| FrontPageMag.com | Articles By Robert Spencer | Articles By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Robert Spencer Bio |  |
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
UPDATE, November 10, 2008: A later post on this, "Charles Johnson hits bottom, digs (part 2)" has mysteriously disappeared from Google's Search tool, although it still appears on this site. (I have written to Google about this.) Thus for the ease of readers who may be searching, and for anyone offended by thuggery, I decided to paste that page into this one. Here it is:
I had not intended to write about Charles Johnson anymore, but tonight he has posted a video of two antisemitic idiots singing a song making fun of Holocaust victims. One of them turns out to have been a member of the Belgian Vlaams Belang party, although apparently he has been expelled from it due to this video. Anyway, this has become the occasion for Charles and his sycophants to renew their libels -- and since one person encouraged people to contact me, as if I have something to do with these people, I thought this occasioned another statement.
Anyway, whatever the relationship of these people is or was with the VB, as I said here: "I want to emphasize that I have not endorsed the Vlaams Belang. This whole controversy is not about the Vlaams Belang, but about whether or not one can disagree with Charles Johnson and not be defamed as a result." It was occasioned not by my linking to Vlaams Belang, as someone at LGF falsely claimed, but because I restored links to Gates of Vienna and Brussels Journal. I did this not because I agree with everything written there, any more than I agree with everything written at any site to which I link. In fact, Dymphna of Gates of Vienna has been sharply critical of me in the past. But there are some noteworthy things being written there. In fact, yesterday I was told that Gateway Pundit and Michelle Malkin linked to a Gates of Vienna post. Will Charles Johnson denounce them as neofascist sympathizers?
Charles Johnson says of me in this LGF thread, "I won't have anything to do with him. He's behaving despicably." You can see that here -- he has classily blocked links from this site, so you can't just click and go, but you can paste this link into your address bar and see it: http://littlegreenfootballs.com/showc/287/6184151. He has also fabricated out of whole cloth the claim that "if you believe what Spencer has written, Geert Wilders has apparently softened his opposition to groups like the Vlaams Belang too." That one is here: http://littlegreenfootballs.com/showc/555/6184555. In reality, I have never written a single thing about what Geert Wilders thinks of Vlaams Belang, and I have no idea what Geert Wilders thinks about Vlaams Belang.
In fact, it is Charles who is behaving despicably, and not only because he is lying and being completely inconsistent in his denunciations. In the first place, I have a disclaimer above my links -- he has completely ignored that. In the second place, he blamed me for a genocidal comment left at LGF, with no evidence that I had anything to do with it -- and I didn't. This is the sort of thing that is outstandingly despicable, as I can remember times when his opponents blamed him for unmoderated comments at his site, and he rightfully took exception. And in this case, mind you, he blamed me not for a comment left here, but for a comment left at his site.
Third, he is again inconsistent, linking to others who link to Brussels Journal, and not denouncing others who don't share his views of the situation in Europe. Even the Wall Street Journal links to Brussels Journal. Is the Wall Street Journal a genocide-encouraging, fascist-sympathizing rag, Charles?
Charles Johnson continues to defame me without just cause or provocation. He is encouraging in his followers the idea that my work is worthless and I am evil, and providing a platform for their Orwellian Two-Minutes' Hate, because of a couple of weblinks. He ostensibly champions liberty and free speech, but in reality LGF has little to do with either and everything to do with its owner’s singular narrative, featuring his moves to quash all dissent and demonize all dissenters. This is ironic at best and fatuously and pathetically hypocritical at worst. Charles Johnson is, therefore, hardly the kind of ally one needs in the struggle that looms before us, the defense of free speech.
ADDENDUM, November 9: Family Values' comment below, at November 9, 2008 12:55 AM, makes reference to this LGF comment:
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/showc/73/6197660
I was sent the text of this comment. In it, the man who wrote me, Walter L. Newton, claims that I am monitoring LGF closely. In fact, I only see what people send me from there. This was sent to me, and I went over there to check it out -- the first time I had been there in awhile, and the last time I hope to go there.
Anyway, for the record: Walter L. Newton asked me about my intention to “investigate” the groups that Charles Johnson says are neofascist. I wrote this:
Actually, I am fighting jihad, and have no interest in or intention to investigate these groups. Insofar as they are fighting jihad, I applaud them. Insofar as they are doing anything else, my endorsement is not implied.
Walter L. Newton, perhaps unsurprisingly, takes this to mean that I don't care if they are Nazis, as long as they are fighting jihad. In fact, as I have said many times, I will not make common cause with neofascists, white supremacists, or neo-Nazis. Just weeks before Charles Johnson and his frenzied hordes decided I was "embracing the neo-Nazi movement" and encouraging genocide, I wrote here that I could not endorse the Cologne anti-jihad meeting because of the involvement of LePen and Jorg Haider. I retract nothing in that post, which you can find here.
What is at issue here is whether Vlaams Belang is indeed a neofascist, white supremacist, neo-Nazi party. That is indeed a matter that requires investigation, since they are not openly or obviously any of those things. Charles Johnson believes he has marshaled a great deal of evidence that shows that they are. Sensible and well-informed people (in fact, much better informed about Europe than is Johnson himself) believe Johnson has not made his case. As I have remarked several times, Johnson himself has become so manichaean and paranoid that he appears to believe that those who doubt that he has made his case are white supremacist neofascists themselves. He has defamed Andrew Bostom, Diana West, Richard Miniter and others on this basis – which in itself doesn’t say much for Charles’ credibility. He has now even defamed Ilana Mercer, the daughter of an anti-apartheid crusader, as a white nationalist – apparently basing his case on false statements from Wikipedia linking her to a white nationalist organization with which she has no connection. Ilana Mercer wrote to him, asking him to take down the defamatory post, and he actually complied -- the first time I know of that he has shown any compunction for his erratic leaps of logic and rushes to judgment. Meanwhile, Charles Johnson's paranoia increases, and credibility decreases, with every new denunciation.
Anyway, if determining VB’s true nature requires investigation, why did I tell this Walter L. Newton that I wasn’t going to investigate? Actually, I had just told him in a previous email that I was still looking into this matter – which the LGF commenters, true to form, took as a contradiction. It was only a statement of priority. I am going to keep fighting jihad. I will never make common cause with neofascists. I am going to continue examining the situation in Europe in general, and VB, and sifting the evidence. But I am not going to turn Jihad Watch, as Charles Johnson has turned LGF, into a site devoted almost entirely to this question – and certainly not into the witch-hunting hatefest that LGF has become.
But yes, I am going to continue to monitor the situation in Europe. In fact, as far as Vlaams Belang goes, I asked a Dutch speaker to examine the video Charles Johnson posted, of VB leader Filip Dewinter supposedly visiting a neofascist book fair. This is the information he sent me:
In fact, it does seem to be some book fair of student organizations. The title of the video says:Livres sur le nazisme et le Voorpost (milice nazi du Vlaams Belang) en vente pendant les conférences du Vlaams Belang - Vlaams Choc de Peter Boeckx (2005) 2/8
(Books about Nazism and Voorpost (the Nazi militia of Vlaams Belang) for sale during conferences of Vlaams Belang -- Vlaams Choc of Peter Boeckx (2005) 2/8)
"Vlaams Choc" was an anti-Flemish television program on Walloon (=Belgian French-language) television. This apparently is from the program shown on August 2, 2005.
Belgium is dominated by the French-speaking Walloons. VB wants the independence of Flanders and wants to free the Flemings from Walloon domination.The book fair is definitely NOT from 2005. Mark the orange logo of Vlaams Blok, visible on the background during the video (on the ribbon against the wall: you see the Flemish lion flag (yellow with black lion) and the Vlaams Blok logo). The Vlaams Blok was officially disbanded in 2004. The logo was no longer in use afterwards. Hence, this video is NOT from 2005 and has to be older. Vlaams Belang was founded in November 2004. It has an entirely different logo.
Here is what the video shows:
0:1 VB members with poster saying "Geen stemrecht voor vreemdelingen" ("no voting rights for foreigners") and the Vlaams Blok logo
0:2 a student of KVHV putting out posters and books for display on a table.
KVHV = Katholiek Vlaams Hoogstudenten Verbond (Catholic Flemish University-Student Association)
KVHV is a conservative Catholic organisation. Good guys, anti-Socialist, very Catholic (support the Pope). Their enemies call them "fascists", which they are not, just traditional Catholics.
0:9 Display of "Ons Verbond" (Our Association), the magazine of KVHV. There is also a poster with a stop sign over a communist hammer and sickle.
0:12 Dewinter entering and asking "Where is the president?" (= the KVHV president?)
He shakes hands with a man. Not a student, hence not KVHV.
0:19 Mark the Vlaams BLOK logo on the ribbon against the wall.
0:23 display of booklets, magazines about Flemish volunteers on the Eastern Front during WWII.
0:28 book about Joris van Severen (see below. JvS was a Belgian fascist, pro-Belgium, anti-Flemish independence in the 1930s. He was an admirer of Mussolini, but an opponent of Hitler. JvS was murdered in May 1940 by French soldiers.) There is also a booklet marked "Voorpost". Voorpost is a small right-wing Flemish organization. They are very anti-American. Voorpost is independent from VB, but many of its members vote VB. They often speak aggressive language and seek confrontation with enemies such as leftists and Walloons. I think they are infiltrated by the Belgian state security and deliberately provoke incidents in order to give VB bad press.
0:30 book display of Hitler: une fatalite allemande by Ernst Niekisch, a Communist opponent of Hitler. http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Ernst-Niekisch Niekisch was imprisoned by Nazis from 1937 to 1945. Also there is the anti-immigration novel Camp des Saints of Raspail, and "The Fenian Movement" (the Fenians were 19th century Irish nationalists fighting the British domination of Ireland).It is not clear whether this is the KVHV bookstand (I doubt it since the books are in French). It is not clear either whether these are the books that Dewinter is looking at.
0:36 an open book with a picture of Joris van Severen.
0:40 picture of German soldiers.
0:42 Dewinter at a book stand (PS Not clear whether it is the book stand shown before).
0:50 Dewinter grabs a book. I cannot see which one. He says "Vu de Droite" (The Right-wing View). Vu de Droite is a book by French philosopher Alain de Benoist. De Benoist is anti-American, anti-Christian, and calls himself a "neo-Pagan." (Btw: Benoist opposes Le Pen and called on his followers to vote Communist. He also admires Muslims for their fighting spirit. For Benoist and his followers Christianity has caused the weakness of the Europeans. They Europeans have to rediscover their pagan fighting spirit.)
1:00 Dewinter asks a KVHV member (recognisable by his red-brown student cap and the ribbon with the KVHV arms) whether he has already read this book. The student says he has not read it because he is "illiterate". (If the book is. indeed, Benoist's book, the Catholic student does not seem very impressed with it. It is possible that Dewinter is joking: showing the anti-Catholic book to the Catholic student).
1:08 Dewinter asks whether the magazine (on the table) is the KVHV magazine. The students say he is allowed to take some copies.
1:18 Dewinter at another book stand. Apparently with literature from the independence movement in Brittany (a Celtic-speaking region in the West of France).
He asks the man: "You are a Breton?"
1:20 The man says he is indeed a Breton and tells Dewinter "You are an example for us. Your party is a model for us."
1:32 Dewinter says: "If we can help you we will do so."
PS Dewinter is no longer carrying the Benoist book, but has a glass in his hand, the other hand is free (as we can see when he is shaking hands with the Breton).Here is what Charles Johnson says about Dewinter's conversation with Andries, the Catholic student:
Filip deWinter: “Have you read this, Andries?” (asks as he points to book)Bookseller : “No I am illiterate.” (Sarcasm... meaning he actually read it)
Filip deWinter: “Is this a good book?” (asks about another Nazi book on display)
Bookseller: “It served my beliefs.”
In reality Dewinter showed the anti-Catholic book to Andries, who answered he had not read it because he is "illiterate." I do not hear Andries and Dewinter talk about another book that "served his beliefs." Andries says he is illiterate. Then Dewinter asks whether the magazine on display is their (KVHV) magazine. They say it is, and tell him he can take some copies. I do not hear Dewinter asking "Is this a good book?" Nor do I hear anyone saying "It served my beliefs."
I do not know where Charles Johnson gets this from.
On the table there are a lot of books on Flemish volunteers to the Eastern Front and the Verdinaso movement of the Belgian fascist Joris van Severen. Van Severen began his political career as an MP for the Flemish nationalists (and a democrat) in the 1920s, but later became pro-Belgian and founded a Belgian-nationalist fascist party ‘Verdinaso,’ modeled on Mussolini’s party.
He admired Mussolini, but loathed Hitler, and called on his followers to fight the Nazis in the event of an invasion of Belgium. Nevertheless, he was arrested by the Belgians in the beginning of the war and murdered by French soldiers on May 20, 1940, together with a group of Belgian communists and Hungarian and Czech Jews, who had also been arrested by the Belgian authorities.
After his assassination his party fell apart. Some of his followers joined the resistance, others collaborated with the Germans.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joris_Van_Severen says this:
Joris Van Severen ideological thinking was also influenced by Charles Maurras and Maurice Barrès, whilst failing to come to any accommodation with the Rexists or the Flemish National Union. Van Severen was equally opposed to Adolf Hitler and on the outbreak of World War II he banned his followers from producing any material in support of Nazism.Execution
When Germany began executing Fall Gelb (the invasion of the Low Countries by Germany) in 1940 the Belgian government arrested him, together with many other Flemish-nationalist en communist politicians, and thousands of foreigners, and transported him to France for lack of space in Belgium. Van Severen belonged to a group of prisoners who was imprisoned in Abbeville, where, during havy German air attacks at May 20, he was shot with 20 other prisoners by French soldiers who thought they were dangerous spies.
The death of its leader left the Verdinaso without a leader and it soon began falling apart. Some Verdinaso-members joined forces with the Germans, others joined the (now almost completely unknown) resistance group Dietse Eenheid and others just stopped involving themselves in politics.
But aren’t the book fair operators wearing neo-Nazi uniform caps? No: “the caps are student caps. Flemish student organisations have caps (cfr German student organizations). You can recognize the organization by the cap's colour. The KVHV color is brown-red with a black and yellow (colors of Flanders) ribbon beneath it.”
So we have a book fair selling one book by a fascist, another by a Communist, and an anti-Catholic book. This is a neo-Nazi book fair? Dewinter is a neo-Nazi for going in and glad-handing people there?
Even if Vlaams Belang were everything Charles Johnson says it is (and it clearly isn't), nothing about it is established from this video. Nor is anything established by the activities of people who were expelled from the party for those very activities. Charles Johnson will no doubt keep witch-hunting, and I will keep approaching all the groups in Europe, without exception, with open-eyed reserve. But no one should be under the impression that Charles Johnson is fairly or dispassionately presenting evidence about them.
SECOND ADDENDUM, 7PM PST, November 9:
Charles Johnson is a liar, and even the Lizards -- some of them -- are beginning to wake up to it. I was just sent this comment from someone who is braving the stench and reading LGF:
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/showc/608/6201404
In this one Johnson brushes aside the fact that he had posted a tissue of fabrications regarding this book fair jaunt by Dewinter:
608 Charles 11/09/2008 5:33:00 pm PSTre: #601 brotherofchronosI'm not defending that. I'm simply saying that the video was badly translated, which could be used to cast doubt on your other evidence. I don't understand why you would want to take that risk.
At this point, it's far beyond any nitpicking that comes from those people. Let them go ahead and "cast doubt" all they like - it's all they have left.
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/showc/616/6201420
Then the commenter "BrotherofChronos" dares to respond to The Master by reminding him that truth and integrity are, well, important:
Nevertheless, the translation was wrong. It's not right, charles. I realise it's your site and you can do what you like with it but I can't see any moral justification in using what is effectively manufactured evidence to prove this. The video says one thing. The translation you were provided with says something completely different. If you're not careful it could bounce back at you.
Oh, it's bouncing! Bouncing just like a...little green football...
And so honest readers are bouncing right out of the defamation and lie factory that is Little Green Footballs.
UPDATE November 12: I have been informed that Charles Johnson has completely revised his presentation of this book fair, removing without explanation (in the main post, anyway) the false translation he earlier posted. Now, apparently, the big problem is the book Dewinter picks up, Vu de droite by Alain de Benoist.
I'm not sure how Johnson and his Little Green Moonbats can rationalize the idea that picking up a book means that one endorses it, but of course rationality has nothing to do with this. The book that Charles Johnson called a "Nazi book," and that his sycophants at LGF are apparently calling a "fascist book," actually received the Grand Prix de l'Essai from the Académie Française in 1978. The Académie Française did not in 1978 and does not now award prizes to "Nazi books." The neofascist rag known as the New York Review of Books reviewed the book in 1980 and said that de Benoist condemns "fascism of the left and right." His book Vu de droite, in Charles's world so unforgivably handled by the demonic Dewinter, according to this actually won praise from that noted fascist...François Mitterrand.
Little Green Moonbats now devotes a considerable amount of time wringing its hands over the horrors of Bobby Jindal, Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum, Human Events, and the Conservative Book Club. I would rather fight Osama bin Laden, Omar Bakri, Anjem Choudary, Abu Bakar Bashir, and people who share their ideology -- people who are much less of a concern at LGF than they used to be.
------
And here is the original post:
------
Charles Johnson of Little Green Footballs has denounced me and he and his followers are slinging wild accusations against me because I have linked -- under a disclaimer saying that I don't necessarily agree with everything at every linked site -- to two sites he doesn't like.
To read the whole story of his unprovoked attack, and this petty and needless conflict, read on.
I'm sorry to say that my old friend Charles Johnson of Little Green Footballs has written this:
I'm done with Robert Spencer. And very, very disappointed in him.
And:
Jihad Watch and Dhimmi Watch are out of our RSS feeds. I'm not going to support people who link to vile sites like Gates of Vienna and Brussels Journal.
He also wrote me, asking me to take down the "Designed by Little Green Footballs" logo that had been up on this site.
What heinous crime have I committed? Last month I restored the links here to Gates of Vienna and Brussels Journal, after speaking with Baron Bodissey, Paul Belien, and Geert Wilders in Washington, and wrote that I doubted that Fjordman was a neofascist or race supremacist.
Of course, for many, many months my list of links has carried this disclaimer: "Note: Listing here does not imply endorsement of every view expressed at every linked site." One might have thought that my linking to both LGF and Gates of Vienna was indicative of an openness to perspectives even from people who disagreed with one another and also with whom I might disagree, and not a blanket endorsement of either one or any other site. That, however, was too subtle for some LGF commenters, who dressed me up in jackboots right away, accusing me of an "apparent embrace of the neo-Nazi movement" and claiming that I support genocide.
So apparently my doubting that Fjordman et al are racist neofascists who support genocide makes me a racist neofascist who supports genocide. Linking to groups that are accused of being neofascist, although they deny it, makes me one who embraces neo-Nazis. Unfortunately Charles himself has endorsed this loopy leap of logic in the past. Richard Miniter and Diana West both disagreed with him that several European parties, especially Vlaams Belang, were fascist. In response Charles wrote this:
I've learned recently that neo-fascists are much more prominent in conservative circles than I had previously realized. There are other well-known pundits who are sympathetic to the fascists, too -- I've drastically revised my opinion of more than a few people, e.g. Diane West, Richard Miniter, and several others.
Whatever one thinks of Vlaams Belang, that just makes no sense. West and Miniter don't think Vlaams Belang is fascist, and Charles is representing that as meaning that they are "sympathetic to the fascists."
Charles did this also to Andrew Bostom:
I'm now getting hate mail from Andrew Bostom, who believes we should all be joining forces with European white nationalists, calling me all kinds of names and insults.It's an eye-opener about Bostom.
Andy is less than diplomatic, but in one of his emails to Charles he was making a point that I think was compelling. In speaking this way about West, Miniter, and Bostom, Charles seems to have been assuming that anyone speaking favorably about European individuals or groups who are accused of being neofascist, or accepting their denials that they are neofascist, must himself be a fascist sympathizer, or one who believes we should ally with white nationalists. Andy accordingly noted that Roger Kimball had commented favorably on a Diana West piece on people in Europe who are accused of being neofascist, and that National Review Online had also linked to the piece. He called upon Charles to be consistent and label NRO and Kimball as neofascists also. There are others also, besides Kimball and NRO. At LGF I put it this way:
The statement that I have "embraced the neo-Nazi movement" is false, and libelous. Charles, you and your friends here are now in the position of saying that everyone who doesn't believe these people (Fjordman, Belien, etc.) are neo-Nazis must themselves be neo-Nazis. Well, Ian Buruma recently published an article in the LA Times saying that the European anti-immigration parties were not neo-Nazis. Diana West has written the same thing in articles that have been picked up at the National Review and quoted favorably by Roger Kimball at Pajamas Media.Unless you all are prepared to say that Buruma, the LA Times, West, Kimball, and National Review have "embraced the neo-Nazi movement," you can't logically say it about me.
I forgot to mention John Rosenthal, who also wrote a piece doubting that some of the European parties accused of being neo-Nazi are actually neo-Nazi.
Also, when we start playing guilt by association games, how much guilt do you incur for how much association? If one who links to the Brussels Journal has thereby become someone who "apparently embraces the neo-Nazi movement," or at least someone who has done something so "disappointing" as to warrant being removed from RSS feeds, etc., then why does Charles still link to Pajamas Media? For on PJM's blogroll you will find...Brussels Journal. Has Charles, by linking to PJM and appearing on PJTV, become one with whom we should be "very, very disappointed"? Has he become one who is "sympathetic to the fascists"? Why is PJM's link to Brussels Journal not something that makes him "very, very disappointed," but mine is?
Is that not absurd? I have gone on record many, many times explaining why I reject race-based approaches to the jihad threat -- most recently in connection with the Cologne conference. Hugh and I have been clear here in our rejection of LePen, the BNP, and all those who traffic in such approaches. We have been consistent in maintaining that anyone who advocates genocide in comments here will be banned and find his comment deleted. The controversy here is over whether or not some other individuals and groups belong in that category, not over whether one should support race supremacism and genocide or not. Charles has done a grave disservice by acting as if those who reject his judgments about these groups and individuals, or who even -- like me -- are willing to entertain differing points of view on these matters, are ipso facto neo-Nazi or white supremacist sympathizers. He is in this behaving much like the Islamic supremacist bullies of East Tennessee, who are convinced that anyone who says something they don't like must be a liar, a bigot, a racist hater.
I'm done with Charles Johnson. And very, very disappointed in him.
UPDATE: The links to LGF above no longer work; click on them and you'll get a "Forbidden" notice. Well, Charles, old friend, you stay classy -- this only confirms the impression that what we are dealing with here is the bully's fear of actually having to answer for what he said. But his comments are still at LGF; you can go there and see them, or copy the link location from here and paste it into the address bar -- it will become visible that way.
Meanwhile, I note also with sorrow that the mendacious Kejda Gjermani ("medaura") is spreading her libelous attacks on me at LGF yet again, as she has been allowed to do for months. It is telling.
SECOND UPDATE: The comments over at LGF are getting really vile -- accusing me of actually posting pro-genocidal material there, or sending someone to do so, or inspiring someone to do so apparently by what I post here. As well as all the accusations of race supremacism, fascism, etc., that he has for months allowed to become standard over there when my name comes up.
Bear in mind that all of these attacks are based on guilt by association. None of them are based on anything I have actually ever said or written. And the case against those whose association so taints me is, contrary to Charles's repeated and strident assumption, unproven.
Charles ought to be ashamed of himself, both for his bullying and inconsistency, and for his allowing this to go on. In any case, he has rendered himself irrelevant (at best) in the struggle to defend the principles of freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, the equality of rights of all people before the law, and Constitutional pluralism against the jihad and Islamic supremacism. His demand of an absolute ideological lockstep is ultimately at variance with those principles of freedom anyway.
THIRD UPDATE: As you can see from my comment here, Charles himself has now begun defaming me with hints that I support genocide -- because of a comment that some idiot who has nothing to do with me put up at LGF. Probably he will block the link again, but you can paste it into a new window and it will work.
