Nazis.”

18. Examples of other statements by Melanie Phillips:

“The nation-wrecking ideology of multiculturalism and the Marxist redefinition of racial prejudice into racism – ‘prejudice plus power ‘– which have turned our society inside out are the product of the left.”

“Voters have been told in effect that there is nothing standing between national suicide on the one hand and racism on the other. If you don’t want the former, you are automatically branded with the latter.”

“They are areas of very high immigration where the transformation of the ethnic, religious and cultural landscape has made indigenous inhabitants feel strangers in their own country — and yet they are told they are racist for saying so”

“In the war being waged by radical Islamism against the west, such symbolism [as mosque-building] is of the utmost importance and significance. It is itself a strategic weapon of cultural and religious demoralisation.”

19. It is presently unclear if the BBC and the Daily Mail are aware of the full scale of Melanie Phillips’ anti-Muslim activities and affiliations, particularly her involvement with Robert Spencer, the David Horowitz Freedom Center, and Douglas Murray.

Rev. Deacon Robert Spencer Thinks Garibaldi is Nathan Lean

Spencer resembles someone here.

by Garibaldi

Hate group leader, Far-right Catholic fanatic and anti-Muslim Crusader/terrorist-inspirer, Rev. Deacon Robert Spencer of Our Lady of the Cedars Church, a full-time paid shill for racist David Horowitz has been pretty sore that I exposed the fact he is an ordained deacon. The only person that he should be upset at however is himself, he’s the one who irresponsibly left an internet trail that could easily be found by anyone with basic google searching abilities.

It is understandable why Rev. Deacon Spencer, who claims to be an objective “reporter” on so-called “Islamic violence” was so upset, any remaining veneer of “objectivity” and feigned concern for “freedom” was permanently abolished; once again Robert Spencer’s sectarianism was exposed through his own words and deeds.

This point is buttressed in a post yesterday by Rev. Deacon Spencer in FrontPageMagRag, it is the first post by Rev. Spencer on new Pope Francis I. What does the good Deacon have to say? Well, he slams the Second Vatican council’s positive statements regarding Islam as reflecting “the outlook of a vanished age,” equal in its irrelevance as statements by the likes of Pope Benedict XIV of the 18th century and Pope Callixtus III of the 15th century. (By the way, Rev. Spencer is opposed to Vatican II for more reasons than just statements regarding Islam).

Bizarrely, Spencer still cites the two Popes quite approvingly, the hostility they had towards Islam and Muslims is strikingly evident in two quotes Spencer reproduces,

…Pope Benedict XIV, in 1754, reaffirmed an earlier prohibition on Albanian Catholics giving their children “Turkish or Mohammedan names” in baptism by pointing out that not even Protestants or Orthodox were stooping so low: “None of the schismatics and heretics has been rash enough to take a Mohammedan name, and unless your justice abounds more than theirs, you shall not enter the kingdom of God.” Pope Callixtus III, in a somewhat similar spirit, in 1455 vowed to “exalt the true Faith, and to extirpate the diabolical sect of the reprobate and faithless Mahomet in the East.”

Spencer absurdly believes the Vatican II reforms are in parity with quotes about “extirpating” Islam. Look up “Extirpate” in the dictionary, it still means “to root out and destroy completely.”

It appears Rev. Deacon Robert Spencer is setting himself up for a lifetime of disappointment. Pope Francis I will not be the kind of fanatical anti-Islam/Muslims-rolling-back-Vatican-II-type-pope that Spencer wants him to be. After all, the new pope is named after St. Francis of Assisi whose two chief concerns were to convert people to Christianity and to help the poor.

In fact, St. Francis came to oppose the Crusades (read: The Saint and the Sultan by Paul Moses) which Rev. Deacon Robert Spencer falls all over himself to defend, as he loves to remind us of the Crusader slogan, God wills it!

The story goes that St. Francis’ parents wanted him to go out on the Crusade so that he could be knighted.

He later set out for the Crusades in Northern Africa, but while on his way to join up with his batallion he heard a voice that asked him where he was going.

Francis responded “to the Crusades” and the voice asked him “why he served the squire instead of the Master.” The voice told him to return to Assisi where he would be told what to do. Later, after much prayer and penance, Francis was praying at a small chapel outside of Assisi, San Damiano and he thought he heard a voice that came from the crucifix. The voice said, “Francis, go repair my Church, can’t you see that it’s falling into ruins.”

The new Pope Francis I will focus on repairing the Catholic Church which is struggling in many ways and will not focus on breeding Crusader-esque civilizational conflict.

Rev. Deacon Spencer thinks I am Aslan Media editor Nathan Lean, I reveal my true identity

Rev. Deacon Robert Spencer’s irrelevance both to Catholicism and scholarship on Islam is only matched by his delusional indulgence in conspiracy theory. Unable and unwilling to respond to numerous Loonwatch rebuttals of his faulty pseudo-scholarship and “police blotter reporting,” and a very long outstanding fear to debate Danios has now given way to Spencer claiming to have uncovered my identity–unbeknownst to me I am actually supposed to be Aslan Media editor Nathan Lean!

What is Rev. Spencer’s smoking gun? A cross-post from the hate site Logan’s Warning claiming “evidence” that I, Garibaldi, am Nathan Lean. Recall the only time we’ve mentioned Logan’s Warning, a post titled, Amusing Islamophobia Blog Wars: Logan’s Warning vs. Brigitte Gabriel, in which Christopher Logan attacked Brigitte Gabriel for even hinting that there might be such a thing as a “moderate Muslim.” The heresy! Logan’s website is replete with an abundance of commenters who call for Crusading violence against Muslims and racism against Arabs, as was shown in screenshots in my post.

So it’s no surprise that Spencer would cross-post from Logan’s Warning, as we know “birds of a feather flock together.” It is also unsurprising that Spencer, with a track record for weak scholarship would be so gullibly convinced by Christopher Logan’s “evidence.”

Logan’s “evidence”:

Evidence 1:
Recently in writing about Mr. Spencer, Garibaldi wrote this in a comment on his own article about Spencer’s private life: 

GaribaldiOfLoonwatch Mod Leftwing_Muslim_Alliance • 13 days ago

He is not celibate, he’s married. In the course of digging on the internet, I also learned the name of his wife and children, though that isn’t really germane to the discussion so I won’t advertise it.

Who else has dug on the Internet and found the names of Mr. Spencer’s wife and children? Nathan Lean. Spencer has written of Lean: Nigeria Jihadists threaten country’s top spies by publishing their home addresses and names of family 

Four months after that, he sent Mr. Spencer an email calling him a “dumb fuck” and adding “But, having a look at this, I kind of pity you,” which was followed by a link containing a photo of a woman in the same city. The woman has the same surname Spencer; apparently Lean thought she was his wife.

