I posted a comment at LGF last year..saying I thought a few of the posters were paid by CAIR...I really thought they were...what they say is so over the top.

Posted by: storagemanager at July 31, 2007 10:26 PM

There are at least a half dozen death fatwas on "all Americans" utilizing "all Muslims." They always talk about Islamic duty (fard ayn, fard kifaya). Fatah and al Qaeda have promulgated two big ones. Then there's the Hook Hand Hamza argument: that we're (non-Muslims) lower than farm animals under Islamic law. We can be killed at their pleasure, he noted. He is hardly alone in this feeling.

So what sort of uninformed nimrod would I be if I didn't have some well-founded concerns about Islam?

Posted by: Beagle at July 31, 2007 10:29 PM

And they are no longer there...makes me think I was right.

Posted by: storagemanager at July 31, 2007 10:29 PM

Robert,

Maybe you should add a tag field where posters can flag a comment (like genocidal ones) as inappropriate?

Posted by: karelmartel at July 31, 2007 10:30 PM

that genocidal comment was condemned by all of us. whoever wrote that stupid comment should realise the enormous damage in which they have caused. and thanks to your idiotic genocidal comment we will all be under government scrutiny. thanks moron.

btw, CAIR is reading jihadwatch, good. Then lets let them know that the USA will never be an islamic state. regardless of their violent threats and malicious actions towards us.

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at July 31, 2007 10:31 PM

If CNN were a competent and honest reporting network they would make all efforts to get the one egregiously defamed during their interview - Robert - onto a follow up program. I said IF...

Posted by: Brett_McS at July 31, 2007 10:31 PM

keep up the great humanist work RS!

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at July 31, 2007 10:32 PM

Mr. Spencer has more integrity in his pinky nail than hooper has in his big fat head.

Posted by: nyone at July 31, 2007 10:33 PM

I had the opportunity to watch the exchange as well. Hooper was his tacky self applying what a couple of commenters said on Jihadwatch as if they were written by Robert Spencer himself. This misleading ploy has been played out over and over again by CAIR rep. Hooper. Both Christopher Hitchens, and Dennis Prager did an excellent job refuting the comments of Hooper at every turn.

As a commenter on Jihadwatch going on nearly 4 years, I strongly condemn commenters who insist on making these genocidal remarks, it is non-productive and does not serve the site well. I wish commenters would take the time to read what Mr. Spencer's has asked for at the beginning of every comment section.

Posted by: Mackie at July 31, 2007 10:34 PM

Robert, keep up the good work. You are truly a profile in courage. When Mr. Hooper has to grasp straws to try to do a put down on both you and JW/DW, that means both you and JW/DW is doing something good.

Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at July 31, 2007 10:36 PM

How fortunate that you used this image from that program. Note the background image used in this program. . .now go here, to Mr. Hooper's base, the CAIR website and examine the image he and his cohorts find appropriate for display. . .(scroll down the lower left sidebar and study the image of the U.S. capitol with gold dome and added minaret.)

As Mr. Hooper stated . . ."We love the first amendment, we uphold it every day."

Yes, Mr. Hooper. Duly noted. Using that image and you dare accuse others of intimidation?

Posted by: justamomof4 at July 31, 2007 10:37 PM

While I appreciare Prager defending you, I cannot understand why he could not have told Hooper, "Robert Spencer would never say such a thing. You are referring to the comments section, aren’t you? Not all cementers represent his views."

Instead, he said in the end of the show that he will tell you he disagrees. No “IF Robert said it, then I’ll tell him”. I am disappointed in Prager.

Posted by: War On Hate at July 31, 2007 10:38 PM

Robert Spencer should sue this creep, HOOP, for committing "hate speech" (which by CAIR's own definition of the term he is doing as well as setting up a "false premise.").

Posted by: pythagoras at July 31, 2007 10:38 PM

I learned from Robert...teach about danger...don't give in to anger and hate....and make yourself look like a fool.

Posted by: storagemanager at July 31, 2007 10:39 PM

"...after Hooper's use of this comment despite its being deleted, I suspect that even more strongly that it was written by a provocateur."--R.S.

I do not suspect; I am absolutely convinced the comment was planted here.

It was nice to hear Mr. Prager state so clearly that Jihad Watch is an honorable site. Not to worry, Mr. Spencer. Your admirers are legion.

Posted by: IrishEi at July 31, 2007 10:41 PM

justamomof4

thanks for spotting that.
that image is imperialist propaganda. saudia arabia funds CAIR. this is disgraceful. this should be our banner to show Americans the true goals of CAIR. to transform the USA into an islamic nation..

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at July 31, 2007 10:41 PM

While I appreciare Prager defending you, I cannot understand why he could not have told Hooper, "Robert Spencer would never say such a thing. You are referring to the comments section, aren’t you? Not all commenters represent his views."

Instead, he said in the end of the show that he will tell you he disagrees. No “IF Robert said it, then I’ll tell him”. I am disappointed in Prager.

Posted by: War On Hate at July 31, 2007 10:41 PM

While I appreciate Prager defending you, I cannot understand why he could not have told Hooper, "Robert Spencer would never say such a thing. You are referring to the comments section, aren’t you? Not all commenters represent his views."

Instead, he said in the end of the show that he will tell you he disagrees. No “IF Robert said it, then I’ll tell him”. I am disappointed in Prager.

Posted by: War On Hate at July 31, 2007 10:42 PM

"...after Hooper's use of this comment despite its being deleted, I suspect that even more strongly that it was written by a provocateur."--R.S.

I do not suspect; I am absolutely convinced the comment was planted here.

It was nice to hear Mr. Prager state so clearly that Jihad Watch is an honorable site. Not to worry, Mr. Spencer. Your admirers are legion.

Posted by: IrishEi at July 31, 2007 10:42 PM

justamomof4

thanks for spotting that.
that image is imperialist propaganda. saudia arabia funds CAIR. this is disgraceful. this should be our banner to show Americans the true goals of CAIR. to transform the USA into an islamic nation..

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at July 31, 2007 10:44 PM

Robert Spencer does not fight in the gutter...he wins by knockouts.

Posted by: storagemanager at July 31, 2007 10:45 PM

The acronym CAIR actually means "Convert All Infidels Religiously". Thank you for blogging the Koran, Mr. Spencer...amazing how a "religious book" starts with a chapter called "The Cow", isn't it?

Posted by: AmericanTiger at July 31, 2007 10:46 PM

ah! so CAIR was booked for an interview on CNN and then someone planted a genocide comment. it all makes sense now. what a crock. what a cheap salesman.

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at July 31, 2007 10:47 PM

What if we fotoshopped an American flag around the Kaaba, just for fun?

Posted by: karelmartel at July 31, 2007 10:48 PM

As a commenter on Jihadwatch going on nearly 4 years, I strongly condemn commenters who insist on making these genocidal remarks, it is non-productive and does not serve the site well. I wish commenters would take the time to read what Mr. Spencer's has asked for at the beginning of every comment section. - Mackie

Amen to that, and thanks for your support.

I just wanted to add a link to this posting from last spring, which contains some extensive comments from Robert on... comments. I've also come to use it as my basic reference for deciding to remove a comment.

Posted by: MarisolJW at July 31, 2007 10:51 PM

I apologize for the three duplicate posts I made. Posting comments here takes forever so I kept clicking "Post". Sorry about this Robert.

Posted by: War On Hate at July 31, 2007 10:51 PM

I am so bummed! I can't seem to get any of these videos to run! I downloaded Flash Player, but no dice.

Posted by: Abscedere at July 31, 2007 10:58 PM

The comment didn't happen to be that bit of flagrant lunacy by one "Barry Laden" (B. Laden, sic) yesterday, did it?

