The phone has been ringing off the hook this morning, so I haven't had a chance yet to reply to this New York Times hit piece. But David Horowitz has just posted this at FrontPage:
The New York Times today has a wretched editorial masquerading as a news story on Robert Spencer and his alleged complicity in the Oslo massacres because his ideas are cited by the lunatic responsible. Joseph McCarthy could not have done it better. The Times next will blame Noam Chomsky for the crimes of Osama bin Laden and Al Gore for the crimes of the Unabomber since the ideas of both were cited by the lunatics. Chomsky is not only cited by the Islamic terrorists, he openly supports them — yet the Times would be the first to express shock and outrage at mere suggestion of Chomsky’s complicity in the crimes of al-Qaeda, Hizbollah and Hamas.Robert Spencer has never supported a terrorist act. His crime in the eyes of the left is to have told the truth about Islamic fanatics beginning with the Islamic prophet who called for the extermination of the Jews and said in his farewell speech that he was called to fight until all men say that there is no God but allah. (see Bruce Thornton’s article today’s Frontpage).
The attack on Robert Spencer a man of great courage and decency is just one phase in the war against all those who speak out against Islamic terror and Islamic imperialism. The Times attack is but the latest and most repulsive salvo in this war.
Robert, I have read nearly all your comments on this site and cannot remember any which were hateful or which condoned violence. I am sure your thousands of readers would say the same.
God bless you and please continue to expose the evil of Islam.
The Islam-loving Socialist Left is equally evil to the Muslim fanatics/Islam - and I will keep on saying that (don't ever forget, Hitler was an Islam-loving Socialist no matter how much the Left wants us to forget that)!
At - http://europenews.dk/en/node/41655
NORWAY: SOCIALIST LEFT PARTY TO VOTE ON MOTION CALLING FOR BOMBING ISRAEL IF IT ACTS AGAINST HAMAS IN GAZA
Tundra Tabloids 29 March 2011
It’s come to this. The junior partner in the Norwegian government, the Socialist Left Party of Kristin Halvorsen, (Sosialistisk Venstreparti), plans to vote on a measure calling for military action against Israel if it decides to act against the Hamas in Gaza. Norway, Israel and the Jews blog informs the Tundra Tabloids of the following:Socialistic Left dubious moral tradeoff for bombing Libya: Use armed force against Israel.....
Robert Spencer is fighting against Islam not muslims. We are all behind him, fighting this evil ideology. As another great fighter, Father Zakaria Boutros, once said: "As much as I hate Islam, I love muslims."
Gos bless your work Robert.
As that rare bird, a very liberal avid Jihad Watch reader (and supporter--not every post, but overall), let me add my voice from the "other side", that I have never read Robert calling for violence against Muslims, or anyone else for that matter. The essence (if I may be permitted to put words in your mouth) of this site, is that the problem is with Islam itself (and yes, by extension those Muslims who choose to follow those tenets), but we cannot and do not generalize about 1 billion Muslims.
This is the classic guilt by association, and any fair reading of Robert's writings would show that he bears zero responsibility for the horror in Norway. Indeed, as was pointed out by others, it is the position of many of those who dismiss the threat of Islam, that even when terrorists cite clearly that they are following their understanding of their religion, that we are not allowed to make that religion responsible for their crimes, rather they have "misunderstood their own religion." Perhaps, but sauce for the goose is not sauce for the gander? So maybe the monster in Norway didn't fully understand what Robert was saying. A "misunderstander of Jihad Watch" if you will.
If Norway's tragedy was a made-for-media massacre (Islamic PR) -- it may be time to limit our intake of it.
Truth and those who value it may be very hard to find in the short term and we need all our wits about us.
May God continue to bless your work on behalf of free people everywhere.
I believe we all need to do an all-out character assassination of - Anders Breivik. Now.
Some talking points can be nabbed at Tundra Tabloids.
PS: Great post with Helter Skelter, Robert!
There is no moral equivalence between destroying the evil ideology of Islam and killing one's ideological opponents. Islam must be destroyed as Nazism had to be destroyed, but this time it can and must be done non-violently: http://crombouke.blogspot.com/2011/03/how-to-destroy-islam-non-violently.html
The leftist media (in this case the NYT) have in this piece presented an untenable, slanted argument. The Oslo killer is a psychopath whose actions lack all sense. How can he claim to be defending Europe from jihad by slaughtering his fellow non-Muslim Scandinavians? Outside of a just war in which armed combatants fight their peers, the idea of killing anyone to further a political cause is a sure sign of total depravity (one of my main gripes with Islam, Pol Pot, Hitler, Stalin, etc.). Moreover, his actions don't even make sense within his peculiarly insane worldview - not even any interior logic here!
This madman has only succeeded in guaranteeing those who strive to call public attention to the dangers of allowing Islamic domination of the West will be further suppressed and vilified as his "accomplices." In this way he has damaged his own warped cause.
Mr. Spencer, those who read Jihad Watch daily as I do understand that you are acting in the best interests of all, both Westerners whose civilizations are actively threatened by Islamic ideas and the Islamists themselves who as human beings deserve a chance at life with basic freedoms and the pursuit of happiness. Thanks for all you do.
David Horowitz,as usual,has nailed it.
I doubt that this article will run in that rag that calls itself a " News Paper ".
It's not " Fit to print ".
Kudos to David. That NYT piece is abhorrent, and the comments aren't much better, especially early on, but they are accumulating quickly that's for sure.
From the NYT article:
"Marc Sageman, a former C.I.A. officer and a consultant on terrorism, said it would be unfair to attribute Mr. Breivik’s violence to the writers who helped shape his world view. But at the same time, he said the counterjihad writers do argue that the fundamentalist Salafi branch of Islam “is the infrastructure from which Al Qaeda emerged. Well, they and their writings are the infrastructure from which Breivik emerged.”"
Gotta love that. Exonerated from and then implicated in blame in two adjacent sentences. A hardcore case of doublethink to say the least.
Relying on someone like David Horowitz as a character witness is kind of like using Charlie Sheen as a drug free spokesperson. David, an ethnocentric zionists clown, has been constantly exposed as a lier and has zero credibility. Advertising Horowitz's support just shows how desperate Spencer and Geller is to avoid indirect responsibility for this act of terror.
These so called "anti terrorist, anti jihadist" are inciting exactly what they claim to be against! Speller havnt issued any killing orders per say. But they shape and mold the right sort of mentality for these deranged morons to act on. Fueled by their tremendous and still growing hatred for anything Islamic
The NYTimes editorial staff is a bunch of liars and never admit the truth. They are the same who published Duranty accounts of great communist Soviet Union in Thirties or so. I guess nothing has changed there since then!!! Any body who believes any editorial opinions of NYT is living in delusion!
You hate Israel and the Jews and you call yourself a 'real Jew'?! Savage Muslim are such cowards that they have to hijack Jewish/women/Christian names - after all, their role model is that creator of Islam, the RACIST Arabic Pedophile predatory rapist, robber, slave-owner (including sexual slaves such as young Jewish captive girls), and mass murderer of the Jews, Mohammed, in his evil goal to construct pure Arabian race and kingdom, and legitimize his and his tribe’s evil and savage Arabic socio-cultural practises and god (i.e. the Devil), especially against Judeo-Christian shared God and civilized tradition and laws! Get civilized!
Hear! Hear!
Today I am sending a check for $100 to support Jihad Watch. Earmarked for this site, it will be sent to:
The David Horowitz Freedom Center
P.O. Box 55089
Sherman Oaks, CA 91499-1964
I'm also sending donations to Pamela Geller at Atlas Shrugs and to Gates of Vienna, both of which were also targets of the Old Gray Whore's axe.
Lan astelem! I will never submit, either to Islamic supremacism or its loathesome leftist lickspittles. NEVER!
Yes, Mr. Horowitz naild it
61:9 “…that He (Muhammad) may make it conqueror of all religion however much idolaters may be averse”
+ 48:28 “…to proclaim it over all religion”
9:33 “…prevail over all religions”
8:39 + 2:193 “…and religion should be only for Allah”
+ 3:189 “And Allah’s is the kingdom of the heavens
and the earth….”
ISLAM WILL CONQUEROR & DOMINATE THE WORLD
The spirit of Quisling and his rabid antisemitism lives on in Norway's hard leftists. I'd just love to see the Norwegians try anything with Israel. Hell, even Britain or France wouldn't try it on with Israel.
How is it that reporting on actual occurrences is wrong?
