These technical difficulties occur very often. What is going on?!

Posted by: george_rem at October 12, 2006 4:32 PM

It's almost as though muslim hackers are trying desperately to 'electronically behead' the jihadwatch.org servers. I could be wrong. I do know that Islam is allergic to the truth, and they get mighty testy when someone else has access to it. I'm not naive enough to think this site isn't under attack on a regular and ongoing basis.

But despite the best efforts of the enemy, the site soldiers onward. Best of luck, and godspeed Robert et al, you're providing a priceless service to all who frequent these pages.

Posted by: Muzzl'em at October 12, 2006 4:40 PM

good to hear that. keep up the good work.

Posted by: raja at October 12, 2006 4:46 PM

All's well! Thanks for the update.

Posted by: Malinois at October 12, 2006 4:46 PM

"We're under attack ! Abandon your posts rrrrrun for your lives"

'The steward from Lord of the Rings'

Posted by: thehappyinfidel at October 12, 2006 4:50 PM

Maintenance is a pain. Thanks for doing it and providing us a forum to vent and share thoughts. I think I'm hooked..., starting to get itchy.

Posted by: limes at October 12, 2006 5:01 PM

Whew!

Posted by: PRCS at October 12, 2006 5:08 PM

Glad to hear it's nothing worse than technical difficulties.

Since the site went down around 5:00 pm Wednesday PDT I did wonder if there was any connection to the threatened hack on the Vatican web site. I did try not to jump to conclusions, though.

Posted by: gravenimage at October 12, 2006 5:16 PM

I sent Mr. Spencer an email query about it this morning, but that was before I discovered that this was not just a Jihad Watch problem. Many conservative blogs have been blocked by the Department of the Interior. See Gates of Vienna blog for details. It is one of those that have been blocked.

Posted by: Frieda at October 12, 2006 5:20 PM

Ironic that this tech difficulty comes a few days after the new Robert Spencer book. Hmmm.......

Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at October 12, 2006 5:28 PM

Looks like the perfect thread for an OT item.

Debating Handbook for Infidels

Several weeks ago here, we were discussing creating a handbook for Infidel debaters. After that thread closed, a few of us - Caroline, Archimedes, I and initially Television - went offline and continued our discussions on what it should be like, what are the topics, and also did a few of those topics ourselves to establish a template that should be followed.

After a few weeks of working this out, we are now at a point where we are ready to invite other people here in JihadWatch who were and are interested in contributing to this effort to come and join us. We have laid down the goals, how to go about it and your role in contributing to this effort. If this is something that you had been interested in doing when this discussion last took place, or any time since, and are interested in joining (now that we have defined the what and how of this project) please visit our site and read our introductory FAQ to see what is expected and how to get started. Should you choose to join, create an account and then let us know in that thread itself.

Hope to see you there.

Posted by: Infidel Pride at October 12, 2006 5:45 PM

Robert, I sent you an email this morning letting you know the siteinstitute.org seemed to be undergoing the same, but worse difficulties, as I was receiving tons of emails from their subscribers that had been sent to the site, thus the emails were being forwarded to everyone on their subscriber list. When I tried to access your site last night, all that came up was the parent list, administrator page. I was quite concerned, but relieved everything is ok now.

It does seem odd that the anti-terror sites seemed to be underdoing various technical difficulties at the same time after the announcement that Al Qaeda would be hacking the Vatican site.

Posted by: Bonniea at October 12, 2006 5:52 PM

CORRIGENDA:

WE ARE - WE ARE - UNDER ATTACK.
And we have been under attack for 1400 years.

But not a cyber attack, a monster attack instead.

Posted by: POITIERS-LEPANTO at October 12, 2006 6:24 PM

Frankly, I haven't seen these kinds of "technical difficulties" on other sites. Either Jihad Watch is hooked up wrong, or it has been under periodic attack. Which is it?

Posted by: remote_control at October 12, 2006 6:36 PM

Remote Control:

Neither one. Jihad Watch was under attack several weeks ago. We solved that problem by moving to a different server and blocking traffic from Saudi Arabia, Iran, and several other countries from which the attacks were coming.

Today's trouble is entirely unrelated, and was caused by a human error -- mine.

Cordially
Robert Spencer

Posted by: jihadwatch at October 12, 2006 6:38 PM

Robert

Block most of the OIC countries, and you should be fine. I doubt you'll see too many attacks though from Guyana, Surinam, Mozambique or Cameroon.