Spencer apparently thinks this is evidence. Anyone who has access to google can find out the names of Rev. Deacon Spencer’s family, it’s all over the internet. I thought Spencer was supposed to be in mortal fear for his life? If so he’s doing a poor job of covering up the identities of his family and place of residence. The fact is we have had people who’ve wanted to share information regarding his personal life and whereabouts since 2010.

One commenter on Spencerwatch named “Abdullah” wrote on the site in 2010 saying:

Abdullah says:

I have all the information on Spencer, his address, real date of birth, and information on his family. I want nothing more than to share it, please e-mail me.

We responded to Abdullah by letting him know that we were not interested in Spencer’s personal information:

admin says:

Abdullah,

That will be unnecessary. We have no interest in Spencer’s private life. We are only interested in exposing the shallow, deceptive, and bigoted nature of his anti-Muslim work.

– SW Admin

My comment is consistent with our long-held position that our only interest is rebutting and exposing Rev. Deacon Robert Spencer’s faulty arguments, lies, hate, deception and distortions, we can care less about Spencer’s family.

Evidence 2:
Garibaldi wrote of Mr. Spencer in a comment:

But the shaggy walrus beard and so forth indicates its him.

Reza Aslan said to Mr. Spencer: The Incredilbe Reza Aslan automated insult generator

I told you. I’m into women not walruses.

Nathan Lean works for Aslan.

Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha. I freely admit here and now that I actually picked up the walrus reference from my interview with Reza Aslan, it still gives me a chuckle!

Evidence 3:
Garibaldi interviewed Aslan for Loonwatch. Most of the interview was made up of nasty ad hominem attacks on Mr. Spencer: http://www.loonwatch.com/2011/11/exclusive-loonwatch-interview-with-reza-aslan/

I’ve also interviewed Haroon Moghul. Does that mean I’am Haroon Moghul as well? And why am I Nathan Lean and not Reza Aslan? Or maybe I am all three-in-one, like a super stealth Islamist-Leftist trinity?

Evidence 4:
Jonathan Schanzer wrote a scathing review of Lean’s book for the Wall Street Journal. Loonwatch published a petulant and defensive response piece viciously attacking Schanzer. Who wrote it? Garibaldi.
http://www.loonwatch.com/2013/01/bush-era-neo-con-schmuck-jonathan-schanzer-shills-for-nasty-islamophobia-movement/

Yes, Schanzer did get the vicious Garibaldi treatment, but that was more so because he’s a Bush era, warmongering neo-Con schmuck who wrote an Islamophobia-denial piece in the mainstream Wall Street Journal that sought to exonerate war criminals like his former boss George W. Bush and Islamophobe pals such as Daniel Pipes and the useful idiot Zuhdi Jasser. I fail to see how this can be described as evidence and not more appropriately as “worthless conjecture 4.”

Evidence 5:
Nathan Lean has frequently called for opponents of jihad terror to be denied free speech rights:

Editor-in-Chief of moderate Aslan media endorses cyber terrorism

Nathan Lean is a Thug

Garibaldi wrote a piece at Loonwatch celebrating the vandalism of AFDI’s anti-jihad ads:
http://www.loonwatch.com/2012/09/mona-el-tahawy-and-spray-painting-pamela-gellers-hate-ads/

Reza Aslan also called for that vandalism: Reza Aslan Calls for fascist vandalism of AFDI pro-freedom ads 

Loonwatch is actually consistent in its opposition to hacking, we ourselves have been victim to vile hatemongering “counterjihad” hackers. As for my article it actually did not celebrate Mona Eltahawy’s protest of the racist AFDI/SIOA hate ads. In fact I was critical of her, writing,

Mona’s method of protest was therefore ineffective, aesthetically unappealing and not the best expression of street art. It is unclear if Mona was going to spraypaint a message before her confrontation with Hall, but using a hot pink spraypaint can to completely erase or cover the hate ad, which is what she was doing, is a bad way to register such a protest. It is poorly planned, poorly executed and at the end of the day strays from the goal of highlighting the most important aspect of such a protest: the message.

I happily admit however that I am not really moved to condemn any protest against the racist AFDI/SIOA hate ads. Just as I wouldn’t condemn protests against ads describing Native Americans as “savages,” or Blacks as “N—–s.”

Interestingly, this most recent foray into conspiracy theory by Rev. Deacon Spencer wasn’t even convincing to Spencer’s most ardent fans. Kinana of Khaybar, in what could be the most understated comment on JihadWatch ever wrote,

This is entertaining, but to me does not add up to sufficient evidence that Nathan Lean is Garibaldi.

One also has to wonder if Logan and Spencer even thought about asking themselves why Nathan Lean, who has been speaking, writing and publishing publicly for quite some time would decide he needed to be anonymous? He is already calling out Spencer, Geller and other Islamophobes under his own name.

As for my real identity…

I am actually….

<drum roll>….

the second love child of Malcolm X and Stanley Ann Dunham, and my name is Barack Hasan Shabazz!

There you go, the secret is finally out! Thanks a lot Spencer!

Pamela Geller’s False Claim that Muslims Curse Christians and Jews in Their Daily Prayers

Pamela Geller’s False Claim that Muslims Curse Christians and Jews in Their Daily Prayers

by Sheila Musaji
Pamela Geller said Now I also believe that a true translation, an accurate translation of the Koran, is really not available in English, according to many of the Islamic scholars that I’ve spoken to.  That’s deeply troubling.  And I don’t think that many westernized Muslims know when they pray five times a day that they’re cursing Christians and Jews five times a day.  I don’t think they know that. in a 10/8/2010 article in the New York Times.

Jeffrey Goldberg of the Atlantic wondered about the accuracy of this statement and did a little research:

I sent some of Geller’s quotes to my friend Reuel Gerecht, a genuine expert on Islam, to see what he thought of them. Reuel, as many of you know, is no apologist for radical Islamism; quite the opposite. He believes we are at war with a dangerous ideology. But he also has respect for Islam, and a great deal of knowledge of it. Here is what he says about Geller’s assertions:

I have to plead an embarrassing ignorance about Pamela Geller.  I was well aware of the Internet-driven opposition to Feisal Abd ar-Rauf’s Ground Zero/Park 51 mosque, but had not entered her name into my memory.  I don’t read blogs much—except Goldblog and those that publish me—and I was more than a little taken back when Jeffrey sent me a note containing comments by Ms. Geller about English translations of the Qur’an.  The intersection of politics, public policy, and scholarship isn’t always pretty, and we are most often fortunate that scholars don’t write our domestic and foreign policies.   However, there is a certain deference that activists must give to scholars when they tread on what is clearly academic terrain.  A good cause—and Ms. Geller’s general concern about the harm that violent Islamic militants can do is an estimable fight—is no excuse for agitprop and what amounts to a slur against some of the greatest scholars of the twentieth century.  According to the New York Times, Ms. Geller has stated:

Now I also believe that a true translation, an accurate translation of the Koran, is really not available in English, according to many of the Islamic scholars that I’ve spoken to.  That’s deeply troubling.  And I don’t think that many westernized Muslims know when they pray five times a day that they’re cursing Christians and Jews five times a day.  I don’t think they know that.