1023 Charles 10/31/2008 7:28:22 pm PDTUnbelievable.
If I were you, Robert, I'd ask myself some serious questions about what I was doing to encourage the open support for genocide expressed by jdow.
Good luck indeed.
The background of this is that this "jdow" character posted a pro-genocide comment there, and this is supposed to be my fault. The evidence? Well, apparently "jdow" has commented here too.
Do I know who "jdow" is? No, I do not. Is he any different from anyone else who posts here whom I don't know? Is he any different from Abdullah Mackay, who posts here often, and sharply disagrees with everything I write, or from any other commenter here?
The only possible way that I could be responsible for someone promoting genocide is if I promote it myself. So: can Charles Johnson or anyone else produce a scrap of evidence from my writings to show that I have encouraged open support, covert support, or any support for genocide? Charles should either produce evidence that I do, which he cannot do, or he should retract his libelous insinuation. That he will almost certainly do neither is evidence that he has become a deeply dishonest and untrustworthy man.
But that he would stoop to this defamation shows what he really is, and what he is about. It makes me sorry that I ever counted him as a friend or ally.
FOURTH UPDATE: Paste in this link:
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/showc/25/6143272
It reads thusly:
25 Charles 11/01/2008 10:18:32 am PDTNote: please use the report button if you see anyone posting ugly comments related to Robert Spencer's vicious attack on me this morning. I expect some meltdowns.
And Charles knows meltdowns! Note well: falsely accusing me of encouraging genocide -- that's not a "vicious attack." Asking for supporting evidence for the charge or a retraction, and doubting I will get either (and I won't) -- that's a "vicious attack."
Charles seems to be working from the playbook of the jihad enablers who have nothing to say about jihad attacks but are quick to label the reporting of jihad attacks as "Islamophobia."
Charles, have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?
FIFTH UPDATE: I want to emphasize that I have not endorsed the Vlaams Belang. This whole controversy is not about the Vlaams Belang, but about whether or not one can disagree with Charles Johnson and not be defamed as a result. I have merely recognized that people of good will, who are not "seriously deluded" (as someone calls them below) and are not racists or neofascists, have mounted a case opposing Charles Johnson's assessment of the Vlaams Belang. In other words, the question is not whether or not we should support neofascists, but whether or not Vlaams Belang is neofascist. That question is hotly disputed, and those who think that Johnson has not made his case are not evil just for thinking that.
If Vlaams Belang were openly neo-Nazi, it would be an open-and-shut case, and no one should support them. But this is a search for crypto-fascists, and people assess the evidence differently. It is an issue warranting further study. And until Charles demanded that his link be removed from here, I had both sides represented in my links.
All this has eluded them, however, such that over in his LGF echo chamber they say -- and even Charles suggests -- that I have embraced the neo-Nazis and encourage genocide. He ought to be monumentally ashamed of himself for this defamation.
SIXTH UPDATE: Heartfelt thanks to all those who have expressed their support and appreciation of my work. I am grateful to each one of you.
As far as the ongoing discussion of the BNP goes, it is their race-based membership requirement and race-based emphasis that makes me unable to support them. I have explained why elsewhere, more than once.
The libels and misrepresentations of my positions at LGF, and the fascist/Stalinist snap-to of instantly excoriating someone who had been a valued friend as an evil and dangerous foe, should be illuminating to anyone who wonders what is going on. And remember, this all happened not because of anything I said or did, but because of a couple of blog links under a disclaimer.
The LGF commenters, however, have begun -- here again in true Stalinist fashion -- searching for previous signs of my ideological deviation.
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/showc/1145/6142955
In that comment someone quotes something from my 2003 book Onward Muslim Soldiers: "Begin to regard Muslim immigration as a national security issue, and take steps to limit it and end it if possible. (And of course all illegal aliens should be made to leave immediately.)" This is evidence of my secret wickedness.
So apparently Muslim immigration is not a national security issue: the stealth jihad, the sleeper cells, the jihad plots are all chimeras. And illegal aliens should make themselves at home.
Then there is this:
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/showc/1146/6144662
This links to a Gates of Vienna post about the honor killing of the Said sisters in Texas. I am not sure what the point is here -- perhaps it is that it is terrible and neo-Nazi to suggest that there could have been an honor killing in Texas. Unfortunately, the facts demonstrate otherwise.
With comments like these going unchallenged, it is hard to argue against the proposition that LGF has ceased to be concerned about the spread of Islamic supremacism in the U.S.
Those who exhort both Charles Johnson and I to cut the crap should recall that Charles Johnson is entirely, wholly, and solely responsible for provoking this rift, and for the overheated rhetoric of support for genocide, fascism, etc.
I see also that Charles Johnson is also charging me with personally betraying him by "embracing" people who have attacked him.
It is odd that he would make this charge after allowing his comments fields to become the arenas for repeated libels of me and my work by Kejda Gjermani ("medaura"), Michael Hussey ("mph"), "Killgore Trout" and others.
And even if he had not done that, his charge would only make sense if I had dropped the link to LGF while restoring the link to Brussels Journal etc. In fact, I had links to all sides here, which I had hoped would become the foundation for a gradual reconciliation of people who, let us not forget, had once been friends. That Charles would get so angry about a couple of blog links is reminiscent of a second-grade lunchtable where one kid gets angry with another kid for inviting other kids to sit at the table also.
It was Charles who chose to see these links as a repudiation and betrayal, when there was no necessary reason for him to have done so. Gates of Vienna has criticized me in the past, so I could have followed Charles' path and considered that anyone who even suggested they were not evil was no longer my friend. I have links to other people I don't always agree with and have had public disputes with -- such as "Allahpundit" at Hot Air. Yet no one at LGF is insisting that I must share all of Allahpundit's views because I link to Hot Air. They only insist that I share all of GoV's views because of the link here to them. Why is that? Because insisting on the latter is consistent with the picture of me as a neofascist that they want to paint.
In any case, LGF commenters are now saying I have restored "VB" to my links, when Vlaams Belang was never there, and I have stated above that I have not endorsed VB. And they're saying that soon I will be bringing white supremacists to speak at anti-jihad conferences in the U.S. This is arrant, libelous nonsense, and it illustrates that the commenters there simply aren't interested in the truth, but are here again falling into Stalinist lockstep.
Charles also has stated that he did thousands of dollars of work for this site, for which I never paid him. In reality, he did a great deal of work for which he was duly paid. Then he did some work here and there for which I repeatedly asked him to bill me. (I just found half a dozen requests from me, asking him to bill me, in a moment's search of one email box.) He never did. Ultimately, it seemed clear at the time that he considered the unbilled items minor tweaks, but to imply that I ripped him off his, to put it mildly, untrue. That he would attempt to use against me something over which I had no control and that was against my repeatedly expressed wishes is a measure of the man. He is essentially saying, "Hey, I tried to buy Robert Spencer's friendship, and he betrayed me by not being for sale."
And finally, Charles has referred repeatedly to my "vicious attack" upon him, yet he has never answered the points I made in the "vicious attack," which could only refer to the above post. For instance, why is it OK for LGF to link to Pajamas Media, which links to Brussels Journal, and Pajamas Media is not fascist, but if I link to Brussels Journal, LGF must delink from me and call me a fascist? Charles Johnson doesn't answer that question, and he can't answer it, because in fact when it comes to a "vicious attack" and a "stab in the back" he has been the perpetrator, not the victim.
Charles Johnson, let us remember, initiated this whole thing and wrote he was "done" with me, etc.
I responded, defending myself, and have added updates responding to his increasingly shrill attacks, most notably that I am encouraging genocide.
This is what constitutes in his eyes a "vicious attack."
Apparently the only way I could have avoided "viciously attacking" Charles Johnson would have been to roll over and allow him to defame me without response.
Call this one "Charles Johnson Hits Bottom, Digs."
SEVENTH UPDATE: Charles Johnson is going CAIR one better by blaming me not for unmoderated comments made here at Jihad Watch, but for comments left at LGF and emails he has received that oppose the lunatic course he has taken. So for the record I am stating here now that I have never asked anyone to write to Charles Johnson or to comment at LGF in my defense, and have no responsibility for anything anyone says while doing so. And I ask those who support me not to write to this man, or to comment at his site. Thank you.
Posted by Robert at October 31, 2008 11:48 PM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
|
Robert
This post isn't good. This sort of thing needs to be swept under the rug. Everyone knows you aren't racist; on this topic you have nothing you need to prove.
I can promise you a post discussing this post will appear on LGF and you will get more negative press there. It won't help anything. Best to let the whole thing die--- it will make it easier to be allies with each other when that time comes. It must come.
Posted by: Jr.![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at October 31, 2008 11:56 PM
IMO I think Mr. Johnson real motives are unknown. He has his own agenda and its becoming clear being concerned with the Muslim threat to the west is very low on his list.
That said over the last 2 years I've been a reader at Jihadwatch, and I never saw anything Spencer posted that could be construed as racist. All he's ever done is let various Muslim authorities implicate Islam.
Posted by: waltc at November 1, 2008 12:06 AM
Jr.
It is far, far too late for that.
However, I don't intend to say anything else about it. Let medaura, Killgore Trout and the other liars rave. I have more important things to do.
Cordially
Robert Spencer
at November 1, 2008 12:14 AM
I have been reading Robert Spencer for several years. He is no Nazi.
Posted by: HotSpur at November 1, 2008 12:21 AM
I'm really sorry to hear this.
I wasn't too active in comments, but I did go there almost every day. But at some point or another, they started ranting on about those who favor Intelligent Design. The problem was that they misrepresented it so badly that I couldn't just leave it.
I tried several times to send them correct information. Not to convince one way or another, but just so they would stop posting such misleading and incorrect things. Not only was it ignored, but the same completely wrong information continued to be posted.
Little by little, I started going there less frequently. The next time I did try to post a comment (I don't even think it was the same topic) I found I had been banned. It was unbelievable to me. It's not like I even got into arguments or anything. I tried to correct wrong ideas where I could, but never in a nasty way.
Anyway, shake the dust off your feet and all that. It's not worth it.
at November 1, 2008 12:22 AM
For what it's worth, Robert, we at The Jawa Report continue to respect and admire the work you are doing.
Over the years that I have closely followed your work, I have seen NOTHING to suggest you are somehow in league (or even sympathetic) to white supremacists, neo-Nazis or genocidal maniacs of any stripe.
I'm very sorry you are now forced to deal with such spiteful attacks, from someone who should be treating you as a valued ally... or at the very least, giving you the benefit of the doubt.
Do not be discouraged.
Sayan Neviot (aka Kafir)
Posted by: Kafir_Alalazoo at November 1, 2008 12:25 AM
Sayan
1000 thanks. I hope Charles doesn't put pressure on you for this.
Meanwhile, give my best to Rusty. You all are doing fantastic work over there.
Cordially
Robert Spencer
at November 1, 2008 12:28 AM
With 12,154 Islamo-Fascist 'religion of peace' terrorist attacks since 9/11, there are more important things to address than any peeves from LGF. http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/
Move on. They're not worth it. Bigger battles lie ahead.
at November 1, 2008 12:30 AM
Having been repeatedly forced to deny that you are fascist, may I ask if you are a space alien, Dauphin of France, or a shiny new bicycle?
I look forward to your denials, but remember: anyone who doubts that Robert Spencer is a space alien is ipso facto a space alien.
Posted by: AnneCrockett at November 1, 2008 12:32 AM
Battle of Tours:
Quite so. Quite so.
Cordially
Robert Spencer
at November 1, 2008 12:32 AM
Annie
Of course I'm a space alien.
Klaatu barada nikto.
Yours
Robert
at November 1, 2008 12:33 AM
Annie
Of course I'm registered to vote. 72 times.
R
Posted by: jihadwatch at November 1, 2008 12:35 AM
Dear Robert,
I am very proud of you for seeing what Charles really is like. You are one of our most valuable assets in the counterjihad movement, and Charles' attacking of you shows how unhinged he has become. Thank you for posting this, and keep up the good work.
P.S. We may be meeting each other sometime in the next few months... I hear there's a chance you're coming to my university.
Posted by: Natalie at November 1, 2008 12:35 AM
Qapla!
Posted by: MarisolJW at November 1, 2008 12:37 AM
Robert,
I've been a lurker for many years on both LGF and JW.
After Charles had his hissy fit with Brussels Journal and Fjordman, I was annoyed, but stuck with it. This however is the last straw. I am sad to see Charles losing it after all he's done some good work in the past, but I fear he has been lost in is own celebrity. As a fellow bicycle rider who frequents the South Bay strand, I always had an affinity for Charles and LGF. Alas, my heart has betrayed me once again. I have always enjoyed the Brussels Journal not only because I spent some time in Belgium, but because they give a frank view of the anti-jihad movement in Europe.
Charles, just like his arch nemesis Markos has got caught up in his own "blog-go"™ (a form of a blog-ego where thinks he is bigger than the information he or she is web logging).
I removed LGF from my RSS a few months back when he found it necessary to lash out at the creationist commiunity. It's nice to see I'm not missing anything with he and his lizzoids.
Freedom of choice, I choose to not visit his site anymore, I however enjoy JW and BJ...
my $.02
Jonas Nightengale
Posted by: jonas at November 1, 2008 12:40 AM
Robert,
It was bound to happen sooner or later. Johnson is an unrestrained ego-maniac, similar to Auster. If you are not in perfect lock-step with He is most fortunate in his estimation to have the perfect moral and ethical compass in these matters.
He is basically valueless in the anti-jihadist movement anyway and should stick to what he knows, computer programming and bicycles.
With his iron-grip on the discourse at LGF, with his community member LGF careers tied directly to echoing Johnson's position perfectly, is nearly laughable. His bannings occur with such prevalence, it has become a badge of honor for serious anti-jihadists.
Charles Johnson posts stories about jihad, yet he can offer no background or insight into the ideology of Islam behind it, with the exception of what he has learned from you.
That was a power play by Johnson, the control freak, to see if he could get you to jump when he said so. He has plenty of sycophants to appease his him as it is, although he appears to never be sated.
He tried to pretend that he just noticed you have GoV and BJ on your blogroll, and he feigns ignorance that you still post Fjordman. Nonsense. He just decided that tonight he would make you acquiese to him or face banishment.
His weak guilt by association claim was aptly refuted by you as being illogical and also, hypocritical on his part. That being said, I suggest you speak of him no more and allow the LGF community to speak of pressing matters like Halloween candy.
The jihad continues and Charles Johnson chooses to bicker about those who do not share his self-perceived moral terpitude.
Regards.
Posted by: awake at November 1, 2008 12:40 AM
Sad. Just goes to show that fighting for the truth entails dealing with the real enemy (e.g., radical Islam) and, sometimes, with well intentioned, but still deeply misguided, folks (e.g., Charles Johnson). Shouldn't be this complicated, but it is.
Posted by: Wellington at November 1, 2008 12:41 AM
Robert,
I've been a lurker for many years on both LGF and JW.
After Charles had his hissy fit with Brussels Journal and Fjordman, I was annoyed, but stuck with it. This however is the last straw. I am sad to see Charles losing it after all he's done some good work in the past, but I fear he has been lost in is own celebrity. As a fellow bicycle rider who frequents the South Bay strand, I always had an affinity for Charles and LGF. Alas, my heart has betrayed me once again. I have always enjoyed the Brussels Journal not only because I spent some time in Belgium, but because they give a frank view of the anti-jihad movement in Europe.
Charles, just like his arch nemesis Markos has got caught up in his own "blog-go"™ (a form of a blog-ego where thinks he is bigger than the information he or she is web logging).
I removed LGF from my RSS a few months back when he found it necessary to lash out at the creationist community. It's nice to see I'm not missing anything with he and his lizzoids.
Freedom of choice, I choose to not visit his site anymore, I however enjoy JW and BJ...
my $.02
Jonas Nightengale
Posted by: jonas at November 1, 2008 12:42 AM
Just for the record, I really dislike the Kejda woman. I had a fight with her about Serbia several months ago, in which she basically said that all Serbs should die. And guess which of us got banned? Hint: it wasn't her...
Posted by: Natalie at November 1, 2008 12:51 AM
If Charles cares to bring pressure to bear, let it be on my head, and my head alone. I am stating MY opinion, and if anyone doesn't like it, including the folks at LGF... well, I'll be sure to lose some sleep over it during the next lunar eclipse.
I'll pass your message along to Rusty.
Sayan
at November 1, 2008 12:54 AM
A public de-linking? Because of your blogroll? bwahahaha
I thought we all decided that was stupid somewhere in 2005.
at November 1, 2008 12:58 AM
It's very upsetting when there are major rifts in the anti-jihad community
It was a very sad day when the split occurred between Charles and Fjordman -- I beniffited greatly from Fjordman' writings and point of view. It was amazing to actually be able to ask questions when he joined a comments section. And in no way did I believe Fjordman was a neo-Nazi or white supremist.
And today is another sad day. A second member of the anti-jihad movement has been banned by Charles. I am so sorry Mr. Spencer, you do not deserve this treatment.
Mo -- yes, there does seem to be a crusade of sorts against whatever meets the idea of intelligent design whether here or in the Islamic world. Terms are ill defined, so it's impossible, for me at least, to enter into any discussion on the matter.
And Robert, just to let you know, the links you provided to LGF in your article all lead to a Forbidden page and a 403 error. This is pathetic.
at November 1, 2008 1:00 AM
Johnson has cornered himself on this one. The way he administrates his site and castigates those who may differ with him on minute points of contention is, well, fascist. He will do well in the upcoming Obama administration, that is, until he is shut down.
Oh the irony, a fascist labeling anothers as fascist.
Posted by: awake at November 1, 2008 1:03 AM
Very disappinting behavior by Charles Johnson.
He has blocked, as forbidden, the links from JW as well. The LGF thread is the Friday Evening Open thread of October 31, 2008.
His contact form is redirected to his main page.
He jumped the shark.
The irony (if my conjecture is correct) is that LGF, formerly strongly opposed to Ron-Paulians, has become dominated by several and their sockpuppets. My conjecture, based upon reading Medaura's website, is that Kejda and her husband Michael (mph) would have been Paulians.
Posted by: del at November 1, 2008 1:10 AM
Dear Mr. Spencer,
I am sorry for the hurt you must feel by the apparent betrayal of your fellow Charles at LGF.
I have examined the hundreds of comments at LGF's Friday night open link, and what appears to me there in Mr. Johnson's sudden reaction is undeserved by you.
The two links in question, I do not visit nor read; so perhaps I should, or perhaps I should rely upon the books on my bookshelf written by you sir, which have given me many hours, days of insightful reading and warning, instead.
Mr. Johnson, despite his great website, of which I'm a commentor as well as here for years, has not written anything as comprehensive as your tomes on Islamic tradition or Jihad.
And so with this, my very first comment at JW in over 15 months, I offer you this sir:
the emailed words of friendly advice which you gave me last year when I complained of unwarranted attacks on me, by others here at JW; only, sir, friend, please change some of the pronouns:
"I think you should indeed reevaluate my(his) significance, and I hope you come to this conclusion:
I(He) don't(doesn't) matter at all. Not one bit.
What matters is the cause.
I'm sorry someone insulted you. I get insulted 2000 times a day. I just keep working, and telling the truth. Why don't you do the same?
Cheers
RS
Shake it off, and proceed, friend. You have plenty of support, including mine.
Posted by: localmalcontent at November 1, 2008 1:22 AM
Jane
Hey, it's nice to see you. Thanks for the hearty laugh. I think it is stupid also. Keep up the good work, and keep in touch, eh?
Yours
Robert
at November 1, 2008 1:24 AM
I pride myself on picking fights with medaura (of "I am so mad, my stomach hurts") and Charles on the Kosovo issue and on the issue of unsavory alliances (my attitude is that there are some combinations of an imminent threat and our estimate of manageability of an unsavory alliance when those alliance would be made by anyone favoring survival, e.g. slave-owning and abolitionist states at the dawn of or republic).
I think these fallouts are growth pains of the counter-jihad movement.
On subject of alliances (for the record, I have not looked into evidence and therefore have no opinion on Vlaams Belang or any of the outfits in question) a recently published Russian book on the Russian civil war apparently shows just how close the Czarist White Guard and the assorted cossack regiments came to destroying the commies if they only managed to unite. Which they didn't.
at November 1, 2008 1:27 AM
STRANGE MINDLESS RAMBLINGS AND ACCUSATIONS FROM LGF.
R.S. has always indicated that being anti islamic has nothing to do with race.
Anyway why is it that all races and cultures of the world can push their own race/culture but the europeans can't? (incedently I am asian but I prefer to live in the west with it's western culture and traditions). Why is it that the rest of the world, with it's many races and cultures making a beeline towards th western world? could it be that the western culture has proven itself to be great at proving these people with away of life that their own culture inhibits? why isn't the rest of the world clamoring to go to the arab states? or asian states? or african countries? or latin american countries? I have read the brussel journal and fjordan, neither one of these pushes the massive white racisim or genocide.They have the perspective on the going on in europe, concerning muslim immigration, that most newspapers won't print. This charles guy is off his rocker and he needs to retire and write cross word puzzles.
at November 1, 2008 1:30 AM
localmalcontent:
How are you? Good to see you again. Thanks for the excellent advice.
It is hard to take an unprovoked and unwarranted attack from someone I had thought of as a friend, but I think that it is self-evident to any fair minded person that Charles's delinking my site, and allowing the wildest and most libelous accusations to be made against me, all because of some links on my blogroll, or all because I am not sure Brussels Journal and Fjordman are as evil as he says they are, or that they even believe what he says they believe, is mad.
And in any case, you're quite right. To get involved in this further would be to become as myopic and bereft of sound priorities as he is.
Cordially
Robert Spencer
at November 1, 2008 1:31 AM
Oh and Mr Spencer -- I understand Charles was helping out from time to time with some technicalities of your website -- if you need help, just whistle.
Posted by: kuchuklambat at November 1, 2008 1:32 AM
Also, Mr. Spencer, a P.S., I'm wondering what will Mr. Johnson do about his LGF links and RSS feeds from Michelle Malkins' website, and of her 'Hot Air' site, where you frequently post excellent "Jihad Watch" videos?
at November 1, 2008 1:33 AM
kuchuklambat
Thanks. I may just do that. I have been working with a guy from the Horowitz Center who is excellent, but very busy -- so in a pinch, I may be in touch. Thanks again.
Cordially
Robert Spencer
at November 1, 2008 1:34 AM
localmalcontent:
The Hot Air link will pose Charles no problem, as I no longer post there -- for reasons that have nothing to do with this silly controversy.
Cordially
Robert Spencer
at November 1, 2008 1:35 AM
Why don't you have a post on the Assam blasts. They were really major, and everyone is of the opinion they are the handiwork of bangladeshi jihadis.
Posted by: infidel_hindu at November 1, 2008 1:43 AM
infidel_hindu:
What I have seen on them is not clear that jihadists were the perpetrators. Do you have a link to a story from a trustworthy source that says that jihadists are responsible?
Cordially
Robert Spencer
at November 1, 2008 1:46 AM
Robert, it's Vinnie of the Jawa Report here. My screen name reflects my job as Brad Thor's head moderator on his reader forum. Plus, "Vinnie" was already taken as a Typekey username.
I respect and admire you, Robert, but I have to go all PC on you.
Kafir does NOT speak for the Jawa Report. His erroneous use of "we" may not reflect all of our views.
That's not to say, however, that I personally disagree with what you've posted.
All I'm saying is that it's Rusty, and only Rusty, that gives the official Jawa Report opinion.
Rusty has been away for quite awhile and will return next week, I know you'll understand why I posted this.
Posted by: Trollhammer at November 1, 2008 1:49 AM
Trollhammer:
Got it. But please note: I haven't done anything wrong. I haven't endorsed neo-Nazism. I haven't called for genocide. Quite the opposite in both cases. All I have done is, after many conversations with many people and much investigation, become skeptical as to whether some people who are accused of being race supremacists and neofascists are in fact race supremacists and neofascists.
If Rusty can't hang with me because of that, well, it would be a shame. But if one person jumps off a bridge and then another one follows, it still doesn't follow that jumping off a bridge was a rational thing to do.