Weird, when I first read the New York Times piece earlier after someone emailed it to me I didn’t check carefully and simply assumed it was an editorial. I didn’t realize it was supposed to be a “news” article until just now when I read this Horowitz piece Robert posted. What a joke of a publication.
Those who blame Christians for the atrocity of a single individual must also do that with Muslims and hence turn out to be the true bigots.
There may have been method in Breivik's madness. I mean that the kids on that island were the children of members of the ruling Labor party. And media reports have mentioned that almost all government members knew one or more of the kids who were killed or injured.
This means he may have chosen them for murder because it would strike hardest at the government and force the government to wake up to the dangers of immigration and Islam, Breivik's causes.
These weren't just any kids, they were mostly the children of Norway's ruling class.
However, imagine if he had gone to a mosque and shot 95 Muslims dead. The outcry of 'you see, we are the real victims' would have echoed across the world for years to come.
It would have been the 'perfect storm' to justify any and all jihadi crimes across Europe, something jihadists and their apologists have to invent at the moment.
It will all come out in time, but my take on this is that Breivik was trying to alert the Norwegian government in the only way he thought would work.
At any rate, Robert Spencer can not be blamed for Breivik's madness.
If reporting on actual occurrences makes somebody look bad, that's their problem, not the reporter's.
Robert, I have read nearly all your comments on this site and cannot remember any which were hateful or which condoned violence.
That's beside the point. The point here is that Breivik quoted Spencer 64 times. What was in those Spencer quotes that triggered the tragic events that ensued after Breivik ream them?
Following the logic of our Lamestream news entertainers, we can only speculate that, had Breivik quoted him 128 times instead of only 64 then twice as many white children could have conceivably been murdered Friday.
Well, I say thank God almighty for Breivik's intellectually laziness. Yes, the thinking here is akin to the jobs saved dastistick invoked so often by our elected Prez Barack Hussein Obama, but that does not implicate Barack in Friday's wholesale slaughter.
*** 33:21 ***
Further tracing the logic trail, we have now have no choice but to further speculate on Spencer: why exactly did he study Arabic at UNC-Chapel Hill, was identifying with Moslems in the hope as going undercover as a Moslem double agent? Or,conversely, it could be that, although he's hinted at being of Coptic extraction, and that's a pretty handy cover story, Spencer could actually a Jew conspiring to kibosh social progress in the Moslem world. Hint: he's seen with Geller all the time, which would make the Jewish John Kennedy of the growing Resistance niche, but influential, publishing market.
There are many speculations. There are many news entertainers. And there is plenty of bandwidth, what with all the Synchronous Optical Network pipe multiplied times 256 with Dense Wavelength Division Multiplexing at each end. Double agent or Jew, or both, Spencer has limitless Internet pipe over which to spread his teachings. Coincidence?
To me, as a rustic pork agrarian with hog pens laid out on the hillsides like those enormous coffee farms making a lattice across the sweeping Andean mountainsides, I can't help but to ponder that the integers 64 and 124 are of almost religious significance in the computing crowd, and it's only one small step to a magnitude of 256 poor white children were killed on Friday.
The inability to distinguish between discussions of the danger of a philosophy or world view, and equating such discussions with acts of violence, is evidence that many Americans have lost the ability to think logically.
All Mr. Spencer does is discuss the teachings of islam and provides examples and explanations of how they prove to be a danger to western freedoms that many of us take for granted.
To in any way intimate that he is responsible for the violence in Norway is scurrilous and cowardly.
The Islam critical author Henryk Broder is also cited
in the Manifesto
http://newstime.co.nz/me-and-the-manifesto-german-journalist-author-henryk-broder.html
“Me And The Manifesto” – German journalist & author
Henryk Broder
“…Only one detail wrong,” he [Henryk Broder] wrote in his opinion.
“I have not discussed with any blonde woman who was raped. I was only quoting from an article in which a raped woman grumbled about the fact that it would be better not to fight back, if you want stay alive.”
(I posted this under the "Anders Breivik stole..." story but it really belongs here, so am reposting. Apologies for the redundancy.)
The New York Times hit piece on Robert Spencer is a good example of how the Left manipulates concepts and news in such a way as to ignore metrics that distinguish among various levels of importance. Their knee jerk moral equivalence positing that relatively infrequent attacks like those of Breivik or McVeigh are no different from the many thousands of attacks by Islamists since 9/11 is similar to equating a dollar in your pocket with a million dollars in the bank, merely because both are denominated in dollars. This is flawed logic at its worst, although the Left is loathe to recognize they are guilty of it.
In the NYT piece, the last sentences of the story read:
"...John D. Cohen, principal deputy counterterrorism coordinator at the Department of Homeland Security, said Ms. Napolitano [Secretary of DHS], who visited Oklahoma City last year for the 15th anniversary of the bombing there, had often spoken of the need to assess the risk of violence without regard to politics or religion.
“What happened in Norway,” Mr. Cohen said, “is a dramatic reminder that in trying to prevent attacks, we cannot focus on a single ideology.”
Here we see the flawed logic on full display. No metrics reflecting the fact that there is a distribution of terrorist acts among groups of all kinds but it is not a uniform distribution - Islamic terrorism leads the pack by a huge margin. Instead, we have the fatuous statement "we cannot focus on a single ideology."
No, Mr. Deputy Coordinator, we do not expect you to focus on a single ideology, but we DO expect you to direct your investigative efforts proportionately according to where the actual threats come from - ACTUAL threats, not imagined ones dredged up from the fevered imaginations of innumerate Leftist ideologues with an agenda and morally equivocated according to your cockeyed logic. This is the sort of thinking that leads to such idiocies as three year old children and octogenarian grandmothers being felt up by airport security screeners as if they posed the same level of potential threat as a twenties-something Middle Eastern male matching the exact profiles of the 9/11 hijackers.
You're a clown!
If JW sparks psychotic behavior in some people by publishing the truth about Islam's agenda, supported entirely by quotes and references to core Islamic texts, then it's the content of these texts that is to blame, not JW.
What do you suggest? Not publishing the fact that Al Qur'an mandates Muslims to 'fight until all religion is for Allah'? Or say nothing about the verifiable fact that Al Qur'an says that Muslims 'are the best of people' while non-Muslims are 'the vilest of creatures'?
If that's what sparks psychotic behavior, then the Qur'an and other core texts of Islam are entirely to blame.
You're blaming the messenger for bringing the message. Your blaming the Richter scale for the earthquake, the thermometer for the fever.
You're a clown!
How often have I seen Robert Spencer comment thus on this site? So often I can recite the phrase by rote, and was thus easily able to do a search for it:
"Hamas-linked CAIR ... and other Muslims have not hesitated to fabricate 'hate crimes.' CAIR and other groups like it want and need hate crimes against Muslims, because they can use them for political points and as weapons to intimidate people into remaining silent about the jihad threat."
So much for the mendacious assertion that Robert's writings are an implicit incitement to violence. Indeed, this is an implicit admonition to forbear the same, because it would only benefit those who would see us crushed -- a truth this wretched episode is bearing out in spades.
Even if it is true that the Norway killer committed the horrible crime after being partially influenced by anti-jihad sites, it does not reduce at all, the threat posed to the world by Islam. I have been visiting this website for years and I know that Robert has never advocated violence. He inspires us to take political action of the non-violent sort e.g. rallies, demonstrations etc.
Mr. Robert Spencer, I want you to know that in this time of difficulty when Leftards are having a field day hitting you with all and any accusations, I am fully on your side. What you are doing is necessary for the good future of this world. Keep up the good work.
"Real" Jew wrote: "David, an ethnocentric zionists (sic) clown, has been constantly exposed as a lier and has zero credibility.....These so called "anti terrorist, anti jihadist" are inciting exactly what they claim to be against! (They) havn't issued any killing orders per say. But they shape and mold the right sort of mentality for these deranged morons to act on. Fueled by their tremendous and still growing hatred for anything Islamic...."
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
A couple or so weeks back Spencer and Geller publicly distanced themselves from an anti-jihadist movement in the UK because of rumors they were associating with or allowing fascist and / or racist elements into their movement. I'm not sure where that stands at this point. Having been active for several years in party politics, I understand the importance of associations and being ever-vigilant. Barack Obama was not vigilant; either that or he resished his associations with violent men and women. If Spencer and Geller disassociate themselves from troubling elements I think they will be fine. In any activist movement like this one, there will be parasites that seek to attach themselves from an otherwise healthy tree. We all have our character and reputations to protect. For several years, I was active in our local pro-life movement - the kind of innocent human life for which it would seem you have little respect, since it would appear you support the murder of innocent Jewish women and children in Israel. Otherwise, why would you call Horowitz an "ethnocentric Zionist clown" when he defends innocent Jews (living in Israel) against Palestinian Muslim terror?