Let’s take the Qur’an first, Muslim prayers second.  Concerning the translation of the Muslim Holy Book, who might these Islamic scholars be?  Since Ms. Geller is without Arabic, it’s impossible for her to compare the original to a translation.  She must depend upon others, who, if I follow Ms. Geller, are involved in a conspiracy to hide the ugly truth about Islam.  If the translations were more “accurate,” we would all see what’s apparent to Ms. Geller, who ascertained the truth despite the blinding scholarly conspiracy.  One has to ask whether Ms. Geller has perused the translation masterpiece by Cambridge’s late great A.J. Arberry or my personal favorite, the awesomely erudite, more literal translation and commentary by Edinburgh’s late great Richard Bell?  Both gentlemen are flag-waving members of Edward Said’s most detested species—Orientalists.  Now if you look at these translations—especially if you look at Bell’s, which is blessed with exhaustive notes in a somewhat complicated formatting—even the uninitiated can get an idea that Muhammad had trouble with Christians and especially Jews during his life.  If you look at the Qur’anic commentary by Edinburgh’s late great William Montgomery Watt (another Orientalist), who was always attentive to Muslim sensibilities in his writings, you can also find in clear English Muhammad’s unpleasant ruminations about Christians and Jews.

Now what all of this means to contemporary Islamic militancy is a very long discussion, for which I suspect that Ms. Geller doesn’t have abundant patience.  Islam has been having awful problems absorbing modernity; its travails so far—let us underscore—have been less bloody than what we witnessed as Christianity modernized.  Any non-Muslim certainly has the right to study, question, and criticize the Islamic faith, as Muslims have the (well-exercised) right to let loose against what they see as the imperfections of Christianity, Judaism, and humanist secularism (the West’s dominant faith).   As Iran’s robust, astonishing intellectual wars over the last twenty years have shown, it’s good for Muslims and non-Muslims not to pull their punches.  Muslims should never be treated as children, which is a debilitating disposition found widely now on the American Left.  (President Obama has not helped.)   But the great Islamic scholars of the past did not lie.  There is no conspiracy.  We are blessed with illuminating English translations of the Muslim Holy Book.  Ms. Geller might consider blogging less, and reading more.

And about Muslim prayer:  I certainly have no perfect way of knowing what Muslims think when they pray, but I really do think they know what they’re doing.  If westernized Muslims are facing the Almighty, they know what’s in their hearts.  Devout Muslims need not hate Jews and Christians to worship the Creator.  Christians have slaughtered Jews through the centuries.  But it would be theologically atrocious to believe that the Christian message requires Jewish blood. (Christians’ killing Jews so often did provoke some Christians to question the foundation of their faith—a theologically estimable exercise.)  The Prophet Muhammad is certainly a different kind of historical figure than Jesus, but it should not be startling to discover that Muslims through the centuries have not seen the prophet’s slaughter of the Jewish Banu Qurayza tribe in Medina as a mainstay of their creed.  In my experience—and I’m intuiting here—most Muslims do not think about Jews and Christians at all when they pray.  Suffering, in all its merciless variety, takes center stage, I suspect.   When I’ve watched Muslim pilgrims come to Sunni and Shiite tombs and sacred sites in Egypt,  Turkey, and Iraq, I’ve not seen a conquering people.  I’ve usually just seen misery and the human hope that good fortune will come with a better heart.   I’ve seen fraternity among a men who live in lands where fraternal behavior is rare.  Ms. Geller would do well to travel more.   It’s a very good and essential cause to fight jihadism, but such a struggle should not incline us to maul Islamic history or to treat Muslims as if they were merely a walking version of this surah or that legal treatise.   Christians and Jews and atheists are much more than the sum of their parts.   So, too, are Muslims.

After this exchange, Geller’s partner, Robert Spencer published a defense of Geller’s statement in which he brings in “translations” like the Hilali-Khan, commentaries and interpretations as if they represent what most Muslims (or particularly American Muslims, or “westernized Muslims” as Geller calls them) understand about the meaning of Surah Fatiha.  The Hilali-Khan translation is an extremist interpretation of the Qur’an produced in Saudi Arabia and given out free.  I wrote about the Hilali-Khan translation at length here.  Here are a few passages from that article:

The number of comments in parenthesis in this particular translation is more than excessive, and instead of clarifying the text or explaining a word or phrase that cannot be easily translated into English, these comments make the text very difficult to follow and often distort rather than amplify the meaning.

The appendices contain discussions of Christian versus Muslim beliefs that read more like a polemical debate and really do not belong as part of a translation.

I will give just a few examples of the difficulties with this translation.  Sadly, I could give many more examples, but these should sufice to show the extremist character of this translation.

Beginning immediately with Surah Fatiha 1:1 (the opening chapter of the Qur’an) we find a translation not to be found anywhere else:

“Guide us to the Straight Way.  The Way of those on whom You have bestowed Your Grace, not (the way) of those who have earned Your Anger (such as the Jews), nor of those who went astray (such as the Christians).” (HK translation 1:1-7)

This can only give the impression to any non-Muslim or Muslim who either does not have fluency in Arabic or access to individuals with competency in Classical Qur’anic Arabic that the Qur’an denounces all Jews and Christians.  This is a great untruth.

This unique translation is then followed by an extremely long footnote which justifies this hateful translation based on traditions from texts that go back to the Middle Ages (Ibn Kathir, Qurtubi, Tabari) as if these are the only interpretations, and without any discussion of the history of these commentaries and the hadiths on which they are based.

…  In the interests of preserving the purity of the Qur’an as much as possible for non-Arabic speakers and also as a means to combat the tirades of professional Islam bashers and Muslim haters, I would strongly recommend that every copy of the Hilali-Khan translation be removed from every mosque in the U.S.  …  This current crisis (and many others), I believe is a direct result of such translations as the Hilali-Khan which have been responsible for influencing some Muslims with extremist interpretations (and also providing them “justification” for criminal actions), and for providing Islamophobes with “proof” of the supposed “savagery” of Islam.  Basically, this translation (and others like it) are propaganda coming out of Saudi Arabia which attempts to spread their particular supremacist, divisive, bigoted, and very dangerous interpretation of Islam.

There are only two groups who equate jihad and terrorism – the terrorists and the Islamophobes.

Across the world, even in countries where Muslims and their non-Muslim neighbors have lived together for centuries in peace, we are seeing violence against churches and against minorities, and seeing violent non-Islamic responses to the provocations of Islamophobes.  Why?