I think "interestinconundrum" flagged it for "clean-up" immediately as pure b.s.

Posted by: profitsbeard at July 31, 2007 10:59 PM

Has someone done a Hooper "lie count"? Should hold a contest for "spot the lies." (another board game could be devised -- like "halal/haram"). Let's see, there's the Spencer said X lie, then there's the Cat Stevens' didn't say X lie, then there are all the lies about how much Hoopy supports the U.S. Constitution and doesn't believe in "intimidation" (o heaven forfend! perish the thought! "intimidation" why that's just so vulgar! particularly when one considers Dhimmitude and the jizya and "humiliations to pacify the Infidels" or the need to murder those who insult Mo...)

Posted by: J.S. at July 31, 2007 11:03 PM

profitsbeard

yes that was the one. someone else wrote a comment for it to be removed. genocide is a disgrace to humanity. it is evil and wrong. genocide is happening right now in darfur by arabic muslims and the muslim community in the west says nothing. did Hooper condemn genocide against the "black" sudanese tribes on CNN last night?

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at July 31, 2007 11:05 PM

While I am by no means a fan of hitchens, I have to admit that - unlike his book - his comments to hooper were great.

Prager did an awesome job as well, but faltered at the end. He should have defended Robert, but maybe he was just caught off guard.

Still, someone needs to confront CAiR on the air tell them that even if someone wrote a genocidal comment about muslims (does genocide even apply since it means the killing of a genepool/race?) on this board, those are only words. So far, the only people actually doing any killing are muslims.

Someone needs to ask him why infidels who diss muslims are more upseting to them than muslims who kill infidels.

Posted by: senatortombstone at July 31, 2007 11:06 PM

Absolutely. Good job, Mr. Spencer.

Posted by: Ma Sands at July 31, 2007 11:09 PM

I'm sorry I missed the genocidal comment yesterday, but I have some doubts about the poster.

In any case, I find it interesting that Hooper is making such a BIG fuss about mere comments alluding to genocide -- which perhaps he himself might have posted here under an assumed name for all anyone knows -- yet, he expresses no concern whatsoever for real people being murdered in the name of islam, such as those Korean hostages.

Through it all, Hooper implements the same old stunt -- coin a phrase to intimidate others into silence if they criticize you or cross examin your idea; lay blame for errant comments on your enemies to silence them; and remain silent yourself over real slaughter and murder of innocents done in the name of the ideology that you espouse.

And by-the-way, JW has been watched by numerous government agencies for a very long time.

Free speech is not dead nor is freedom to think what you choose. Hooper and CAIR are working to change that -- DON'T LET THEM INTIMIDATE YOU INTO SILENCE!

Posted by: witness at July 31, 2007 11:12 PM

I have emailed CNN of my opinion that Robert Spencer's character and purpose was intentionally defamed by Hooper. Hooper has looked more and more horrible everytime he appears, like a man on a verge of a seizure of some sort. I wouldn't be surprised if one day soon he will be babbling that he, too, is talking to Allah.

Posted by: Briars at July 31, 2007 11:15 PM

The thing is, as you watch Mr. Hooper, observe his body language and his intonation - he's just a shill for CAIR. He doesn't actually believe the BS he's spouting. Or, if he does, its strictly automatic - there is no thought involved. He is simply mouthing words and phrases as would a good automaton salesman.
In other words, it appears that the man has no soul.
I listen to Mr. Prager almost every day. I often find him pompous and self involved to the point of being boring. But he believes the things he says. He has a certain passion and he does indeed think upon most of what he says (as long as you don't get too specific about Judaism. He tends to be a tad "unclear" on that subject in spite of "having taught the Torah for 25 years...")
I love Christopher Hitchens. He is so snide, self-righteous and unpleasantly biting to his opponents. And, as he is totally, historically and factually, accurate regarding Islamic fascism, he is a pleasure to listen to. The man has soul. (Of course, his moronic views on religion in general are inane and his biting wit tends to sound like ignorant whining but, each to his own).
Hooper is creepy in his lack of conviction on his lifestyle of choice...
I cannot actually credit him with the evil that he espouses. He seems to be more the carny barker outside the Tent of Horrors, urging everyone inside and who goes home at night never even thinking about his job; the Tent; or any of the people he has actually dealt with...

Posted by: Moishe3rd at July 31, 2007 11:17 PM

Hitchen's rocks on this clip!

http://www.slate.com/id/2171371/fr/flyout


God-Fearing People Why are we so scared of offending Muslims?

If he wants to be an atheist: fine with me. He has many redeeming qualities in this article.

Posted by: Gramfan at July 31, 2007 11:23 PM

Hitchens kicked Hooper's tail in that go-round. He turned ol' Ibraheem into a stuttering, stammering buffoon.

Posted by: Prickzilla at July 31, 2007 11:26 PM

Note that Paule Zahn's introductory remarks stated that the case was considered not that serious until muslims groups exerted pressure to have it listed as hate crime and as a felony. While I read speculation to that effect, and made good sense to me, Hooper didn't deny it and even defended it.

Posted by: Leave Iraq Now at July 31, 2007 11:31 PM

Hitchens article posted here, and mention is made of the koran-flushing incident:

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/hang_the_free_speaker_before_the_baddies_hang_us/#commentsmore

Posted by: Gramfan at July 31, 2007 11:32 PM

Does anyone else notice that Hooper seems to be everywhere lately and that more often than not he's having to field more hardball questions?

Posted by: USBeast at July 31, 2007 11:41 PM

look we need to use simple language for simple people. prager was convoluted, he didnt really come to the point. which is, Islam is not a race. why he never said this in simple language is beyond me. the dumb reporter made him look like a bigot. he could have "dumbed" down. used basic english, put his points acrosss in simple language that mose people understand and said, "islam is not a race". we need some sexy exciting stars, sorry prager, but this is how we will win, as this is how liberalism has won for the past 40 years.

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at July 31, 2007 11:43 PM

This is incredible. Ibrahim Hooper, National Communications Director of the Council on American Islamic Relations said this:

Islam is an ideology, not race.

He is right. It is an ideology. Islam is the ideology of Arabian peninsula conquest and imperialism, rather than a religion. And, as such, it does not constitute a race.

And Dennis Prager is right. The brilliance of adopting the term Islamophobia, as opposed to Arabophobia or even Muslimophobia, is that it means that any criticism of any aspect of Islam can be met with the term Islamophobia. If you ignore the phobia part, this means that any criticism of Islam is vorboten or the CAIR stormtroopers will move in and put you in the un-PC concentration camp.

On the other hand, the logic breaks down when you looks at the phobia part of the term. Phobia implies an irrational fear. There is nothing irrational about fearing Islam. In fact, the facts would argue that it is entirely rational to fear Islam, simply based on the threats emanating from Islamic organizations or the real and factual actions of people in the name of Islam.

So Islamophobia is simply an entirely rational response to the unprecedented extremism (at least unprecedented since the days of Nazi Germany) of a specific ideology (called such by a leading spokesman for Islam in the US).

It is not racist nor phobic to have fear of Islam. It is simply rational.

Posted by: Wimbledon Womble at July 31, 2007 11:44 PM

Robert:

I am a firm believer that providence . . . provides. You do exhibit amazing patience and coolness under pressure. How you can put up with such deceit on a daily basis and still remain a gentleman is beyond my capacity to understand.

If CAIR had a spokesperson with your personal qualities, we would be in substantially more trouble than we are now.