These pro-lifers were law-abiding, peaceful activists, yet you could write, (they) shaped and molded the right sort of mentality for deranged morons to act on." Nonsense. You speak as a fool speaks.
The Times has unwittingly paid tribute to Robert's growing notoriety. Many people are threatened by the truth of something if it is unpleasant.
"You're blaming the messenger for bringing the message. You're blaming the Richter scale for the earthquake, the thermometer for the fever."
Excellent analogies, Buraq.
correctiion. I meant to write: "In any activist movement like this one, there will be parasites that seek to attach themselves to an otherwise healthy tree."
These so called "anti terrorist, anti jihadist" are inciting exactly what they claim to be against!
Said it before and I'll say it again: we need a new name. And so does the Tea Party.
*** 33:21 ***
Advertising Horowitz's support just shows how desperate Spencer and Geller is to avoid indirect responsibility for this act of terror.
It was just speculated that Spencer and Geller are the Kennedys, the Jack and Jackie really, of the glitterati Resistance crowd, where niche publishing proceeds are improving like a barometer of hate speech.
And we are Camelot.
*** 33:21 ***
Relying on someone like David Horowitz as a character witness is kind of like using Charlie Sheen as a drug free spokesperson. David, an ethnocentric zionists clown, has been constantly exposed as a lier and has zero credibility.
Well, to boost your credibility, how about you throw us a few credible citations of when Horowitz got caught lying? I ain't askeert of a little conspiracy theorizing, it's not only good for the cardiovascular, it's good for the soul.
Let's get this credible documentation up and on, Real Jew!
In any activist movement like this one, there will be parasites that seek to attach themselves to an otherwise healthy tree.
Sounds like the human condition going back 100,000 years, Wild.
hey Excellent note, Papa Whiskey.
The entire Manifesto was a copy-cut-paste of plagiarized work from Fjordman, Spencer, Pamella Geller, ... and the Unibomber (with the words "Leftists" replaced with "Cultural Marxists").
Add that to the fact that Breivik's FaceBook page was updated to include "Christian Conservative" AFTER he was in custody implies that he has at least one, probably many, accomplices to his murders. Demand that police find out when and from what IP address the modifications were made.
It is as though some group of leftists/Marxists or Islamists wanted to inflict the most damaging smear through the media they could.
Breivik was out to smear "Christian Conservatives" everywhere. Could this have been a false flag operation?
Mr. Spencer, can you raise these points when responding to the media?
Allah is 'the best of deceivers' (Koran 3.54), and since the highest goal of Islamic ethics is to spread Islam by any means whatsoever, it is hardly surprising that lying and deceit should be quite acceptable if carried out for the benefit of Islam. The tactic of 'Guilt by Association' is a favorite form of taqiyya (see #2 and #3 at http://crombouke.blogspot.com/2010/01/twelve-tactics-of-taqiyya.html )
So it is to be totally expected that the Islamists and their dimmi quislings in politics and media should try to use any association with the psychopath, no matter how tenuous or implausible, to discredit the most effective critics of this evil totalitarian cult.
Scott Shane in the NYTimes piece wrote [my emphasis]:
"[Breivik's] manifesto, which denounced Norwegian politicians as failing to defend the country from Islamic influence, quoted Robert Spencer, who operates the Jihad Watch Web site, 64 times, and cited other Western writers who shared his view that Muslim immigrants pose a grave danger to Western culture."
64 times? I doubt that. I did see that Breivik cited numerous articles in which the author (not Breivik) cited the jihadwatch link, along with other links, in the references portion. I did not see 64 quotes of Robert Spencer making statements. I suspect most of those links to the site are actually for news reports of jihad attacks and other such happenings related to Islamic militancy, sharia, etc., or featured articles, not all of which are written by Robert. I shall have another look. I've perused/read several hours worth of material from Breivik's manifesto, and Shane's characterization does not seem correct.
Anyways, regardless of how many times this nut Breivik quoted Spencer or Jihadwatch, what's noteworthy is that Shane fails to provide even a single such quote to support his allegation of a causal connection between Robert Spencer's views and those of the mass murderer Breivik. If there are 64 quotes, shouldn't Shane be able to quote at least one of them that is relevant to supporting his accusation against Robert?
Breivik claimed to be an admirer of Al Qaeda and claimed to be willing to work with them to obtain WMDS with which to slaughter massive numbers of non-Muslim European civilians. How Shane can ignore this and persist with his baseless insinuations against Robert and other opponents of sharia and jihad is unclear.
Shane wrote:
"Mr. Spencer wrote on his Web site, jihadwatch.org, that “the blame game” had begun, “as if killing a lot of children aids the defense against the global jihad and Islamic supremacism, or has anything remotely to do with anything we have ever advocated.” He did not mention Mr. Breivik’s voluminous quotations from his writings."
Shane mentions Breivik's "voluminous quotations" but does not provide even one, not even one part of a sentence, that would support what he is insinuating about Robert Spencer. Shane apparently hopes that NYTimes readers will fill in the blanks, that is, that they will imagine or assume that there is relevant evidence in the "voluminous quotations" to support what Shane is insinuating. But this is just a cheap trick or at best sloppy journalism. Shane's job is to either produce the support for the allegation, or withdraw the allegation altogether.
As I argued in a previous thread, journalists would not be waging a campaign to blame scientists who warned about global warming if some enviro-terrorists (a) blew up an oil pipeline and killed oil industry workers and (b) produced a manifesto citing the warnings of the scientists as part of the rationale for the attacks. They wouldn't, because only an idiot would assume that the "logical conclusion" following from any criticism is to launch terrorist attacks at the subject of the criticism.
All:
"Real Jew" is, in fact, a mohammedan. Treat him as such in these discussions.
It will dominate if we let it. And the omens aren't very good. To see the beginning of the end within 100 years of Churchill being Prime Minister would be an unmitigated disaster for freedom and the very things we treasure.
A Norwegian expert from Norwegian Institute of Internatioanl Affairs - brave enough to challenge ruling Islam-loving Left-Socialist Govt of Norway, to take responsibility for being undemocratic when not listening to many ordinary frustrated Norwegians by bowing to Islam and allowing massive non-integrated Islamic migration from Pakistan and Somalia especially (for the votes - of course; that's how they stay in power)!
http://islamineurope.blogspot.com/2011/07/norway-it-was-attack-against-labour.htmlSunday, July 24, 2011
Norway: "It was an attack against the Labour Party"
See short video.
Mr. Spencer, can you raise these points when responding to the media?
No he can't do that. To do so would be to wade into Minutia Marsh, whereupon he'd be swallowed up by Triangulated Torpor -- the final resting place of defeated leaders.
*** Bukhari Vol 7 Bk 71 Nbr 661 ***
Magic was worked on Mohammed so that he began to imagine that he had done something although he had not.
Somebody else has to work the deal on this apparent fraudulent update of Breivik's blog. Breitbart, maybe.
Such a leap from the actions of this psychopathic maniac are incomprehensible to say the least. But we have people everywhere that try to make outrageous connections when it suits their ideological bend, or ignorance and illogical thinking.
These people never try to explain how they are able to reach such preposterous conclusions. These are the same kind of people who reached the same lunatic conclusions as to what caused the pathological homicidal maniac to go on a shooting spree in Tuscon,Arizona and ended up blaming Sarah Palin or any conservative they could point to.
Can you imagine going back around 75 years ago and you are an anti-Nazi crusader living in an average American city,then out of nowhere a psychopathic killer wipes out 50 Americans in your town claiming it was his way of bringing attention to the threat of Nazism, Your right,--do I really have to tell you how idiotic it would be to put the onus on you for being against Hitler?
We have people like Tavis Smiley who made this outrageous accusation while interviewing Ayaan Hirsi Ali Nearly a year ago.see the minute long video exchange between Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Tavis Smiley.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0WxMHMcFh-s
I wouldn't be so sure. There are in fact Jews who are on the far left; even anti-Israel. No? Why there are even American Jews who support this racist in the White House!