I believe that propaganda such as the Hilali-Khan translation and other materials coming primarily out of Saudi Arabia are one of the root causes.

We need a counter-narrative, not only to the Islamophobes, but to the Muslim extremists, and our scholars and community leaders need to help get the message of traditional Islam out to the masses.

I believe that it is time for ordinary Muslims to go into their local mosque or Islamic bookstore and see if this translation is there, and if it is to ask the Imam or mosque leadership to remove it immediately and dispose of it in the appropriate Islamic manner.  And, it is time for the leadership of national organizations to speak out loudly and clearly condemning such translations and materials.  The Saudi’s may provide “free” copies of this translation, but there is a cost, and we are all paying it.

Here is a transliteration and translation of Sura Fatiha by Shakh Kabir Helminski of the Threshold Society:

Bismillaah ar-Rahman ar-Raheem
Al hamdu lillaahi rabbil ‘alameen
Ar-Rahman ar-Raheem Maaliki yaumid Deen
Iyyaaka na’abudu wa iyyaaka nasta’een
Ihdinas siraatal mustaqeem
Siraatal ladheena an ‘amta’ alaihim
Ghairil maghduubi’ alaihim waladaaleen
Aameen

In the name of God, the infinitely Compassionate and Merciful.
Praise be to God, Lord of all the worlds.
The Compassionate, the Merciful. Ruler on the Day of Reckoning.
You alone do we worship, and You alone do we ask for help.
Guide us on the straight path,
the path of those who have received your grace;
not the path of those who have brought down wrath, nor of those who wander astray.
Amen.

Here is the introduction to this verse from the translation by Muhammad Asad

THIS SURAH is also called Fatihat al-Kitab (“The Opening of the Divine Writ”), Umm al-Kitab (“The Essence of the Divine Writ”), Surat al-Hamd (“The Surah of Praise”), Asas al-Qur’an (“The Foundation of the Qur’an”), and is known by several other names as well. It ismentioned elsewhere in the Qur’an as As-Sab’ al-Mathani (“The Seven Oft-Repeated[Verses]”) because it is repeated several times in the course of each of the five daily prayers.According to Bukhari, the designation Umm al-Kitab was given to it by the Prophet himself,and this in view of the fact that it contains, in a condensed form, all the fundamental principleslaid down in the Qur’an: the principle of God’s oneness and uniqueness, of His being theoriginator and fosterer of the universe, the fount of all life-giving grace, the One to whom manis ultimately responsible, the only power that can really guide and help; the call to righteousaction in the life of this world (“guide us the straight way”); the principle of life after deathand of the organic consequences of man’s actions and behaviour (expressed in the term “Dayof Judgment”); the principle of guidance through God’s message-bearers (evident in thereference to “those upon whom God has bestowed His blessings”) and, flowing from it, the principle of the continuity of all true religions (implied in the allusion to people who havelived – and erred – in the past); and, finally, the need for voluntary self-surrender to the will of the Supreme Being and, thus, for worshipping Him alone. It is for this reason that this surahhas been formulated as a prayer, to be constantly repeated and reflected upon by the believer.“The Opening” was one of the earliest revelations bestowed upon the Prophet. Someauthorities (for instance, ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib) were even of the opinion that it was the very firstrevelation; but this view is contradicted by authentic Traditions quoted by both Bukhari andMuslim, which unmistakably show that the first five verses of surah 96 (“The Germ-Cell”)constituted the beginning of revelation. It is probable, however, that whereas the earlier revelations consisted of only a few verses each, “The Opening” was the first surah revealed tothe Prophet in its entirety at one time: and this would explain the view held by ‘Ali.

Here is Asad’s translation and commentary

In the name of God, The Most Gracious, The Dispenser of Grace:
ALL PRAISE is due to God alone, the Sustainer of all the worlds,
the Most Gracious,the Dispenser of Grace,
Lord of the Day of Judgment!
Thee alone do we worship; and unto Thee alone do we turn for aid.
Guide us the straight way, the way of those upon whom Thou hast bestowed Thy blessings,
not of those who have been condemned [by Thee], nor of those who go astray!

According to most of the authorities, this invocation (which occurs at the beginning of everysurah with the exception of surah 9) constitutes an integral part of “The Opening” and is,therefore, numbered as verse 1. In all other instances, the invocation “in the name of God” precedes the surah as such, and is not counted among its verses. – Both the divine epithets rahman and rahim are derived from the noun rahmah, which signifies “mercy”, “compassion”,“loving tenderness” and, more comprehensively, “grace”. From the very earliest times, Islamic scholars have endeavoured to define the exact shades of meaning which differentiate the two terms. The best and simplest of these explanations is undoubtedly the one advanced by Ibnal-Qayyim (as quoted in Manar I,48): the term rahman circumscribes the quality of abounding grace inherent in, and inseparable from, the concept of God’s Being, whereas rahim expresses the manifestation of that grace in, and its effect upon, His creation – in other words, an aspect of His activity.

In this instance, the term “worlds” denotes all categories of existence both in the physicaland the spiritual sense. The Arabic expression rabb – rendered by me as “Sustainer” -embraces a wide complex of meanings not easily expressed by a single term in another language.It comprises the ideas of having a just claim to the possession of anything and, consequently,authority over it, as well as of rearing, sustaining and fostering anything from its inceptionto its final completion. Thus, the head of a family is called rabb ad-dar (“master of the house”) because he has authority over it and is responsible for its maintenance; similarly, his wifeis called rabbat ad-dar (“mistress of the house”). Preceded by the definite article al, the designation rabb is applied, in the Qur’an, exclusively to God as the sole fosterer andsustainer of all creation – objective as well as conceptual – and therefore the ultimatesource of all authority.

According to almost all the commentators, God’s “condemnation” (ghadab, lit., “wrath”) is synonymous with the evil consequences which man brings upon himself by wilfully rejecting God’s guidance and acting contrary to His injunctions. Some commentators (e.g., Zamakhshari)interpret this passage as follows: “… the way of those upon whom Thou hast bestowed Thy blessings – those who have not been condemned [by Thee], and who do not go astray”: inother words, they regard the last two expressions as defining “those upon whom Thou hast bestowed Thy blessings”. Other commentators (e.g., Baghawi and Ibn Kathir) do not subscribeto this interpretation – which would imply the use of negative definitions – and understand the last verse of the surah in the manner rendered by me above. As regards the two categoriesof people following a wrong course, some of the greatest Islamic thinkers (e.g., Al-Ghazali or, in recent times, Muhammad ‘Abduh) held the view that the people described as having incurred “God’s condemnation” – that is, having deprived themselves of His grace – are thosewho have become fully cognizant of God’s message and, having understood it, have rejected it; while by “those who go astray” are meant people whom the truth has either not reached at all,or to whom it has come in so garbled and corrupted a form as to make it difficult for them.