Cordially
Robert Spencer
at November 1, 2008 1:52 AM
Considering that 'Indian Mujahedeen' have 'taken responsibility' for the blasts, there should be no doubts that jihadists were the perpetrators.
Just one link you can get dozens on googling.
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2008\11\01\story_1-11-2008_pg7_50
Posted by: infidel_hindu at November 1, 2008 1:52 AM
infidel hindu:
Thanks. Oddly enough, I did just Google and came up empty, but perhaps it is because it is nearing 11PM local time and I am getting tired.
Anyway, I will put it up now.
Cordially
Robert Spencer
at November 1, 2008 1:54 AM
Robert, search google for assam, blasts, indian mujahedeen.
http://www.google.co.in/search?hl=en&q=assam+blasts+indian+mujahideen&btnG=Search&meta=
Rather than the daily times of Pakistan ( my earlier link, I didnt check ) You can put up Times of India story
As a side note the situation in Assam is really, really dire, nothing that you guys in US or Europe can comprehend. Muslims are already 35-40% of the population there and the whole region is slipping out of control.
Posted by: infidel_hindu at November 1, 2008 2:04 AM
Robert,
I know you haven't done anything wrong. I know you haven't endorsed Neo-Nazism. I know you haven't endorsed Neo-fascism. Or pretty much Neo-anyism.
I just don't want Rusty, who has been away from blogging for some time, to come back and find himself embroiled in a controversy not of his choosing because of an erroneous comment from a co-blogger.
Posted by: Trollhammer at November 1, 2008 2:06 AM
Trollhammer:
Got it again, and thanks. It is sad to see Charles go off the rails this way. I for one will miss him.
Cordially
Robert Spencer
at November 1, 2008 2:09 AM
Speaking for myself, and myself only.
Me too, Robert, me too.
*wink wink nudge nudge*
Posted by: Trollhammer at November 1, 2008 2:11 AM
"then why does Charles still link to Pajamas Media?"
I guess the logical conclusion will be that Charles Johnson will ban himself from going to his own site.
Posted by: DenverRodeo at November 1, 2008 2:12 AM
Hey Robert - with friends like that, who needs enemies, right? One day he'll realize that he didn't just hurt a team member, but the team itself. Little Green Footballs just made a touch down for the other side. Good going coach.
Posted by: champ at November 1, 2008 2:16 AM
Mr. Johnson is an anti-European fanatic and an enemy of civilisation. He deserves to be repudiated.
at November 1, 2008 2:17 AM
I was gently corrected once by someone who told me that I haven't actually been commenting here longer than Robert and Hugh. Well, it feels like I have been. In all these years of reading and writing, of following Robert and this site and this way of life, I have always been proud of Robert as a man among men. Every day that Robert writes and speaks to the world, we win. We win because Robert is honest.
Whether one has been here for years or only a short time, it is clear that Robert is fair to his opponents, generous with his confederates, and sensitive to all regardless of their worth or lack thereof. I've been here for years, and I have seen pretty much everything that can happen; and in that time, Robert has never once failed us: he is consistently fair and honest. When he's made factual errors, he comes to correct them and explain his failure in the first place. If he's made errors in judgments about people, he has had reasons I can't fault. Robert is my captain.
We've lost many friends here over the years, some to death, some to the enemy, some to lack of stamina. Some, like Johnson and Pastorius, gone to Left/Gnostic lunacies. That latter is a good thing. Those we lose, if not to death, are those who should be gone from us anyway so we can, as dedicated people, continue fully involved in our efforts without the drag of the worst among us. My captain leads, and where he leads, I follow. Those who will not come, better they be gone.
Now, I'm not particularly stupid, and I don't follow stupid people. I follow Robert, not as a fool follows a demagogue, but as a man who follows a better man. I am proud to follow Robert in his year and years of thinking, teaching, and being a good man. If he takes up cookery in time to come, look for me to be a fat man. Not because of the food, but the swelling pride of knowing we've won where Robert has lead us.
My hope is that in further years we'll continue as comrades, all of us and more, in this continuous and unending struggle for freedom and the good of humanness that Robert leads us to.
My best to all of you.
Dag Walker,
Vancouver, Canada.
at November 1, 2008 2:18 AM
The obvious repercussions as a result from Johnson's excommunication of Robert Spencer and Jihad Watch will be drastic.
The extensive list of venues who will also relinquish support for Spencer and JW as a result of Johnson's self-aggrandized, erroneous moral cleansing is provided below:
1)
Posted by: awake at November 1, 2008 2:21 AM
This is very depressing. I've been a daily reader of both JihadWatch and LGF for about a year and a half or so now, and I definitely wasn't expecting to see this kind of a rift develop between Robert and Charles. I've never read or heard anything here or elsewhere that would make me believe that Robert is a supporter of neo-Nazis or fascists, or that he is one himself. Quite the opposite. I'm sorry that the fact that JW links to certain sites means that you don't pass Charles' ideological purity test, Robert. It's very disappointing to see Charles go off the deep end like this. I have no plans to stop reading LGF, because I enjoy the content most of the time, but I can't help but think less of Charles after seeing this. Anyway, Robert, keep up the good work. I'm looking forward to reading your new book.
Posted by: staff_of_magius at November 1, 2008 2:33 AM
Fjordman was/is not a racist or a genocide advocate, and Robert Spencer was/is not a racist or a genocide advocate. To even have to write such a sentence is absurd. That anyone takes up the deranged claims of CAIR et al only reflects poorly on the accuser; the accused has done nothing to deserve this treatment.
To do what next needs to be done in the anti-jihad will require moving beyond partisan politics and the scorched-earth tactics of personal destruction of those who hold slightly different views. We infidels are a very diverse group, like it or not. Robert Spencer has shown himself to be willing to work with people of diverse backgrounds and viewpoints (to the specific exclusion of those who promote genocide or racism).
Robert Spencer and the other JW/DW editors have a clear record of understanding that the antidote to jihad is not more misguided and misplanned military invasions, but education and open, honest discussion. Genocide is not the answer; rational self-preservation is.
The politics of division are a dead end. Robert Spencer and JW/DW are the way forward.
Posted by: special_guest at November 1, 2008 2:35 AM
Hey Dag, my fellow comrade, I share your sentiments about Robert and Jihad Watch, and your post really touched me, even though it was written to Robert, LOL! Take care.
Posted by: champ at November 1, 2008 2:40 AM
Robert,
I use to read LGF in the past, but slowly I felt that he was acting more like “Antifa” then a searcher of truths. I had found myself going to his blog less and less till I finally just deleted his site from my favorite. I found this sad that he's drifted from his original mission into more of a narcissistic love affair.
With you and your site I find myself returning almost daily to read what you've posted and the comments. Though I don’t comment myself, I do appreciate the hard work and truthfulness you put into this site and the books you've released. (They are still very hard to get returned some times after loaned out.)
Senor Doeboy
at November 1, 2008 2:56 AM
"KillgoreTrout", head Johnson tool over at LGF, said that genocidal posts are better served over at JW than at LGF and that genocidal comments of 800 to 1000 words will be considered as a separate thread posting by Robert.
See the second Friday "open" thread at LGF. These jokers actually think that they are different from KOS? "Trout" boy makes libelous claims about JW and Spencer with no reprimand from "bicycle boy" Johnson.
Of course, not disimilar from the tactics by Islamists and Islamist apologists, "Trout" boy offers no proof to substantiate his baseless claim.
I say, let blogwars 3.0 commence!
The truth is the truth, no matter who utters it.
Posted by: awake at November 1, 2008 3:11 AM
Like a lot of former leftists, Charles never quite left behind the whole notion of "thought crime".
The conservative judges by actions because he knows that people have all sorts of thoughts and motivations - quite often mutually contradictory thoughts and motivations - and so what matters is what a person does.
The left doesn't think that way. In fact it is almost the opposite. The main thing with the left is that people believe in the true way. (ref Arthur Koestler, George Orwell or even Solhzenitsyn). What they actually do is less important.
So a person can be perfectly civil, peaceable and kindly, but if a leftist (or some former leftists such as Charles Johnson) thinks they harbour evil/racist/reactionary thoughts, then that is enough to put them beyond the pale.
And frankly, anyone who could look at Robert Spencer and see anything but the most honest and gentlemanly of men has clearly flown the coop.
at November 1, 2008 3:36 AM
Good for you Robert. One should always follow ones convictions. Personally I'm not surprised this happened. I'm surprised it didn't happen sooner.
Robert, saw you had to deal with Fjordmans advocacy of mass-deportation of muslims(dunno If he's said that, but it wouldn't surprise me). Ofcourse, if that's a problem, then your much closer connection to Hugh Fitzgerald should be an even greater problem, since he suggested the same thing in his "100 things Europe can do" post around the time of "the great schism". Apparently that little bit of information has escaped the lizards.
I'm sure this won't benefit the anti-jihad in the short term, but hopefully it'll work wonders in the long term.
Regards
at November 1, 2008 3:59 AM
Hi Robert,
I am so sorry to see Charles do this and he is sadly mistaken about you being racist and supporting neo nazi's and such ilk. I stopped going to LGF over a year ago after I was rabidly attacked for trying to post an alert about islamofacism and the threat it is to all of us, who can see through the illusion that is islam.
You are always a gentelman and a wise scholar, Robert. You are truthful and always back up what you are saying with facts that cannot be disputed.
Whatever game Charles is playing at LGF, he has succumbed to the PC side of reality and has partaken of too much koolaid. It has obviously taken it's toll on him. Hard to take when one who is and perhaps was a friend, does this to us.
"I get up. I walk. I fall down.
Meanwhile, I keep dancing."
Hillel
Keep on dancing, Robert. You are an inspiration
to me and many others!
Most respectfully,
Rick
PatriotUSA
at November 1, 2008 4:03 AM
I got banned from LGF months ago. The problem there is that they celebrate the killing of some Hammas thug in the West Bank, but they fret at any any effort to curb Muslim immigration to Europe.
At every turn, LGF equates anti-immigration movements in Europe with trains to Auschwitz.
Charles reminds me of the Mossad agents arrested in NYC on 9/11 after they were spotted cheering as the towers burned. There's something wrong with their thought process.
Posted by: Bingo at November 1, 2008 4:21 AM
It's funny Johnson wants to play the guilt by association game since he uses a supposed Anti-Fascist Action member as a source for many of these smears. He used this radical Marxist blog (which coincidentally stopped posting when Johnson was done destroying their reputations) as a source for a smear of Lionheart, a man I had several pleasant Internet exchanges with and who I can guarantee isn't a Nazi and the Center for Vigilant Freedom who I was involved with and can tell you are not Nazis.
I myself left the 910/cvf group over a disagreement I had with their politics but they are not racists, nor do they promote racist or genecidalist ideas. GOV and Fjordman unfairly bore the brunt of LGFs wrath during that dust up and I've always been shocked and disgusted that Johnson has continued to be a well respected blogger after that incident. Perhaps this will be the wake up call the rightosphere needs to see Johnson's true colors.
Why Johnson and company see "fascists" everywhere is something we may never know, but what we do know is that LGF is an untrustworthy source more interested in attacking Johnson's competition of the web (thus their fixation on DailyKos) than in any serious effort to expose or halt Militant Islam's imperialist agenda.
For what it is worth I've learned more about Islam on this blog than I did in the Comparative Religion program I got my B.A. from, or the religion courses I took in grad school. Your site is worth a thousand LGFS.
p.s Hey Natalie! Fancy seeing you here
at November 1, 2008 4:26 AM
In a way, this is a relief.
I attended the conference in Brussels that started this whole mess. The Jewish presence there was so strong that any respectable neo-Nazi would make for the nearest emergency exit, frowning.
Charles Johnson had also been invited to attend, but he had not responded to the invitation. When Charles turned on Pamela, who had also attended, we were puzzled. Then, when CJ turned his wrath on Gates of Vienna and Brussels Journal, the thing became a firestorm. We worked like crazy to set everything right, to show that the accusations thrown up by Charles were undocumented and false. A heap of documentation is available at CVF.
Charles failed to acknowledge even the most obvious of this. Including the rather amusing fact that the tiny Belgian neo-Nazi group detests the Vlaams Belang for their close ties to Jewish circles.
The notion that Charles acts like Antifa and other left-wing extremists is correct. In particular, Charles used Øyvind Strømmen as his primary source, without fact-checking the details. Fjordman wrote about the connection to the Swedish group EXPO, whose founder has the outspoken wish to see the West do down in a sea of suffering. Nice friends Charles associates with...
The situation originally landed in sortof a stalemate. The notion that some broad, fascist-like resurgence exists in Europe made some rounds, and I addressed it in an article on EuropeNews. Interestingly, I took offense of the use of the expression 'Young Turks', because I knew about the historical Young Turks and didn't like the use of that moniker. Turned out it wasn't meant quite like that :)
Then, when Diana West wrote about Pro Köln, Charles resumed his disassociation games. Next, he kicked Andrew Bostom. He shouldn't have done that. Anyone who has met Andrew, or read his book about Antisemitism would know that Andrew is a wonderful and resourceful fellow, a good friend to have.
So, this time Charles frowns at Robert. The successive rounds of frowning from CJ makes this almost a badge of honour.
Little Green Footballs (a link from here would be pointless) is an opinion-machine, while JihadWatch represents years and years of investigation, research and actual knowledge. Which Robert fortunately has put into book form for us all to read and learn from. Charles does not exactly match up.
Still, it's worth remembering that Charles and his blog did a great job right after 9/11, when he stood up against the evil that had hit us practically out of nowhere. For years, Little Green Footballs was the big, strong man of the counter-jihad efforts, and being linked to from LGF was an honour. How times change!
History aside, it's time to get back to work. CJ may, like some deadly wounded Boromir, pluck a few arrows and make some more noise, but he is largely pushing himself backwards, away from the action. He's more interested in the election than in countering Jihad anyway, his relevance in the struggle against Islamism is fading.
I'm increasingly finding that we are facing a problem that is much more complex than simply Islam, and that we need to deal with some severe problems of neglect within our own political systems, as exemplified by the latest developments in Belgium.
Understanding democracy and standing up for its core values is what we need to do.
It is no coincidence that one of the most successful efforts in this respect has been the Danish Free Press Society, which over a few years has become one of the strongest public voices in the matters.
We have work at hand. Interesting times.
Posted by: Henrik at November 1, 2008 4:34 AM
Cant say I didnt see this coming. You are better off without LGF anyway. Its not what it was.
Posted by: Elric66 at November 1, 2008 4:38 AM
Charles over the last while has become more and more an ego-maniac who bans anyone who disagrees even slightly with his party line.
The only posters he doesn't ban are those who lick his boots. They are the ultimate yes-men. A brainless mob. Ignore them.
I've been reading JW for years, I still remember when Hugh came on board. (I remember asking him if he was married!). Robert is a man of the utmost integrity and I completely trust his judgement.
Posted by: Silvester at November 1, 2008 4:44 AM
Robert
I had never been a fan of either Charles Johnson or LGF, but after reading about the disputes over the various European parties, like Vlaams Belang, and his rift with Fjordman and others, I had long concluded that he was suspect. However, what did it for me was his endorsement of the jihad against the Serbs.
One thing I do think you should do - re-examine all the groups that he had previously disowned on the basis of LGF independently - like Vlaams Belang, and come to his own conclusions about whether they are what they're alleged to be. If he concludes that they are racist, he should explain why Diana West, Fjordman, Baron Boddisey et al are wrong about them. If he concludes that they aren't, he should include them in the list of allies against Jihad, and refute the basis on which the previous assumptions were made. After all, this is not about one measly blogger, but rather, about whether potential vehicles for confronting Islamic supremacy in Europe are legitimate standard bearers of the non-racist anti-Islamic movement.
One question about Charles Johnson - is he European? If not, how can he claim to know more about what's going on that side of the pond than native Europeans? And worse - how can he harangue them on what they ought to be doing, when they are the ones living the daily realities of European life and he's not?
He and Lawrence Auster are 2 sides of the same coin. I thought that it was only a matter of time before you were on his excrement list, and the only thing I was interested in was whether he'd dump you or you'd dump him. I was hoping for the latter, but given how he's also fallen out with Atlas Shrugs, Diana West, I'm not surprised that it's the latter which has happened.
Posted by: Infidel Pride at November 1, 2008 5:00 AM
One more thing - the headline says 'Excommunicated'. Whoever made CJ the pope of the anti Jihad movement? How did we miss the memo?
Posted by: Infidel Pride at November 1, 2008 5:12 AM
Dear Robert, if you're a neo-Nazi, then I am the Queen of England.
I think what's happened is that Charles has let the people who massage his ego, also affect his once-balanced viewpoint.
After all, there's the old adage of "divide and conquer".
It's something that Charles never saw coming, nor would he think that he'd be one of it's victims. How very sad.
Posted by: Jerusalem Posts at November 1, 2008 5:36 AM
Late comments rarely get read, but here's one anyway. Following 9/11, LGF and CJ was like the many of us, trying to figure out what happened, and he had a good nose for finding the lie in Saudi- and US-government speak. He didn't know the answers, but he had a good sense for falsehoods. He did good work, getting others like yourself on the net and targeting Saudi falsehoods, but around 2004, when the site exploded following his demonstration of the falsehood of the CBS documents, things slipped. In time he became a good news source, but not much else. With the battle over GoV, he lost more of my attention, but stayed on my daily rounds.
But when he went after Andy Bostom, and Bostom revealed what CJ was doing, I drew my lines. One day I noticed I was getting through my daily rounds of blogs more quickly. For weeks I had not visited LGF, and I hadn't even noticed.
CJ, for all his technical talents, remains a musician at heart, a profession which requires great discipline in its own right, but is not known for intellectual rigor. I've often noticed the disconnect between the Frank Zappa quotation in the sidebar, and the creature Zappa would have abhorred in the posts.
As for you (all of you) at JW, you've done yeoman's service in your publications and your support, direct and indirect, to those of us in the trenches trying to shape US policy. God bless you and thank you.
Posted by: longtime lurker at November 1, 2008 5:43 AM
I wonder if Charles knows that the now strong anti-immigration parties in Europe aren't all racist (but they're being portrayed in the media as such) - they're just trying to protect our way of life.
When this happens in America and it starts flooding with Muslim immigrants, then I'm sure that Charles et al will see sense and understand how we over the pond feel.
Robert is the only one to write what's really going on in Europe, especially here in the UK, where being white and British means that you'll be discriminated against. London is now more than 56% immigrants, of which a great number are Muslim. It's the taxpayer who has to carry the burden of this forced immigration, and there's no national party willing to challenge this policy forced on us by the communist EU state.
Posted by: Jerusalem Posts at November 1, 2008 5:48 AM
Another message of support, but first a warning about the use of "Guilt by Association" which was outlawed here in the UK until fairly recently. These days in the UK there is ANPR (Automatic car Number Plate Recognition) and the associated database which stores details of all car movements for at least 5 years (the police do not know how to use the "delete" key). It is there to be data mined whenever the police want to. One of the announced intentions of the police was to discover who travelled together with known criminals. So if one has inadvertently travelled between two cities at about the same time and at about the same speed as a known criminal, they intend to ask the innocent to account for themselves. It is this ghastly police state nightmare that the use of guilt by association will have us march boldly towards. But clearly others are far too righteous to notice the effect of their name calling.
As for Robert, or indeed anyone else on the JihadWatch team, in my years reading the posts here I see only honest warm human compassion for those who are or who might be afflicted by Islam's ever bolder jihad. Facts, yes. Hate, No. It is rather sad that the Islamicists and their fellow travellers have begun to equate 'provable fact' with 'hate'. But look at the history of any totalitarian state or system and it is an inevitable step.
It is also blindingly obvious that those who equate the Brussels Journal, Fjordman, Vlaams Belang, and many others, with Hitler's Reich have not been to Europe recently. They have not seen the damage done in the enforced multiculturalism that is really only Islamism in a skin. But fear not. When the US has elected President Barack Hussain Obama in a few days time, then the US will start down this road as well; just follow our footmarks.
In the meantime Robert please be assured that you are NOT a neo-Nazi, or a neo-anything else that the Left wish to promote to a figure of hate.
Posted by: Jeff at November 1, 2008 6:11 AM
The caniballistic Lizards unhinged, again!
The LGF'ers are the Koz Kidz all over, just a bit more faschist. CJ's morally supreme sycopants all sing in unison, no dissent allowed. And the chief moralist doesn't even realize how ridiculous that makes him: "everybody is entitled to my own opinion"...
hahahah!
Posted by: sheik yer'mami at November 1, 2008 6:13 AM
I'm sorry to see you falsely accused,
Mr. Spenser.
This accusation is absurd and outrageous.
I concur with Jerusalem Posts and many of the other commenters.
Charles Johnson has lost his objectivity and apparently, his ability to reason.
Something is very wrong when a man attacks his friends in such a manner.
at November 1, 2008 6:17 AM
MmmH ...a choice between Fjordman's contributions and CJ's contributions. Fjordman contributes essays that address the nub of the problem in a way that Mr Spencer ( an lets face it Mr Fitzgerald) cannot.... while CJ's contributions are but fairy floss...the break was always inevitable...Spencer should have forced the issue earlier.
Posted by: David Xavier at November 1, 2008 6:27 AM
I noticed, after reading several of Johnson's comments at LGF, he says it's "Mr. Spenser made his choice."
No Charles, you are the one who made "the choice,"
and you are the one that has chosen to make an enemy out of a good and honest man, and to smear him with the worst of lies.
It's past time you honestly examine yourself, Charles, and ask yourself why you did such a horrid thing to your friend. Is your ego so big, you no longer have room for friends?
I don't comment often, Mr. Spenser, but I want you to know I appreciate all the hard work you do exposing Jihad and educating us.
And you are one of the most courteous men I know of.
Thanks!
at November 1, 2008 6:27 AM
My apologies for mispelling your name,
Mr. Spencer. It shall not happen again. :^)
This is what happens when I stay up all night.
at November 1, 2008 6:36 AM
Mr. Spencer:
Have you ever considered you seem to fall out with just about everyone? That almost everyone else in the world does not agree with you? Please think about how it is that everyone else who is wrong is considered right and how you can learn from this.
Perhaps the answer is that it is not really about whether you are right or wrong but how you present your arguments and yourself through your website. You can learn from this; people tend to agree or at least go along with people that they like. Perhaps its time to ask yourself which is better: to be successful in convincing others or to be quick in pointing out where others are wrong.
at November 1, 2008 6:44 AM
Danish Dynamite:
Hugh has discussed that as a last resort, invoking peaceful and UN-endorsed population exchange models such as the Czechs dealing with the Sudeten Germans after World War II.
In other words, he wrote about the possible, last-resort use of what was an anti-Nazi measure that was not genocidal or murderous, and that had the approval of the world community. To characterize this as some kind of incipient neo-Nazism would be the height of unfairness -- not that I expect fairness from LGF after the way things went down last night and after some commenters (medaura, MPH, Killgore Trout, etc.) have been allowed free rein to libel me there for months.
Cordially
Robert Spencer
at November 1, 2008 6:59 AM
Robert,
Sometimes it takes years for the ego-maniac in some people to really go public. Those like you that run a good show for years and years do not seem to have that problem and continue to be just the extraordinary writer of objective books that most of us believe you are. I believe that anyone who would call you a racist is either deluded or Islamic.
Posted by: Spot on at November 1, 2008 7:00 AM
Here's another voice of support, Mr Spencer.
The self-anointed Grand Inquisitor Charles Johnson is not really worth further comment.
Posted by: Ernest T Bass at November 1, 2008 7:04 AM
Dear Mr. Spencer,
I've been reading JW on a regular basis for a few years, and have read all your books. It should be obvious to even the most casual observer that you've consistently and clearly taken a stand against racism, hatred, and fascism in all its forms. I believe your approach is the right one, as it avoids blurring the issues. You have my wholehearted support. May your courage and honesty be blessed.
As for Charles Johnson, though I commend his past work against jihad, I disagree with many of his positions and certainly with his methods. I just don't read LGF, but I must say I'm disappointed he would tolerate and even initiate attacks against your work and your character. The facts prove him wrong on this.