CORRECTION: A Norwegian expert from Norwegian Institute of Internatioanl Affairs - brave enough to challenge ruling Islam-loving Left-Socialist Govt of Norway, to take responsibility for being undemocratic when not listening to many ordinary frustrated Norwegians by bowing to Islam and allowing massive non-integrated Islamic migration from Pakistan and Somalia especially (for the votes - of course; that's how they stay in power)! See - http://islamineurope.blogspot.com/2011/07/norway-it-was-attack-against-labour.html
Sunday, July 24, 2011
Norway: "It was an attack against the Labour Party"
See short video.
wildjew, the 'Real Jew' keep defending all Muslims and hate all Jews and Israel! So, I agree with CGW!
I agree the tea party designation leaves these activists open to ridicule by the opposition. Besides, "tea party" is indicative of a narrow field of interest; government spending, not that it is unimportant. What is wrong with "anti-jihadist?" What would be a better designation?
Mackie, that move Tavis Smiley busted with Ali sez it all. Equivalence is one thing, but willful misidentification is another. But, equating purposeful Jihad terror war operations with a Judeo-Christian nutcase going off is just plain stupid, dishonest, self-serving, factually incorrect, wishful thinking and, above all, dangerous.
That's what keeps Smiley and news entertains like him, which is to say all news entertainers, working. The highly dangerous bullsheet keeps flowing out like clockwork, and the direct deposit pay checks keep flowing in. It's the safe thing to do, and the money's good. So why not?
katharina, I dialogue with not a few American Jews (on Internet sites) who defend Islam and Muslims in general and are critical of Israel. We have a problem here in the US especially with our youth, many of whom do not feel any connection to Israel. If you read David Horowitz's Frontpagemag website, you will read his battle for the minds and hearts of American Jewish youth on our college campuses. I am not as diplomatic as David. A Jew who is not a proud Jew, is critical of Israel. A Jew who is not a proud Jew defends Israel's enemies. What can I say?
All: "Real Jew" is, in fact, a mohammedan. Treat him as such in these discussions.
I knew that.
The New York Times is a paper that plays character assasination to the fullest. There are people out there that won't believe you even if you state that 2+2=4. We know you. You speak the truth. Nothing is ever going to change that.
You know, "Real Jew," you might have some tenuous purchase on the ground of credibilty if you could provide even ONE example to support your accusations. But you can't, can you? Why? Because Robert Spencer is not a violent man; he's NEVER espoused violence, never approved of its employment, never incited to it--not by ANYONE, for any reason, anywhere, any time. That's not just my opinion--that's an easily verifiable FACT. Oh, sorry, am I perhaps boring you with facts, here?
So, where does that leave you, "Real Jew?" With your broken-record, repetitive empty accusations you have proven no more than that you are a vile, slandering ignoramus with an insidious agenda and ZERO credibilty. You're an embarrassment to those whom you claim to support. Not that they need your help to look bad...
It is very unfortunate to blame on a gentle man like Robert Spencer. As an Indian I experienced the act of extremism in our country on a daily basis and the entire world too know that. The liberals and their media houses trying to make an elephant out of a single cell creature. The most unfortunate aspect is that in such a gruesome act of bloodshed the liberals and their media houses are trying to politicizing the issue which is the most heinous act.
I'm usually not fond of character assassinations, but in the wretched case of Anders Breivik, things are different. Capital punishment would be too easy a way out for this scumbag, living his last years in utter disgrace and humilitation is much better. Some points for anyone to use:
He’s shown that he doesn’t understand the fundamental sancticity of life.
He’s a bad nationalist, for he attacks his own rather than protecting them.
He executed the law himself, which is deeply illegal.
He executed his completely own law, not that of society.
He committed high treason against the society he claims to protect.
He deceptively used a police uniform to create trust in those he intended to kill – and did.
He killed children.
And he’s punishing collectively, for problems that these children never contributed to.
My god, what an evil person! German Politically Incorrect appropriately labels him Judas Iskariot".
Mackie, you wrote: "Can you imagine going back around 75 years ago and you are an anti-Nazi crusader living in an average American city,then out of nowhere a psychopathic killer wipes out 50 Americans in your town claiming it was his way of bringing attention to the threat of Nazism, Your right,--do I really have to tell you how idiotic it would be to put the onus on you for being against Hitler?"
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Pearl Harbor had the affect of bringing attention to the threat of Nazism and Japanese imperialism. I'm not justifying what this killer did but I don't think the comparison fits exactly. Even the socialist-leaning Roosevelt administration was alarmed by the Nazi threat, albeit he did not have the courage to make his case until America was attacked. It was the isolationist movement here in the US led by Henry Ford, Charles Lindbergh, Father Charles Coughlin, elements (sadly) within the Republican party, etc., that was the problem. Norway's political elites have this anti-Israel obsession. Norway's ruling class is overwhelmingly pro-Hamas, pro-Islamic jihad against the Jews, pro-Islam; very anti-Semitic.
Look at this: "Pro Palestinian Rally at Norway Youth Camp the Day Before Massacre"
http://www.americanpendulum.com/2011/07/pro-palestinian-rally-at-norway-youth-camp-the-day-before-massacre/
Please, permit me - Everyone - to add my point!!!.
Robert Spencer is not for Hamburger brain and fashion-mental main steam media mafias in American and elsewhere. (sex and beach lovers). Non-sense! (...as my mother will put it).
(a). Robert Spencer is for the whole World.
(a). Robert Spencer is for a large number of Good Muslims world over (suffocating in oppression)
(a). Robert Spencer is for Africans (In there remote no light, no computer, no education, no awareness remote and desert Countries)
(a). Robert Spencer is for a feasible Free Society.
(a). Robert Spencer is the only genuine God-fearing and courageous man left on American Internet and geographical soil.
What an irony that a greater percent of American left-legs; and their Islamic cohorts think that Osama bin Laden was a courageous man. ¿…Imagine the likeness?.
America and the World owe Robert Spencer immeasurable remuneration.
God bless Robert Spencer.
God bless America.
God save the World.
Thank you.
While the article is negative to say the least, consider the source. The Times has virtually no credibility left, and anyone with any sense, will know that.
There are Moslems among the victims in Utøya, but they weren't killed as Moslems for their religion, they were killed as Norwegians for their political views. Anders Behring Breivik might be the symbol of anti-Islamic madness, but in a way, his terrorism is as anti-anti-Islamic as you can get.
-- http://islamineurope.blogspot.com/
More damning speculation on Spencer's culpability in the Friday massacre. When I read the "anti-anti-Islamic" part I got a little lost, but somehow I just know that there is big trouble on the horizon for Spencer. I can just feel that this is right thinking, know what I mean?
When it comes to the Leftists, we know full well that had Breivik carried out his atrocity in Israel instead of Norway, and had murdered 97 Israeli Jewish youngsters, he would have been another of their poster boys. You only need look at who they worship - Pol Pot, Che Guevara, Fidel Castro, Hitler, Stalin, Chairman Mao, Nasrallah, Ahmadinejad, Arafat, Haniyeh and Ayatollah Khomeini - quite a 'rogues gallery' of evil there, and look at who they hate - The US, Israel and Jews, with Christians coming up on the rails.
NOW we know the truth - its the fault of the newspapers...
"Q: Why did he use a method which was previously linked to Islamists?
"He says he saw there was no way except for using violence. He tried all other ways. He wrote letters to different newspapers about his thoughts, but didn't get the letters printed.""
To blame Spencer for this loon? Purposeful deceit.
Who was cheering this mass-murder? The real enemy...
Robert: as you may know by now I am in entertainment business thus I have information about our business that others may not know about and they only find out when it is happened.
Discovery Chanell Internationan has just commosioned a one hour documentry to be produced on a fast track about this massacare. It is called"
"Norway Masacare: the killers mind". this being produced by a company based out of london called ITN. as you know discovery has a lot of money and ITN is a huge production company wiht lots of resources. this progarm is going to be aired in August and it is going to be aired only in Middleeas, Africa and Pacific Asia. this is all seems to be very sinister and since I have been doing 30 years if to had to bet my money you and JW will be portrayed an evil right wing muslim hate monger in order to justify this murderous act. I will garantee you you will be mentioned and since you are a public figure they not need or have to get your permission. Just a heads up.
m
Robert you cannot take this quietly.
As David Horowitz put it, the NYT would never "blame Noam Chomsky for the crimes of Osama bin Laden and Al Gore for the crimes of the Unabomber since the ideas of both were cited by the lunatics".
If they did, it would rain lawsuits in them, and they would back off. These media thugs only understand intimidation, look at Sarah Palin, they almost lawsuited her out of office. Its a tactic they routinely use, they always put forth a dozen bogus legal claims, not to necessarily win, but only to silence and intimidate.