And, before Pamela Geller gets too attached to her specious claims, she should consider that the Blessing/Benediction recited each morning by Orthodox Jews is the following“Blessed are you O God, King of the Universe, Who has not made me . . . ” and conclude, respectively, “a goy [Gentile],” “a slave,” and “a woman.”
UPDATE 6/1/2011

Another Islamophobe, Andrew Bostom has jumped on this bandwagon of insisting that the Hilali-Khan translation/commentary reflects the meaning of Surah Fatiha.

UPDATE 1/29/2012

Geller again raises this spurious issue saying: “The Muslims refer to Christians in their daily prayers as “those who are led astray” (Muslims curse Christians and Jews multiple times in daily prayers). This madness validates their contempt and supremacism.”
UPDATE 2/11/2013

Geller is nothing if not consistent.  Today she published Hamas-CAIR leads Arizona State Senate in anti-Jewish, Anti-Christian Prayer raising this same debunked issue yet again. She says:  “How many people actually know that every time Muslims get down on their knees, posteriors in the air, they are cursing Christian and Jews? Obama says, “respect it!”

All of this fury on the part of Geller (and her partner in hate Robert Spencer) was because an Arizona Imam, Anas Hlayhel, who is also the Chairman of the Arizona Chapter of the Council on American Islamic Relations CAIR-AZ led the Arizona State Senate’s prayer invocation with a reading of Surah al-Fatiha.

Geller & Spencer promote Muslim “collective guilt” over a FB post

Geller & Spencer promote Muslim “collective guilt” over a FB post

by Sheila Musaji
Pamela Geller posted an article Dearborn Muslim calls for killing anti-Islam protesters and her partner in the AFDI hate group posted an article with the same title.

They reprinted an article by David Wood which included a screen grab of this FaceBook post:

This is a hateful message.  The individual responsible should be ashamed.  If there are any FaceBook regulations that he has violated, he should lose his ability to post.  However, this single hateful message was all that it took for Geller & Spencer to not only post articles including the “Muslim” description, but also to tweet on the #MyJihad hashtag


Spencer asked “Will Dearborn authorities investigate Aboudi Berro? Don’t hold your breath.”  Geller said: “Islam in America. Respect it.”

So, according to them, this tweet by one individual jerk somehow is representative of “Islam in America” and this should be investigated by local law enforcement.

I wonder why their concern is always so selective, and only focuses on Muslims who behave badly.

Here are a just a few tweets from Islamophobic spammers on the #MyJihad site:









Would Geller and Spencer agree that all of these are hateful?  If so, why do such statements not concern them?  Would a headline like “Christian calls for killing Muslims” serve any purpose.  Are all Christians or all Jews somehow responsible for the bigotry of some?  Should all of these individuals also be investigated?  If they are not investigated is that “proof” of some Christian conspiracy to impose their will on non-Christians.

I doubt that they would be concerned, as some of their own AFDI/SIOA/SION leadership have previously suggested genocide, wiping out Muslim “bacteria” and “destroying Islam”.

This is pure hatred.

Pamela Geller advocates banning Islam, demolishing mosques, deporting and killing Muslims

Atlas Shrugs banner

Pamela Geller has renewed her calls for banning Islam, demolishing and killing Muslims. (h/t: J. Singh)

Pamela Geller advocates banning Islam, demolishing mosques, deporting and killing Muslims

Over at Atlas Shrugs, Pamela Geller has posted a response to the latest “Muslim patrol” video to appear on YouTube. “For years now,” Geller pontificates, “Leftists and assorted ‘anti-racists’ have been denying the existence of these Sharia patrols….” It is of course true that we deny their existence, but that is for the simple reason that they don’t really exist.

You’ll see that the new video contains no actual patrolling at all. In contrast to the two previous videos the two-man, self-appointed “Muslim patrol” doesn’t even approach anyone on the street, still less harass them. The video just features a lot of loud-mouthed ranting to camera, with a middle section showing an apparently drunken man nodding off on a bench, accompanied by a disapproving commentary.

As existential threats to western civilisation go, you’d have to say this one isn’t particularly scary.

More significant, however, is that Geller crossposts, with evident approval, an article from another Islamophobic blog called The Muslim Issue commenting on the video. It reads in part:

If a government wants to learn how to manage growing Islamic problems, take some advice from Ottoman army officer Mustafa Kemal Atatürk. Atatürk abolished Islam by putting a complete ban on Islamic materials, demolishing mosques, and removing any traces of Islam in his country to get rid of the evil. Those who tried to revolt were put in their place, or basically killed….

It is time for the UK to stop wasting their military abroad, but bring them to patrol their own streets and begin to remove Muslims. And it is vital time to plan and arrange deportation programs – and even arrange new deportation programs for practicing Muslims born in England to be deported to their parent’s country of origin.

This goes way beyond anything that even the English Defence League or the British National Party would officially support. They are the sort of policies advocated by the most extreme neo-Nazi elements of the far right in the UK. Are US Republican Party organisations and mainstream media outlets going to continue providing a platform for a woman who posts material like this on her blog?

Robert Spencer needs to learn to do a fact check

Spencer is working hard to disassociate himself from one of his fans

Robert Spencer needs to learn to do a fact check

by Sheila Musaji

An individual using the twitter name @LearningKoran posted two hateful and unacceptable tweet on the #MyJihad hashtag.  Here are those tweets:

 

Many Muslims involved with the #MyJihad campaign responded to him as soon as we saw the tweets.

The MyJihadOrg account administrator tweeted him and told him they don’t condone such talk and consider himself blocked.

I posted a reminder that Sheikh Ali Gomaa said Violence is never an acceptable answer to provocation.  I told him that such a statement was totally outside the bounds of Islam, and that I found it fascinating that the #MyJihad campaign angers Musim extremists & Islamophobes.

Angie Emara posted a series of reminders:  calling him a hypocrite and an extremist and someone trying to sabotage the campaign.  She told him that it’s funny how you & Islamophobes share the EXACT sentiment towards majority Muslims!  She asked him “what’s wrong w u? Islam was never ever by force. U ruin the beauty of Islam picking ayat out of context 4 ur benefit”.  She asked him to “change the condition of your heart” and told him “you have major issues.seek therapy. That’s not Islam.”

Within hours he stopped posting, and when his twitter name was clicked on it said he was suspended.

No one involved with #MyJihad knows who this person was, whether he/she is a Muslim, or why he would make such a hateful post. Sad little incident, but handled as well as anyone connected with #MyJihad could handle unsolicited tweets.