Certainly, the Brussels Journal, Gates of Vienna, and Fjordman focus more on immigration and the demographics of Europe. Understandably so. But again, as a regular reader of GoV and Fjordman, I know they're no fascists or closet nazis, quite the contrary. Fjordman is an extraordinary blogger and intellectual, one of the most interesting I've read. These people are free to tackle controversial topics like demographics and the preservation of European culture, and it doesn't weaken their stand against jihad.
In any case, thank you for your excellent work! You continue to amaze me.
All the best,
Martin
Posted by: Martin at November 1, 2008 7:06 AM
The tragedy of all of this is that, as far as I understand things, you and Charles were friends before this.
I'm very sorry that you had to endure this, Mr Spencer. Though I rarely comment, I'm an avid reader and as many have said, it's obvious from your writings that you are anything but a neo-nazi or whatever the latest insult to hurl is. You're an honest and forthright man.
The greater tragedy is that this will now be used by your opponents as a very effective smear. If I could offer a prediction, it's that this will be brought up time and time again now when you are debating. "Your former ally has called you a racist, ergo you are a racist!"
Charles has done more damage than he probably realises.
Posted by: Archonix at November 1, 2008 7:13 AM
Lek:
I am quite sure that I could present my arguments more effectively, but in this case there are several problems with your assertions:
1. I don't actually fall out with almost everyone. The people I fall out with are not anti-jihadists, and I fall out with them because they are not. When it comes to anti-jihadists, I haven't fallen out with any of them except for two, who have themselves entirely initiated and provoked the conflict. Charles Johnson is the second of these two.
2. In fact, recently a rather prominent anti-jihad activist was gracious enough to write me to say that after holding for a long time to the view that Islam had been hijacked, he had come to realize that I had been right all along, and that there was a problem within Islam that had to be dealt with. This was whatever you would call the opposite of a falling out. I will not name him here but anyone who watches these things closely will have noticed a change in his public pronouncements.
3. The cognitive dissonance in the LGF position runs very deep: I am in close collaborative contact with some people Charles still counts as on the right side. If what he were saying were true, they would shun me and others whom they work with often and have appeared with publicly. Will he excommunicate them also, because they work with me? This will become clearer in the coming weeks, and if he does, his position will be shown to be absurd. As if that weren't obvious already.
4. Charles Johnson entirely provoked our "falling out," and is entirely responsible for it, and it had nothing to do with "arguments" I present. It had to do with my not disliking people he dislikes. For him to anathematize me because I don't share his judgments 100% is schoolyard bully behavior -- and the schoolyard bully is not I.
Cordially
Robert Spencer
at November 1, 2008 7:13 AM
I wouldn't worry about listening to a second or third Fiddle when the first one is available and plays so well.
The left eventually shows how unhinged its door are.
Posted by: flowerknife_us at November 1, 2008 7:14 AM
LGF is cliquesville,a self congratulatory bunch of sycophants who not infrequently succumb to lynch mob mode.Hypocrisy and double think abounds, such as the condemnation of Robert's so- called support of genocide while at the same time sanctioning the mass murder of Serbs. Absurd.
Posted by: johndoe at November 1, 2008 7:15 AM
I'm a more recent banned from LGF, so if you don't mind me saying, Mr. Spencer, I know now I'm in great company.
LGF was once a great site, but now it has somehow succumbed to a bizarre madness (which I'll attribute to the Obamessiah) that has infected Charles Johnson's ability to accept dissenting opinion. But LGF is his game, and members must abide by his rules, however unreasonable and even if they change day by day.
But that doesn't stop us from playing elsewhere. :)
Posted by: DJM at November 1, 2008 7:16 AM
Robert ..... I am glad you have posted this issue
for some time now.... I have not any more posted anything coming from .... Charles Johnson
Very disappointing behavior by Charles Johnson has actually made him to myself irrelevant indeed
At the end ... it will be Charles' loss .... not Yours Robert .... and certainly not anyone elses
Sad ..... but he's just killed his own work in doing what he does
Where is the freedom in his behavior ?
Nowhere !
After having my own website destroyed 3 times by people who act like Charles ..... and constantly being attacked .... Just like You Robert ....
I take this opportunity to ask WHO IS OUT THERE willing to help to run my site (I honestly cannot pay for such service help ... since I already pay a lot out of my own pocket... plus my site server) ..... and obviously a person of the kind like Robert's views and my own ..... who can have some share on the site ....
Please contact me ... at iii44@aol.com
Under the motto;
The world is a dangerous place, not because of those who do evil, but because of those who look on and do nothing.
--Albert Einstein
at November 1, 2008 7:17 AM
To our European friends,
Although people like Robert Spencer and Geert Wilders are clearly on the good side of the anti-jihad movement, there are also genuine fascists and racists out there. I'm very sensitive to that question. I strongly support Israel and cherish our civilization based on freedom and individual rights, irrespective of color, creed, or culture. It's important to distinguish between anti-jihadists who defend universal human rights, and actual racists and bigots.
To that effect, I've been trying to learn more about European parties who oppose jihad and Muslim immigration, for good or bad reasons. From my ill-informed North American perspective, here are my impressions so far.
Good guys:
Dansk Folkeparti (Denmark)
Partij voor de Vrijheid (Netherlands)
Schweizerische Volkspartei (Switzerland)
Demokratene (Norway)
Mouvement pour la France (France)
Not sure, but seem rather ok:
Lega Nord (Italy)
Freiheitliche Partei Österreichs (Austria)
Bündnis Zukunft Österreich (Austria)
Vlaams Belang (Belgium)
Highly questionable:
British National Party (UK)
Sverigedemokraterna (Sweden)
Not good:
Front National (France)
I've already brought this up in past comments, but I still don't have an accurate picture. If anyone knows more about these parties or other ones, please share the information. Especially if we have compelling reasons to change my "ratings" above.
Posted by: Martin at November 1, 2008 7:26 AM
Martin, I can't precisely vouch for the BNP but I will say this: it's a very schizophrenic party. It was formed out of a genuine nazi party but much of its membership is not even remotely racist.
My problem with them is that they're statists. I have a hard time dealing with statists. They do have a nasty habit of going bad on you.
Posted by: Archonix at November 1, 2008 7:50 AM
Robert
I'm not really interested in debating what Hugh said or meant. Personally I don't believe anyone has a god given right to remain in any country outside the country of their original citizenship(I would say birth, but some/many are born in foreign countries). Therefore I don't see a problem with discussing or suggesting mass deportations of (muslim) immigrants.
When that's said, I find his "100 things Europe can do to protect itself"(http://jihadwatch.org/archives/019755.php) post far from being what you describe. Aside from deportation there's mostly suggestions of (gross) discrimination. It's possible it may have been pure conjecture and a list of "last resorts", but it doesn't explicitly say so.
Anyway, it's of no real import to me, but it is something that can and probably will be used against you in the future, and I'm amazed it hasn't been used against you yet(except by me, when we were discussing counter-jihad strategy and human rights).
Regards
Posted by: DanishDynamite at November 1, 2008 7:51 AM
Sorry, much s/b most.
Posted by: Archonix at November 1, 2008 7:52 AM
Martin, a few comments on your list:
Vlaams Belang is an important player here. They take some 25 % of the vote in Flandern, the larger constituent country of the Belgian state. In their beginnings, there might have been connections to extremist circles, but they have been cut clean 15+ years ago. VB is a straight-out conservative party who focuses on the rule of law, the right for Flemish self-determination and the free markets. They are as far from fascism as is almost possible. I have personally worked with these people for three years and find them civil, rational and absolutely devoid of bigotry. Also, they have close connections to the Jewish community of Antwerp etc., and are supporting the bilateral treaties between Flandern and Israel.
Unfortunately, they are being smeared by their leftist opponents in Belgium, and are subject to some rather rude behaviour from the side of the Belgian authorities. Usually we assume that the state, the courts etc. are playing fair, and that the judgements from these courts constitute a reasonable assessment of what has gone down, and what crimes have been committed. But this is Belgium, and thus a different game. The incidents I know are surprisingly clear, yet hardly anyone speaks up against the injustice that goes down in that country.
My opinion is that VB belongs with the 'Good guys'. If they manage to make Flandern independent, their country may easily become an anti-Jihad stronghold, due to their strong commitment to the Rule of Law and civil liberties.
As for SverigesDemokraterne, they were initially on the 'hit list' of Charles Johnson. But they provided detailed documentation and refutation for each item they were accused of, and Charles actually backed down, seeing further attacks as futile.
The situation in Sweden is quite problematic, where speaking openly against immigration and/or Islam will get you in a lot of trouble fast. Political freedom in that country (I'm Danish - it's quite distressful to watch our formerly strong neighbours fall flat like this) is subdued, the freedom to express alternative views limited. SD is doing what they can to combat runaway immigration. I object to SD being grouped with BNP, whom I plain out don't trust.
Extensive documentation about VB and SD can be found at Center for Vigilant Freedom, who dilligently dissected everything Charles threw at them.
As for FPÖ (founded by the recently-deceased Jörg Haider), they had some strange alliances, and Israeli commenters have a cautious position on them. I think their position on your list as 'Largely OK' is suitable. Am hoping, though, that they will make a stand for Israel, so they'll one day qualify to move up to the 'Good guys'.
Posted by: Henrik at November 1, 2008 8:01 AM
Danish Dynamite:
Since you are "not really interested in debating what Hugh said or meant," I will not bother to discuss further the specifics of what he wrote there or elsewhere.
Ultimately Hugh is Hugh and I am Spencer. I am responsible for what I write and he is responsible for what he writes, and the fact that he is on staff here does not mean that I agree with him 100%.
Likewise I would advise against your assuming that Raymond accepts and subscribes to every position I have ever taken. At this site, unlike others, we are not hostile to a multiplicity of views.
Attempts to hang me by using something that Hugh or some commenter has written here tacitly bear witness to the fact that it is impossible to find inflammatory language or recommendations in anything I myself have written. And as far as Hugh goes, I would caution against taking any of his writings in isolation from all his work: the whole of his thought is not always contained in one single piece, any more than it is for any other writer. I myself am confident that Hugh is a passionate defender of Western civilization and Constitutional rule. Allegations to the contrary generally only demonstrate the mean-spiritedness of the one doing the alleging.
Cordially
Robert Spencer
at November 1, 2008 8:02 AM
Robert l believe you have become more credible from your success for all the work that you have done, from your website, your books all of them rated top in the Best Sellers lists, and actually you go out in this dangerous islamists pc world and lecture at the colleges, gov't groups. l have on occaision visited LGF and lately l have been dismayed at also the attacks of those who believe other than Darwin. There seems to be no allowance for other ways of thinking as CJ seems to clamp down on people's freedom of choice. And now his attacks on you only places him lower in my eyes and others. Robert your friends, family, and those who have read your works know you not to have one once of racism, neonazism what ever the charges from a fanatic it seems from this Charles. God Bless your works and those of us regular people who have learned so much from you!
Posted by: ZenaWarriorPrincess at November 1, 2008 8:33 AM
In response to Martin:
I'm not an expert on the agenda of the political parties you mention, but Vlaams Belang is the most important party on your list (and perhaps Robert's reopening the link to people who are that closely associated to VB is the real reason for why he was "excommunicated"). If they succeed in breaking Flanders free from Belgium, then it would be a huge defeat for the multiculturalists islamist sympathisizing elites and really change the dynamics of European politics. I don't believe they are "closet nazis" in any way, as there is no way that a racist party would get 25% of votes in a European country that was occupied by the nazis during World War II. But because they are perhaps the biggest threat to the existing order in Europe, the EU elites hate and fear them and they are demonized in every possible way.
Sverigedemokraterna are a marginal party, but Sweden is the most dhimmified anti-Israel country in Europe, so I wouldn't trust any labelling of them as racists. Every body who criticizes Sweden's insane immigrant policies is automatically called a racist in Sweden.
Posted by: European Crusader
at November 1, 2008 8:38 AM
I don't know how long I've been registered at LGF, but I didn't start reading it on a regular basis until Charles attacked Pamela. I like Pamela, and I really liked the way she stood up for herself during that incident. But I also try very hard to get both sides of a story before I make up my mind so I followed a lot of Charles' posts about it to get it from his perspective.
He lost me as soon as he went after Fjordman. Charles linked to several of Fjordman's articles. The disconnection between how Charles presented Fjordman's views, and what Fjordman actually wrote in the articles Charles linked to was typical, to me, of how Liberals operate: Demonize someone because they disagree with you, smear them with your own opinion of who you think they are, don't read of listen to anything they have to say, and do everything you can to make sure no one else listens to them either.
LGF is basically a cult of personality. It is almost impossible to follow the comments there unless you are there 24/7 because each post will have several hundred comments in a very short period of time. As a former message board junkie myself, I understand the allure of a place like LGF. It's so easy to get caught up in the action, and I was looking for just that kind of thing. But it's just an echo chamber.
I tried the Lounge for a while but I gave up on that, too. If you don't toe the line, you're attacked. And heaven forbid you say anything against Charles. I was there one night when a kid joined the Lounge and it was pretty obvious that English was not his first language. He was just asking questions, but the others didn't like it. Somebody must have emailed Charles because he showed up. Whoa! You would have thought the King had entered the room.
Everybody was in a race to tell Charles what this kid had been saying. So stupid me kept correcting them. "That's not what he said, he said this..."
I got IM'd and was asked "WHY ARE YOU DEFENDING THIS GUY?". Cripes. Charles banned him.
Anyone who reads what Fjordman actually writes can only respect him. Same with Robert Spencer.
Posted by: Jaynie59 at November 1, 2008 8:43 AM
I have been banned from LGF twice, I suspect because I did not toe the party line. At the time I was surprised because my posts were neither profane nor seemingly offensive but the ideological lock-down there is extraordinary, dissent is not tolerated at all.
To see Robert Spencer libeled like this confirms my fear that Charles Johnson has simply lost the plot. Spencer goes out of his way (as does Brussels Journal, Fjordman, and Gates of Vienna) to be straight and even handed in the face of a fair amount of provocation.
These cries of racism and fascism against these people simply do not stack up - it is lazy guilt by association.
Perhaps Charles should visit Europe some time. There are fascist parties here - the BNP, the NF, and more. I can't help thinking it would help his analysis to meet with the fascists and then meet with RS, BJ, and co. He might notice a few differences.
I have no doubt he'd secure interviews if he were minded to leave Southern California.
at November 1, 2008 8:46 AM
Robert, the plain truth is that this site is several levels above LGF as far as news articles and your analysis of them, and all things Islamic, is concerned.
One of the things I appreciate about this site is that you meticulously stick to the facts and you don't need to resort to the language of the bloke at the end of the bar who's had a few pints and is setting the world to rights.
Nor do you have a "Pro American", "Anti British" or"Anti European" agenda, even to a small extent when discussing the threat of Jihad. This is also neither a "Left wing" or "Right wing" site and does not push any Christian agenda, while still noting that our societies do have a Christian heritage.
I'm sure like many others, I stopped posting at LGF some time ago as I was fed up with some of the idiotic comments about Europeans in general and British people in particular.
In short, you do a very good job of keeping people on board and educating them.
Posted by: Celsius at November 1, 2008 8:47 AM
It is really sad to see this happening. In the past I've been a big fan of LGF. It was LGF who helped get the ball rolling in the media about Esam Omeish's "jihad is the way" rant to a crowd of Muslim activists in DC. As well as Steven Emerson's Investigative Project on Terrorism. Which of course led to Omeish tendering his resignation from the Va. Commission on Immigration. A position that Tim Kaine appointed him to. Lately though, LGF has sort of gone off the deep end. Especially with what I would call his "anti-creation blog posting binge." It didn't used to be that way on LGF.
Posted by: Amerisrael at November 1, 2008 8:49 AM
I'm sorry to hear that your friendship with CJ, had to end this way, but I'm not surprised that LGF and JW had to go separate ways, seen by the way that LGF have developed. LGF has departed more and more from reality and moved deeper and deeper into paranoia territory -- where even the slightest deviation from the views of CJ will be seen as a hostile and enemy action. And with every “excommunication” the paranoia mode gets an extra notch, and the cheerleaders of the echo room will all applaud each excommunication, while those people with some sanity intact will leave or be excommunicated as well, thus enforcing the party line even stricter.
So don't feel bad that you have been excommunicated, it actually is a badge of honor, and the alternative would have been much worse, if one is to be judged by guilt of association, it is far better to be judged to be in the group of rational and intelligent people than a group that only consists of people walking in lockstep, and have to watch their every move in fear of being the next to be excommunicated.
So when the choice is between being a follower of CJ or being an outcast free to have and voice your opinion and views and associate with whomever you like whether you agree with them or not. Any rational being chooses the latter.
Posted by: Zonka at November 1, 2008 9:15 AM
Robert,
Charles was never your "friend", you were merely a stepping stone for establishing his little empire.
You are in good company. You have joined Pamela Geller, Dr. Paul Williams, myself and several other in Johnson's list of "enemies".
After you interview Sirwaj Wahaj, LGF will have friendly links to the Al Taqwa Mosque!
All the best,
Michael Travis
Posted by: Miluimnik at November 1, 2008 9:20 AM
I haven't read LGF in years, but I click on Spencer's site EVERY day.
And my point is?
Posted by: Aiken Bryce at November 1, 2008 9:20 AM
Robert
Hope you don't let this get you down. I have a small political blog which used to have an emphasis on the Islamic Republic of Iran. One morning I caught a manipulated Iranian photograph which I brought to the Little Green Footballs (a site that I used to donate to, btw) comment section instead of blogging about myself (I was watching my two grandchildren in diapers that day). The manipulated photograph became an international story as it revealed an Iranian attempt to deceive the international community and the traffic load basically shut down LGF for days and brought recognition to Charles from (of all places) the New York Times among others.
My thanks? A hat tip and subsequent banning because Charles didn't like someone in my blogroll.
Posted by: ec marm at November 1, 2008 9:21 AM
Rob! How nice to see you.
Posted by: Natalie at November 1, 2008 9:29 AM
I haven't read LGF in years, but I click on Spencer's site EVERY day.
And my point is?
Posted by: Aiken Bryce at November 1, 2008 9:20 AM
Ditto to about the one millionth power.
CJ and lgf are irrelevant. I hope he reads this.
Completely and totally irrelevant.
Posted by: darcy at November 1, 2008 9:29 AM
Who on Earth still reads LGF anyway? I used to like them, but they haven't been worth the bdanwidth for quite some time now.
They're just jealous because they're so inferior to Jihad Watch, Brussels Journal, and Gates of Vienna. Being called a racist by conservatives is different from being called a racist by liberals. I wouldn't take it seriously. They're not quite as connected to reality as the rest of us, obviously, like anyone who takes issue with Fjordman, Bostom, or Spencer (none of whom actually read anything thye write).
As a conservative, I have to say that I am a firm believer in guilt by association, but there's just no guilt to be found in this case. All three of you guys have taken issue, in print, with the racism inherent in Islam. I'm not even sure that I believe that Bostom is taking the time to write them. I also have to suspect these guys of Judeophobia + projection, which is invariably how this kind of stuff works. People who support Israel are racists. Backward logic.
OT, but good news: My pre-order of 'Stealth Jihad' shipped today, ahead of the estimated ship date! How do I know that it will be better than anything Charles Johnson has ever written?
Posted by: jdamn at November 1, 2008 9:33 AM
Robert,
I've only seen whatever you posted from LGF, never frequented the site myself. However, judging from the many comments here, you haven't lost much.
Amerisrael said: It didn't used to be that way on LGF.
The Democratic Party was once very different as well. They were once devout anti-Communists. Later, Ted Kennedy conferred with the KGB for advice on how to answer Ronald Reagan.
People change. Has LGF been threatened by advertisers? I was unaware that CJ was a former leftist but, if that is the case, he should be very happy under President Obama. Obama just threw journalists from three respected newspapers off his campaign bus whose editorial pages just happened to endorse John McCain. CJ seems to appreciate that mindset.
desidude asks: why isn't the rest of the world clamoring to go to the arab states? or asian states? or african countries? or latin american countries?
Good question. It's why I disregard any group or politician that talks about the US being the source of all that is bad in the world. (That's not entirely true. I make note of them in order to ensure that no one who supports them ever gets my vote.) People are voting with their feet. The one problem is some are coming here to set up New Arabia or New Colombia. Those who come to become Americans and join us in our struggle to preserve our freedom are always welcome. Those who want to set up their own little fiefdoms need to look elsewhere.
How can ANYONE look at Fjordman and see a racist?
Posted by: PMK at November 1, 2008 9:39 AM
Sometimes there is an indefinable line that gets crossed.
Spencer is it. Bostom is it.
I don't look at too much more than the link viewer at LGF so this is news to me, but I cannot imagine
CANNOT
IMAGINE
how the efforts of Spencer and Bostom can POSSIBLY be besmirched.
What chain of logic and self aggrandizement can possibly have led Johnson to this breathtakingly MORONIC conclusion?
He's not just wrong, he is destructive to the main effort on this.
Posted by: epaminondas at November 1, 2008 9:43 AM
Genocide? Genocide implies common genetics. What race is Islam, again?
Posted by: Abscedere at November 1, 2008 10:12 AM
I just saw this story but wanted to add my words of support to Robert. I used to frequent LGF and even tried to register a number of times, but the window was never open when I tried so I was never successful. I still frequented the site, but started to notice that it had a somewhat erratic quality, both in its selection of stories and the way events in the Islamic world were covered. The commentaries from the regulars were sometimes good, but at other times they were downright vicious. Overall, JW/JW has a much more consistent editorial approach, which includes a reasonable policy of moderating comments to keep things respectable, and a more sophisticated and educated set of regular readers than LGF, in my opinion. I pulled LGF out of my list of Bookmarks some time ago, and now only occasionally visit to get a quick sense of what's going on in Europe.
So, sorry to hear about the fall out within the community, but if sides have to be taken I'm with you, Robert.
Posted by: Eastview at November 1, 2008 10:14 AM
United we stand, divided we fall
Now Robert states that he does not affiliate himself with the BNP or Le Pen's Front Nationale, yet these movements in France and the UK are gaining in stature everyday.
I do not vote for the BNP although I am becoming more and more inclined to with the rise of Islam.
I really don't think many of you can understand just what it's like living in London. It really is a SH*THOLE and I really mean that. There are parts of London(where the tourists don't go) that are almost identical to Islamic Countries. There is more and more appeasement daily to Islam. Barclays have just allowed a Saudi Prince to buy 34% into their bank, because they do not want to be Nationalised(Bosses want to keep their exuberant bonuses up to 100 times their salary). Gordon Brown is off 'begging' to the Gulf states and what will be the outcome? Have a look at SIOE's article here and see the demands of the Muslim Council of Britain's demands for their Muslim children here in the UK, very possible if Brown is doing what he's doing.
It's like a nightmare every day seeing just how the UK is becoming Islamised. I feel like the guy at the beginning of the remake of Invasion of the Body Snatchers(Donald Sutherland, Jeff Goldblum), who ran around the streets saying "they're here, they're here", with not one person interested.
Going back to the start of the post and the BNP, more precisely, they are actually the only party in the UK that is actively trying to combat the BNP and I believe will do so effectively. The EDP are not strong enough. UKIP, see Muslims as Peaceful/Moderate and Radicals, something many of us see as rubbish as Islam is Islam and Muslims are either passive or active as they both want the same goal - Islamisation, but go around getting it completely differently. Then there is Veritas, which is more about stopping the absorbance of the UK into the EU, more than anything else(a good cause most definately but not really has plans on Islamisation).
What I am trying to say is this, by alienating yourself from the BNP and Front Nationale, for example or any other group you believe to be Extreme Right Wing or Fascist etc etc, you end up losing a large slice of the 'support' pie.
Why is Islam winning so well in the UK? Simple - It has the support of the Left Wing that is completely controlling the UK.
It is best to stand united with all of the enemies of Islam because once Islam is defeated here in the West, can we then draw our attention on sorting out the Racists, the Fascists and the Neo Nazis.