You should respond in kind. They must understand that if they want to commit defamation against a freedom fighter they will not go unchallenged in courts.
If every story they published libeling a freedom fighter were accompanied by a dozen lawsuits, they would think twice before putting them out.
Robert and everyone else:
If you like to know more about the documentry that I mentioned above, please go to:
Screenworld.com. scroll down and you will see the article about discovery international.
M
Yep, and ITN is no different from the BBC, apart from the fact they don't charge the licence fee.
You speak hard truths, Mr. Spencer, but you do it with honesty, restraint and compassion (and you always have). I support you 100 percent.
It's a good thing I am not in Spencer's shoes. They would have "nailed" me by now.
The deeds of Breivik are the wedge to shut down any criticism of Islam.
Will those deeds "take down" Robert Spencer? I don't think so.
But we're kidding ourselves if we think that no damage has been done. I'm saying this with an ache in my heart.
What really brought about Breivik's deeds: the Leftist government of Norway. Breivik's attacks were primarily political in nature (as mentioned in this comments thread).
In the next few days, we shall see if other mainstream media outlets follow the lead of the NYT and blame Robert Spencer (and others) for Breivik's deeds.
Fully agree with Horowitz and it's good to see Robert's friends supporting him.
It's disappointing though not surprising that media outlets like the NYT and other leftists have shown themselves to be completely lacking in morality by cynically exploiting this heinous crime in order to attack Robert and his work. They know full well that the only person responsible for this crime is the terrorist himself but that won't stop them doing their hit pieces on Robert.
David, I agree with you that Robert, and Pamela and David Horowitz, as well, should raise a public fuss. Drag the sorry asses of NYT into court in a defamation lawsuit, with huge monetary damages. This is the only way you'll ever get the attention of the Leftist smear merchants such as the NYT in any way that is meaningful, and winning such a lawsuit would provide a useful precedent for halting similar attacks in the future. So sue 'em. Otherwise, there will be no end to this.
The Left thinks it is getting the range of the Right - this, Rupert Murdoch (owner of Fox News), the documentary in production mentioned by miriam rove above - and is starting the artillery barrage preparatory to a full scale assault to come. If it isn't nipped in the bud now, in court, it will only get worse.
Breivik's manifesto also borrows extensively from writings of the unabomber, Ted Kaczynski (thus adding plagiarism to the list of his crimes). His ideas seem pretty eclectic, not to mention psychotic, and it's hard to take seriously the claim that Islamocritical writers and bloggers bear the blame for these actions.
Sam Harris:
"It has been widely reported that Breivik is a “Christian fundamentalist.” Having read parts of his 1500-page manifesto (2083: A European Declaration of Independence), I must say that I have my doubts. These do not appear to be the ruminations of an especially committed Christian"
"I have written a fair amount about the threat that Islam poses to open societies, but I am happy to say that Breivik appears never to have heard of me. He has, however, digested the opinions of many writers who share my general concerns—Theodore Dalrymple, Robert D. Kaplan, Lee Harris, Ibn Warraq, Bernard Lewis, Andrew Bostom, Robert Spencer, Walid Shoebat, Daniel Pipes, Bat Ye’or, Mark Steyn, Samuel Huntington, et al."
"Islam remains the most retrograde and ill-behaved religion on earth. And the final irony of Breivik’s despicable life is that he has made that truth even more difficult to speak about."
http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/christian-terrorism-and-islamophobia/
The New York Slimes. I wonder how long it will be before it blames Churchill's criticism of Hitler for the Holocaust?
"In any activist movement like this one, there will be parasites that seek to attach themselves to an otherwise healthy tree."
Exactly
The man also attached himself to Christianity in his hypocrisy.
And this is the worst thing. Breivik, either single-handedly, or more likely, with the help of others, might have plunged the knife into the heart of Western civilization and twisted it. This could have far-reaching consequences for future generations, and maybe our own if we're still young enough, because the moralizing and traitorous self-loathing Left, who aid and abet our enemies, are now out in full throttle, helping our enemies and denouncing those who think Western civilization is worth saving. Once the population of a civilization no longer thinks it is worth saving, then it is truly doomed and heading for history's graveyard.
News media claimed he referred to two more "cells", which by his referring to himself as a cell, suggests, two more accompisses, minimum!
Excellent comment, very astute, Henrik
Spot on Spirit Of 1683! The Muslim terrorists of Hamas have ben murdering Jewish children - but the evil hypocrite Left loves that savage Hamas anyway! The Norwegian Socialist(part of the ruling Govt)even threatens to bomb Israel if Hamas is atatcked in self-defence by Israel - such nastiness and hypocrisy of the Left! They're sick!
Excellent points, wildjew, among many, but the bottom URL felt like a slap in the face to see it, makes things ever so slightly better to understand. Juda's Priest! Makes it ever so more a crazier time we live in, reminds me so much of some of the sick stories of 1932 and later in Germany.
Spot on WildJew - as I explained before, the Muslim terrorists of Hamas have ben murdering Jewish children - but the evil hypocrite Left loves that savage Hamas anyway! The Norwegian Socialists (part of the ruling Govt)even threaten to bomb Israel if Hamas is attacked in self-defence by Israel - such nastiness and hypocrisy of the Left!
"These so called "anti terrorist, anti jihadist" are inciting exactly what they claim to be against! Speller havnt issued any killing orders per say. But they shape and mold the right sort of mentality for these deranged morons to act on. Fueled by their tremendous and still growing hatred for anything Islamic"
Just like your mein kuranmpf fuels hatred and murder, on a daily basis, for kaffirs.
I do note that the NYT article online has a hot link to Jihad Watch. Law of unintended consequences might come into play.
Just sayin'.
Capital punishment is never a too easy way out for him. It will save a fortune on keeping him in jail for 50 years or more. It's the easy way out for us and does justice in full. Having him still alive 50 years after his victims are dead is not my idea of an easy way out. Besides, he has done far too much damage to the West itself - damage which our children and grandchildren will pay dearly for.
Keep up the great work, Mr. Spencer. I can't imagine what it is like to be attacked and slandered by people who obviously never read your blog in such a public way, by the NY Times, no less.
Hopefully some good can come out of this as more people will have the chance to see who you are and be motivated by your intellect and your extraordinarily fine character to go on and read your work.
If Breivik was acting out of the exclusive influence of anti-jihad sites would not his victims have all been muslims?
Katharina, I am pretty sure "Real Jew" is a Christian of the anti-Israel variety and has taken his name from Romans 2:28,29. Dispensational doctrine's evil fruit.
I agree with alwaysonwatch. Look at the bright side. You know the saying - no publicity is bad publicity. Many who are curious about the demonization of this site will come here to see what all the fuss is about (Pam's blog, GofV as well as religionofpeace) and learn something in the process. You never know.......
I have some comments about this:
1) I do not condone what the terrorist did in Norway although I understand his motivations,
2) This incident opens a new debate under the principle I called Swordfish for the movie of the same name,
3) The progressive left must now realize that it must not only fear the actions of Islam but also of those who are resisting, and we are already seen it from commentators at BBC and others,
4) It is to be expected that Spencer and Geller would be attacked, I hope they do not stop their great efforts. It is the only rational effort we have. Silencing them will only open the gates to extremism.
Keep up the good work guys. Please
Thank you.
I stand by you Mr. Spencer. You have been nothing but a Gentleman & scholar ta boot for years online & off.
They can use this to decry your truths but like death these people cursing you have a date with reality. It won't be long before yet another atrocity by Islamists occurs.
Probably against other Muslims which seems to be the norm except in Africa.
Please sir continue this rightious fight against the dispoilers of our society.
MMM okay, "RealJew," let me tell you like I see it. I have read your posts for some time now and have refrained from engaging in the type of character assassination and lies in which you seem to excell.
Allow me to state it plainly: Judging from your online behavior, you're about as "real" a Jew as a veal milkshake is kosher. Just sayin'. I will also be the first to state that I am not trying to represent what "real Jews" think or state, or that I claim a monopoly on the truth; but your libels and falsehoods are simply beyond the ethical domain and I refuse to remain silent.
Not only do you misrepresent Mr. Spencer's PLAIN meaning in what he states, your knowledge of history, and Jewish history in particular, is atrocious.
I suggest you do some Jewish homework and look up the terms lashon hara, motsi shem ra, rechilut, and sheker v. emet and do a cheshbon nefesh on your activities here.
This was my only and final word to you.