OT--but the link below shows how "moderate" Islam isn't really moderate. The gentleman from Pakistan gets hung up on a couple things, but the discussion about the morality of Muhammed (may he repent for his misdeads) is truly enlightening.
http://www.news.faithfreedom.org/downloads/probing-islam.pdf

Posted by: JSobieski at July 31, 2007 11:50 PM

You're damn right Womble, I was a bit shocked by that comment by Da'wah Doug too. The best part was Hooper calling Islam an "ideology" rather than calling it a religion. Hmmm, too much truth from the professional spokesman.

Posted by: Jan Sobieski at August 1, 2007 12:04 AM

Mr. Spencer, I am also impressed by your patience and your thoughtfulness. The Holy Spirit has blessed you with this gift (and likely honed you over time for this role) and it is pleasing to see you respond again and again with your valid criticisms of Islamic jihadist ideology.

Ideas in a society are more of a Kairos (def: God's time or when the time is ripe)nature than Chronos nature (natural time ... like a clock. You can say the same thing for decades, then WHAM, people finally get it. It is like the environmental movement in the 1970's. People thought they were loons (some really are), however now people really think twice about how pollution and chemicals effect out lives.

The lack of discernment and insight into the importance of theology/ideology for the formation of cultural attitudes towards outsiders is currently quite pathetic. The liberal/secular news will in time come to understand that Islam is a different kind of horse than Christianity/Buddhism/Hinduism. I hope it does not take a major attack on a western city with hundreds of thousands dead, however given human history often this is when people will go "Oh ... may those folks at jihadwatch.org were not wrong after all."

Keep up the good work. Personally, I suspect that the comment was a plant. It is possible it was a plant for the very show where the comment was criticized. We in the west are so naive and innocent regarding the depths of human depravity. Others and our own. (is my Calvinism showing ;) )

Posted by: James Martel at August 1, 2007 12:05 AM

Obviously, Hooper had that comment planted. He knew that he was going to be interviewed on CNN and needed a red herring to throw out whenever the interview got out of his control.

For the brief time that the genocide comment was up, it is highly unlikely that Hooper would have been so blessed by chance to read it and commit it to memory before it was deleted and then have it at hand during the course of the interview.

That type of desperate childish behavior is indicative of a cornered rat...

Cheers,

http://doctorbulldog.wordpress.com

Posted by: Doctor Bulldog at August 1, 2007 12:06 AM

Robert et al,

A commenter at LGF just made an excellent suggestion:

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=26486#c0093

#93 Gathering Storm 7/31/2007 8:41:11 pm PDT

Charles,

Can you help Robert trace the IP address of the individual who left the genocidal / provocative comment?

It's entirely possible that that comment was posted by some cretin, but there's always the possiblity of deliberate sabotage by your fans at CAIR or one of their partners-in-jihad. Charles is extremely skilled at IP tracing, as I'm sure you know.

Posted by: Tasty Beverage at August 1, 2007 12:07 AM

If you look at the CAIR website you will find language *identical* to the evasive non-responses uttered here by Hooper regarding pointed questions. Paraphrasing: "But of course we wish harmony between followers of *all* religions, they should all get along, blah blah blah" in response to a question asking whether we need fear Islam based on its record of human rights abuses and violence everywhere it finds a home. For alert viewers this was an insightful answer.

On their site are statements "condemning terrorism" and the one regarding 9/11 is simply breathtaking. It only condemns an unqualified act of terrorism, without mentioning the religion of the highjackers or the religious nature of their inspiration. It is so generalized as to be worthy of a declaration from the UN. This inability or unwillingness to self-examine or self-correct, with concomitant public candor, will help undo them in the end.

Muslims have made a point of condemning acts of terrorism but only in an abstract sense, never honing in on the connexion with Islam. In this context they never recuse fellow Muslims or other Muslim groups. "Terrorism is such a bad thing, I wish it wouldn't happen." Perhaps this reflects the perfect nature of the Koran and resulting very limited possibilities for non-heretical discussions of theology in Islam, by Muslims. Too bad for them.

Hooper and his ilk are on the defense. Let's see if we can get them on the run.

Posted by: lycaste at August 1, 2007 12:20 AM

How do we know CAIR didn't post that comment that Hooper brought up in the interview?

After reading what they included in their supposed Anti Muslim hate crimes report, I wouldn't put it past them. They are low-down dirty dogs.

Posted by: Prickzilla at August 1, 2007 12:21 AM

Robert, maybe you should file a lawsuit against CAIR for defamation. After all, it seems like Hooper and his ilk love using those to impose their will on others.

Posted by: Kosher Hotdog at August 1, 2007 12:21 AM

Robert's right...
that HAD to be a setup...as none of the regulars in here would make genocidal comments (unless of course, endorsing the rational idea of fighting back constitutes "genocidal"...but enough of the islamists lexicon)...

It wouldn't surprise me at all to find out he had one of his own henchmen do it, and blame us here, considering the twisted narcissistic thought process he tries to pass off as "logic".

Stay on his @$$, Robert...fraudulent scum like that must be met head-on every time they try to attack anyone who dares to call them on their fraud.

Posted by: jcom972 at August 1, 2007 12:22 AM

at 4:28 of the clip, hooper scooper makes a remarkable admission. (perhaps he's said it before, but I haven't heard it.) He said,

"Islam is an ideology."

I, like most JWer's I'm sure, believe that islam is an ideology as well as a religion. and I'm sure that most muslims in islamic countries would agree. but for an American spokeman for a U.S.-based muslim organization to state that here in the U.S. is startling. It's unthinkable that a spokeman for any mainstream Christian, Jewish, Hindu, etc. organization would say that Christianity, Judaism, etc. is an ideology. They'd say it's a religion. It's too bad the moderator didn't ask hooper why he called islam an ideology and not a religion. he might then have said something really damning.

Posted by: sheik yer booty at August 1, 2007 12:27 AM

We are witnessing the breakdown of CAIR, ladies and gentlemen. I would not wish to every underestimate the power of money, but the at some point even the rich come to be perceived as so out-of-touch that their money loses its power.

CAIR and its campus watchdog client, the MSA, are a spent force. They have been revealed. They are, in CAIR spokesman Ibrahim Hooper's words, an ideology, not race. Not a religion. Not a race. An ideology. Like Nazi ideology.

Goodbye, CAIR, you're money was as well spent as George Soros'. We understand you now. You are Islamists, a tiny minority that is well-funded. You work, together with the MSA, to bring Sharia-accommodation to university campuses to Islam as a special protected group above all other religions, to work to facilitate and increase Muslim immigration to the US, even if the immigrants have ties to terrorism, and to protect any Muslim who is accused of any wrongdoing, regardless of whether the wrongdoing was real or not. You, CAIR, are not concerned with Muslims or truth, you are concerned with showing that any Muslim is right and that every demand made in the name of Islam, no matter how it infringes on the rights of non-Muslims, is correct and defensible. You are willing to expend huge amounts of money, which you are get from foreign sources, to advance this absolutist Islamist agenda. You claim to be a Muslims civil rights organization and the voice of mainstream Muslims in the US.

Goodbye, CAIR, we know this is all a lie.

Maybe one day we will see a moderate Muslim organization rise up in your stead, one that instead of desiring dominance over and submission of all others, seeks instead to practice religion as a private matter.

Maybe one day. In the meantime, the jig is up. Adios, CAIR.

Posted by: Wimbledon Womble at August 1, 2007 12:31 AM

Gee whiz! Anyone who reads Jihad Watch on a regular basis knows that Robert Spencer and other staff do not tolerate genocidal comments.

If I disagree strongly with a comment, I will post my own comment in response (and then get flamed... most of the time). That happened recently (sans flames) and later I saw that the original comment had been deleted. Although I thought the comment was distasteful, I didn't know how the administrators would feel about letting it stand (in the interests of free speech, for example), so of course I didn't report it.