One thing about the Extreme right is that they are dedicated to the cause. Many were really born far too late and to make a quote from Sin City(Dwight on Marv); "He just had the rotten luck of being born in the wrong century. He'd be right at home on some ancient battlefield swinging an axe into somebody's face. Or in a Roman arena, taking his sword to other gladiators like him.
Like it or not, the right are mobilising to face the threat that is Islam and when the sh*t hits the fan and war is here I know who I'd rather have next to me backing me up if given a choice between some Left Wing, liberal twit(incidentally responsible for the whole mess) or a member of the BNP or any other far right group.
By trying to do it on our own we will lose. We are in this position now because we've let the morons in the left allow us to take our guard down, let in our enemies and allow them to segregate themselves off from us in our own countries. Worse still, we've put them into positions of power and influence and allowed them to institute their laws and culture as well, something that was inevitably going to cause conflict.
Now before any of you start harping on that I'm a fascst or a racist, tell that to my 'Black' partner and mixed children. If anyone has more to lose from the extreme right it's me, but then the way I look at it, is that they are like me, they are British, proud of their roots and proud of Britain. They will defend their history and their culture to the death, more than anyone else I know. Many also fail to understand that, people in the right wing, CAN change, they can see that hating people because of their colour is not good, but then when looking at the situation in London, with African gangs killing one another, with no respect for people around them, then you can understand why many feel the way they do.
We should ALL unite together to kick Islam out of the West and then enter into dialogue with the extreme right parties to come to some kind of happy medium for all, otherwise, if we don't, continue to be fragmented then when Islam comes, then that's it, forget about anything other than Islam, Arabis and Islamic Culture. The losses in the West would be huge. Everything you take for granted and that we love would disappear. Remember also that the Far right parties want to protect what Islam wants to destroy and many people forget this.
On a last note to emphasise my point; firstly, the BNP are not a Racist party. All one has to do is read their manifesto and they will see that their policies are beneficial to the majority in the UK and the reason why our country has been in the mess it's been in is because the government has been pandering to the minority. The BNP have been demonised by every party and I find that simply despicable. They are a legitimate party, they have a following in the UK(that's growing) and by ignoring them, you are ignoring the people who support them. This is NOT democracy and is not what Britain was and should be like.
Secondly, the Scots, lost against the English throughout history because of one thing and that was they were divided. The English were strong, but the Scots were fearless. In many of the battles between the English and the Scots, the Scots not only fought against the English but also against other Scottish Clans, whose Lairds had been bribed by the English King to fight for him.
United we stand and divided we fall. All I can see from looking from outside is continuous in fighting between people who should really unite and muster up all their resources so as they can knock the Conservatives/Labour/Liberal of the top spot and into the political wilderness forever. Otherwise, Islamisation is a matter of time and that time will be around 70 years or so.
You think about it.
Posted by: Richard the Lionheart at November 1, 2008 10:15 AM
Brussels Journal publishes Takuan Seiyo who is easily construed a racist. The horrible and unpleasant thing, though, is he speaks the truth. Don't tell anyone, but I print out everything he writes and read it under the covers with a flashlight! With our future president Obama intimately associated for twenty years with the most repulsively evil and vile black racist imaginable, I just don't CARE much about the 'R' word anymore. I care about what is TRUE.
Posted by: poetcomic1 at November 1, 2008 10:16 AM
Correction :
3rd Paragraph Going back to the start of the post and the BNP, more precisely, they are actually the only party in the UK that is actively trying to combat Islam.......
Posted by: Richard the Lionheart at November 1, 2008 10:19 AM
"KillgoreTrout", head Johnson tool over at LGF, said that genocidal posts are better served over at JW than at LGF and that genocidal comments of 800 to 1000 words will be considered as a separate thread posting by Robert.
See the second Friday "open" thread at LGF. These jokers actually think that they are different from KOS? "Trout" boy makes libelous claims about JW and Spencer with no reprimand from "bicycle boy" Johnson.
Of course, not disimilar from the tactics by Islamists and Islamist apologists, "Trout" boy offers no proof to substantiate his baseless claim.
I say, let blogwars 3.0 commence!
The truth is the truth, no matter who utters it.
Posted by: awake at November 1, 2008 3:11 AM
Not to mention, but I will, this "KT" person misspells the name of Vonnegut's character. It's "Kilgore," one l. So, he's illiterate, too?
Posted by: darcy at November 1, 2008 10:19 AM
I never go to lgf ever. That's intentional redundancy...I went there once years ago and discovered the site was being ruled, not governed.
Rulership turns me off...
And Kilgore Trout??? I remember him from before 911...I tried to get into his head once, but no one was home...Looks like there is still a 'vacant' sign out front...
I have been coming this site, reading and posting almost daily (for better or worse) for a long time. (My how time flies when your having fun).
In my estimation, Spencer talks the talk, and walks the walk.
This makes him a man among men.
Weak minded men that wallow in ego stimulation and intellectual masturbation. Right Kilgore?
Men that can't hold a candle to Spencer's knowledge, stamina, dedication...And courage...
And Racism? I don't like racism, and don't hang around with racists...I have never read or heard Spencer say anything racist...
The issue is jihad, the encroachment of Islamic hegemony and all it's trappings...It is not about who's ego is larger and more demanding.
If LGF, Trout, Bostom, and others, can't stick to the subject, they have lost their value...if they ever had any to begin with...
But look at it on the bright and positive side...
They 'are' making Allah happy...
And you know, anything that makes Allah happy has to be good...Mohammadans never laugh, but they are chuckling over these incidents. Stupid kufrs...
Posted by: duh_swami at November 1, 2008 10:22 AM
Abscedere:
You say:
Genocide? Genocide implies common genetics. What race is Islam, again?
It's true that Islam is not a race, but I want to state again without any possible equivocation: genocide is morally abhorrent, and anyone advocating it is no friend of mine.
That Charles Johnson would allow Killgore Trout and others to libel me with charges that I secretly support genocide is unconscionable. If I were a rich man with time on my hands, I would not let this libel go unchallenged legally.
Cordially
Robert Spencer
at November 1, 2008 10:24 AM
This just raises my already high opinion of you and your website, Robert.
Things like these do not need to swept under the rug.
Intolerant PC villians like Charles Johnson should be exposed and ridiculed where ever possible.
It is a badge of honor that you have been ex-communicated to join the forces of the real Counterjihad.
Posted by: Thunder Pig at November 1, 2008 10:24 AM
Posted the news of your book on mt site...can't wait to read it.
Posted by: storagemanager at November 1, 2008 10:27 AM
Is this why Jihadwatch defends Jews against Islamic tyranny all the time? WOW JW is amazingly deceptive!!! Pro Jews and Jew hating at the same time. Too much glue sniffing over at LGF.
Good grief.
I used to post [a little] at LGF, until I started seeing their little Jihad against Conservative Christian Creationists. Man I was thinking these people rail against politically correct intolerance yet play the role of the hypocrite so vividly over a issue that has no bearing on the problems we presently face in politics. Now this with Robert Spencer is just over the top into la la land.
Its time to anoint Little Green Footballs as a shiny new cult of the secular oddball ostriches.
May they enjoy their eyes & noses full of sand hiding from the Islamic threat.
at November 1, 2008 10:31 AM
Dear Robert,,
I am so sorry this has happened to you. At a time when the Infidel world,, needs to come TOGETHER as a unified force, we have drama like this happening.
Jihad also means,, "divide and conquer", and to see you and Charles divided now,, makes US that much weaker!!
How we will prevail against a force that for 1,400 years,, has been unified, and focused to destroy FREE WILL,, if we cannot put down our own ego and differences,, to STAND STRONG TOGETHER!!
I have been here reading for many years now,, and I have NEVER seen anyone on the staff of Jihadwatch,, write anything I would consider neo-nazi.
I am kinda sad and dismayed to see this post this morning,, our struggle for FREEDOM, has another hit against it, radical islam,, takes ANOTHER chunk of our western way of life, everytime we
bicker amonst ourselves.
Remember,, that the medeival BRUTES want to see us divided, and weakened,, they circle like the predators that they are, just waiting for ANY weakness.
Just look back into their DARK history,, what happened to Robert,, has played out 1,000's of times over 1400 years.
270 million infidels dead,, and counting.
Keep strong,, Robert,, we all love you,, you are one of the MOST brave, BEST Humans on this tiny planet,, without you, many of the readers here would never understand,, what jihad has in store for the FREE WORLD!!!
Love and Light!!
and Bright Samhain Blessings
)0(
solsticewitch13
"don't annoy the bikers,
it's a islam free zone"
at November 1, 2008 10:35 AM
Robert,
I do not know exactly what this is about.
BUT, I know that several Flemish nationalists (of the Vlaams Belang)(not all of them) do not like me only because I speak French as native language. I know too that several Flemish nationalists (not all of them) do not like persons only because they are black or anything else they do not like.
So, I am certain that several people of the Vlaams Belang are racists (not all of them).
The ideology of the Vlaams Belang is not clean and has several problems.
However, there is one point I appreciate in the Vlaams Belang: they are against abortion. I could help them on that topic.
But I do not agree with them many other issues: language, "races", nationalism, ...
The position of the Vlaams Belang as to Islam is not OK as to christianity. The Vlaams Belang wants to put both Muslims and their islamic ideology out; they hate both the siners and the sin (not all of them)!
Christianity requires to love the siner as somebody that is sick in order to cure, save him and to hate the sin. So, as to Christianity, Islam must be hated because it is an evil ideology that destroys the human beings, it is a kind of ideological sickness, but the Muslims must be loved and a way to be cured of islamic sickness must be proposed to them, for example by telling them the truth about their islamic sickness like you do.
at November 1, 2008 10:40 AM
For what it's worth, I support you, Robert. As do the primary administrators of Infidel Bloggers Alliance.
Keep up the great work, and thanks for all you do.
Posted by: pastorius at November 1, 2008 10:41 AM
Coaltaxopeuh
I have never endorsed Vlaams Belang. There are certainly some troubling aspects of the party's past and activities of some of its members, although some of that has been wildly exaggerated and misrepresented. I was at one time fairly sure that they were not a party with whom we should deal, but many, many people who have sound judgment, are not racists or neofascists, and who know more about them than I do, thought otherwise.
That is a fact that one can deal with either by declaring all these people to be fascist sympathizers, as Charles has done, or by considering the possibility that the evidence Charles adduced to show their neofascist tendencies was not open and shut. So I was attempting to keep up good relations with both sides while trying to gather more information.
Charles Johnson has made that impossible. This is what I was referring to when I wrote that he is acting as if simply doubting that people he has labeled neofascist or racist are in fact neofascist or racist makes one in his view neofascist and racist.
That is logically unsound. Combined with his allowing his comments fields to be turned into arenas for rabid and rampant libels of my work and my character and decency as a human being, it puts Charles Johnson beyond the pale. But all this is his doing, not mine.
Cordially
Robert Spencer
at November 1, 2008 10:46 AM
"That Charles Johnson would allow Killgore Trout and others to libel me with charges that I secretly support genocide is unconscionable."
Cordially
Robert Spencer
Posted by: jihadwatch at November 1, 2008 10:24 AM
Interestingly, regarding RS's words above, I went over to lgf a few minutes ago just to check it out, and someone had posted this apt quotation last night:
"False words are not only evil in themselves, but they infect the soul with evil."
— Socrates
CJ - Read and learn, read and learn, Slanderer.
Posted by: darcy at November 1, 2008 10:48 AM
Pastorius:
Thanks. I am very, very grateful.
Yours
Robert
at November 1, 2008 10:49 AM
My apologies to Robert, Rusty and the co-bloggers at TJR.
I was under the impression that everyone at TJR does support you and your work, and while that may be the case, Vinnie is correct in stating that only Rusty officially speaks for TJR.
My choice of words was unfortunate, but my motives were good... and we all know where good intentions get you.
As a result of this, I fear I may have caused you additional anxiety, and that was the very last thing I wished to do. Again, my apologies.
For my part, I now realize that I am not suited to being a member of a group blog, and under the auspices of another person. My candor often overwhelms my discretion, causing unintended conflict... and because of this trend, I will now be taking my leave from The Jawa Report.
I'm not being forced out because of my comments to you - this is my decision, made for personal reasons.
I'd like to thank you for your continued efforts to confront the global jihad, and for your past contributions to my (now defunct) website, Global Defense Group.
I hope we will have an opportunity to communicate or collaborate at some future date.
Sayan (aka Kafir)
Posted by: Kafir_Alalazoo at November 1, 2008 10:52 AM
Spencer can be overly defensive and testy. He can be downright immature and ungentlemanly in email. Anyone ever notice that neither he, nor Fitzgerald ever admit to being mistaken? They are a couple of dogmatic prigs, which is why I started frequenting the far more popular LGF and stopped reading this bookseller's web rag. There is nothing here that anyone cannot learn elsewhere and you get to skip JW's childishness.
P.S. Fitzgerald needs a writing course. The bonehead thinks floridity is a writing virtue.
Posted by: CharlestheCrusader at November 1, 2008 10:53 AM
CharlestheCrusader...Your kidding right?...Charles banned me for asking why a commet was deleted..that is immature.
Posted by: storagemanager at November 1, 2008 10:59 AM
Charles the Crusader:
While all of that may or may not be true, it really has nothing to do with the matter at hand. Charles Johnson did not excommunicate me for being defensive, testy, immature, dogmatic, or priggish. He excommunicated me because I don't share his judgments about some other people, and he has allowed his commenters to libel me repeatedly and outrageously.
I may be a bad guy, I may be not worth reading, and I am well aware that I have many, many faults, but that doesn't excuse his behavior in this case.
Cordially
Robert Spencer
at November 1, 2008 11:03 AM
Posted by: CharlestheCrusader at November 1, 2008 10:53 AM
Say "Hi!" to Johnson for us and tell him what an excellent job you did castigating Spencer and Fitzgerald in a most mature manner.
The difference in quality of comments between the two sites is rarely more profoundly demonstrated than by your offering above.
Back under the rock, you lizard!
Posted by: awake at November 1, 2008 11:06 AM
Uh, excuse me, CharlestheCrusader, I have definitely seen RS and Hugh "admit to being mistaken." These are rare, however, because most often THEY ARE NOT MISTAKEN.
LGF? Popular? Oh, that's funny! LOL - keep trying! Only Losers like you frequent lgf, oh, and you're a "dogmatic prig," too. You like the name-calling re-directed to you? In addition, if anyone is "childish," it's immature, ego-maniac CJ. And, yourself, I see.
And the insults continue! No, YOU need a writing course, you bonehead. You think your vicious little rant is a "writing virtue?" LOL!
You need to lose the "Crusader" part of your nic as no real Crusader would have you. Only Pretenders, such as CJ.
Posted by: darcy at November 1, 2008 11:08 AM
Very unfortunate. Jihadwatch, LGF, FPM & Drudge are my mainstays.
I'll keep going to LGF every bit as frequently as in the past for the info that can be gleaned, but if it's a choice, it's Robert 10 times out of 10.
Unlike Charles Johnson, Robert Spencer's contribution to the cause of human freedom certainly transcends the relative worth his own web-site.
Posted by: Cornelius at November 1, 2008 11:09 AM
Robert,
What amazes me the most is that the West is facing the greatest threat to its very existence and that is merely through population increase, by Islam and that is not illegal. However, everyone is still bickering with one another. All parties who oppose the Islamisation of their countries should unite together to fight against their common foe.
Remember that without the help of Russia in the 1st & 2nd World Wars, there would have been no Europe and Britain would have been defeated, because their would have been no Russian Front.
We disagreed with their Communism completely but Russia saw the threat of Germany as much as we did.
All parties should be uniting together as in the list of Martin's above.
If we continue to fight amongst each other, the Islam's plan will have worked.
They are following classic Gramscian Hegemony in the West. One part of Islam is attacking with the Sword while the other maintains its peaceful approach. While this happens, Muslims have more and more babies who will grow up to be Jihadis.
We argue about "whose side to be on" and "we can't associate with them because they believe this and that".
United we stand and divided we fall and the West is very much divided.
Posted by: Richard the Lionheart at November 1, 2008 11:10 AM
Over 125 supportive posts, and one attack by Charlesthecrusader...125/1...Your outnumbered Charles...
Where's Abdullah to make this fair and balanced...I would think he would be all over this thread like fly a fly on fly paper. A fatal attraction...Where's Kilgore Trout?
Posted by: duh_swami at November 1, 2008 11:13 AM
Mr. Spencer, I owe a great deal to you and this site. My educational background in religion (both Jewish & Roman Catholic) and social studies (via late 70's Public School) was extremely lacking. Although I was always a good student, the material provided was void of issues related to Islam and the Middle East. As for politics, any and all discussion related to politics was a no-starter for me. I didn't - and didn't care to understand any of it until 9/11.
Even then, I didn't discover the urgency of needing to study and comprehend more about these topics until my oldest child began his university studies and I began using a computer for the first time - to use e-mail to stay in contact with him. It was through one of the early e-mail exchanges from him that I was introduced to FrontPageMag.com which brought my attention to Jihadwatch.org in 2004. JihadWatch has been a daily read for me ever since. I have since established a personal library of each and every book Spencer has written, along with many books recommended on this site. These books (and videos) fill several shelves here at my home as well as at local public & religious libraries. Many of these books are stuffed with printed copies of Fitzgerald's & Fjordman's & Bostom's essays posted on these pages.
There is not ONE item I've come across from LGF that I felt was worth saving. That in and of itself says it all.
Over all these years, I have come to admire Robert Spencer as a dignified man whose scholarly tenacity is punctiliously tempered by the golden rule.
Robert asked:
What heinous crime have I committed?
If there is one thing I've learned here over the years. . .as with 9/11 . . .that is a misguided question.
As a fellow banned member, it is a great honor to find myself in such good company.
*****
ec marm @ 9:21 AM - you are too modest. I recall the incident and the many technical details you posted. I admire your skill and the spirit in which you offered your expertise during that period.
Without the information and technical details you provided, there was no story. Such are the lessons that particular lizard will soon learn the hard way.
at November 1, 2008 11:20 AM
Charles the Crusader:
Oh, and by the way, allow me to admit to being mistaken:
I was wrong about Charles Johnson.
Cordially
Robert Spencer
at November 1, 2008 11:23 AM
Charles the Crusader:
Oh, and by the way, allow me to admit to being mistaken:
I was wrong about Charles Johnson.
Cordially
Robert Spencer
Robert,You're not the only one to feel that way.
at November 1, 2008 11:27 AM
Don't you just love the drive by drivel from "CharlestheCrusader" lamenting "JW's childishness" while calling Hugh a "bonehead"...
Just what I come to expect from septic think tank chameleons over at little green hypocrites.
Posted by: revparadigm at November 1, 2008 11:29 AM
Charles Johnson has become delusional. Therefore, being banned, de-linked or shunned by LGF should today be worn as a badge of honor.
CJ's "research" seems to consist exclusively of either Google searches or parroting someone else's work and then making connections that exist only in his imagination. He does no genuine leg work of his own--and it shows. The best recent example of this delusional state is his fantasy that the Discovery Institute and the Institute for Creation Research are funded by radical Islam.
Keep up the good work, Robert!
at November 1, 2008 11:35 AM
Unfortunately, something seems to have happened to Mr. Johnson a couple of months ago. He made up his mind, obviously after being fed by some dishonest people. The "facts" he used were false; this was demonstrated to him; he chose not to accept the falseness. And so he's on a crusade against anybody not subscribing to his views.
One can only hope he will realize some day that he's been had for good.
at November 1, 2008 11:40 AM
I just went over there, as I no doubt should not have, and waded back into the swamps. And I saw this:
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/showc/1023/6140299
Probably he will block the link again, but you can paste it into a new window and it will work.
1023 Charles 10/31/2008 7:28:22 pm PDTUnbelievable.
If I were you, Robert, I'd ask myself some serious questions about what I was doing to encourage the open support for genocide expressed by jdow.
Good luck indeed.
The background of this is that this "jdow" character posted a pro-genocide comment there, and this is supposed to be my fault. The evidence? Well, apparently "jdow" has commented here too.
Do I know who "jdow" is? No, I do not. Is he any different from anyone else who posts here whom I don't know? Is he any different from Abdullah Mackay, who posts here often, and sharply disagrees with everything I write, or from any other commenter here?
The only possible way that I could be responsible for someone promoting genocide is if I promote it myself. So: can Charles Johnson or anyone else produce a scrap of evidence from my writings to show that I have encouraged open support, covert support, or any support for genocide?
Of course he can't. But that he would stoop to this defamation shows what he really is, and what he is about. It makes me sorry that I ever counted him as a friend or ally.
It is a shame.
Robert Spencer
Posted by: jihadwatch at November 1, 2008 11:42 AM
"What heinous crime have I committed?"
-- from Robert Spencer, in the article above
"Kakoe sdelal ya durnoe delo/I ya li razvratitel' i zlodej?"
A variant for Mladen, and Ruslan Tokhchukov, Enraged Since 1999, and others who constitute, linguistically, the Greater Slavic Delegation to this website.
Posted by: Hugh at November 1, 2008 11:44 AM
The above link is already "Forbidden." How does that happen, btw?
Posted by: darcy at November 1, 2008 11:48 AM
Robert,
This is devastating news. I am still a big fan of LGF because of its valuable service to the last two elections and the anti-jihad movement. Even though I never believed that Fjordham, Gates of Vienna, or Paul Belien were racists, I felt at the time that they were turning a blind eye to problematic aspects of the political parties they were supporting.
When they had the falling out, I immediately sent an email to Gates of Vienna expressing my reservations about the groups they supported. And even though I mostly sided with Charles, I invited them to make use of the infamous pro-Islamic quote by Adolf Hitler (from his Table Talk) to test the sympathies of the groups they support. One week later, Paul Belien published an article using the quote I gave to the Baron:
"Had Charles Martel not been victorious at Poitiers – already, you see, the world had fallen into the hands of the Jews – so gutless a thing was Christianity! – then we should in all probability have been converted to mohammedanism, that cult which glorifies heroism and which opens the seventh Heaven to the bold warrior alone. Then the Germanic races would have conquered the world. Christianity alone prevented them from doing so." – 28th August 1942"
Maybe it was just a coincidence. At any rate, Paul Belien was making his anti-Nazi sympathies very clear to everyone.
As for Fjordham, I once felt suspicious of him when he referred to the "rights of white people," but in retrospect he was responding to the reverse discrimination that is so rampant in multiculturalist Europe. And let's not forget that it was Fjordham who nominated Hirsi Ali for a Nobel prize, at the Gates of Vienna no less!
Robert did a great job of maintaining a delicate balance of maintaining a relationship with both sides. He even acknowledged that the danger that our movement could be hijacked by neo-Nazis was very real, and could be attributed to all the mainstream parties selling out to multiculturalism and petrodollars.
I never imagined Charles would ban Robert. If anything, I always thought that Robert might someday mediate between his falling out with Paul Belien and Gates of Vienna. I don't know what has gotten into Charles. It is even harder now to imagine him backing away and apologizing. But I would welcome this because it is heartbreaking and wasteful to see so much talent going to waste.
Posted by: Pavlov's dog at November 1, 2008 11:51 AM
I kind of followed this last night in quasi-real time on LGF, and, at the time, I didn't understand what was going on. There seemed to be no reason for the dreaded 'banning,' at the time, and I still don't see the reason. In LGF's defense, it is a commercial site- this is not. Perhaps they are getting pressure from advertisers that no one knows about. That's the only reason that makes any sense at all to me.
That all being said- none of us agree 100% with our friends. Jihadwatch is my home page, and will continue to be my home page. I find it the best source for information on Islam, and will continue to agree with and support Mr. Spencer. While Charles at LGF laments that he had to stop doing bicycle posts because of vague "threats," I'm sure Mr. Spencer has to deal with real, verified threats every day, and puts himself on the line every single time he goes out and does a lecture or writes a book. Kudos to you Mr. Spencer and thank you for all that you do an continue to do.
Posted by: s at November 1, 2008 11:51 AM
>>Unfortunately, something seems to have happened to Mr. Johnson a couple of months ago." --heplev
Lobotomy?