Posted by: Infidel Pride at October 12, 2006 6:41 PM

A hacker attack was the first thing that I thought of when JW started acting funny.

Posted by: Jesus Christ Supercop at October 12, 2006 6:57 PM

Hey Robert,
It's time to update your blogging software to something more robust and user friendly.

http://communityserver.org/Default.aspx

seriously, you can give Hugh and anyone else at your site their own easy to use blog, forum discussion and multimedia/file download area.

Posted by: Avatar at October 12, 2006 6:58 PM

Whew! I'm glad it's only technical difficulties.
I was prepared to aim a little Arabic phrase that I picked up at the hacker! Hopefully all will be well soon because I can't get enough of this site.

Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at October 12, 2006 7:03 PM

Are the archives live as yet? Doesn't look like it - I tried clicking the first link I referenced above, and it still goes to

Not Found
The requested URL /archives/012883.php was not found on this server.


Additionally, a 404 Not Found error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to handle the request.
Apache/1.3.37 Server at www.jihadwatch.org Port 80

Posted by: Infidel Pride at October 12, 2006 7:15 PM

Mr Spencer: Amazon was very speedy delivering your latest book (Muhammad) and I am engrossed in studying it, outstanding job as usual. Glad to notice that up front you mentioned that both Iraq and Afghanistan have U.S. Backed Shari'a constitutions, (kind of blows away the bs. about "spreading democracy in the mid east", unless Dubya and Co define democracy as voting, if that be the case then there is plenty of democracy in the mid east because they vote from Pakistan to Iran, to Lebanon, Kuwait, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, "Palestine", Morocco, Tunis, Algeria.

OT compare these pieces on the same event

Al-Hindi pleads guilty on terror charges

NDTV Correspondent

Thursday, October 12, 2006 (London):

The terrorist known as Abu Musa Al-Hindi has pleaded guilty on charges of conspiring to murder people in terrorist campaigns in Britain and the US.

Al Hindi was born in India as Dhiren Bhanot before converting to Islam when he was 20 years old.

Thirty-four-year-old Al-Hindi, who made a court appearance in London, intended to cause injury, fear, terror and chaos in plotting to carry out explosions in US financial buildings and underground car parts in the UK through the use of radioactive materials, toxic gases, chemicals or explosives.

Barot was reportedly sent to the United States several times by 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and has authored a book called The Army of Madinah in Kashmir.

In the book, he has narrated his experience fighting Indian forces in Kashmir and describing ways to kill Indian forces in the Valley.

Same story from the "scared shitless of Islam" BBC.
Man admits UK-US terror bomb plot

One of the targets was the New York Stock Exchange
A man has pleaded guilty to conspiring to murder people in a series of bombings on British and US targets.

Dhiren Barot, of north London, planned to use a radioactive "dirty bomb" in one of a series of attacks in the UK, Woolwich Crown Court heard.

Notice that BBC misspells the name (it is Dhiren Bhanot, not Barot)neither do they mention that he is a convert to Islam, nor do they mention that his new name is Father of Moses the Hindu (Abu Musa al Hindi).

Posted by: Nariz at October 12, 2006 7:17 PM

I agree with Avatar above.

Posted by: Infidel Pride at October 12, 2006 7:17 PM

Hello, Infidel Pride. Thanks for the work you and the others are doing toward a Debating Handbook for Infidels. Nice project.

Posted by: Jim The Kafir at October 12, 2006 7:23 PM

Haha.. I like the Mine aspect of error... But the only time I ever made a mistake is when I thought I was wrong ;) (as my computer sizzles... hahah)

"Hello, Infidel Pride. Thanks for the work you and the others are doing toward a Debating Handbook for Infidels. Nice project."

What is this about? May I ask?

Posted by: Weatherob at October 12, 2006 7:39 PM

Doh! NM I just need to read up further! Haha Nice IP!

Posted by: Weatherob at October 12, 2006 7:40 PM

Weatherob

The first link that I provided is to a past article in JihadWatch where Hugh called on posters to put together a Debating handbook for Infidels. The link looks broken, which is why you're probably not getting what's it about.

Nonetheless, visit the last link I provided, and start from there. We need volunteers.

Posted by: Infidel Pride at October 12, 2006 7:47 PM

Can one be so certain that the site is not under attack? Is computer diagnosis these days so clear cut?

Just asking.