However, that was not the end of the saga.  Robert Spencer posted an article with a screenshot of the tweet and Spencer’s own comments.  Spencer said “The deceptive and misleading #MyJihad campaign has apparently attracted at least one persistent Misunderstander of Islam. No doubt Hamas-linked CAIR’s Ahmed Rehab is in deep talks with this fellow already, explaining to him that jihad doesn’t really involve killing anyone, but is really just romping through the daisies.”

He is correct that the individual misunderstands Islam.  The rest is simply an attempt to cast aspersions on the #MyJihad campaign as if they can control individuals tweeting using that hashtag.  Spencer also does not mention any of the responses to this individual.  Not only do Islamophobes not know how to do a “search”, they also don’t know how to follow a conversation on twitter.

All Spencer would have had to was to follow the conversation, and he would have seen that the individual was immediately called to task and condemned for what he had said, asked to stop, and ultimately suspended.

But, Spencer is too busy demonizing Islam and Muslims to be concerned about facts.  He used this non-incident to stir up a frenzy among his readers.  The comments under Spencer’s article show how easily they are influenced.  Here are a few:

— John Spielman “These pagan muslim’s blind devotion to their demon god Allah’s cult of death is getting tiresome.” — Meryl Petkoff “The psychological projection of pedohammedans is f’ing SURREAL!. Poe’s Law is all that comes into mind when i read verbiage like that.”— Iloveport “I say, bring it on!!! You camel urine drinking numbnut maniacs.  I’m ready and able. You’re not kidding when you say this is getting tiresome. I’m so tired of the major a**kissing going on to appease these bozo’s.  Let’s dance….

And since he began the title of his article with the #MyJihad hashtag, many of these folks are tweeting this, again overwhelming the hashtag with hate.

Anyone who visits the hashtag can see over the course of any day how many Islamophobes come there and post hateful messages.  Some individuals post scores of messages each day, many of them repeat whatever is the current meme in an article on Pamela Geller or Robert Spencer’s sites that begins with the #MyJihad hashtag.  Some post the exact same comment over and over.  See the article Anti-Muslim Propaganda Against #MyJIhad Campaign for many of the claims made and responses to them.  Sometimes 20 or 30 of them will retweet or repeat the same comment over the course of a few minutes.  It is amazing that there are human beings who can find so much time to do nothing except spread hatred.

Some are more hateful than others one calling himself @pissedizard calls Muslims “vermin”, “demons” and “disgusting”, says “all Muslims smell like ass. Dead,rotting ass”, and has made a number of tweets suggesting directly that Muslims should be killed.  One of his tweets appears at the top of this article.

Robert Spencer would never notice such hatred directed at Muslims.  And, that is not surprising, since there has been plenty of it from his own AFDI/SION board and he has made no condemnations.  He also does not remove hateful comments from his site.

I wish we knew how the solitary nut job @LearningKoran was suspended by twitter, as the gang of about 30 Islamophobic nut jobs who are serial spammers of the hashtag should also be suspended, but continue with no problems.

All of this is very frustrating, but the Muslims involved with the #MyJihad campaign are resolute and committed to taking back Islam and the term jihad from both the Muslim extremists and Islamophobes.

It would be wonderful if not only more Muslims, but also any non-Muslims who believe in mutual respect, bridge building, and understanding would visit the hashtag and help to keep it from being overrun by haters.

It is amazing that projects such as #MyJihad through which American Muslims are attempting to counter extremist interpretations are seen as so threatening to those who say they wish Muslims would speak up.  Whatever claim or catch-phrase is put out by Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer becomes the meme of the day, endlessly repeated by their followers on the #MyJihad hashtag and drowning it in hate.  All they are doing is making it more difficult for American Muslims to counter actual extremism.  They are a painful distraction.
UPDATE 1/28/2013

David Wood on a site called Answering Muslims posted an article about these tweets from @LearningKoran.  He titles his article “Muslim Tries to Educate Me about Peaceful Islam, Then Calls for the Execution of Critics!”.

Even David Wood notes that @LearningKoran became angry when he was condemned by individuals involved in the #MyJihad campaign, and before he was suspended by twitter posted this tweet:

 

Wood is one of the individuals who has been a serial tweeter of anti-Muslim messages, so not surprisingly his view of this exchange casts blame on Muslims and Islam.

The reality is that no one knows who this person @LearningKoran is, or whether or not he is a Muslim.  He could be anybody.  One of the difficulties with social media like twitter is that individuals can set up an account and a screen persona using any name they wish and post anonymously.

Whoever @LearningKoran is, he deserves condemnation as does @pissedlizard and others who have posted such messages threatening Muslims.  You can see screen shots of a few of these hateful anti-Muslim posts at the bottom of the page.

Pamela Geller & Robert Spencer: Far-right terrorists are “ordinary Americans” & “patriots”

Pamela Geller & Robert Spencer:  Far-right terrorists are “ordinary Americans” & “patriots”

by Sheila Musaji
A 148 page report titled “Challengers from the Sidelines Understanding America’s Violent Far-Right” PDF here was released by THE COMBATING TERRORISM CENTER AT WEST POINT ( http://www.ctc.usma.edu ).

The Atlantic Wire reported:

Aren’t conservatives supposed to be hawkish on terror? They tend to be when it comes to foreign terrorists, but many are taking umbrage at a new West Point report on violent far-right extremists home-grown right here in the U.S. Earlier this week, the Combatting Terrorism Center (CTC) at America’s leading military academy published an extensive report on the “dramatic rise in the number of attacks and violent plots originating from individuals and groups who self-identify with the far-right of American politics.” Christian fundamentalists, Militia movement groups, Skinheads, neo-Nazis, and violent anti-abortionists were all cited in the report, titled Challengers from the Sidelines: Understanding America’s Violent Far-Right. These factions may harbor different ideological goals, but as this chart shows, they’ve all ramped up their violent tactics in trying to achieve them:

“Although in the 1990s the average number of attacks per year was 70.1, the average number of attacks per year in the first 11 years of the twenty-first century was 307.5, a rise of more than 400%,” writes Dr. Arie Perliger, Director of Terrorism Studies at the CTC.

In short, this report makes a convincing case about extremists trying to inflict harm upon innocent Americans, and it’s full of alarming data and clear policy recommendations. Conservatives love appealing to these kinds of studies when arguing that we need to get tough on terror, right? Well, not in this case. One Republican congressional staffer—who thinks only Muslims can be terrorists—told The Washington Times’ Rowan Scarborough:

If [the Defense Department] is looking for places to cut spending, this junk study is ground zero. Shouldn’t the Combating Terrorism Center be combating radical Islam around the globe instead of perpetuating the left’s myth that right-wingers are terrorists?