Posted by: darcy at November 1, 2008 11:52 AM
While Charles at LGF laments that he had to stop doing bicycle posts because of vague "threats," --s
What are "bicycle posts?"
Posted by: darcy at November 1, 2008 11:54 AM
Robert,
OK, I do not know Charles Johnson and his opinions.
And I agree that not all the Vlaams Belang is racist.
And I agree it should be possible to work with anybody on good purposes.
Posted by: Coaltaxopeuh at November 1, 2008 11:59 AM
I've added a Third Update above about Charles Johnson's libelous comments about me. Oh, if only I had a lot of money to hire a lawyer, and a lot of time to divert to calling him on his libels.
Robert Spencer
Posted by: jihadwatch at November 1, 2008 12:01 PM
Actually, for those '403 Forbidden' messages at LGF, you can just reload the page in the browser. Then the reference from JW is forgotten, and the comment loads.
Not that it's really worth reading, though...
Posted by: Henrik at November 1, 2008 12:05 PM
ROBERT: "The only possible way that I could be responsible for someone promoting genocide is if I promote it myself."
This is not necessarily the case.
By our associations, we DO lend credibility to certain views.
This has nothing whatsoever to do with jdow, someone Robert doesn't even know. In this respect and in other aspects of this dispute, I think Charles has gone over the deep end.
But it would be hypocritical of me (and those like me) to suddenly claim that associations are devoid of context when, for the last 6 months, I've been trying to warn anyone who would listen that Obama's past associations DO speak volumes about his judgment and his beliefs.
This is no reflection on Robert. This is about myself...some honest introspection in a desire to avoid the stench of hypocrisy and double-standards.
Posted by: Cornelius at November 1, 2008 12:08 PM
Robert Spencer is not a neo-Nazi and does not endorse neo-Nazi views. He focuses on the history of Islam and Islamic jihad, relating its present state to the past and to Islamic scriptures. He will associate with individuals or organizations that seem "fascist" until they are proven to be fascist.
There is nothing wrong with nationalism, and in a majority-White country, of course it takes the form of "White nationalism." Nationalism is normal and healthy, and it is essential to national survival. Nowadays, the "fascism" label has lost its meaning due to overuse by extreme, demented globalist leftists who want to see borders, religion and national heritage erased. Leftists and Muslims use the "fascism" and "racism" labels to discredit any form of nationalism and patriotism. They constitute collectively a fifth column in the West.
The rift that has grown between JihadWatch and Little Green Footballs is unfortunate and unnecessary.
Posted by: US_infidel at November 1, 2008 12:08 PM
Dear Robert Spencer
It was just over two years back that I first wrote to you to highlight the growing number of pro-BNP posts appearing in the comments here. I pointed out that the party encouraged supporters to use third-party websites to promote its message, and warned of the damage that any links with neo-Nazi parties - however tenuous, unsolicited and unwelcome - could do to the anti-Islamist cause.
It’s sad to see that rifts are now occurring. I’ve never been an LGF-er - the anti-European attitude and rabid partisanship of the comments section left me cold - but from reading other blogs I do know of other British former-Jihadwatchers who have dropped away from your site, dismayed by the amount of pro-BNP propaganda posted in comments on here (see above), something that Mary Jackson, Hugh Fitzgerald’s colleague at the New English Review, has also remarked upon. I know that you are not responsible for comments posted to JW, and how deeply you value free speech, but free speech is a double-edged sword - it can damage as well as enlighten.
I know a thing or two about Europe’s neo-Nazis. For my part, I’ve never once suspected you of supporting or even sympathising with such groups, and it is deeply unfair of Charles Johnson to suggest otherwise. I think that perhaps you were, to begin with, a little naïve about the true nature of some of these parties, but that’s not surprising. How can Americans be expected to be au fait with the intricacies of European fringe politics? Let’s face it, most non-Americans would be unable to state the basic philosophies of the Republicans and the Democrats, let alone know of such groups as the National Alliance and the American Nazi Party (who are both for Obama, believe it or not.)
However, guilt by association is, sadly, part of human nature, and uninformed people - particularly first-time visitors to JW - will mistakenly make such links. All you can do is keep plugging away, keep restating your position, and keep an eye on your comments section for propaganda. Jihadwatch remains the pre-eminent website in the anti-Islamist blogroll, and for this reason neo-Nazi parties will continue to try to associate themselves with it. It’s no coincidence that when the BNP launched its own hapless, short-lived “counterjihad” newsletter, it chose to call it BNP Jihad Watch.
Best Wishes
Matamoros
Posted by: Matamoros at November 1, 2008 12:09 PM
Matamoros:
Mary Jackson was unjust. I have been consistent in repudiating the BNP, and have done so repeatedly.
Cordially
Robert Spencer
at November 1, 2008 12:11 PM
Cornelius
So the idea is that because someone associates with supporters of genocide, he is responsible for people who favor it.
Fair enough. The only hitch is that I don't associate with any supporters of genocide.
Cordially
Robert Spencer
at November 1, 2008 12:13 PM
A poster accuses me of thinking that "floridity is a virtue." I can't deny it. I am fond of Floridity:
http://newenglishreview.org/blog_direct_link.cfm/blog_id/17804
at November 1, 2008 12:14 PM
Hugh
I am fond of floridity as well. I always make sure that it is included in my toothpaste.
Yours
Robert
at November 1, 2008 12:15 PM
Damn. I hate this.
LGF is a good place to link news so it will get exposure, and I link a lot of news, BUT, if I have to choose, I choose Jihadwatch and Robert Spencer, and it seems Charles makes us choose.
The anti-Christian bias is getting pretty bad over there also.
I have never seen anything here that can be called "Nazi" or anything like it. The Jewish people have gotten nothing but support at Jihadwatch.
Just a bad, sad, situation.
at November 1, 2008 12:19 PM
Great... A rift in the anti-jihad movement. We need this like we need to be divided and conquered. I have no tolerance for Nazis either, in fact, it's a form of fascism we're fighting. But Johnson's excessive zeal in purging extremists by association smacks of McCarthyism.
Doesn't LGF's long term association with Jihad Watch and similar sites bring up an air of suspicious and even subversive activity?
Does Mr Johnson think he can fool us all by pretending he suddenly figured out what's really going on here?
Does Mr Johnson own any of Robert Spencer's books, or did he burn them all in a manner approved by the Central Scrutinizer? We require detailed reports of methods, timing and a list of party approved witnesses.
In fact Charles Johnson is a very suspiciously common name. An alias perhaps?
I demand a full investigation...are you now or have you ever been a reader of Jihad Watch?
at November 1, 2008 12:21 PM
A poster accuses me of thinking that "floridity is a virtue." I can't deny it. I am fond of Floridity:
http://newenglishreview.org/blog_direct_link.cfm/blog_id/17804
Posted by: Hugh at November 1, 2008 12:14 PM
Hugh
I am fond of floridity as well. I always make sure that it is included in my toothpaste.
Yours
Robert
Posted by: jihadwatch at November 1, 2008 12:15 PM
Speaking of Floridity - I love Florida. Key Biscayne is a favorite. I even have a "Florida Room" in my house. Nothing compares to the Floridity of Florida.
Posted by: darcy at November 1, 2008 12:27 PM
In attacking Robert Spencer, Charles Johnson appears to have completely lost it.
I must admit that I had not followed this controversy closely until Charles Johnson attacked Andrew Bostom and Diana West. I then suspected that Johnson was either off his rocker or completely reckless, or both.
Charles Johnson has provided no clear evidence to support his allegations about Fjordman, The Brussels Journal, and Gates of Vienna. I've seen no smoking gun, no clear money quote that would support his claims. He provides no basis for his policy of shunning the accused parties, or of libeling them and anyone else associated with them. He has taken a guilty-until-proven innocent, conviction-by-accusation approach in this whole affair that tells us way more about Johnson than any of the parties on the receiving end of his accusations.
If Johnson cannot substantiate his accusations, he should do the honorable thing and withdraw the accusations, and apologize publicly to all of the accused parties. Given Johnson's apparent stubbornness over this, and the general results in burning bridges, I don't think that is likely.
Posted by: Kinana of Khaybar at November 1, 2008 12:27 PM
Good riddance to Charles Johnson.
Posted by: anonymous at November 1, 2008 12:28 PM
LGF became irrelevant and peripheral many years ago. I woudn't let it bother you Robert. I have and continue to consider you a great author, a man of integrity, an intellectual, friend, and a formidable champion of western values and culture. Charles Johnson should take a very long hiatus.
Posted by: mare at November 1, 2008 12:28 PM
I think Mr.Johnson needs to have his head checked for some chemical imbalances. He is pulling the same thing as CAIR did as claiming some comment speaks for Spencer...
Comments
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)
Claiming that Robert agreed with him is quite slanderous. Why didn't Sir Charles provide us with a copy of the text when he axed the link then?
Posted by: revparadigm at November 1, 2008 12:36 PM
I don't know floridity, but if you post her phone number, I will give her a call...
Posted by: duh_swami at November 1, 2008 12:40 PM
I have not posted a comment here (or anywhere else) for a long time. Being a stay at home dad and full time student, I barely have time to read the news/comments much less comment.
I have been a regular here (lgf as well) for many years and read most of your books. How anybody could perceive you as racist is beyond me.
The comment section at lgf has been mostly irrelevant for quite a while. Consisting mostly of one-liners, jibs, jabs, and idle chatter, there is entertainment value, but little education.
I owe an immeasurable debt to you Robert for educating me about islam. Perhaps I will now go to lgf and pick a fight on your behalf and get banned.
Posted by: RecoveringHog at November 1, 2008 12:41 PM
Mr. Spencer, besides the things well said above, I want to add this:
You will be remembered, your works will be used and studied, and you are/will be praised.
Charles won't be. He is not a scholar of any kind, he is not a researcher of any kind.
The moment he stops posting, he's work will slowly vanish, while your books will be on our bookshelves for generations to come.
Posted by: Ben-G at November 1, 2008 12:42 PM
heroyalwhyness
Thanks, but actually it was the cooperative effort of many who were on-line that early morning. Some person scanned in an ammo box for size and comparison and to see the printed info on the box, while 'Dar Al Harb' created an animated GIF file to point out the various 'cut and pasted' repeated areas of the image. All while Charles slept. But he sure stepped up and quickly took credit for the work of many, later that day.
It's funny but the person on my blogroll that I got banned for not dropping is, like Robert, quite and accomplished individual and published author. But he wrote a piece critical of the evolution vs creation battle at LGF and Charles flew off the handle in rage. Many "long-time" LGFers were banned in the following days.
Now replaced by the likes of medaura, Jimmah, and mph. Proof of de-evolution.
at November 1, 2008 12:45 PM
Robert,
My "What race is Islam..." was a bit on the terse side.
Of course what I meant is that it would be impossible for you to subscribe to a genocidal / racist point of view, if you wanted to.
Anyone who reads JW on a fairly regular basis knows you don't subscribe to this silly notion, in the first place. (Or, that was the place where I was operating from, anyway.)
Sorry if I mislead anyone with the possible oblique inference that could have been drawn from a too-short comment.
I try not to run off at the keyboard, but I need to learn to be brief, without damaging the whole point.
Sorry again, everyone!
Posted by: Abscedere at November 1, 2008 12:57 PM
To be fair, Gates of Vienna is a really terrible site.
They oppose freedom of speech and will delete posts that they don't agree with it. Their ways of thinking are scarcely more advanced than those of Islamic apologists and multiculturalists. When I say they I am actually referring to Dymphna, who is so emotionally unstable and immature that she shouldn't be in charge of anything as important as a Counter-Jihad site, but since Baron hasn't kicked her out I guess it means that he supports her.
Critical thinking and open discussion are absolutely essential, and any site that doesn't respect those principles should be shunned.
Little Green Footballs is so awful that I can't find an adjective to describe it.
Posted by: Jesus Christ Supercop at November 1, 2008 1:00 PM
I've followed this site for the past few years, and must commend Spencer once again for his intellectual and moral courage, especially in light of all the false accusations.
Re the Islamization-of-Europe demographics issue: Why does Fjordman end up in Charles Johnson's bad books, but Mark Steyn doesn't? Looks like an inconsistency to me. (For my part, I don't think either Fjordman or Steyn should be in anyone's bad books on the anti-sharia side).
Posted by: Kinana of Khaybar at November 1, 2008 1:01 PM
Robert,
LGF's smears should be water of a ducks back for someone like yourself. People will be referencing R.Spencer for generations, while LGF will whither on the vine.
The really sad thing about this, is that LGF has been allowed to libel the reputation of so many good people for so long.
Posted by: km at November 1, 2008 1:06 PM
Robert,
Don't let eh LGF stuff shake you. I've found their site tos often has an adolescent tone to it and I therefore am not surprised by this turn of events. Thoughtful people will discern that your views are not racist or genocidal.
Keep focused on your primary mission, which I see as exposing the ugly side of Islamic theology and tradition. The Evil One often attempts to side track us with lesser diversions. Just keep hammering home the same points and those with ears to hear the truth will understand. Keep to your mission and let God deal with the other stuff.
As for links, if you want links, just ask your supporters to create links to your site. I already do this.
Peace,
James
at November 1, 2008 1:16 PM
From post above: The Evil One often attempts to side track us with lesser diversions.
Yes, but I'm trying to give that up...
Posted by: duh_swami at November 1, 2008 1:21 PM
Fourth Update just added.
Charles characterizes this post as a "vicious attack" from me. But his falsely accusing me of encouraging genocide, and not providing a shred of supporting evidence? Oh, no, that's not a "vicious attack."
Robert Spencer
Posted by: jihadwatch at November 1, 2008 1:28 PM
Richard the Lionheart: It eludes me how you can say that the BNP is not a racist party when its own website I went to some months ago attempted to explain why non-whites were not welcomed in it. That's when I wrote here at JW that were a black British citizen who was a devout Christian, a good family man, a staunch conservative who had a deep admiration for Winston Churchill, a believer in the democratic and capitalistic system, an admirer of British civilization and possessed of a keen sense that the Islamicization of Britain posed a dire threat to so much that he cherished were so inclined to join the BNP, he could not precisely because he is not white. How is this not racist? By the way, I have profited from reading many of your posts, providing, as you do, a well-informed British perspective, and so please don't take this as a hostile question. I just don't see how you can say the BNP isn't racist, though I admit full readily that they have several good positions on many subjects.
And may I say here as well, in light of the many comments on this already and based on what I have come to know about Jihad Watch, posting here regularly as I have for some time now, that the notion that Robert Spencer is in anyway an endorser of racist policies is absurd on its face. LGF and Charles Johnson should be ashamed of themselves. But I doubt they ever will be.
Posted by: Wellington at November 1, 2008 1:32 PM
I see. Complaining about Charles's attacking you for daring to link to someone with whom he has disagreed ceratinly counts as a "vicious attack."
at November 1, 2008 1:36 PM
I have seen Charles Johnson's evidence that VB and Sweden Democrats are fascist, and I happen to believe he is correct. They are, and I was surprised that you attended the Brussels conference awhile back. I don't believe Geert Wilders is, but he should cut ties with groups like VB if he has any. Diana West is severely deluded if she believes that those parties aren't fascist or white supremicist. Oh, and BTW, Pat Buchanan, who hangs out with VB and appears on Nazi radio shows, is an anti-Semitic fascist as well.
Posted by: sonomaca at November 1, 2008 1:36 PM
Fourth update: Charles, have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?
Just as 'hell hath no fury as a woman scorned',
the bruised ego's on the football green, will
respond in kind.
Emotional ego responses require no thought or structure. Raw emotional energy exists to be exhausted. When verbally directed, it is projectile vomiting.
Expect the rhetoric to increase, expect this to be the longest thread in JW history...
Stay factual, and in control RS, (no problem actually) and let the 'out of controller's' dig their own holes...
at November 1, 2008 1:44 PM
sonomaca: I am no admirer of Pat Buchanan, and I think his latest work on WWII to be a classic example of "blame the victim" as well as being stunningly naive respecting Hitler's intentions, but exactly what "Nazi radio shows" has he appeared on?
Posted by: Wellington at November 1, 2008 1:47 PM
Sonomaca:
For a long time I believed he was correct as well. But I don't believe that Diana West is "seriously deluded," and she and many others have marshaled a good deal of evidence suggesting that they are not fascists or white supremacists.
The real question is: is one allowed to question these matters and investigate further, or is that in itself evidence that one is evil? Myself, I support Constitutional pluralism, non-establishment of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of thought, equality of rights of all people before the law. In supporting these things I have spoken out consistently against Islamic supremacist threats against them.
Are these things fascist? Or could it be that those who want to extinguish them are fascist? Now look at how Charles has behaved. If anyone is behaving like a fascist, it is Charles Johnson in insisting that everyone must fall into lockstep with him or be defamed and smeared in the most appalling manner.
In other words, why is simply suggesting that these matters are disputed grounds for being ostracized and defamed?
Charles Johnson ought to take a long look in the mirror, and see what he has become.
Oh, and by the way, I do not support Pat Buchanan, and I despise his antisemitism, but I doubt very seriously that he wants to replace Constitutional rule with fascist authoritarianism.
Cordially
Robert Spencer
at November 1, 2008 1:51 PM
duh swami:
The "Have you no decency, sir?" is a quote from words directed at Senator Joe McCarthy by the Army's attorney, Joseph Welch, during the Army-McCarthy hearings on June 9, 1954. Welch began by making another a propos remark: "Until this moment, Senator, I think I never gauged your cruelty or recklessness..."
Cordially
Robert Spencer
at November 1, 2008 1:53 PM
duh swami:
Expect the rhetoric to increase, expect this to be the longest thread in JW history...
Nah. When Nick Berg was beheaded, there was, if I recall correctly, a thread with 495 comments.
Cordially
Robert Spencer
at November 1, 2008 1:56 PM
Robert wrote:Are these things fascist? Or could it be that those who want to extinguish them are fascist? Now look at how Charles has behaved. If anyone is behaving like a fascist, it is Charles Johnson in insisting that everyone must fall into lockstep with him or be defamed and smeared in the most appalling manner.
How true. Lgf has ceased to be a place for serious discussion of ideas. If you agree in principle than a debate on the nuances is tolerated, but you are right, anyone not in "lockstep" is reviled. Sad.
Charles will have very self-righteous response to this. I could probably predict his actual words.
Posted by: RecoveringHog at November 1, 2008 2:01 PM
Sonomaca says: I have seen Charles Johnson's evidence that VB and Sweden Democrats are fascist, and I happen to believe he is correct. They are, and I was surprised that you attended the Brussels conference awhile back. I don't believe Geert Wilders is, but he should cut ties with groups like VB if he has any. Diana West is severely deluded if she believes that those parties aren't fascist or white supremicist. Oh, and BTW, Pat Buchanan, who hangs out with VB and appears on Nazi radio shows, is an anti-Semitic fascist as well.
I say: I agree.
And, because I agree with, and have posted, comments like this, I am lumped in with those who would call anyone who would call anyone who supports the Vlaams Belang a "neofascist."
Here's something to consider: A person who supports Socialism is supporting a poltiical system which will, inevitably, find itself in the position of having to use legislative and judicial coercion to enforce its dictums. Socialism leads to fascism.
Likewise, Ethnic Nationalism will also, inevitably, find itself in the position of having to use legislative and judicial coercion to enforce its dictums.
In this sense, the inevitable ends of both Socialism and Ethnic Nationalism are fascist.
That is not the same thing as saying that all those who support Socialism or Ethnic Nationalism are fascist.
In a Europe where white people do not breed in equivalent numbers to non-white immigrants, it is ineviable that non-white immigrants will eventually become the majority, especially in major cities. This is already happening.
A party like the Vlaams Belang, whose primary goal is to create an Ethnic Nationalist state, will have to resort to fascist methods to enforce its ideology.
Our fight is against Islam, which is not ethnic in nature. I don't think we ought to tie our fight with Islam to any existing ethnic conflict in Europe.
at November 1, 2008 2:10 PM
From above: I have seen Charles Johnson's evidence that VB and Sweden Democrats are fascist, and I happen to believe he is correct.
I have not seen this evidence so I can't comment on it. But I wonder just how these determinations are made. Is fascism or racism stated in their
mission statements? Their literature? Speeches by leaders? Is it subtle or outright fascism and racism? Do members vote on these ideas? Are they in unanimous opinion?...I don't know the answers to any of those questions...
In my experience, every group of any controversial nature, has fringe members/supporters, who
have one foot into trouble and the other on a banana peel. Every social issue suffers this same problem. A few rotten apples can spoil the whole barrel...'Pro-lifers' who shoot abortion doctors', animal rights people who eat hamburgers for lunch, political protesters who show up just to fight with the police, block traffic, and do property damage. All fringe lunatics who may not represent the ideology of the organization at all...
at November 1, 2008 2:13 PM
Pastorius;
I agree 100% that "our fight is against Islam, which is not ethnic in nature." I have written many times that the jihad resistance should not be waged on racial or ethnic grounds, as if it were (as the Left and jihadists charge) a racial issue.
And as I said above, I have not endorsed the VB. I have merely recognized that people of good will, who are not "seriously deluded" and are not racists or neofascists, have mounted a case opposing Charles Johnson's assessment of the VB. In other words, the question is not whether or not we should support neofascists, but whether or not VB is neofascist.
This has eluded them, however, such that over in his echo chamber they say -- and even Charles suggests -- that I have embraced the neo-Nazis and encourage genocide. He ought to be monumentally ashamed of himself for this defamation.
Cordially
Robert Spencer
at November 1, 2008 2:18 PM
For what it's worth, I support you, Robert. As do the primary administrators of Infidel Bloggers Alliance.
Keep up the great work, and thanks for all you do.
Posted by: pastorius at November 1, 2008 10:41 AM
And now Pstorius claims by supporting sonomaca's comment:
"And, because I agree with, and have posted, comments like this, I am lumped in with those who would call anyone who would call anyone who supports the Vlaams Belang a "neofascist."
Where are you going with this, Pastorius?
Posted by: awake at November 1, 2008 2:18 PM
"Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, Jihadwatch is free at last!"
LGF, and the so-called “lizard army” (or Johnson groupies) have been wrong about so many things over the years it is hard to find a good place to start. But here is just a few I can think of…
(1) Iraq War
(2) Islam
(3) Bush
(4) Rumsfeld
(5) Understanding the front lines of this war which is the stealth Jihad in Europe.
I am sure others could find more if they tried.
The difference between Robert Spencer and Charles Johnson is thus…
One is doing REAL work for the truth, fighting to good fight, putting his life on the line to save western civilization, and yes might get KILLED fighting this fight, and the other is a Neocon hack, a decent computer programmer, and a former mediocre jazz musician, who has a severe Napoleon complex, and thinks he leads a real army with a gecko on the flag!
LGF = DailyKos
at November 1, 2008 2:21 PM
Death to all religion or religion will be the death of us all.
Posted by: RedDawn at November 1, 2008 2:23 PM
why does Fjordman end up in Charles Johnson's bad books, but Mark Steyn doesn't? Looks like an inconsistency to me.
it seems that CJ is biased against Europeans since he has low tolerance with anyone from Europe, ie Fjordman, while Mark Steyn resides in the US. If anyone is to be called prejudiced it would be CJ, especially towards Christians. The sad part of all is the is that islamists can sit back and watch Western people go at each other. We need to go ahead like Robert is doing and keep up our vigilence and attack those islamists and their appologists.
Posted by: ZenaWarriorPrincess at November 1, 2008 2:24 PM
I just really don't understand this very well. I believe everyone's position had been clear since last year's discussion. Why resurrecting it again? It doesn't have any sense...
Posted by: Claudia at November 1, 2008 2:36 PM
Robert,
I'm on your side in this situation, however i think you should confront posters who impicitly or explicitly state here that it's ok to join forces with the real nazis. See for example this post: Posted by: Richard the Lionheart [TypeKey Profile Page] at November 1, 2008 11:10 AM. That's one of their (LGF) points: that on one hand commenters here say VB and SD are not racists and on the other say argue that it's ok to join forces with racists.
Anyway i want thank you for all the amazing job you do.