But recently (not yesterday), someone posted a genocidal comment and I emailed Jihad Watch directly because I knew this comment had crossed a clearly-defined line. The genocidal comment was deleted pretty quickly.

I didn't see the comment that was mentioned in this thread. I'm sure it's quite possible that it was planted, given everything said about it in this thread. I wonder if it's also possible that some CAIR folks monitor the threads here and report the worst comments back to the higher-ups. That would have been "lucky" timing, though.

Is it possible to input some keywords into an internet search engine and then get "dings" when a new item pops up? If so, that might be another way they saw the post so quickly.

Posted by: Josephine at August 1, 2007 12:34 AM

I wouldn't have put it past Mr. Hooper to have posted the comment himself.

Can you trace the IP address or something?

Posted by: CrazyFool at August 1, 2007 12:37 AM

Tasty Beverage-

The poster's screen monicker was "Barry Laden". (B.Laden? Ho-ho.)

(I searched online and found that to be the name of a moderately well-known guy in England -who is a fashionista and author and recent playwright- and suspected his name was being hijacked, so maybe the faux commentor was English?)

It would be interesting to see who it tracks back to.

Ibrahim's imam cousin in Camden Town, mayhaps?

Posted by: profitsbeard at August 1, 2007 12:39 AM

lol @ flames

Old hat, Josephine...been there, done that, bought the tshirt 10 times over...
That's why I don't flame...instead always use NAPALM.
Never leave home without it!
lol

(/sarc)

Posted by: jcom972 at August 1, 2007 12:39 AM

In a world where those who cannot build shacks are busy tearing down cathedrals, it is difficult to be civil. Robert Spencer is a study in character. Kids will read about him someday.

Posted by: pez at August 1, 2007 12:43 AM

Underhanded Tactics from CAIR? Who would have thought.

Posted by: senor doeboy at August 1, 2007 12:44 AM

I keep hearing that CAIR has only 1700 members and that jihadists represent only a minority of Islam. This piece by Paul E. Marek should dispel any misconceptions that a minority cannot create chaos on a vast scale.

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/6996

A minority of 19 jihadists killed 3,000 Americans on September 11, 2001. For a jihadist, or for anyone for that matter, nearly 160 to 1 is a good bet.

Posted by: Viking at August 1, 2007 12:45 AM

Hahahahaha...

Once again Dougie Hooper is not called out for his sharia support. God when will somebody nail him to the wall on that. If he supports sharia he is a sexist and a bigot. Call him that to his face! If you support a sexist and bigoted law code does that not make you a bigot!

"I wouldn't want to create the impression that I wouldn't like the government of the United States to be Islamic sometime in the future. But I'm not going to do anything violent to promote that. I'm going to do it through education." Dougie Hooper

Thus he wants an Islamic government. By any western definition an Islamic government is bigoted and sexist. So what if he wants to do it by peaceful means (which we can call into question)!

Posted by: greatcometof1577 at August 1, 2007 12:46 AM

I emailed RS yesterday and the comment was deleted quickly. "Barry Laden" posted nearly the same trash about a week ago. Clearly trying to place the offending words into search engines in relation to JW.
All I can say is the CAIR-bears must have someone reading constantly. One question for you spys, how about all the jihadists on YouTube? There is enough there to fill several pages here. Beheadings, torture...and from the comments, it seems to be an enjoyable pastime. Jihadwatch at it absolute worst doesn't hold a candle to what is on YouTube.

Posted by: interestinconundrum at August 1, 2007 12:51 AM

I was thinking that we should all be more thoughtful and constructive when posting comments here.

Personally, I have an issue with ideas, the idealogy, behind Islam, but not with Muslims as an entire group. Obviously, a Muslim that commits terrorism - that individual I have an issue with

I would also add that my concern is the effect that Islamic ideology is having upon the Muslim as a fellow human being.

Furthermore, after listening to the video clip of the CNN show - it is obvious to me that Mr. Hooper appears to be unable to respond with a direct answer to a direct question.

Although I'm tempted to support some sort of a warning flag system for similar outrageous comments as alleged by Mr. Hooper - I'd rather we see that we didn't have one, free-speech issue, but do think that there should be some way for Mr. Spencer to clarify that the views expressed in the commentary field our the individual poster and not his.

Posted by: Monkeywho at August 1, 2007 12:51 AM

I guess CAIR reads your web site mr spencer, so I have a message for the LIARS at cair.

Mohammed was a Liar and false teacher.
MR hooper is a liar just like Mohammed.

Mohammed was a pedophile, he married a 6 year girl and slept with her when she was 9.

Does mr hopper like young girls too?

Posted by: Michael Miller at August 1, 2007 12:54 AM

Mr. Spencer

Yes he defamed you...but then again most Americans have a inverse reaction to Dougie...

Fact: Dougie thinks Robert Spencer is bad
Fact: Dougie is a member of CAIR

Conclusion: Thus Robert Spencer must be good.

Posted by: greatcometof1577 at August 1, 2007 12:56 AM

I guess CAIR reads your web site mr spencer, so I have a message for the LIARS at cair.

Mohammed was a Liar and false teacher.
MR hooper is a liar just like Mohammed.

Mohammed was a pedophile, he married a 6 year girl and slept with her when she was 9.

Does mr hopper like young girls too?

Posted by: Michael Miller at August 1, 2007 12:56 AM

LOL, jcom972.

If I ever have my own blog, I will have a delete button beside each comment. Instead of "delete" it will say "shut up". Or maybe "please shut up" since I'm a strong believer in good manners. I'm still working out the details, obviously.

(But that's because I would never have a political blog; it would be something bland like genealogy research, sewing projects and complaining about my aches and pains.)

I consider banana-eating a hate crime because I have an anaphylactic allergy to them (yes, a banana almost killed me). Anyone eating a banana in my presence or touching something with banana-smeared hands is uttering a death threat against me. I feel unsafe in a world of banana-eaters.

I think I have a pretty strong case.

Now if someone would only make number two on a banana and leave it on my doorstep, I'd be set for life.

No food is victimless.

Posted by: Josephine at August 1, 2007 12:58 AM

Aww, anyone with a single brain cell knows "comments" are not RS' opinion.

***********//////////**********************

Comments
(Note: Comments on articles are unmoderated, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Jihad Watch or Robert Spencer. Comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying may be summarily deleted. However, the fact that particular comments remain on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Robert Spencer of the views expressed therein.)

Posted by: interestinconundrum at August 1, 2007 12:58 AM

The genocidal post was up for about 20-30 minutes before it got deleted.

I have absolutely NO DOUBT that it was implanted here deliberately by CAIR.

Robert, If you can trace the ip of the poster ("Barry Laden") -- I think that we'll be another major nail in CAIR's coffin.

Posted by: Leopard at August 1, 2007 12:58 AM

Hooper's claim at the end - that Spencer believes that the practice of Islam should be made so difficult that Mohammedans would voluntarily leave - is inaccurate in that not only did Spencer never state it, but even if he was referring to the opinion at large on JW, he was still wrong in that

1. Most people on JW advocate ending Mohammedan immigration to the West, or making it more difficult. Had Hooper stated this, he'd then have been forced to defend allowing Muslims from Jihadi hotspots like Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, et al coming here;
   
2. The Benes decree references that generally get invoked from time to time, advocating mass deportations given the loyalties of Muslims to the Ummah, are usually in the contexts of belligerent behavior by Muslims in the West - be it honor killings, riots in Paris, harassment of Sikh or Hindu girls in Britain by Muslim students, Muslim cabdrivers in MN refusing to service passengers who serve alcohol, Ft Dix, Dearbornistan being a Hizbullah stronghold, et al. When these things are considered, the demands to deport Muslims do become popular, and given the above contexts, who can blame those?
   