The National Review‘s John Fund also wants to change the subject to terrorists in other parts of the world:

The world is beset by terrorists—witness the American hostages taken in Algeria this week—but portions of our federal government continue to obsess about alleged home-grown threats from the “far right” … My sources inside Congress tell me they continue to worry that efforts to monitor domestic Muslim extremists as well as interdiction efforts against radical Islamists crossing the U.S. border are sometimes put on the back burner. The government denies this, but it seems to me its protestations would be more persuasive if it spent less time producing half-baked warnings about the danger of “right-wing extremists.”

World Net Daily’s Michael Carl extensively quotes blogger Pamela Geller in his article on the report. “This is another appalling attempt to demonize loyal Americans and whitewash the Islamic threat,” Geller says. “West Point probably is working on orders from higher ups. Or else it has bought into the dominant PC culture.” Over at Newsmax, Christiana Lilly buries the lede—turning a story about far-right terrorists into a story about liberals:

The U.S. Military Academy at West Point released a paper calling far right groups anti-federalists while describing liberals as “future oriented,” the Washington Times reports.

And yes, you better believe Drudge sirened it:

West Point cites dangers of ‘anti-federalists’ in U.S…. drudge.tw/WnbwBW

— DRUDGE REPORT (@DRUDGE_REPORT) January 18, 2013

The Atlantic Wire mentioned Pamela Geller in passing, but she and her partner in hate, Robert Spencer, went far outside of anything that could charitably be called rational.

West Point targets believers in “individual freedoms” as terrorists is the title of Geller’s screed.  Geller says: “As the country (and the free world) face increasing threats and acts of war from jihadists both here and abroad, America’s leading military academy is focusing its military training on the enemy’s (and fifth column’s) obstacle to enslaving the union: Americans who believe in individual rights.”

She then cherry picks one sentence out of the West Point report, ignoring the rest of the report, and uses that out of context sentence justify this gem:  “The founding principle of this once-great nation is individual rights. The very reason for our existence. Everything magnificent and noble that we are acheived as a nation was a consequence of that founding principle. And now those patriots who adhere to that fundamental belief are the enemy.  …  This is war against who and why we are. And it seems it is “perishing” without so much as firing a shot.”

She is saying that American non-Muslim far right terrorists are an “obstacle to jihadists enslaving the union” and therefore they are “patriots”.  West Point in targeting these “patriots” is helping “the enemy”.   This is what happens to reason and decency when pathological hatred of any minority becomes the sole focus of an individuals worldview.

She then references an article by her partner in hate, Robert Spencer to reinforce her position West Point brands believers in “individual freedoms” as terrorists.  Spencer says “The U.S. Government has long since abandoned any realistic discussion of the Islamic jihad threat, and now is focusing on ordinary Americans who believe in individual rights as terror threats. And so the descent continues, ever more rapidly.”

The satire site Wonkette pretty well nailed this one Pamela Geller: Why Is America Being So Mean To Domestic Terrorists?:

Vision of loveliness Pamela Geller has taken a break from inciting crazy people to push Sikh dudes into the path of oncoming trains to wonder why West Point is being so mean to “loyal Americans” who just want to violently overthrow the United States government and/or kill some mud people! It is not like the oaths of office we just heard Barack Obama and Old Handsome Joe Biden swear include anything about enemies “foreign and domestic.” And our domestic terrorists loyal Americans just happen to be committing an average of 307 violent attacks per year lately, according to a new report from West Point! So what does Pamela Geller think of loyal Americans using violence to make their needs known?

“This is another appalling attempt to demonize loyal Americans and whitewash the Islamic threat,” Geller said. “West Point probably is working on orders from higher ups. Or else it has bought into the dominant PC culture.”

It’s true, Pamela Geller. Everyone knows that Timothy McVeigh was a loyal American, just watering that good old tree of liberty. And you couldn’t ask for nicer guys than the ones who shoot up temples if’n they are worshiped at by non-whites. West Point is a communist. Go to jail, West Point! Go directly to jail.

Such lunacy is par for the course for Geller and Spencer.  Their comments on the Hutaree Christian Militia arrests, and their shameless attacks on Anders Breivik’s Norway terror victims are an example of their one-dimensional worldview.  They are concerned only with Muslim criminals, any one else pretty much gets a free pass.

SEE ALSO:

New Study Highlights Threat From Far Right-Wing Groups In U.S., Hayes Brown http://thinkprogress.org/security/2013/01/18/1467741/west-point-study-right-wing-threat/

West Point Report Warns of Violent Far-Right Groups http://www.allgov.com/news/top-stories/west-point-report-warns-of-violent-far-right-groups-130120?news=846803

Harry’s Place Contributor Says Rape Isn’t That Bad

Andy Hughes Facebook profile

The Neoconservative Zionist website Harry’s Place whose commenters we’ve engaged in the past is taken to task by Bob Pitt of Islamophobia-Watch for hypocrisy, double standards and Islamophobia.

Sarah Brown, a regular commenter on articles here is also criticized. (h/t: Frank P.)

Harry’s Place contributor says rape isn’t that bad

by Bob Pitt

Last year we ran a piece on former English Defence League activist Andy Hughes, proprietor of the Islamic Far-Right in Britain blog, whose articles denouncing the Islamist threat to western civilisation are regularly crossposted at the notorious Islamophobic blog Harry’s Place.

We pointed out that, in addition to declaring his admiration for convicted thug Joel Titus, the ex-leader of the EDL’s youth section, Hughes had made antisemitic comments on the Expose Facebook page under the pseudonym of Arry Bo. Expressing his dislike of “Yids” who “think they are superior beings and the rest of us are scum”, Hughes wrote that this explained “why Jews have been kicked out of so many countries” .

Given HP’s readiness to denounce opponents of the state of Israel as antisemites, you might have thought they would be quick to dissociate themselves from Hughes and his vile remarks. But no. Sarah Annes Brown, who presents herself as the voice of reason at Harry’s Place (competition isn’t exactly fierce), happily accepted Hughes’ laughable explanation that in posting these antisemitic comments he was simply trying to wind people up. She attributed this to the fact that Hughes is “a bit – skittish”!

Earlier today Hughes joined a discussion at Expose, posting comments under one of his other aliases, Arry Ajalami. Although he has in the past insisted that he has broken with the EDL and rejects its current methods and ideology (which is why HP say they have no problem with publishing his articles), this didn’t prevent Hughes from posting a number of comments that show he still identifies closely with this gang of racists and fascists.

Even more disgusting, however, was Hughes’ reaction to the posting of a screenshot from the EDL LGBT Division’s Facebook page, in which one EDL supporter advocated a sexual assault on Expose admin Darcy Jones. A denunciation of “these muslim dogs and the liberal garbage who protect them”, was followed by: “Let them rape Darcy. She likes these dogs so much.”