Posted by: AlexD at November 1, 2008 2:37 PM
Nah. When Nick Berg was beheaded, there was, if I recall correctly, a thread with 495 comments.
Cordially
Robert Spencer
I'm perpetually sorry about Berg, but is that a challenge? I can easily top 495 comments all by myself...on second thought, forget that, I can never beat out Abdullah M for hijacking a thread... :)
When I said stay in control, I did not mean your ego or emotions, I meant the situation.
Which is just basic advice that you don't really need, but given for free...
Your way ahead on points, the other side will attempt a rally. I would not expect CJ and crew to just suddenly go silent...There's more noise to be made...
at November 1, 2008 2:39 PM
Robert,
I think this is clear-cut defamation. Sue him.
Charles has been "losing it" for quite a while, becoming more reactionary and controlling. Meanwhile his "commentors" have become shallow and trite. They are a captive audience and they know it. I only go to LGF very infrequently, and that is because sometimes CJ breaks a story earlier than others. Other than that, he has lost his usefulness. JW/DW are still the best.
Posted by: Concerned Citizen at November 1, 2008 2:43 PM
Robert,
Skrew LGF and any one else with
their heads up their butts!
at November 1, 2008 2:44 PM
Concerned Citizen:
In all seriousness, I would love to sue him, but I have neither the money nor the time to devote to it.
Also, he probably believes his wild charges. He has to know what he is saying is false for there really to be a case.
Cordially
Robert Spencer
at November 1, 2008 2:51 PM
Wow - I never thought I'd see this day. Unreal. What ever it’s worth Mr. Spencer… I think you are a great man, and I have learned a lot from you…
Posted by: co2hog at November 1, 2008 2:57 PM
[Charles Johnson] and Lawrence Auster are 2 sides of the same coin.
Out of curiosity, why does Infidel Pride consider Johnson and Auster to be 2 sides of the same coin?
Posted by: anonymous at November 1, 2008 3:00 PM
Robert,
You are a scholar, CJ is a demagogue. An apparent atheist, at that. I would never have come to understand the threat that is Islam had I never come to know you and your work. I have rarely learned anything at LGF that I cannot find at another source. You, Robert are unique. A one of a kind.
A passionate soul searching for and defending the truth.
Charles has no such passion. He can't even get up in the morning.
I'd like to see him stand up in front of a frothing mob of MSA cluebats and defend his argument against creationism. That won't happen. Why?
Only real men can defend their beliefs in the face of grave personal danger.
Posted by: derak at November 1, 2008 3:05 PM
I am not surprised that it has come to this.
My account has been blocked twice by LGF (of course without explanation or chance to appeal). Once for opposing Johnson's self-indulgent and misinformed vendetta against the Brussels Journal, Gates of Vienna etc. and once for supporting Obama. LGF did some good work at the time of the cartoons crisis but the site has degenerated into Johnson's private zoo (which it in retrospect always was).
Charles Simmonds
Posted by: CharlesSimmonds at November 1, 2008 3:06 PM
People need to stop saying this is a split in the anti-jihad movement, Charles Johnson, and LGF are not anti-jihad and never were. They are neoconservative, and are “Bushites”, but not anti-jihad. They are the 20% of America who still thinks “W” is a great president. They used Jihadwatch, and Robert Spencer, because CJ was clueless about Jihad, and needed someone with knowledge about Islam to make himself look more like an authority, otherwise he would have ended up looking like Dean Esmay or D’Souza! Now that Jihad is no longer important to him, and his ever dwindling circle of friends, thus kiss off, because who needs friends when you are King of the Gekkonidae Family, Lord of Lizards!
Posted by: greatcometof1577 at November 1, 2008 3:08 PM
Wellington,
I do not take this as a hostile question by any means and I respect what you have written, but have a read anyway and see if I can answer some of your concerns.
The BNP party is not a Racist party although no doubt there are certainly racists that are members of it. I know this from experience of people who I know to support them. I disagree with them on their stance of having no Black candidates but then you have to then ask yourself the question is the Black Police Association along with many of the other Black and Asian Associations not exactly the same then as the BNP and racist too? Remember also that every Non White Association in the UK is allowed airtime as well as receives lottery finance, however not the BNP.
What the BNP are doing is protecting the White, Anglo Saxon Culture of the UK and like it or not, the caucasians(angles, saxons, celts, Normans, Norsemen etc etc, were not Black or Asian but very much white).
By the BNP not allowing Black candidates into their ranks is no different to the association I mentioned above and there are many of them. They are merely protecting their culture which is predominately a white one.
I have written letters to the BNP asking them on many occasions that there are Blacks and Asians(Hindus and Sikhs along with many British born Chinese and Japanese) who would welcome being part of Britain and to have them run for the BNP would not only help their cause greatly but also bring in a large part of the population who don't vote for the BNP for this exact reason of alienating people by colour. I disagree vehemently with their stance on this along with their lack of professionalism, but the simple reason is that the BNP are the only party in the UK prepared to sort the country out and do something serious when it comes to Islam and clamping down on it big time. By voting BNP, it gives the country breathing space because although many of BNP's opponents in the Liberal and Right Wing disagree with them, one thing's for sure and that's they agree that Islam is a threat and needs to be stopped. If Islamisation happens then kiss goodbye to all parties. If the BNP comes in then those other parties still exist and regardless what people say the UK would still be a democracy.
My partner is Black and she agrees with almost all the BNP has to say. If you care to read their manifesto you will see that it is not a racist party. It is clear to see from their policies that they are not.
Your analogy of the Black Man :
were a black British citizen who was a devout Christian, a good family man, a staunch conservative who had a deep admiration for Winston Churchill, a believer in the democratic and capitalistic system, an admirer of British civilization and possessed of a keen sense that the Islamicization of Britain posed a dire threat to so much that he cherished were so inclined to join the BNP, he could not precisely because he is not white.
In all honesty to you, I must say that there are very, few people like that in the UK who are admirers of British Civilisation. They may be Conservative and Christian, a deep respect for Winston Churchill and understood Islamisation very well, but they will always see themselves as coming from Africa ancestry and the Slave Trade and Britain's part in it will always put them off. This is why the argument from people such as Enoch Powell were always shunned because his idea of a Black man, being born in the UK, would hold a British passport but never hold to the ideals of what Britishness was because of History. His ancestors were sold by their own people to the British and Europeans and removed from their homeland to foreign lands to become slaves. This is always in every Black man, regardless. It is a very long argument and one I don't really want to go into on JW, but lets just say that there are Black men I know who do class themselves as English and British, although they are 'old school' generation(over 40) and most of the younger Blacks in the UK don't see themselves the same.
I think to finish off this reply to you Wellington when you see that the BNP is certainly a Party for the White Anglo Saxons of the UK (who happen to make up 90% of the population) and there are many more Minority associations in the UK catering for their races, then I think it's perfectly fair in this situation for a party to want what the BNP does. Remember also that the BNP is ostracised from the press, vilified in fact and yet, if people in the UK are voting for them and BNP councillors are getting elected, then it means that by the Democratic process of the UK, we must allow them that right. The BNP party is growing at an alarming rate, simply because people can see that NuLabour, Conservative and Liberal Democrats are not speaking to the British People.
I have got very angry at the treatment of the BNP, especially as I know quite a few people who vote for them and they are not racism but believe in a Britain of Morals and values with those very things having been completely destroyed by years of uncontrolled immigration and forced multiculturalism.
I also strongly suggest that you visit their website and have a read of some of their articles and trust me, you will be surprised, especially in the forums and what people have to say. I to was very dubious until I had a read of their manifesto and visited their site and when I read of what many people had to say, I felt for the first time, in a long time, I was in Britain again as living in London is a hell hole. My partner and I are trying to leave for Ireland next year. Make your own decision of the BNP by reading what they and people have to say on their website as my attitude changed when I read what they had to say, although I do believe they do need to change some attitudes and sort out their lack of professionalism if they want to do a lot better.
Thank you.
Posted by: Richard the Lionheart at November 1, 2008 3:11 PM
Charles Johnson when angry!!!!
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/dc/Chlamydosaurus_kingii.jpg
You notice how the frills when flared out make him look big, but in truth he is very small...
Posted by: greatcometof1577 at November 1, 2008 3:21 PM
I wonder if you could link to LGF using a link anonymizer, like
Posted by: ChrisC at November 1, 2008 3:21 PM
If you took one person each possessing every conceivable human skin color and lined them up lightest to darkest, where would you delineate white, yellow, red, brown, black etc.
Race is nothing more than a social construct.
Posted by: RecoveringHog at November 1, 2008 3:23 PM
ROBERT: "So the idea is that because someone associates with supporters of genocide, he is responsible for people who favor it.
Fair enough. The only hitch is that I don't associate with any supporters of genocide."
I'm with you 100% sir.
I think you clarified the entire issue with this point:
"the question is not whether or not we should support neofascists, but whether or not VB is neofascist."
at November 1, 2008 3:24 PM
PS - The appropriate analogy to my original point would be:
"the question is not whether or not we should support proponents of anti-Americanism, but whether or not Bill Ayers, Jeremiah Wright and Rashid Khalidi are anti-American."
In this particular case, they are, unequivocally.
Posted by: Cornelius at November 1, 2008 3:30 PM
PSS - If disagreement were tantamount to betrayal - as Charles Johnson apparently believes - Hugh would've had me banned long ago.
Thank God JW has a different ethic than LGF.
Posted by: Cornelius at November 1, 2008 3:33 PM
Well that will teach Jihad Watch from ever daring to question the leader of the LGF cult and intellectual midget Charles Johnson.
Jihad Watch is much better off, you don’t want to associate with the likes of LGF.
Charles Johnson is way off his rocker and makes more and more crazy unfounded accusations, I have seen this pattern going on for a while now, its completely illogical.
I suspect the limited reputation of LGF and Charles Johnson is long gone, they are as respectable as daily Kos and the Huff post and just as illogical to boot.
Posted by: Bar at November 1, 2008 3:34 PM
Robert, I support you 100% and value this website so much. Thank you and please keep up your excellent work.
I'm very disappointed in CJ.
at November 1, 2008 3:38 PM
Look, first of all forget the comments at LGF, folks.
We have no way of knowing if some, none or all have a clue
Second this has nothing to do with whether Vlaams Belang is a bunch of fascists (probably not IMHO) or racists (probably yes if you consider ethnic nationalism....which is what the CofCC believes in, to be racism).
The fact is that Mr. Johnson has now imputed BOTH of the above to anyone who links to or has a reasonable word to say about anyone who links to anyone who links to...well you get the idea.
It is RIDICULOUS.
RIDICULOUS.
That harms this movement of ours every bit as much as ethnic nationalists being involved.
Ignore the comments at LGF (but the linkviewer remains great), and focus on what demands our attention ...OUT THERE
Posted by: epaminondas at November 1, 2008 3:42 PM
Sonomaca and others who believe as he/she.
You claim that Vlaams Belang are fascist. Fair enough. Which definition of fascism do you base your claim on? There are after all a lot of definitions, so I'd like to know the one you're using. If we do not, how can we possibly ever prove or disprove your claim? And if you do not know, how can you honestly make that claim?
I don't much about the political parties of other countries, so I can't really judge them. I'll say this though:
-Totalitarianism/authoritarianism is not necessarily fascist. Monarchy is or can be totalitarian/authoritarian, but it is not fascist.
-Racism is not necessarily fascist. The US wasn't fascist when slavery or segregation existed, was it?
And for alle those who ask, "what does an American know of European political parties?", I'll this: What does a European know of European know of European political parties? Fact is, most of us know nothing or very little about the political parties and processes of other countries not to mention those of the EU. The fact that it's an American who has oppinion should be irrelevant, and he/she should be treated seriously.
P.S.
I agree with those who said that LGF is rampant with hatred of Europe and Europeans.
at November 1, 2008 3:46 PM
Something else I should point out about Charles Johnson, as if you already did not know:
Charles Johnson will make completely unfounded accusations against you, he will provide no facts as if to say that his word is fact enough.
Then when you reply to his illogical innuendo, he will accuse you of “attacking him”, he will write it up on his website as if you are making some personal attacks against him, that gets his minions in a ruckus and lots of praise heaped upon the pseudo king.
It would be funny if it wasn’t so sick.
Posted by: Bar at November 1, 2008 3:47 PM
I have been consistent in I have been consistent in repudiating the BNP, and have done so repeatedly.
Cordially
Robert Spencer
And I have criticized Robert several times because of this, and many of my posts remained, So Robert deserves respect and admiration,
Despite the fact you repudiate the BNP, many of the BNP supporters have deep respect for you and your work. Also many BNPers are influenced by what you write, so you are playing a small part in what the future BNP will evolve into.
Today there are about thirty blogs that are supporting the BNP, and they all have one thing in common, they all support Israel. Where as all the anti BNP sites support Palestine
Yes, I am one of the dreaded BNP supporters that Matamoros warns about, but I am not here to spread BNP propaganda, I am here to do my bit in fighting islam.
At the moment I am living in Java, so I am not able to be active in my support for the BNP, yet I am active in supporting Java for the Javanese, As a Nationalist I am just as concerned about the traditions and culture of Java being obliterated by islam, as I am concerned by British traditions and culture is being obliterated.
We Nationalist have a ‘point of view’. Why should we be denied the right to put that point of view in the same way that anybody else does ?
Why is it Charles Johnson and Matamoros strive to deny free speech to nationalist using the same tactics as nazis? After all, we are in favour of democracy, and deeply concerned about islam.
Matamoros, why is it you hardly ever comment here except when the BNP is mentioned, it is apparent that you more opposed to the BNP than Islam. Are you one of Gerry Gables Goons, because you seem to share this lefty Communists obsessive hatred for anyone true to their country
It is to Roberts credit that he does not take the same path as Charles Johnson, or Matamoros, because that is the same path as tyrants and fascists.
Robert, I strongly disagree with you about your stance concerning the BNP, But I admire you for what you are doing. Also should you ever go to Britain, it will not be the BNP who will try to disrupt your talks, it will be the anti-BNP thugs.
Posted by: InfidelK9 at November 1, 2008 4:02 PM
"The Vlaams Belang wants to put both Muslims and their islamic ideology out; they hate both the siners and the sin (not all of them)!"
Posted by: Coaltaxopeuh
Sign me up, dude!
Posted by: DenverRodeo at November 1, 2008 4:03 PM
Death to all religion or religion will be the death of us all.
Posted by: RedDawn at November 1, 2008 2:23 PM
Apparently, you don't know the teachings of either Judaism or Christianity, as opposed to the teachings of Islam.
No, only Islam "will be the death of us all," if we don't stop the Global Jihad.
Neither Judaism nor Christianity has a "Jihad" doctrine. Only Islam. Therefore, please correct your wild and uninformed statement.
Posted by: darcy at November 1, 2008 4:04 PM
Hey, a Proclamation, by The King, for Suppressing Rebellion and Sedition
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/showc/209/6143973
“Robert knows very well the extent that I've supported him over the years, defending him against attacks and smears, and even doing an enormous amount of work on his web site without billing him. I consider this a personal and professional betrayal.”
King Charles, Given at our California Beach House, in the first day of November, Two-Thousand and Eight, Seventh year of our Lizard Blog Lord reign….God Save the King!
Now compare it with this…
“Whereas many of our subjects in divers parts of our Colonies and Plantations in North America, misled by dangerous and ill designing men, and forgetting the allegiance which they owe to the power that has protected and supported them after various disorderly acts committed in disturbance of the publick peace…..…”
King George III, Given at our Court at St. James, in the twenty-third day of August, one thousand seven hundred and seventy-five, in the fifteenth year of our reign….God Save the King!
Cool! Robert Spencer is now officially a founding father! No Taxation without representation!!!
Posted by: greatcometof1577 at November 1, 2008 4:19 PM
I was banned from LGF for suggesting that the Serbs had a right to defend themselves against Islamic jihad. It was most unpleasant to be on the receiving end of mob rule in the comments thread prior to being excommunicated. But it was a relief to be out of that nest of vipers.
I was also banned on here a few years ago because I suggeated putting a certain psychedelic substance in the Meccan water supply. Robert politely explained that he did not wish to provide fodder to his enemies and found my outburst too provocative. A lesson was learned.
I have a profound respect for Robert and this site. He is an eminently reasonable man and accusing him of supporting genocide is nothing short of deranged.
at November 1, 2008 4:23 PM
InfidelK9,
Well said. As you know we have had our discussions and although I am not a supporter of the BNP or a member I have defended them on here meany times.
Many people immediately associate Nationalism with Racism and Fascism and this couldn't me more than wrong. I am without a doubt a Nationalist and as a Nationalist I respect other people cultures as much as I do my own. The only problem is, that I disagree with another culture or cultures co-existing amongst the dominant culture of a country as we have seen the outcome of what happens when the minority cultures' population grows.
When I have travelled to other countries I have shown the utmost respect to them and their culture. I have respected their laws and practices and have never tried to force my opinions or beliefs upon them - "When in Rome..." as they say.
I however am beginning to realise that the only hope for the UK to stop Islamisation as well as the absorption into the EU and loss of our sovereignty and Nation State is to vote for the BNP. You are very correct that every BNP member I've met has supported Israel, this may come as news to the many people on here who believe otherwise. You are also correct as well in that the Anti BNP and the left would try to disrupt Robert Spencer should he come to the UK as well as their continuing support of Islam/Radical Islam and of course Palestine.
Many people do not understand that Nationalists just want to be left to live in their country under their own laws and to continue with the culture we have. It is a great culture. We have a great history and many great Britons to thank for that. We have something in the UK that many countries wished they had and yet the left are doing their very best to destroy that(SAS Chief in Afghanistan quits for example due to MOD pathetic-ness).
The most ironic thing that people are yet to understand is that a Britain under the BNP or Nationalists, would be the same as what Britain was when it was a Great Country. Our standards in Education would rise back to where they were. Crime on the streets of the UK would drop drastically. There would be no children killing one another. Our farmers would not be struggling to survive. Our industries would be giving employment again to British people. We would end allowing Europeans free travel, jobs, healthcare and education in the UK and in doing so would educate our own to be the best as we once were. We would of course allow foreign students, of course but only a certain quota as we have a duty to the people of Britain before any other. These words I've just written could just as easily have come from the words of an American, a Canadian or and Australian, but because they come from the BNP then they are automatically racist.
Robert Spencer really does not understand that I am about to be a supporter of the BNP(with a Black partner and mixed race son) and yet I am not or ever have been a racist. I just know one thing that if Britain continues under the Left, then it will destroy itself, chaos will ensue, Islam will grow and there will be civil war. There will be far more danger to the minorities in the UK when that happens and my voting for the BNP would not allow this to happen. People fail to realise that just because a Party wants to protect British Culture above all else, it does not mean that it's going to start removing people not white from the UK. They will and I hope they will make a condition in allowing people not white to live in the UK and that will be - "You can stay and live in the UK, educate yourself and benefit from all we have to offer you, but all we ask in return is that you embrace Britishness, our culture and do not try to force your way of life on the majority of people here who do not want it. If you do then you are not welcome to live here and we suggest you do not come or else you will be removed back to your own country and never allowed to come to the UK again."
The UK has far more to offer Somalians, Bangladeshis, Pakistanis and all other 2ns/3rd World countries than they have to offer them or us. They should realise this upon coming to the UK and if they can't see it or don't want it then they shouldn't come. It's common sense really as Multiculturism destroys societies and host cultures eventually leading to all out war.
At least you've had a reply from Robert Infidel. He doesn't even read mine or reply, although I am a great admirer of his website, his articles and of course his published books. However that does not bother me as what he says I believe in and he is not my enemy, Islam is.
Posted by: Richard the Lionheart at November 1, 2008 4:28 PM
LGF Has remained consistent in it's support for
Republicans, it never was a serious anti jihad site. C.J is clueless about everything related to
Islam, he recommended the people he now condemns.
He is the one who has had a change of heart about the Islamic threat in particular to Europe. How Gay of you Charles, LGF is going down the sewer.
at November 1, 2008 4:32 PM
This is very sad. I've been a regular reader of both LGF and Jihad Watch for a couple of years, now, and think both sites are very valuable. I'll continue to read both.
I agreed with Charles about Vlaams Belang and thought Pamela at Atlas Shrugs had let her opposition to the renewed jihad skew her judgment of them, and I thought GoV had become distasteful, too.
But to attack Robert and his sites for being "fascist and racial apologists" for resuming links to those sites? Give me a break. Charles has gone over the top and three trenches deep with that one. I've read several of Robert's books and many, many of his posts, and I have never, ever found reason to doubt his motives. In this case, I'm very disappointed in Charles and have to wonder about his judgment.
Posted by: Phineas Fahrquar at November 1, 2008 4:42 PM
Gosh. Guess I missed the ruckus.
I have never read anything written by Fjordman or Robert Spencer that would make me think that either one of these gentlemen is a racist.
Posted by: tanstaafl at November 1, 2008 4:55 PM
Anyone who wants to frame others for being 'fascists' should, first of all, understand fascism. I know it sounds obvious, but I've seen that smear so often, so out of context, so obviously misused, it simply needs repeating.
Fascism is a statist ideology. It is totalitarian, in that the State is meant to control everything, guarantee everything, be everything Good. Mussolini himself used that word with great pleasure. It's a variation of socialism, too, which is good to know.
But fascism isn't racist per se. That was a unique contribution of a small, unskilled painter out of Austria, who had the particular evil idea to blame the Jews for all kinds of evil. His ideology, too vile to name on a decent blog, had racism as its prime purpose, assault on Bolschevism as a diversion.
I don't consider fascism evil - it's just stupid. Stupid, because it takes away individual responsibility and places all faith in some Great Leader, who then will have the opportunity to demonstrate his ineptitude unconstrained. That usually leads to rather serious trouble.
Jonah Goldberg gave a passionate analysis of fascim in his book Liberal Fascism. While I think he goes a bit too far lashing out at Hollywood and other of his favorite aversions, his fundamental analysis is sound. Daniel Pipes said something to the effeact of: "He changed the way I understand politics". I wrote about it at EuropeNews, to bring out a few cardinal points of the book.
I wish that people understand fascism. There are many subtle points in todays' politics that are in line with classical fascism, yet people don't notice, for they think fascism is all about parades and military influence. There's more to it, like the never-ending 'Management by crisis', the denigration of reason and common sense, and - amazingly - the urgency of Change.
Probably the most fascist entity we have in Europe today is, unfortunately, the European Union. The disconnect from democracy is severe, and the road to bring it back on course hard to find. This is a serious challenge to civil liberties, as well as a strong enabler of Muslim immigration and a direct supporter of Islam and construction of mosques.
We need to take democracy back from our disconnected elite. That will be hard work, but sticking to respect for private property and the Rule of Law are good fundamentals.
Posted by: Henrik at November 1, 2008 5:10 PM
During the 40s the US sent considerable aid to the soviets, this did not mean that the US supported communist ideology, but that there was a war on and we had a common enemy.
I think there is some discernment between guilt by association and guilt by alliance. If one of the members of my bowling league turned out to be a member of the Nation of Islam, that would not make me an antisemite. If on the other hand I sat on a board that included a nation of Islam member and our board was involved in proselytizing within prisons then there is an alliance there.
I have thought much lately about the question of guilt by association and where a more sure guilt of alliances is merited. Sure we had an alliance with the atheistic godless mass murderring dictator stalin, back during ww2, that does not mean that we thought communism or mass murder were endorsable acts.
It seems to me that the more serious the issue, the more lenient we can be with alliances made for the sake of the greater good.
Posted by: stickman at November 1, 2008 5:15 PM
Richard the Lionheart: Thank you for your response. I appreciate it. As I read through your post what came most to mind is how different race is viewed in Britain and continental Europe versus America. I remember years ago (about twelve) teaching a young Swiss man who was highly intelligent, perfectly fluent in English and desirous of learning as much about America as he could. He not only studied American history but even made a valiant attempt to do what so few Europeans ever venture-----try and understand the game of American football (I found this particularly laudable). I remember on one occasion his asking me how there can be black fraternities and a Black Congressional Caucus and other exclusive black organizations but were whites to try the same thing they would be branded racist. He asked this as sincerely and without malice as it was possible to do. I looked at him and said something like, "Welcome to America. Let's go have a few beers and talk about this."