The leaders of the Left, just as Islamic leaders, gather their strength through holding their followers in the darkness of ignorance.
This is their most potent weapon, because from that darkness the ignorant masses will follow whatever light those corrupt leaders shed upon them.
dear mike,
i have read many of your posts in the past, and i can assure you, that, if you read my comments, you would know that "anachnu shneinu me'oto hakfar".
inasfar as this little character, masquerading as a 'real jew', i tend to agree with cgw and the apf : the guy is a musloid troll.
should he be a 'real jew' as he claims...there are truly no words of contempt fit to be typed inasfar as describing him and his ilk.
NEWS ALERT JWers, THIS IS GREAT ANALYSIS, SETTING REALITY STRAIGHT.
BILL O'REILLY ON FBN, at 8:16 ET, just did one of his best pieces "calling a spade a spade" that I've ever seen him do, covering realities of Breivik and jihadis and Chriatianty. Absolutely beautiful and brave work, Bill, if you happen to read anything here. And he went after the left MSM press and coverage. Absolutely beautiful critical analysis. His monologue was 3 minutes or so, and he has been in related discussion 4 more minutes.
JW READERS, it is worth looking for the replay later today, and the you tube copy that will soon come out.
Bill O Reilly is continuing even good so far with Juan Williams, "....radical islamist pose the greatest threat to the world....", great stuff on FBN, Bill O'Reilly. 10 minuts of truth and reality, wonderful and amazing.
Oh are they going to get leftard complaints, ha.
The Norwegian tragedy and crime committed by a deeply warped human being has revealed just how difficult it is, and will be, to demonstrate to the West at large how nefarious Islamic doctrines are to the preservation of liberty. Leftists of all sorts are out in spades using this Norwegian atrocity, committed by a non-Muslim, as evidence that people who indict the Islamic faith for deeply anti-freedom elements exist on some kind of lunatic fringe.
Never mind that Islam and liberty cannot be squared with each other. Never mind that since 9/11 Muslims acting in the name of their religion have committed thousands upon thousands of terrorist attacks. Never mind that Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Sikhs, Hindus, etc. have committed almost no terrorist attacks in the name of their religion of choice. All this is of no matter to the modern liberal. Far more important to one who possesses a modern liberal mind is the need to to castigate conservatives and those fading number of liberals who remain who have not abandoned common sense.
Pathetic but very predictable. Islam is a menace to liberty to be sure, but so are modern liberals with their blind hatred towards conservatives, their stupid PC/MC nonsense, their reliance on emotion far more than reason and their deep, their profound, ignorance of what Islam really teaches. The Age of Nonsense marches on, courtesy of modern liberalism and whining, self-pitying, never-taking-responsibility-for-their behavior Muslims. What an awful combination---clueless modern liberals and clueless Muslims (excuse the double redundancy).
Wellington, the moonbats who are pouncing all over this to say - see you so-called righties are no better - but seriously, nothing is going to change their minds - even if they were about to be beheaded by their buddies in izlum, they'd be blubbering excuses anyway...
They've be salivating at the chance to have a new "example", as mcveigh was what? 16 years ago? it was getting sooooo old even they must have been getting embarrassed - TWO "white christian extremist terrorists" in the last 16 years compared to the nearly 17,000 jihadi attacks since 9/11 ... it is to laugh if it wan't so serious
Blessing in disguise?
I have seen many a new poster here today, and God knows I haven't had time to peruse all the postings. That said, they were led here by links on other blogs and wanted to see and judge for themselves if JW is what the New York Times and others say it is.
Some of them said that this was their first post and that they found none of what's being said about JW and Robert Spencer elsewhere credible, only "rational opinions being expressed" to quote just one.
It only stands to reason that many others also come here to see, and realize that JW is actually a very informative site and they stay to become regulars.
Something positive in all of this.
To "Real Jew"
There is nothing "real" about you. You are not real, honest or truthful. I also donot believe you are a real jew, but if you are, you need to seek medical help for your self hatred. Your posts show a definite hatred for jews.
Also, you are not honest or truthful. David Horowitz, Robert Spencer and Pamella Geller are not to blame for a mentally ill mans actions. Never has Spencer, Horowitz or Geller incited or promoted violence. Speaking out, telling the truth about Islam and it's tolatarian idology is not hateful or hostile. Truth is What it is, "truth". The truth is what sets men free.
I have read David Horowitz, Robert Spencer and Pamella Geller for years now, just like many on this blog. They are not responsible for the actions of a mentally ill man. As a reader of "Jihad watch," I have never had the urge to go kill anyone because of what was reported here. Truth is truth.
I am a born-again Christian, and Mr Breivlk, is not. To be a Christian is to believe in and follow the one (Jesus), who laid down his life in love for all mankind. One can call themselves anything, but if they are not followers of the tenets, the "truths," taught by that person, then they are not followers of that person.
I am glad for and support people like Spencer, Horowitz and Geller. I say "Thank You" to them for their dedication and truthful reporting.
Also, "Mr. Real Jew/Rip Van Winkle," Islam and it's followers are at war with all non-muslim, possibly even you, muslim or not.
Agreed, j. Modern liberals never learn unless they leave liberalism. Muslims never learn unless they leave Islam. The common tie between modern liberalism and Islam is that both rest on false premises functioning as axioms. That's why breaking away from all the rot is the only winning solution for either the modern liberal or the Muslim. It's rather harsh that this is the truth of things----but it is the truth of things.
dear wellington,
in reply to your 5;53 pm comment, i offer the following thoughts:
under the current situation, all we are doing is, engage in an incredible water-treading exercise where NOTHING gets done, nothing is achieved, except for a mind boggling waste!
waste of time,
waste of treasure,
waste of lives
and seeing our way of life go down the drain....
until the seditious government is not kicked out (fitted with orange jump suits and locked up...) and replaced with patriots that INTEND to honor the oath to defend the constitution and not to trample it and abbet the enemy (who is poised to 'destroy the miserable house from within')...i am afraid all we'll see is just reshaffling the deck chairs on the titanic...
until the CRIMINAL msm is not being taken down and replaced with PROFESSIONALS who just present the facts with no bias and no agenda... we may see a few more 'breiviks' at work.
do not get me wrong, i am not condoning or whitewashing the shooting spree...what i am saying is that when a person is pushed repeatedly, lied to repeatedly, and he sees things just getting worse, with no chance of improvement....
he/she may just snap .
also, please read sultan knish's commentary "Anders Behring Breivik and the High Cost of Muslim Immigration" at:
http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/
kind regards
Another cure for liberalism is to throw liberals into third world cultures and countries.
Worked for me. :D
"There may have been method in Breivik's madness. I mean that the kids on that island were the children of members of the ruling Labor party. And media reports have mentioned that almost all government members knew one or more of the kids who were killed or injured.
This means he may have chosen them for murder because it would strike hardest at the government and force the government to wake up to the dangers of immigration and Islam, Breivik's causes.
These weren't just any kids, they were mostly the children of Norway's ruling class."
Did anyone see the interview with the Norwegian moderator of the web site where Breivik posted? He said that Breivik hated western multiculturalists more than he hated Muslims.
That would seem to fit Buraq's hypothesis.
...Breivik hated western multiculturalists more than he hated Muslims.
Underneath it all, was hate.
By asking your representative in the U.S. House of Representatives to help pass the bill H.R. 1687 -- the Open Fuel Standard Act of 2011 -- you do something very practical to resist sharia and jihad.
The bill already has over a dozen Republican and Democratic sponsors in the House of Representatives. Get your rep to sponsor it too!
The Open Fuel Standard Act of 2011 (HR 1687) would require a rapidly increasing percentage of new cars sold in the U.S. to include a small change that would cost only $100 a car. The fix would allow cars to run on any fuel and any mix of fuels (including methanol, ethanol, bio-diesel, or gasoline). The fix would break the OPEC monopoly on transport fuel. It would create price competition among fuels and increasingly allow drivers to choose at the pump which fuel they want to buy. The Open Fuel Standard Act of 2011 (HR 1687) is supported by a coalition of strange bedfellows who normally might not agree with each other: former national security officials, environmentalists, military bigwigs, evangelicals.