Posted by: traeh at October 12, 2006 8:38 PM

Okay, now it's working

Posted by: Infidel Pride at October 12, 2006 8:44 PM

That's good to hear. I just finished watching "Islam : What the West Needs to Know" on DVD. Great documentary. Lots of quotes from the hadith, Koran, and Life of Muhammed. I'll admit it is a little plain, but I watch documentaries frequently, so that doesn't bother me. Only problem with it being plain is how will this hold the attention span of the average American who knows little about Islam? Has the production company thought about remaking it with some acting and production to make it more appealing to the general public (assuming sales are good)?

I am wondering why the film didn't use Robert's own example of his family being asked to convert to Islam or leave. That would certainly have tied into the subject and been persuasive as well.

Posted by: non-redneck at October 12, 2006 8:54 PM

Infidel Pride,

KUDOS! I went & took a look at some of the discussion & lots of the FAQs; what good work you guys are doing.

I was especially impressed by your inclusion of links to logical fallacies, and reasoning. Good sign, to me, of the seriousness of the work.

We who are just starting to absorb all of this information desperately need concentrated sources of information, such as this handbook. Thanks very, very much for taking this project on.

Vee

Posted by: Vee at October 12, 2006 9:10 PM

Robert,

I also thought it must surely be a DOS attack.

I just assumed that Adam Gadahn just couldn't stomach the photo of him holding your new book anymore!

Regarding that book, my solemn respect goes to you for choosing to go ahead with writing it, despite acknowledging, as you do on page 16, "The subject matter is provocative - perhaps lethally so".

You have great courage, in my opinion.

Be well, and be safe.

Vee

Posted by: Vee at October 12, 2006 9:22 PM

Broken machines are truly annoying. The owner usually has to get his hands dirty or pays through the nose to get it fixed, whatever “it” is, but machines are important, liberating and comforting. I have two that require constant maintenance, wouldn’t trade them for the world. They are worth the constant fixing and I don’t mind the dirty hands because they feed my soul, make me whole.

Posted by: butterfly at October 12, 2006 9:44 PM

I can corroborate from personal experience that sometimes software and hardware break down with no assistance from jihadists.

Posted by: special_guest at October 12, 2006 10:00 PM

When I saw the notice I must admit that I thought that it was the work of hackers. What a suspicious mind eh!

Posted by: Maggie4Life at October 12, 2006 11:01 PM

I disagree with blocking blindly all traffic from islamic countries since, I believe, JW has many fans originating from those countries and they need help in spreading any issue related to islam/jihad to their relatives n frends there. I myself an Indonesian christian and actively forward good information from this site to my friends here....

Posted by: asian crusader at October 13, 2006 12:36 AM

Oh good news, what had me worried was the link on the homepage to Robert Spencer's (pbuh) new book 'the truth about muhammad'

Posted by: eloivsdiablo at October 13, 2006 3:23 AM

Asian Crusader:

I'm sorry, but it had to be done. Too many attacks were coming from the blocked countries, too frequently.

Cordially
Robert Spencer

Posted by: jihadwatch at October 13, 2006 11:30 AM

That's good to hear. I just finished watching "Islam : What the West Needs to Know" on DVD. Great documentary. Lots of quotes from the hadith, Koran, and Life of Muhammed. I'll admit it is a little plain, but I watch documentaries frequently, so that doesn't bother me. Only problem with it being plain is how will this hold the attention span of the average American who knows little about Islam? Has the production company thought about remaking it with some acting and production to make it more appealing to the general public (assuming sales are good)?

I am wondering why the film didn't use Robert's own example of his family being asked to convert to Islam or leave. That would certainly have tied into the subject and been persuasive as well.
Posted by: non-redneck

Not sure whether you're still reading this, but fwiw...

I just received it today and finished watching it, and it was good, although I daresay it could have used either more footage or more commentary. The way the maps were used to show the rapidfire spread of Islam - green with flares - was beautiful. While Bat Yeor did well to describe how Islam marched all the way upto the Gates of Vienna, I would have liked her to show how Islam spread in the Indian subcontinent and was beaten back by the end of the Moghul empire, and some more such stuff.

Somehow, I found Abdullah al Araby very underwhelming. Was Ali Sina not available - I mean, assuming that he's in hiding, couldn't his vocal commentaries have been used? Walid Shoebat was easily the star of the show - made even Robert and Srjda look plain, when they normally shine. I found his account about his turning point away from terror moving, particularly when he talked about the attack of conscience, and how he reflected on the death of his relatives who had been lost to Jihad.

Could have been better, but I'm happy.

Posted by: Infidel Pride at October 15, 2006 6:04 AM