As for Hitchens, he did the job that Prager somehow just couldn't do - invoke the examples of Islamic calls for genocide of Jews and Hindus. For those here who insist on slamming atheists like him due to their views on religion, they'd do well to note that almost none of the religious conservatives do such a thorough job of ripping Islam to shreds as do Hitchens and Sam Harris, amongst others. Memo to such people: Atheists are certainly preferable to Mohammedans.

Posted by: Infidel Pride at August 1, 2007 1:01 AM

Hooper is very concerned about genocidal comments.

Do you suppose he cares (CAIRS) about the ones made by Imanutjob in Iran with regard to Israel? Doubt it.

BTW IP addresses don't always yield results. If someone is using a laptop wirelessly the IP will show up as some poor innocent nearby who has adsl or cable.

Found this out the hard way when a friend had his laptop stolen at the airport. The ISP was most reluctant to help as were the police.
We gave up in the end :(

If it is a PC you may have better luck.

Posted by: Gramfan at August 1, 2007 1:06 AM

I watched the videos at Hot Air earlier tonight and it was very depressing. Hitch was off his game and Zahn did an awful job of controlling the situation. Hooper was allowed to just keep talking and Zahn made it worse by talking over all of them.

It was a really bad segment, and when Hooper threw out Jihad Watch and Mr. Spenser it was from totally out of left field and he got away with it.

But the WORST part of the entire segment was Hooper having the gall to say that it was an example of "intimidation". My God! Intimidation? This man had the NERVE to claim that a Koran in a toilet was intimidating to people whose religion advocates the killing of ANYONE who disrespects it?

Unbelievable.

Posted by: Jaynie59 at August 1, 2007 1:07 AM

I like the idea of suing Hooper for defamation. I'd love to see him (or CAIR, for whom he was a spokesperson) for a billion dollars, but here's a better idea: sue him for $1 and a public retraction (or settle out of court for the retraction and he can keep his $1).

A token amount, just to underscore that you are not golddigging or trying to intimidate, only to bring the truth out and clear your name (as if this was necessary!) in a court of law. Next time this happens up the ante to $100 and multiply by 100 each time, with fair warning.

A few JihadWatchers with deep pockets can underwrite the first couple of outings in court; after that it will be unnecessary. For a lawyer I'd highly recommend Reed Rubinstein , who already has a pretty good dossier on these folks, and so far is batting 1.000. Let them file a discovery suit ... "we'll show our cards as soon as you show yours". Rubinstein has a whole laundry list of items they could be disclosing.

It's time CAIR started seeing the other side of a defamation suit. They can't seem to win playing White, so let them try Black and see how they do.

Posted by: Archimedes2 at August 1, 2007 1:14 AM

Ya know...one thing sticks out like a sore thumb I think we should ALL call the hypocrite of the NTH degree called hooper on.

How is it that a lunatic cult like his, who themselves endorse and heartily favor genocide as per their own *ahem* "scriptures", can have the colossal unmitigated gall to lecture ANYONE, let alone those of us who see right through him and his murderous ilk, about ANYTHING...
ESPECIALLY genocide???!!!

Case-in-point that druggie douggie is very much that hypocrite of the NTH degree I said he was...
nothing like letting him prove my point FOR me.

lol

Posted by: jcom972 at August 1, 2007 1:16 AM

The best thing with this CAIR person, Hooper, is that being on CNN while O'Reilly is on means that hardly anyone saw this person.

Robert, keep setting forth the facts. Keep setting forth the verses. Keep hammering these adherents of Islam, The Religion Of Peace.

You are right.

Posted by: PiggDogg at August 1, 2007 1:18 AM

In that CNN segment, what Hooper said about Jihad Watch at the very end seems to be true: Hooper said that Jihad Watch says "we should make the life of Muslims in the West so difficult they will leave." It's true I've never seen Robert Spencer say that, but hasn't Hugh Fitzgerald said that? Hasn't Hugh Fitzgerald also referred every so often to the removal of Germans from Czechoslovakia after WWII, and used that as an example of the legitimacy of a possible future policy of removing Muslims? Maybe I'm misstating Hugh Fitzgerald's views. My memory is notoriously faulty. In any event, I see nothing wrong with such views, whether Fitzgerald holds them or not. After all, Muslims, so far, have failed or refused to disavow, on any significant scale, the various elements of the Qur'an that lead to jihad violence and Islamic totalitarianism. The risks are not merely theoretical. A policy of asking Muslims to leave seems far more needed in Europe than in the U.S., since we in the U.S. have, compared with Europe, relatively few Muslims. But even the U.S. should stop further immigration of Muslims here until Muslims worldwide sort out where they stand when the Qur'an, jihad, and Islamic law conflict with Western civil rights standards. So far, large percentages even of European-born Muslims show strong inclinations toward Islamic law. Since the Muslim population of Europe is growing by leaps and bounds, the inclination toward Islamic law will increasingly endanger basic human rights in Europe, especially for non-Muslims. Many experts expect Muslims to become the majority in Europe before the end of the century.

Hooper's organization CAIR, an un-indicted co-conspirator in a terror case, has been associated with Islamic terror in various ways, and Hooper wants to see Islamic law replace the U.S. Constitution, though he sometimes pretends otherwise.

Anyone who has read Spencer for any length of time knows Jihad Watch exists precisely to defend civil rights and liberties, and that anything like genocidal comments do not fit in here. If some low-life thug or provocateur left such genocidal messages, that's not Robert Spencer's fault, since he disavows all such thuggery and adheres scrupulously, even in the minutest details of his statements and policy prescriptions, to Western sensibilities with regard to the dignity of the individual and the importance of human rights.

Posted by: traeh at August 1, 2007 1:22 AM

Maybe the bigger point here is that CAIR's reference to an obscure post by a very angry person or troll or a CAIR plant is in fact the best sign of their being backed against a wall without anything positive to say for themselves. Islamists sites make genocidal statements all the time, even MSA and CAIR sites make statements (not just as comments but as leads) that appear genocidal and racist or ethnicist (most often anti-Jew, as is the prevailing fashion). So what? Everyone knows the Internet blog game. Initial posts can be provocative and some of the comments even more so.

The fact that Hooper brings this an obscure comment by some unknown anonymous poster up on national TV just underscores the fact that he has no other arguments to make at all.

I view this as a sign of the fact that CAIR is weak and in a corner.

This rubbish is the best they can come up with.

Moreover, this comes when Hooper says that Islam is "an ideology, not a race." What is that? A Freudian slip? This comment undermines everything CAIR has worked for in trying to make Islam into not only a beleaguered but some sort of meta-race, so they can play the "race" card, as they seem to always do. They call everyone a racist for opposing anything in Islam at all. That's kind of Dennis Prager's point: they want to take a term like Islamophobia that could encompass any criticism of Islam and make it as odious and horrible and vilifiable as racism.

CAIR is weak and backed into a corner, and that's why it comes out with the most stupid and transparent guilt-by-association horse dung.

CAIR is an organization that lies and lies and lies again. Their attempt to besmirch Robert Spencer with some stupid comment made by some poster of unknown provenance makes no difference. 99.9% of the people who saw this knew it was a bunch of garbage, and some fraction of that 99.9% will actually wake up and see that this is another sCAIR tactic, thus realizing or being motivated to read about what CAIR is all about. All the info. is on the Internet for all to see. The remaining 0.1% were dimwits or CAIR sympathizers anyway.

As I see it, CAIR is on the defensive. It is weak. It is desperate. It is lying through its teeth (while inadvertently admitting the truth here and there). And the great thing is it is so obvious.

So 99.9% victory to Jihad Watch and all those opposed to CAIR lies. While I sympathize with Robert for having his name dragged through the mud, he comes out clean and the other side comes out muddier than ever.