To see why to support the Open Fuel Standard Act of 2011 (HR 1687), check out this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZFP-ShpwzA&feature=player_embedded#at=11
Or this:
http://openfuelstandard.blogspot.com/2011/05/why-open-fuel-standard-act-is-urgent.html
Or this longer video:
http://openfuelstandard.blogspot.com/2011/05/robert-zubrin-explains-why-open-fuel.html
And check out this website: http://www.setamericafree.org
Set America Free is a coalition including Daniel Pipes of the Middle East Forum; Frank Gaffney of the Center for Security Policy; former CIA head James Woolsey; former National Security Advisor Robert McFarlane; former secretary of Energy Admiral James Watkins; former commander of the U.S. Pacific Fleet Admiral James Lyons; Orson Swindle, Former Commissioner of the Federal Trade Commission and Vietnam POW; and others.
You can contact your representative to support the Open Fuel Standard Act of 2011 (H.R. 1687) by email if you go here:
http://www.actforamerica.org/index.php/contact-congress
But a thousand times more effective than email is to telephone your representative.
1) Click here to get your representative's phone number:
http://www.congress.org/congressorg/directory/congdir.tt
2) When you get to that website, just put your zipcode in the box, hit enter, then images of your representative (and your two senators) will appear.
3) Then click on your representative's picture, and several tabs will appear, including a "contact" tab.
4) Click on the contact tab and you'll see phone numbers for your representative.
If you telephone, and the congressperson is not available, politely ask the name of the staffer who answered the phone, then ask to leave a message saying you support passage of the Open Fuel Standard Act of 2011, HR 1687. Even better, ask when to call back so you can speak directly to the congressperson.
More than 17000 acts of terror committed by Muslims in only ten years and a single act in Europe commiteed by a counter jihadist. But if anybody else commits an act of violence it's a scandal and if Muslim do that, it's business as usual.
And now peaceful people like Robert are blamed for that crime in Norway, the New York Times is a disgrace for America.
I said I would follow up on Scott Shane's claim about the Breivik manifesto's "64" "quotes" of Spencer. Now I've had a chance to go through the pdf using the search feature.
Results:
-There were 54 mentions of the word Spencer (as applying to Robert Spencer).
-18 of them (33%) occurred in whole articles by Fjordman,* in which Fjordman quotes/cites Spencer.
-23 of them (43%) are simply repeats of the name Spencer to label separate quote snippets from one source, the documentary Islam: What the West Needs to Know
-7 of them (13%) were again labels for separate quote clips of Spencer, apparently from one source called What the Crusades were Really Like
-1 of them was apparently from a comment by a poster named "Lonestranger," in response to an article by "Ohmyrus", in which Lonestranger speculates about why Spencer, Ye’or, Bostom, et al., aren't recommending or discussing mass deportations of Muslims from the west
-1 of them is a quote or paraphrase of Fjordman where Fjordman recommends Spencer's books
-1 of them is where Breivik (?) lists Spencer along with Bat Ye'or, Andrew Bostom, and "many others" (not listed) as "relatively moderate contributors" to the so-called "Vienna school of thought"
-3 of them (6%) are occurrences of the word Spencer in labeling of an article by Spencer called "Muslim Persecution of Christians"
Another relevant pasted-in article called Islam 101, from JihadWatch, by Greg Davis, was also included by Breivik.
That's it. So much for Shane's misleading "64 quotes" claim. Breivik himself has apparently "quoted" Robert Spencer by pasting in large unprocessed chunks of material from 3 different sources--the documentary, the crusades piece, and the article on Muslim persecution of Christians.
Needless to say, Breivik never in his approximately 1500-page "compendium" quotes Spencer as supporting his (Breivik's) "revolutionary" views, values, methods, proposals, and objectives.
The most that I would say is that, at a very coarse and superficial level of analysis, Breivik and Spencer share an overall negative or critical view of Islam, and believe there are major problems with Islam in Europe. This is a view that is shared by pluralities to majorities of ordinary non-Muslim Europeans. As Shane surely knows, having a critical view of something or someone does not logically entail or even imply that one will, or ought to, go on a terroristic killing spree in response to that something or someone. (Otherwise, by Shane's own logic, he [Shane] is guilty of encouraging deadly terrorist attacks against Robert Spencer and Islam critics general merely by criticizing them publicly.)
Here's another irrelevant bit of trivia for Shane: According to my pdf search of the document, wikipedia (or wiki) is cited 429 times. (This may suggest that Breivik does not have much patience for scholarship, but that's another matter).
Jihadwatch is mentioned/cited 116 times, almost all of these occurring in Fjordman's lists of references.
*Note that Breivik does not consistently label Fjordman's articles as such, sometimes they are properly attributed, sometimes they aren't attributed at all.
Thanks for going to all that work and posting that...
The details show that there really are no details...
PROJECTION! That's the psychological principle that projects the evil of the evil doer onto some innocent and demands the punishment of the innocent. Robert Spencer is the innocent. Guess who the evil doer(s) are?
When I was watching the liberal media cover the Belsan massacre in Russia, they never used the word 'muslim' extremist. I had no idea Islam was behind it. Yet the CBC in Canada (financed to the tune of 1 billion dollars annually by taxpayers) RUSHED to call this lunatic a 'christian' fundamentalist.
Ezra Levant and his guest Michael Coren had an excellent discussion last night on the Source (Sun Media TV) about the Left using this tragedy as a political point to silence conservatives. Ezra quoted passages from the killer's manifesto in which the killer stated that he did not have a personal relationship with Jesus or God and was a 'cultural' christian. the killer hadn't been to church since he was a teenager and was pro-gay. Hmm, doesn't sound like a 'christian fundamentalist'.
I believe that the CBC is not allowed to use the term 'muslim' and 'terrorist', 'fundamentalist' etc together but how come they are allowed to use the term 'christian'?
The killer quoted from Gandhi and Winston Churchill, etc. Are they responsible for this attack? If the killer endorses someone/a cause, does that mean that person/that cause endorses the killer's actions? I mean, Hitler was a vegetarian - I am a vegetarian - does that mean I endorse Hitler's actions?
The left is desperate.
So what if people jumped to the conclusion that muslims did it. The near-simultaneous attacks were similar to Al-Quaida attacks, a muslim group gleefully lied and took responsibility for it and Norway has had its share of muslim attacks/threats. To scream, 'islamophobia' is ridiculous.
Also, was this 'christian' guy trained in a church? Did any church group approve, finance and train him? Did a christian group lie and gleefully take responsibility for the attack? Nuff said. How many muslim attacks are promoted by a mosque or imam? So many. Muhammad himself was a terrorist, Jesus was a pacifist. (Understanding Muhammad, Ali Sina).
I hate the Canadian media and only watch Sun TV now.
I have read Robert Spencers' books and find his tone to be even-tempered and his books well-researched. I have the utmost respect for him. Let the left scream. Why should Spencer even 'defend' himself? His work speaks for itself. Why should we respond to the left? Let these monsters feed themselves into a frenzy.
See some mad muslims in action:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_kyNIevsIs
And do the lefties who are pro homosexuality, understand what islam and muslims think about and do to gays!!!
Pro gays getting in to bed with muslims to achieve political aims!!!
Oh dear!!!
And do the lefties who are pro homosexuality, understand what islam and muslims think about and do to gays!!!
Hi amalteser. The lefties are totally clueless about history. Even the so-called academia of the left are . . . well, 'in left field' when it comes to history, geopolitics, religion, economics, reality, etc. etc.
The vast majority of them are not educated in any use of that word that any of us here would recognize. They, like Real Jew, can't argue facts because they don't have any. They only have invective. They can't carry on a real argument because they've never made the effort to learn how. They only know contradiction.
They go to University to learn how to be radicals, useful idiots, and so-called activists. They don't go to be thinkers, let alone philosophers.
Sooooo, they have never attained a background that would allow them to even consider your question.
In this particular situation, they at least won't bring harm down on themselves, probably.
But this is a crazy world, and believe it or not, there are gay and lesbian societies that support hamas and the Palestinian cause. In all likelihood they are liberal left educated and are just as clueless as their non-Gay leftist supporters.
Below, is a link to a letter of protest sent by a segment of the gay community to the Toronto Pride Committee regarding its decision to exclude any political speeches or activities by any participants in the parade. This upset Queers Against Israeli Apartheid and Queer Palestine Solidarity who wanted, like anything, to show their support for Islam.
You may notice from the tenor of the letter that it represents the views of individuals that are far left.
You'll also note the narcissism (leftist trait) of the signers, each one of them almost put a résumé to their name. One of them even thought that indicating they were writing a book would sway the committee. Jerks. They're totally oblivious to their danger.