Hughes’ response was: “Well my cousin’s mate was raped and she said it wasn’t THAT bad. She didn’t like it but said it wasn’t as bad as when she got beaten up by a gang of Muslims.” Quite rightly, the comment was almost immediately removed, but not before Expose had taken a screenshot which can be viewed here. You’ll notice, by the way, that Hughes had adopted the National Front logo as his profile picture.

During the past week Harry’s Place has been making hay over the Socialist Workers Party’s failure to deal properly with an accusation of rape against one of its leading figures. Before that, HP attacked George Galloway over his remarks trivialising the rape charges against Julian Assange. So you might think that, in all consistency, they would have to sever links with Hughes over his own reprehensible views on sexual violence and cease crossposting articles from his Islamic Far-Right in Britain blog.

But, again, this would almost certainly be a mistaken assumption. If you’re prepared to assist in the witch-hunting of Muslim organisations, then you can announce your admiration for a violent hooligan, express atrocious antisemitic views, declare your support for a street movement of anti-Muslim thugs, claim that being raped isn’t such a bad experience after all, and you’ll probably get a free pass from Harry’s Place. They’ll put it all down to your skittish personality.

About that Muslims Harass Christian & Jewish Neighbors, Police Refuse to Help Story

PamelaGellerUndead-e1277488194648-1

About that Muslims Harass Christian & Jewish Neighbors, Police Refuse to Help Story

by Sheila Musaji

This particular strategy of the Islamophobia network is getting tiresome.

Pamela Geller posted #MyJihad in Paris: Muslims Harass, Attack Christian and Jewish Neighbors, Police Refuse to Help in which she published an email she received from an anonymous “Atlas reader” in Paris.

We are supposed to take her word for it that this individual’s statement is true.  Geller, of course, will take the word of anyone who has anything negative to say about Islam and Muslims.

What is the story that Geller must share with the world?

An anonymous reader of her site asks Pamela to help her “tell the world about what is going on here so that people will fight these horrible pigs.”  [the “pigs” she refers to are Muslims.] In her story she complains about the French “socialist government”,  altercations with Muslim neighbors, and bizarre incidents that she is aware of (like Muslims forcing a Jewish child to eat pork or they would kill her parents).

This would be laughable if it wasn’t for the fact that there are individuals who do take Geller’s postings seriously.  This is the sort of incoherent story you get from people walking the streets and talking to themselves.

Not content with putting this story out on her site, Geller also tweeted it out using the #MyJihad hashtag, as part of her ongoing effort to undermine that positive effort by Muslims to take back the term from both Muslim extremists and Islamophobes.  And, her followers followed suit, tweeting and re-tweeting this “story” using the #MyJihad hashtag.

Interestingly, the two groups who share extremists views about Islam – the Muslim extremists and the Islamophobes – both attacked the campaign.  Geller & Spencer accused the #MyJihad campaign of inspiring a Chicago bus threat.  They also began churning out articles with the hashtag #MyJihad in their titles, and then tweeting the titles of those articles and encouraging others to re-tweet, in an attempt to take over the #MyJihad hashtag by overwhelming it with hateful messages.  Many of the articles they have come up with have been, even by their standards, disgraceful.  Here are just a few of these false hate pieces from the past few days:  (Don’t worry, the links take you to responses, not the original)  #MyJihad: Egyptian Cleric Warns Christian Women: If You Don’t Wear a Veil You’ll Be Raped – #MyJihad: Muslim cleric tells converts to bury their Christian parents as if they were dead dogs – #MyJihad in Serbia: Kosovo Muslims destroy Serbian Orthodox monastery.  In addition to these new lies, they are recycling many of their old lies in tweets including the hashtag, e.g. #MyJihad 270 million victims of over a millennium of jihadi wars – #MyJihad 17,000+ “Islamic terrorist” attacks since 9/11, etc.   See the RESOURCES FOR DEALING WITH ISLAMOPHOBIA SUMMARY section below for links to responses to many of these current and previous hateful claims.

Based on Geller’s past performance it is difficult to believe that any sane person could take her rantings seriously, but they do.  I prefer to save myself the trouble and just use the Pamela Geller:  Shrieking Harpy Rant Generator to get my dose of Geller “humor” for the day.

Why does this story sound so familiar?

Geller, and her partner Robert Spencer have proven hundreds of times that they have a Tenuous Grasp of the Concept of “Truth Telling”.

One of the many previous lies they spread was very similar to this current one.  In that case Geller posted an article titled “Hate Crime” which shared an email from a reader who had supposedly been harassed by Muslims in her neighborhood and was unable to get law enforcement or elected officials to do anything about it.

In that case, the writer calling herself “Danusha (Redacted) PhD” claimed a Muslim man accosted her and “impeded” her ability to walk down the street, and that Muslims regularly mock her, and one even hit her with his SUV.

When the article was originally posted it included this introduction to the email by Geller:  “The hypocrisy loooms [sic] large. Here’s a letter I thought I should share with you. I expect the gutless congressman who witnessed his Muslim constituents dancing on 9/11/01 will do nothing but hide beneath his desk. If this continues — auxiliary law enforcement will be necessary.”

Subsequently the original email from the “victim” was removed from Geller’s site, as was Geller’s lead in to the article, and replaced with an almost incoherent rant. In that rant, Geller claimed that ” I’ve removed the letter from this post because of threats to its author. The incredible evil that is standard operating procedure for those on the left led them to try to identify the author, and effectively target her for retribution. Thus I removed the letter. Imagine: this woman lives in fear every day, and the response to this violation of her basic human rights was an attempt to out her and put her life in jeopardy. That’s what we’re dealing with.” 

An article I wrote at the time exposing this nonsense, notes that according to Charles Johnson

… the individual who wrote this letter is Danusha Goska and he links to an email sent to a site called VDARE from this person in 2008.  That email complained about “Hispanic noise pollution” in her neighborhood.  In that email she included a copy of a letter that she had sent to her local mayor and claims that her complaints have gone unanswered.  The VDare site posts a note at the bottom of this post saying Goska, a teacher and Democrat, previously wrote to us about her experience with National Public Radio. with a link to this previous letter.

That link takes you to an email she sent which included an “essay” she had sent to NPR.  At the bottom of the “essay” is this:  Goska, a writer, teacher and Ph.D. from Indiana University does “manual labor to make ends meet.” She submitted this essay to NPR (e-mail) which rejected it.

Johnson also turned up a strange film review posted by a person named Danusha Goska.

In a simple google search I turned up a number of articles including this one – Islam and Terror: Some Thoughts after 9/11 by Danusha V. Goska, PhD.

She seems, like Geller to be focused on anti-Muslim rabble rousing.  Geller, rather than explain that she had been taken in by an email from a seemingly unstable person, instead pulled the email, and substituted a rant that still managed to make it seem as if the information contained in that original email was accurate.

This pattern of making outrageous claims based on no evidence at all, and then if caught out, attempting to conceal the evidence is a pattern.