Posted by: Wimbledon Womble at August 1, 2007 1:28 AM

Bottom line though...still...
hooper has no room lectuing anyone on anything, especially the talking points he so tried to make from his empty pulpit of pahblum.

But PiggDogg is right...if he was on at the same time The O'Reilly Factor was, 9 of 10 people didn't even see his spew anyway...and that's giving him the benefit of the ratings at that! lol

Posted by: jcom972 at August 1, 2007 1:34 AM

The shrill, uptight and filibustering Mr Hooper, made everyone look good. Hypocricy runs deep in Islam. Hooper complains about a hate comment on JW, and blames RS. Yet there is no discussion of the reems of video, and audio that has muslim clerics clammering for American blood.
Also, when are they going to stop debating racism?
Is that all they got, phony racism and phony hate?
They better stick with those, if they ever start debating the Quran, Hooper and company are done for...

Posted by: duh_swami at August 1, 2007 1:35 AM

CONGRATULATIONS MR. SPENCER

If you have Ibraham Hooper angrily defaming you on liberal news channels, pumping his fist and raising his voice and snarling into the camera...you know you must be doing something right. :)

Of course, what Hooper is doing is reading blogs on this website and accusing Robert Spencer for everything that gets said on JihadWatch. How pathetic. Liberals and Muslim activist groups just try to enflame public opinion against their enemies by any means necessary. They USUALLY do so by telling lies about the person and almost always by putting words in their mouths that they never said. It is a slimey way to get people to think very negative things about a person, especially if they are not there to speak for themselves!

Posted by: Tookson at August 1, 2007 1:38 AM

traeh-

I wish anyone who does not subscribe to the U.S. Constitution and Bill of rights would leave America.

Can any seriously believing Muslim honestly say that they do not wish for the replacement of the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights with Islamic law?

Why, then, should they stay here?

They only want the destruction of what America stands for.

And why should be stand for that?

I wish they would all to take a One-Way Hadj.

And meditate in Mecca for 1350 years ...about the historical (and current) crimes of intolerant, misogynistic, slavemongering, Koranically-cruel and cosmically-arrogant Islam.

(And they can also argue about whether it's a meteorite glued into the corner of the Ka'aba, or a frozen angel, who once guarded the gate to the Garden of Eden.)

Posted by: profitsbeard at August 1, 2007 2:07 AM

profitsbeard:

I wish anyone who does not subscribe to the U.S. Constitution and Bill of rights would leave America

Agree.

And meditate in Mecca for 1350 years ...about the historical (and current) crimes of intolerant, misogynistic, slavemongering, Koranically-cruel and cosmically-arrogant Islam.

Well, if we're talking about wishes, I probably wouldn't wish them such pains, I'd just wish they'd convert to some other religion or become atheists. But I know what you mean.

Posted by: traeh at August 1, 2007 2:17 AM

profitsbeard @ 12:39 AM (Jihadwatch needs post numbers goshdarnit)

The poster's screen monicker was "Barry Laden". (B.Laden? Ho-ho.)

Yes, har har. So clever.

It would be interesting to see who it tracks back to.

Ibrahim's imam cousin in Camden Town, mayhaps?

I would not be surprised in the least. I think it's pathetic that rational people in the 21st century have to speculate in such a manner -- but we are now, for reasons we all know, unfortunately forced to deal with an ideology that is firmly stuck in the 7th century, with all its superstitions and conspiracy theories. And now we are reduced to contemplating conspiracies as well. In the 90's my friends and I used to have great fun contriving hilarious conspiracy theories while imbibing large quantities of booze, usually after watching the latest X-Files episode. We created them deliberately as fiction, and no one believed any of it, it was just fun to make up stories.

But nowadays some conspiracies have a good chance of being true, i.e., offensive comments being deliberately posted by our jihad-worshipping enemies, to be later "exposed" as indicative of the "true nature" of Jihad Watch or LGF or Michelle Malkin or Powerline or Hot Air or etc. etc. -- any other website that recognizes or has outright learned the truth about islam and jihad.

/goodnight all, it's late here.

Posted by: Tasty Beverage at August 1, 2007 2:26 AM

Muhammedans have no problem with calling Islam an ideology. Its good for us if they confirm it, because our dhimmie's are totally stuck in their 'religions are all equally bad' BS.

However, I'm not impressed with the second video with Greg Davis, the interviewer is clueless and the imam deflects away from the subject matter, which they always do, and lies about it, as always. Greg Davis with a PhD sez 'he read a book' when asked whether he has a degree in theological studies.

A commenter on youtube gets it:

As usual the Islamic spokesman claims that quotes are out of context, telling downright untruths about what or what isn't in Islamic texts (on the assumption that most viewers haven't read them and are not going to): he then, himself, proceeds to misquote the Koran (and the misquote is way out of context) and omits to mention that for Muslims, the Koran is the verbatim, imutable word of Allah - not like other holy books.

Posted by: sheik yer'mami at August 1, 2007 3:04 AM

Repeat after me:

‘Islam is not a race, its an ideology’-

here confirmed by the slandering Ibrahim Hooper from CAIR, agit-prop for Islamofascism in the US.

Strangely, Muhammedans shamelessly promote their genocidal agenda of killing infidels and Joooz and everyone who criticizes Islam, and in our PC-infected, degenerated society ‘piss-Christ’ and ‘Dung-Madonna’ is ‘art’- strange that not one of these brave ‘artists’has ever come out with a ‘Piss-Mohammed’ or a blood-soaked one, what despicable cowards in the face of the enemy!

Here you can see ‘The necessity of killing everyone who insults the prophet or finds fault with him’- its incredible that people with such an agenda are not barred from immigrating here:

http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/misc/alshifa/pt4ch1sec2.htm

America still has question forms on its international flights asking whther the traveller was or is involved with the Nazi party, hardly a threat this day and age. Perhaps its time to move on and change that to 'have you ever been involved with islamofascsim or do you subscribe to Islamic jihad as a means to replace the elected government of the USA'

Posted by: sheik yer'mami at August 1, 2007 3:21 AM

It's pretty clear that CAIR are afraid of Jihad Watch. For good reason.

Posted by: Brett_McS at August 1, 2007 3:38 AM

Mr Spencer, you'd best contact Charles Johnson and crosscheck the identity of the creature posting as 'storagemanager'. At the very best, they are schizophrenic. And most likely utterly false.
To wit:
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=21357#c0039
This person regularly alternates between agreement and slanderous attacks.

I'm far from being an angel myself, but if this is the same viper, beware.

Posted by: rayra at August 1, 2007 3:47 AM

traeh,

Your comment is exactly something I wanted to point out.

At the end, Hooper accuses JW of saying "we should make the life of Muslims in the West so difficult they will leave". As someone who's been reading JW every day for quite some time, this immediately reminded me of Hugh Fitzgerald's incisive postings. I remember several of his pieces putting forward recommendations along these lines, with which I agree.

A few examples:

Nov 1, 2006
making the conduct of a "Muslim" life more difficult
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/013841.php
(in the comments)

Nov 3, 2005
The solution is to stop all Muslim migration to the Lands of the Infidels, and wherever possible, to reverse it.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/008827.php

Oct 7, 2005
Let's end Muslim migration, and work to reverse it.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/008467.php

And many others like that. With the surrounding explanations, these are in fact reasonable proposals, that should be debated more often.

Posted by: Martin at August 1, 2007 4:08 AM

Not all muslims agree with Hooper that Islamophobia' is not racism. Look at the claim copied below from the website of FAIR (Forum against Islamphobia and Racism). No doubt Hooper will be in touch with FAIR to remonstrate with them for their dishonesty.