The video at this link also shows how totally devoid of knowledge the left can be. One of those interviewed claimed Israel can't answer the charge of apartheid, so it shuts up everyone!!?? Its interesting that someone from a so-called oppressed minority managed to sneak in a racist allegation about Jews controlling the world; appalling stupidity and ignorance; but not unexpected from the left.
Toronto Pride founders protest decision to bar
Palestine solidarity
http://mondoweiss.net/2010/05/toronto-pride-founders-protest-decision-to-bar-palestine-solidarity.html
Mr. Spencer,
I agree that both you and David Horowitz have done a marvelous job in exposing the left and Islam as enemies of freedom. Therefore, it pains me to say that while pointing out their dastardly deeds is important, the problem is that both of you have some erroneous beliefs that undermine your efforts. Please correct me if I am wrong, and I pray that I am mistaken, but from what I can determine, both of you believe that the 1st Amendment treats Islam as a “religion only” when in fact Islam is a hyphenated “political-religious” government, which removes such protection.
Last year during a book signing, Mr. Horowitz told me that “Muslims cannot be deported because of the 1st Amendment.” I will never forget that statement because it is patently false. I have written an appeal to his office without a response. I hope that he and all other patriotic defenders of freedom will correct that type of false thinking on this issue. To claim that it is protected as a religion is a misrepresentation of the U.S. Constitution’s protections against religious tyranny. If Islam were protected under the 1st Amendment, it would then be logical to assume that the founders condoned use of the 1st Amendment as a shield to allow an international mafia organization with a religious front to masquerade as a “religion only” and be immune to RICO (racketeering & fraud) arrest and prosecution that it so richly deserves. Furthermore, using the logic that Islam is a religion only, we would conclude that:
(1)_The founders intended that the 1st Amendment could be used to hijack the “Supremacy clause” of Article 6.
(2)_The so-called “peaceful” Muslims can separate themselves from the protocols and mandates of Sharia law and still be called “Muslims.”
Such thinking ignores the fact that “taqqiya” (lying and deception) is an art form in Islam. Even if reformation or reconciliation were possible_ and it is NOT, we do NOT have the luxury of time or clairvoyance to pick the fly specks out of the pepper. Neither reformation nor reconciliation is possible between even the so-called “peaceful” Muslims and those of us who have patriotic allegiance to the U.S. Constitution. As a whole, they have no such allegiance even though some of them may deny their faith and work with Kafirs to their own detriment, i.e. if caught they would be executed by their own.
Islam is the very thing that the 1st amendment was designed to protect us against. It specializes in plundering the wealth of nations. It has no moral boundaries. Murder, rape, enslavement, and religious intolerance are the norm. Deportation is the most humane method of removing these domestic enemies from our midst. Politically impossible? Yes, as long as we deny the necessity of it. The job of government is to assure domestic peace and tranquility of U.S. citizens by putting America first, our Judeo-Christian values over theirs.
Very Truly,
John Noble
Notes:
• Justice Story Commentaries Vol. III, p. 728, §1871
“The real object of the [First A]mendment was not to countenance, much less to advance, Mohometanism, or Judaism, or infidelity, by prostrating Christianity; but to exclude all rivalry among Christian sects.
• House Judiciary Committee: Reports of Committees of the House of Representatives Made During First Session of the Thirty-Third Congress (Washington: A. O. P. Nicholson, 1854), pp. 1, 6, 8-9.
“In this age there can be no substitute for Christianity; that, in its general principles, is the great conservative element on which we must rely for the purity and permanence of free institutions. That was the religion of the founders of the republic, and they expected it to remain the religion of their descendents.”
Hi John. Although I can agree with you in principle, the world doesn't quite work the way you think or hope it does.
The so-called Church of Scientology is a good example. Initially, it was just a scam perpetrated by L. Ron Hubbard. Later, for tax purposes and protection from government intrusion, it claimed to be a religion and although initially this position was opposed by the US, Australian and even German governments it eventually ended up being accepted as such by the courts of those lands.
To this day, the whole story seems like one big brain fart by the courts and governments around the world.
The modi operandi used by this 'Church' are highly reminiscent of Islam today including:
1) infiltrating governments
2) using law suits and threatened law suits to control opposition
3) use of harassment against opponents
4) abuses of its members
5) possible fraud regarding its finances
Anyway, the link, below, is the Wikipedia info on Scientology. It brings a lot of this out if you know how to read between the lines.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology
The point is, once an organization 'claims' to be a religion, the courts seem to be reluctant to interfere with that position. Sometimes the courts won't even interfere when the operations appear to be criminal or borderline criminal in nature.
Below is an example of what happened when two former employees leveled charges of slavery and forced abortion against this church.
http://jonathanturley.org/2010/08/12/scientology-wins-major-court-ruling/
The following link is to an article written by a lawyer who defended Scientology back in the 1980's. He explains why, this organization is treated as a religion even though logic tells you that it isn't.
http://luana1980.wordpress.com/2008/05/23/scientology-cult-or-church/
I guess the bottom line on this is that the courts in order to protect actual religions are also forced to give recognition to questionable ones.
One interesting facet of all this is that Scientology does not profess a God. I think if you asked anyone what the distinguishing characteristic of a religion is, they would answer something along the lines: a belief system that gets its adherents closer to a god or a pantheon of gods. Apparently, the courts don't agree.
It appears that it is the practice of a belief system itself that makes a religion. The presence of a deity is incidental.
So, unless actual legislation is enacted to remove Islam's recognition as a religion, I don't think your position is tenable. It has First Amendment protection and won't be touched.
Greetings Peter,
Yes, I realize that the world doesn’t work the way that our founders established this nation to function. They gave us the local government organization found in Exodus 18, the commonwealth of free men per Leviticus 25:10, and the natural law of Cicero. Natural law (God’s law), also known as “peoples law” includes but is not limited to the following concepts:
• Unalienable rights
• Unalienable duties
• Habeas corpus
• Limited government
• Separation of powers
• Checks and balances
• The right of self-preservation
• The right to contract
• The right to bear arms
• The principle of no taxation without representation
Our Declaration of Independence presents the principles of natural law. The U. S. Constitution reflects and sets forth authority to protect those values. The two are inseparable reflections of each other. That being said, only God can preserve a nation. He does so when the people honor those values in the Declaration and give credit to God as the author and protector of their freedoms. The point that you made, “the world doesn't quite work the way you think or hope it does” is resolved by taking heed to a warning by Ben Franklin that “Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters.”
You see, it really did not matter that the rest of the world did not work that way when the Pilgrims came to America. They operated 180 years under natural law_ prior to both the Declaration and the Constitution. They functioned magnificently as sovereign colonies in spite of the fact that the rest of the world did not work that way. Their autonomy became the model for states’ rights. But, now that we have wandered so far from the tenets of our Constitution, Fedzilla needs to be put back in its cage, i.e. the federal government’s Article 1, Section 8 limitations that have been so blatantly breached by a people who are no longer virtuous. Our real problem is the lack of virtuous people.
Islam is only one of the many diseases that can invade any nation that abandons the One who brought them to the party. Don’t focus on symptoms of national decline and lose track of the true cause, the break-down of America’s spiritual immune system_ ignorance and apathy toward the Word of God.
Cheers,
John Noble
Well said and Amen.
Tom Davis wrote:
Did anyone see the interview with the Norwegian moderator of the web site where Breivik posted? He said that Breivik hated western multiculturalists more than he hated Muslims.
That would seem to fit Buraq's hypothesis...
Underneath it all, was hate.
.........................
Very true, Tom.
Anders Breivik was willing to work with *the very worst Jihadists*—Al-Qaida, Al-Shebab, the Mullahs of Iran—in order to kill Europeans.
In order to 'gain the trust" of these Jihadists, he was willing to kill children and cut off his own penis.
Doesn't sound like much of an "anti-Jihadist", does he?
And yes, you are right about *the hate*.
"Norway Killer Breivik Willing to Work with Al-Qaeda, Iran, Says Templars May Need to Kill Children and Cut Off Own Penis"
http://uk.ibtimes.com/articles/186202/20110725/norway-killer-breivik-willing-to-work-with-al-qaeda-iran-says-templars-must-kill-children-and-cut-of.htm
I thank God for Robert Spencer and his articles and book that have educated us on the evil that is trying to conquer the World.
Without him we would not know the truth. We would probably know and feel the evil, but he brings to us the reasons.
Robert they know your knowledge and they are mearly trying to discredit you.....
We all need to defend Robert and write to the NY Times and tell them we know there game and we don't buy it.
They need to apoligize to Robert Spencer.