"Islamophobia has now become a recognised form of racism. Furthermore, as with the inaccuracy of such terms as ‘anti-Semitism’, to describe the anti-Jewish hostility that developed in the late nineteenth century, ‘Islamophobia’ bears many similar hallmarks."

http://www.fairuk.org/introduction.htm

Posted by: Burnside at August 1, 2007 4:22 AM

Muslims don't shy away from violence, something we find abhorrent. They actually believe that acts of terror make people 'revert' to Islam, and its proven that it works once Islam gets the upper hand.

Whenever you watch these talk-shows the participants usually all fall over themselves when it comes to denouncing violence. When faced with Islamofascism, I'm not sure whether a closer look at this holy cow is not warranted, because I don't believe this whole thing can be resolved non-violently. Actually, I would be quite happy to discuss it. If not here, then on my blog.

Counter propaganda, exposure, shame and finally help and assitance to Muslims who want to leave the cult would be one strategy, but I don't see how we can pacify the hardcore Islamists without resorting to violence. Our respective governments have allowed this rot to fester and no-one has proposed to reverse the trend. At least a moratorium on immigration we need, now. And a repatration program for those who refuse to integrate.

But talk about trends: How do you like the new Madonna urinals?

http://sheikyermami.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/07/china_toilet.jpg

Posted by: sheik yer'mami at August 1, 2007 4:42 AM

Anyone else catch that? Ol' Ibby admitted that Islam is an IDEOLOGY - not a race.
i•de•ol•o•gy - a system of ideas and ideals,especially one that forms the basis of economic or political theory and policy....
So we are all agreed finally that Islam is not a religion.

Posted by: is_LAME at August 1, 2007 4:59 AM

LOL
I'm no atheist but Christopher Hitchens is one of the West's best debunkers of Islam. I was laughing at how deftly he pushed Dougie's buttons. Dougie must have flipped his lid because his embroidered beanie was missing

Posted by: dennisw at August 1, 2007 5:13 AM

Hitchens pushes Dougie's buttons:

"We put up with his ranting and distortions and self pity"

Posted by: dennisw at August 1, 2007 5:16 AM

Hooper's game is to deflect and distract. He and his ilk at CAIR are afraid to take on Robert directly so they cry bloody murder about some anonymous genocidal comment (which I didn't see) in the open comments field here, like somehow that invalidates what Robert posts or comments on himself. He (the oily Hooper) got away with it this time because he succeeded in knocking Dennis Prager off balance with it.

Distasteful as it may be, anonymous angry speech is not against the law, at least not (yet) in America. Genocidal type comments are not welcome here and do not help our cause as we again see in this instance. However...

There is a HUGE difference between angry words and murderous action. As unpleasant as they can sometimes be, angry words to do not kill. Murderous action, DOES kill. Theo Van Gogh was butchered in cold blood on the streets of Amsterdam for speaking out against Islam. That, and thousands of other murderous ACTIONS in the name of Islam, is exactly what we are up against.

Ours' is a reluctant, defensive fight. As such, we stop at words and hope that it will be enough.

For our enemy, Supremacist Islam and the Muslims who preach and practice it, no boundaries constrain them. No actions are too extreme. No murder unjustified, so long as it's done in the service of Almighty Allah and to extend his Dominion over the entire world. "There Is No God But Allah and Muhammad is His Messenger."
OR ELSE!! And By God they mean it!

That, my friends, is what we are up against.

As such, it's hard for me to get too worked up about an overheated anonymous comment here or there in this forum which is dedicated to opposing and defeating this evil ideology. It's counterproductive, yes, but also inevitable given the nature of the internet and the fact that we stop at words and thus strain against them over the injustices and atrocities we see the enemy committing on a daily basis.

Posted by: alexon at August 1, 2007 5:36 AM

I must admit I laughed at the complete lack of understanding in Constitution coming from the CAIR spokesgoon Hooper. He needs to take a course in government methinks as he obvious skipped that part of his education.

CH was on top form as per normal.

Posted by: Andrew Ian Dodge at August 1, 2007 5:52 AM

When Hitchens mentioned the torrents of hate poured out by muslim websites in the Middle East, Hooper had absolutely nothing to say about it, yet he held Robert Spencer responsible for a remark made by an anonymous poster on JW. What a humbug!!

Posted by: Burnside at August 1, 2007 6:00 AM

There are many regular visitors here who are (I am sure) willing to help with moderating comments, if Mr. Spencer think it is appropriate.

Posted by: LazarOfSerbia at August 1, 2007 6:02 AM

Duper or hooper, that is the question.
That comment was so transparently islamist as to need no explaination. Hey people, there are some out there who want to discredit JW with comments such as that, islamists/leftists/ all of the ists. It happens all the time at least it has in the years I have been hanging around here there is no way to avoid it. Sure it is pathetic but they are getting desperate these days, it goes with the terrortory. Just another episode of bad islamist theatre, it is always the same distract, deceive, deride and defame. As a matter of fact this type of behavior coming from the islamists is so predictable my dog can recognize it for what it is. Thatisall.

Posted by: tgusa at August 1, 2007 6:04 AM

"I laughed at the complete lack of understanding in Constitution coming from the CAIR spokesgoon Hooper.'

From a posting above.

Hooper ignores the constitution, but probably knows it better than our elected 'leaders'- especially the idiot in chief and his picanninni Rice, who had the hide to announce to the world in front of a hundred TV camera's that 'Disrespect for the holy Koran is not now, nor will it ever be, tolerated in the US of A'- That, brother, is not only lack of undrstanding, it is a manifest of stupidity.

Or is Rice in the Islamic camp?

Posted by: sheik yer'mami at August 1, 2007 6:29 AM

Mr Spencer, you'd best contact Charles Johnson and crosscheck the identity of the creature posting as 'storagemanager'. At the very best, they are schizophrenic. And most likely utterly false.
To wit:
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=21357#c0039
This person regularly alternates between agreement and slanderous attacks.

I'm far from being an angel myself, but if this is the same viper, beware.

Posted by: rayra at August 1, 2007 3:47 AM

I wouldnt call him a "creature" or "viper" for calling Islam a cancer.

Posted by: Elric66 at August 1, 2007 7:17 AM

Hooper is a liar. He obviously implied Robert said that. All Robert does is tell the truth. Hooper and people like him are afraid of the truth. Islam is a patriarchal, intolerant (Saudi Arabia, e.g.), supremacist belief-system that condones Jew-hating in the Qu'ran.

The Qu'ran is hate speech considering that all its "peaceful verses" have been abrogated by the later chronological verses that mandate violence against unbelievers and the imposition of Sharia law on all people. The Qu'ran is hate speech.

(P.S. The Qu'ran is set-up longest to shortest verses, but what counts is chronological order. Later verses that contradict earlier ones (wine is good, alcohol is banned, e.g.) are what count. The peaceful verses that many Muslims quote to con Kafirs have been abrogated and replaced by the final call to violence against Unbelievers and their forced submission to Islam.

The cat's out of the bag, Mr. Lie Hooper.

Posted by: Frank at August 1, 2007 7:20 AM

Hoper knew very well that the genocidal comments would not be endorsed by Bob spencer, but Hopper had to have a "winning card".

what the people have now is the belief that jihadWatch promotes genocide, but in fact, JW is very clear on that.

Mr Hopper, you should be ashamed of yourself. But then again, since "war is deceit", I can understand why you emulate Muhammad, the child molestor prophet.

Posted by: Crusader at August 1, 2007 7:22 AM

Kinda ironic about genocide when Muslims are commiting genocide in Sudan. Hooper happen to mention that?

Posted by: Elric66 at August 1, 2007 7:29 AM

Robert -
I also believe in free speech, but I know that it is unrealistic to expect anyone's website to be moderated 24 x 7, every second of the day, with every single comment ever posted. And unfortunately that is what it takes to fend off critics. Volunteer efforts won't work, because you literally need moderators on 24 x 7 guard against hate postings.

The enemies of the truth are looking for people to make hate comments, and may even have people planted to make hate comments, simply because that is the only way that they can discredit you.

My advice is to close the comments portion of JihadWatch, so that the enemies of truth no longer have an easy target for misdirection.

If you feel that you need comments, I would suggest that get a new comments portion setup where you can moderate each comment before it is posted, as Yahoo message boards allow.

Anything less, and you will continue to fight this battle of misdirection indefinitely from the enemies of truth.

Posted by: jeffreyimm at August 1, 2007 7:31 AM

Jeffrey you are doing CAIR's work by calling for the closing of comments. This is free speech. If Mr Spencer chooses to delete offensive comments, thats his right, its his blog. But to close all comments is just plain wrong if its because CAIR is watching. Just my opinion.

Posted by: Elric66 at August 1, 2007 7:47 AM

Maybe it would be a good idea not to hide under the bed every time someone whips out the hate card? Yes free speech is a nuisance but closing down the exchange of information is not the way to go. That is what they desire, to proceed along with everyone looking the other way so as to not appear hateful or racist. In America we tolerate all kinds of opinions and so far it has worked quite well for us, that is how we get at the truth. Continue to be manipulated by the islamists and you wont have to worry about them conquering you with force, you will hand it to them out of fear of being associated with hate. They chop of heads while chanting and praising their god and you are worried about them posting hateful rhetoric. If you cant face down rhetoric how are you ever going to face down the head choppers? Stand up for yourself don’t cower in the corner every time a islamist hater attacks.

It’s a good opinion Elric66, stick with it.

Posted by: tgusa at August 1, 2007 7:56 AM

Elric66 -
I disagree with you.

Advocates of free speech do not condone hate speech. Discouraging Internet hate speech and thinking of ways to stop it is not doing CAIR's job for them; it is a challenge that EVERY single web site in the world with live comments faces as a problem.

Unfortunately in any "live" comments section, there will be crazies and there will be provocateurs that will plant hate speech. Anyone can see this on virtually any web site in the world with "live" comments.
It takes a lot of resources to keep up a web site, to provide information, to write articles, to research news, etc. Certainly, anyone who advocates keeping comments on JihadWatch should put their money where their mouth is and donate today to help offset costs.

But even then, no moderators are sitting around 24 x 7 with nothing else to do, but waiting to pounce on an inappropriate live comment, unless you are a major corporation, like FOX News, for example.

The only alternative, as I suggested, is to go to MODERATED comments only, and stop offering live comments section. The problem is that even moderated comments also take scarce resources. Then moderator(s) must review and approve EACH comment before it gets posted - which is how moderators keep hate speech from getting posted online.

If JW goes to moderated comments, I will publicly pledge to donate $100 to JW to help offset the costs of moderator resources. I am aware that is just a drop in the bucket. Who else will match my offer?

How about you Elric66? How about you tgusa?

Those of you who enjoy such comment sections -- are you willing to put your money where your mouth is? Because to keep credibility in a 21st century Internet world, the truth is that free speech with credibility is not free.

Posted by: jeffreyimm at August 1, 2007 8:13 AM

Thanks tgusa. You would have thought the Qur'an flushing would have made more of an impact on the threat of curtailing our freedom of speech and the threat of CAIR.

Posted by: Elric66 at August 1, 2007 8:14 AM

I dont believe jihadwatch needs to prove its credibilty to the likes of CAIR. If you want to rant about hate speech, just go on sites like Koz and wonkette. There you will fight many more crazies. Go preach to them about moderating their sites.

Posted by: Elric66 at August 1, 2007 8:19 AM

"Hooper knew very well that the genocidal comments would not be endorsed by Bob Spencer, but Hopper had to have a "winning card".-Crusader

You are exactly right that he knew Robert Spencer never said that. But Hooper's lie is a window into Hooper's soul. Such lies are a kind spiritual violence meant to hurt the person lied about, destroy their reputation. Hooper is not a good person. A good person would not do what he did.

Hitler recommended "spiritual violence" against opponents, the telling of lies against critics with the object being to break them. Hooper is a practitioner of such "spiritual violence" with his lies and slander. Lies that hurt other people and are meant to harm their reputation are spiritual terrorism.

Posted by: Frank at August 1, 2007 8:20 AM

Elric66 -
OK so the bottom-line is that you don't care how provocateurs and crazies distract from the important message that JihadWatch and Robert Spencer has regarding the world war.

Moreover, you are not willing to put your money where your mouth is in terms of funding JihadWatch to help moderate comments. You want to make "free" comments at JihadWatch staff's expense and labor to moderate, and have open live comments so that any crazy can make their important efforts into a target 24 x 7.

If you really believe the world is at war against Islamists and Jihadists, is this the careless attitude that you should take? Or if we are in a war, wouldn't it make sense to be serious enough about it that you reject those who try to distract from the important mission of JihadWatch?

Posted by: jeffreyimm at August 1, 2007 8:31 AM

Hooper?....wasn't that the guy in Jaws? just kiddin, anyway, he has been making his rounds in the MSM and...I can't believe I'm saying this, but I think the MSM is catching on. Is it true CAIR has only 1700 members? If so why give him the coverage. My band has played in front of 2000 people before and we aren't in the news. Thank God.

Posted by: americanmadestrat at August 1, 2007 8:45 AM

Advocates of free speech? Who are these mysterious advocates of (selected) free speech? You wouldn’t be talking about my revolutionary war ancestors, the first American advocates of free speech would you? No you couldn’t be, they would have found the idea of hate speech police reprehensible as they would the rape of the Constitution that has gone on the last several decades. I see no mention of hate speech in the Constitution or the first amendment and as a matter of fact I do not trust today’s overlords of speech, period. You endorse the hate speech police, well the first American advocates of free speech were lucky the hate speech police were not around during their era, we would not be here talking about it right now. One mans hate speech is another mans factual account. Besides, they are not going back to peacefully playing in their bomb factories just because we stop commenting. I do agree with you on the donations to JW but not necessarily for the same reason. It’s a grown up world, its mean, tough and unfair lets not behave like kindergarteners and rely on the teacher to make it all right. I don’t like the islamist videos on youtube but they serve a purpose, they enlighten us as to what the islamists believe and how they operate. This is a perfect example.

Posted by: tgusa at August 1, 2007 8:52 AM

After seeing the video last night in which Mr. Hooper smeared Mr. Spencer, it is suprisng that the latter has not considered forming a lawsuit against the former because of what was said by Mr. Hooper when he first started to speak.

Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at August 1, 2007 9:07 AM

Robert l applaud your allowing free speech, no one in their right mind would want genocide, as we have learned so much from what the genocide caused by muslims in India, ME, etc. l do agree with posters that CAIR must of had their appologists put in those "genocidel" comments. It would be interesting to see if you can identify who did that. can l post here that l think Hooper is butt ugly and stupid? joking set aside, free speech and Democracy will be the undoing of ISLAM! yeah!!

Posted by: ZenaWarriorPrincess at August 1, 2007 9:11 AM

LOL @ update...
Thanks Robert...man, douggie the druggie hoopty clearly has his schtick rehearsed from script.
He obviously needs a new playbook...we've heard that same old song & dance before...and it failed then, too.

Posted by: jcom972 at August 1, 2007 9:19 AM

If you tell the truth, you don't have to remember anything. Mark Twain.
JW is telling the truth and they dont like our comments either, my guess is we are too rational in exposing their agenda in a non genocidal fo