I tried to explain to him that a long legacy of discrimination against blacks here in America is the root cause for the disparity. On the surface and just abstractly speaking, I went on, it does appear inequitable. Still, there were historical reasons, I argued, for things being the way they were. And yet I also admitted to him that blacks often didn't take the time to understand that whites have reason to be proud of their heritage and that no white alive today ever owned a black slave and few whites were directly responsible for discrimination against a black person. I went on, though, and pointed out to him the kind of subtle ways that blacks were not given an equal opportunity to succeed as were their white counterparts. I also indicated that, unfortunately, too many blacks used historical white discrimination as an excuse often times for not succeeding. I found myself, in short, arguing for the status quo without fully believing myself it was justified, though I understood why it existed. I also told him that it would be beneficial to all to occasionally consider what it must be like to be a member of another race. Well, he got the gist of things but didn't fully grasp it all. But then what American ever has?
I would like to think that the day would come when race is irrelevant and all that matters is character. The world's not there yet but it remains a noble goal. In the meantime, Richard, I must stand on the principle that even excluding one person from joining the BNP because they have the wrong color skin is simply not defensible on any philosophical or religious ground. I hope you understand. But I appreciate your position on this matter, acknowledge, as I have before, that the BNP is possessed of many sound ideas and look forward to future posts from you on what we can all agree upon--------that there's no upside to Britain and Europe becoming Islamicized. I've done my best here and hope you can make some sense out of it, but I wouldn't take it unkindly it you can't. Take care, my friend.
Posted by: Wellington at November 1, 2008 5:17 PM
CJ - cj = CJ+
Posted by: sheik yer booty at November 1, 2008 5:28 PM
Out of curiosity, why does Infidel Pride consider Johnson and Auster to be 2 sides of the same coin?
Posted by: anonymous at November 1, 2008 3:00 PM
Quite simply, because they are. Anyone who criticizes (and more importantly misrepresents) another's position for not being in lock-step with their own, is valueless.
Couple that with the same form of totalitarian control over their blog that Johnson and Auster share, actually Johnson allows and then deletes whereas Auster creates contextual discussions, and we have essentially two sides of the same coin.
Though you and Erich try and try again, anonymous, you will find no Auster supporters here.
Auster and now Johnson are rendered similar armies of one.
Posted by: awake at November 1, 2008 5:34 PM
"Brussels Journal publishes Takuan Seiyo who is easily construed a racist. The horrible and unpleasant thing, though, is he speaks the truth."
Posted by: poetcomic1
Yes, Takuan Seiyo does speak the truth, e.g., his recent article over at BJ. But his views, which some find uncomfortable, are far more nuanced than is captured by the prejudicial and all-condemning label "racist."
As to the LGF kerfuffle, I agree with many of the above commenters. The comments on LGF remind me of those on YouTube, which are often little more than one liner jibes or insults in flame wars initiated and perpetuated by immature posters, and where administrators of the comments routinely delete or ban people they don't like or who challenge whatever POV the site tries to push. By way of contrast, the comments on JW/DW are, by and large, rationally presented and defended points of view, with a high degree of civility and mutual respect accorded other commenters even during disagreements. Although the sheer number of comments at LGF typically dwarfs that of JW, by the time one filters out the noise from LGF the signal that remains is well below that of JW.
Keep up the good work, Robert, and stay on the high road.
Posted by: Eastview at November 1, 2008 5:36 PM
Posted by: stickman
During the 40s the US sent considerable aid to the soviets, this did not mean that the US supported communist ideology, but that there was a war on and we had a common enemy.
The Russians had to pay for that aid in gold, so the glitter blinded the Americans to atheistic godless mass murdering dictator Stalin
Posted by: InfidelK9 at November 1, 2008 5:45 PM
I was writing a response to Charles Johnson over on LGF and suddenly my account was suspended. Never even got to post my response. No idea why I was banned! Anyway, since I can't post my response to Charles at LGF I'll post it here.
Charles,
I've been a long time reader of LGF and have enjoyed your blog but I think your throwing Spencer under the bus (as you did with Bostom and Diane West) is not fair. Spencer has (and Bostom) have done terrific work in the anti-Jihad movement and have provided valuable insights into this most dangerous threat. To my knowledge neither have ever written anything to suggest that they support neo-Fascist, white supremacists or anything resembling that. To suggest they are sympathetic to those vile ideologies is ludicrous. Linking to a site that you deem fascist leaning is not enough evidence of sympathy to that ideology. As Spencer pointed out in his rebuttal on JihadWatch, PJ Media, which I believe you were involved in starting, links to Brussels Journal too. Does that mean that PJ Media is sympathetic to the neo- Fascist cause? Your reasoning would seem so. You link to PJ Media, does that mean you also sympathize with them? How far down the line do you take this line of reasoning?
What have Spencer or Bostom ever said or written that would lead you to believe that they harbor these sympathies? I’d be interested in seeing that since I’ve never come across anything like that in their writings.
I also take exception to your statement that there’s a lot of Fascist sympathy in conservative circles. As a conservative I find that assertion absurd. As Jonah Goldberg pointed out so well in his book “Liberal Fascism” Fascism is an ideology of the Left, not the Right. To say a conservative would be a fascist is nonsensical. Conservatives oppose any kind of tyranny, be it communist, fascist or Islamic. And we also oppose the notion of supremacy, again be it white or Islamic. Conservatives believe in the individual, not the collective and the conservatives I know view the world not through a prism of race, as the Left does, but through the lens of individualism.
I also find it a little cowardly that you did this buried in an open thread like this. If you have an issue with Spencer and you feel so strongly about it, as you clearly do, why not put it in the front page rather than hide like this? I’ll continue to read your blog because I enjoy the stories you post but I am very disappointed in you, Charles, for doing this to Spencer and others.
at November 1, 2008 5:52 PM
Robert,
Add me as an admirer of your site and all the work you do for educating people about the dangers of Jihad.
I have been reading your site for yrs now but never had the chance to say hi until now. I posted this story of yours to my site.
Anything I can to go help with the fight, please feel free to drop me an email or leave a comment in there also.
savage
Posted by: savage_nation at November 1, 2008 6:00 PM
I am sorry to hear this, but...
...welcome to the club. It's not quite as exclusive as it was back in the day, but it's certainly diverse.
Keep up the good work, and thanks.
Posted by: CalGrad at November 1, 2008 6:04 PM
Robert,
I've been reading RSS links to JW, DW, and LGF for quite some time.
It's pretty clear that JW/DW are based on substantive content, and the tone of the posts is (usually) more reflective. By great contrast, LFG -- now that I've perused it for several years -- has become the "Echo Chamber" you point out. It's actually kind of creepy that it's opened up for a short window of opportunity to sign up and become a (ew) "hatchling".
Now that this controversy came to the fore, it seems clear where LGF's intent lies.
I'm sticking by you. Plus, your books and video posts are excellent!
Blues4Allah
Posted by: blues4allah at November 1, 2008 6:20 PM
Robert Spencer -- with this site, his speaking engagements, media interviews, and writings (books, articles, and monographs) -- has done more to bring more people to awareness of the Islamic threat than Charles Johnson has or ever will.
Furthermore, Robert Spencer has clearly stated, time and again, that this conflict with Islam is ideogically based, not ethnically based.
Am I having a meltdown (Charles Johnson's term)? Nope. But he is, with his hiding the links and creating that whacko message page.
The attempt to marginalize Robert Spencer is an exercise in futility for Charles Johnson. Oh, sure, he'll get some attention for a while. Then the reality will set in.
---------------------
To Robert Spencer:
Keep on doing what you do! Charles Johnson's defamation will come to naught -- certainly with any who matter.
Looking forward to receiving my copy of Stealth Jihad, which I pre-ordered from Amazon weeks and weeks ago.
Posted by: Always On Watch at November 1, 2008 6:27 PM
One gets the impression that someday very soon, Charles Johnson will be completely isolated, ship-wrecked on an island, completely alone, but for his lizardoids.
QUESTION: I can't find any indication of a rift with Robert over at LGF. Where am I missing it?
Posted by: Cornelius at November 1, 2008 6:37 PM
Previewing your Comment
Our fight is against Islam, which is not ethnic in nature. I don't think we ought to tie our fight with Islam to any existing ethnic conflict in Europe.
Posted by: pastorius
But since most Muslims are not of European extraction any fight against Islam is interpreted as a racist vendetta against minorities. Opposition to Islam will be interpreted in racist terms. There's no getting around it.
Opposition to immigration is viewed the same way. We are NOT allowed to maintain our cultural and territorial sovereignty if it means restricting access to people of another culture or ethnicity. The UNDHR says that no nation can bar others from its soil.
Since most immigration is from third world countries to the West, any opposition to it is automatically interpreted as racist. The fact that none of us can expect the same treatment in those countries that they expect in ours is ignored. We are the West. We are racist.
Globalization means we are forced to surrender our national sovereignty or be deemed isolationists or bigots or something else. We have the WTO, ICC and many other international bodies that exist for the sole purpose of denying national sovereignty. They are set on erasing borders - at least those between the West and other countries.
For over a century, the Democratic Party was the party of segregation and jim crow in the southern US. No one holds that against Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter or Ted Kennedy. Robert Byrd was once in the KKK. It has gone by the wayside. Why is the BNP forever tarnished?
at November 1, 2008 6:46 PM
Maybe Robert Spencer and Charles Johnson are both right?
Posted by: Dane at November 1, 2008 6:53 PM
Cornelius
Charles has done it under those stupid "Open Threads" of his. You see, unlike Mr. Spencer who is up front, Charlie is not that way at all.
Posted by: greatcometof1577 at November 1, 2008 6:59 PM
Here's another former fan of LGF who learned the hard way that Mr. Johnson has a very thin skin and can't take even mild criticism. I got fed up with his deliberately deceptive posts about ID, and called him on it when he used a type of argument that he had criticized himself on another post on Islamists. I got banned so fast it took my breath away. I decided I didn't need his site anyway - Jihad Watch and MEMRI have just about everything he has, and I don't have to endure the insults to my faith and intelligence. I deleted all bookmarks to his site and actively discourage others from going there now. Too bad as it once was a useful source of information - he is quickly becoming irrelevant.
Posted by: AmateurAngler at November 1, 2008 7:01 PM
Angler, I'm the guy that got 7 years of posts on LGF deleted by Chas...
Posted by: savage_nation at November 1, 2008 7:07 PM
Talk about racist!!!
Charles says this...
"Those rotten Palestinian bastards. Those rotten, cowardly, evil bastards. Suicide Bomber Kills 20 on Israeli Bus."
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=7875_And_Again
(Please note the link is blocked, so you will have to enter it into your browser itself)
Note he does not say Islamist bastards, or Jihadist bastards...but "Palestinian bastards". You know there are Christian Palestinians (I know a dying breed no thanks to Bush), and they are not bastards, sometimes confused, but not evil bastards. Now I know what Charles means, but see how it could be framed, all based on his ignorance of what we are fighting and it appears he just hated Palestinians (or Arabs living in that area). When has Robert Spencer ever spoken this way?
Posted by: greatcometof1577 at November 1, 2008 7:13 PM
Charles the Crusader
Are you by any chance Charles Johnson?
On the question by Anonymous, I see that Awake beat me to it, but the one thing I'll add to his comments - the only difference between Lawrence Auster and Charles Johnson is the directions from which they attack anti-Jihadis. Charles Johnson attacks those he disagrees with as racist, while Lawrence Auster attacks those he disagrees with as panderers. Other than that, as Awake noted, tactics have some subtle differences, but not much more.
Posted by: Infidel Pride at November 1, 2008 7:14 PM
@Dane:
Maybe Robert Spencer and Charles Johnson are both right?
For that to work, Johnson would have to be making points that are based in truth. He isn't.
Posted by: Archonix at November 1, 2008 7:14 PM
(1) Iraq War (2) Islam (3) Bush (4) Rumsfeld (5) Understanding the front lines of this war which is the stealth Jihad in Europe.(6) Serbia
I am sure others could find more if they tried.
Posted by: greatcometof1577 at November 1, 2008 2:21 PM
Incidentally, where does CJ stand on McCain?
Posted by: Infidel Pride at November 1, 2008 7:18 PM
The LGF blog makes for lazy journalism, self-righteous commentary and cheap comedy, the author/director/webmaster is a quasi-fascist hippie psychopath whose agenda is to herd as many sheeple together to sustain his ego driven delusion of grandeur...
http://www.disclose.tv/action/viewvideo/8010/Candid_Camera_proves_the_Sheeple_Theory_correct_/
at November 1, 2008 7:21 PM
Thanks, Mr Spencer, for your fine work.
Your principled and intelligent opposition to Islamic supremacism and your refusal to embrace racial or ethnic supremacism in your fight against the former make you an important voice in this world.
at November 1, 2008 7:23 PM
Just banned by LGF for defending Mr. Spencer in a thread about "the end of journalism" by Victor David Hanson.
"Disappeared" in the terminology of the "tolerant".
The perfect is the enemy of the good.
I trust Robert's instincts over Charles Johnson's, who seems to relish meaningless minutae and inflated, irrelevant micro-controversies over getting something serious done against the global Jihad.
Wasting time fighting in the trenches with allies is absurdity, squared.
I wish him well with the petty Purity Campaign.
Posted by: profitsbeard at November 1, 2008 7:25 PM
Infidel Pride
I am sure he supports him based on what stories he chooses to put up. Good pick up on Serbia...
Posted by: greatcometof1577 at November 1, 2008 7:26 PM
Is this why Jihadwatch defends Jews against Islamic tyranny all the time? WOW JW is amazingly deceptive!!! Pro Jews and Jew hating at the same time.That, and also defending Indian Hindus, Thai Buddhists, Filipino Catholics, and on the Slavic side (since White racists loathe Slavs as well), Serb Orthodox Christians.
Posted by: revparadigm at November 1, 2008 10:31 AM
What a bunch of WASPs JW is!!! (heavy sarcasm intended, just in case it isn't obvious)
Posted by: Infidel Pride at November 1, 2008 7:28 PM
Robert,
You said: And as I said above, I have not endorsed the VB. I have merely recognized that people of good will, who are not "seriously deluded" and are not racists or neofascists, have mounted a case opposing Charles Johnson's assessment of the VB. In other words, the question is not whether or not we should support neofascists, but whether or not VB is neofascist. This has eluded them, however, such that over in his echo chamber they say -- and even Charles suggests -- that I have embraced the neo-Nazis and encourage genocide. He ought to be monumentally ashamed of himself for this defamation.
I say: Yep. I understand and agree.
Careful that you don't begin to "stalk" Charles, as Bostom did.
;-)
Posted by: pastorius at November 1, 2008 7:31 PM
At the moment I am living in Java, so I am not able to be active in my support for the BNP, yet I am active in supporting Java for the Javanese, As a Nationalist I am just as concerned about the traditions and culture of Java being obliterated by islam, as I am concerned by British traditions and culture is being obliterated.Shiva/InfidelK9
I don't see Java ever reverting to Hindu, which is what 'Javanese traditions & culture' essentially are (minus the Islamic influence). Do you? Isn't your concern about 'the traditions and culture of Java' one of those cases of locking the stables after the horses have bolted?
Posted by: Infidel Pride at November 1, 2008 7:39 PM
Posted by: Infidel Pride at November 1, 2008 7:14 PM
I have been an avid supporter of the logic that IP presents for many moons now, and hopefully, that trend will continue.
IP has been critical of Spencer in the past, and Robert has responded to criticism, but most importantly, IP is still free to comment here after all this time and circumstance, whereas at LGF he would have certainly been banned and alternately, at VFR, never published.
Such is life, and reality.
Posted by: awake at November 1, 2008 7:41 PM
Posted by: pastorius at November 1, 2008 7:31 PM
Thank you Pastorius for answering my initial question posed to you, although indirectly.
Regards.
Posted by: awake at November 1, 2008 7:43 PM
Infidel Pride
Where does CJ stand on McCain? its hard to say, CJ cant read or comprehend very well so he tends to misquote positions all the time and based on that who really knows what positions he thinks candidates stand on or what positions he thinks they support when they really don’t.
But I can tell you that when McCain picked Palin, LGF ran a smear campaign against her for being a dirty “creationist” of all things.
at November 1, 2008 7:44 PM
For what it's worth, I had a brief conversation with Charles this afternoon - Defending JW - and did not get banned.
Posted by: RecoveringHog at November 1, 2008 7:48 PM
But I can tell you that when McCain picked Palin, LGF ran a smear campaign against her for being a dirty “creationist” of all things.
Posted by: Bar at November 1, 2008 7:44 PM
Hmmm. Auster smeared her as well, but not on the same face.
Posted by: awake at November 1, 2008 7:48 PM
For what it's worth, I had a brief conversation with Charles this afternoon - Defending JW - and did not get banned.
Posted by: RecoveringHog at November 1, 2008 7:48 PM
Obviously, remorse and common sense has finally set in with Mr. Johnson.
Enjoy it while it lasts, which in my estimation, will not be long.
Posted by: awake at November 1, 2008 7:51 PM
Bar, can you provide a citation for that claim? I've read CJ's posts on Palin and Intelligent Design: far from smearing her, he's defended her:
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/31488
at November 1, 2008 7:53 PM
Phineas,
Please do us all the favor of posting links that Charles has not blocked. Go through the trouble of explaining the way to circumvent Charles' intentional blockade.
Please do.
Posted by: awake at November 1, 2008 8:01 PM
awake
He is sulking...
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/showc/99/6144833
He said he has gotten "hate male" from "From Robert Spencer's fans.".
Posted by: greatcometof1577 at November 1, 2008 8:01 PM
awake
Highlight link, copy and paste into browser address field, click browse.
Posted by: greatcometof1577 at November 1, 2008 8:04 PM
1--Charles Johnson is a light-weight egomaniacal windbag, the Net's answer to Bill O'Reilly. He needs a good ignoring.
2--Robert Spencer is a principled, scholarly and gentlemanly citizen, and freedom-fighter. Oh, and did I say "brilliant"? That, too.
As much as lil Chuck needs to be ignored, the great Robert (and his comrade Hugh, too) shd be heeded.
People, people, people--we don't need these LGF bums and crackpots. As the late great Bernie Mack liked to say: "Let's move on."
Posted by: JewishOdysseus at November 1, 2008 8:04 PM
1--Charles Johnson is a light-weight egomaniacal windbag, the Net's answer to Bill O'Reilly. He needs a good ignoring.
2--Robert Spencer is a principled, scholarly and gentlemanly citizen, and freedom-fighter. Oh, and did I say "brilliant"? That, too.
As much as lil Chuck needs to be ignored, the great Robert (and his comrade Hugh, too) shd be heeded.
People, people, people--we don't need these LGF bums and crackpots. As the late great Bernie Mack liked to say: "Let's move on."
Posted by: JewishOdysseus at November 1, 2008 8:04 PM
1--Charles Johnson is a light-weight egomaniacal windbag, the Net's answer to Bill O'Reilly. He needs a good ignoring.
2--Robert Spencer is a principled, scholarly and gentlemanly citizen, and freedom-fighter. Oh, and did I say "brilliant"? That, too.
As much as lil Chuck needs to be ignored, the great Robert (and his comrade Hugh, too) shd be heeded.
People, people, people--we don't need these LGF bums and crackpots. As the late great Bernie Mack liked to say: "Let's move on."
Posted by: JewishOdysseus at November 1, 2008 8:05 PM
Phineas Fahrquar
"Bar, can you provide a citation for that claim? I've read CJ's posts on Palin and Intelligent Design: far from smearing her, he's defended her:"
His first comment about the Palin nomination was:
36 Charles 8/29/2008 9:00:42 am PDT
Ugh. I'm not thrilled.
Sarah Palin is a creationist.
Posted in "It's Palin" thread.
Cut and paste into browser.
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/showc/36/5782349
at November 1, 2008 8:06 PM
Posted by: greatcometof1577 at November 1, 2008 8:01 PM
GC1577, Whom I affectionately call Comet, another of my most favorite people who I am proud to call friend here at JW.
He will get no hate mail. No one cares about the lamentation of the weak and ineffectual.
That is why we here mourn a once worthy man in our collective cause against the jihad.
I am relatively sure that private apologies will be accepted, though not expected.
Unfortunate.
Posted by: awake at November 1, 2008 8:11 PM
CJ has taken on the traits of Jim Jones. I only hope for the sake of all the misguided and misled Lizardoids, and all the innocents they take to Lizard Island, that it does not end the same way.
Posted by: Wimbledon Womble at November 1, 2008 8:19 PM
I have been an avid supporter of the logic that IP presents for many moons now, and hopefully, that trend will continue.That's right. I don't care much for blogs that only have registration windows open only for a short period, and wouldn't have bothered registering in hotair either, had it not been for the fact that I wanted to get first dibs at the Quran blog. I hardly go there now, although I do have hotair as a pull-down RSS menu on my favorites bar (I use the IE 8 Beta - I am a software masochist most times). For the same reason, I never bothered looking at LGF for registering.
IP has been critical of Spencer in the past, and Robert has responded to criticism, but most importantly, IP is still free to comment here after all this time and circumstance, whereas at LGF he would have certainly been banned and alternately, at VFR, never published.
Such is life, and reality.
Posted by: awake at November 1, 2008 7:41 PM
As for VFR, there is no way I'd ever participate in a forum where comments have to be submitted for approval, since it gives the owner the capability to twist my statements and do exactly what you point out above. Sure, they have the right to do it, and I similarly have the right not to participate in such a format. If someone can't accept my open comments (they can always edit or delete it if it's offensive - it's happened on JW many times), which are aimed not only at them but also their readership, then I don't want to waste time on them.
As for Awake, I generally agree with him. Some subtle differences, maybe, on tactics and strategies now and then, and we have had our differences on how on target Robert's message sometimes is. But regardless of those differences, I've never thought, and probably would never think, that they have anything other than the ultimate defeat of Islam/Jihad in mind.
Posted by: Infidel Pride at November 1, 2008 8:21 PM
LGF used to be my homepage, but the intolerant attacks on creationists was the last straw for me. I haven't even been to the site for about 3 months now. The change on my once favorite site is astounding. I wonder what could be the real cause for such an obvious change? What is that saying... ah.. oh, yeah, .. follow the money. While I'm not making any accusations here and I generally have contempt for conspiracy or nutcase theories... The Saudis do have alot of extra cash these days. Seriously I'm JUST THINKING. A site that once zeroed in on the Islamic threat that now seems to be a deceptive stumbling block in our way.
Posted by: CJK at November 1, 2008 8:28 PM
Charles Johnson has turned on many fellow conservatives for no
good reason. I think he is becoming a terrorist sympathizer as he didn't even make it to the top 12 Islamophobes list this year.
at November 1, 2008 8:28 PM
Charles Johnson has turned on many fellow conservatives for no
good reason. I think he is becoming a terrorist sympathizer as he didn't even make it to the top 12 Islamophobes list this year.
at November 1, 2008 8:29 PM
I think that most Americans do not understand European Nationalist organisations and because of ignorant comments made by Jihadwatch and LGF the whole European movement has been severely damaged. It really doesn't help our cause to be branded as fascist or neo nazi.
Now Spencer and Charles and bickering over web links.
Grow up the pair of you.
On a side note, Obama is creating "civilian national defence" guards, as powerful as the Army...and you 2 are more concerned about the semantics of the word fascism.
Posted by: leon at November 1, 2008 8:29 PM
You have to watch out for those egos. I should know. I'm of a similar temperament to Johnson, though I think the difference is that a) I'm smallfry, and so have relatively little opportunity to have my ego stroked and b) I'm aware of my character flaws.
For example, the fact that Robert didn't respond to me above cut me quite deeply. If I weren't so painfully aware of the fact that I'm liable to self-obsession I would have taken it as a snub and reacted in a manner entirely unfair to Mr Spencer, who has every right to reply or not to any particular post. (Of course it could also be said that my pointing this out is some sort of implied criticism - which it isn't, though I know it could be taken that way).
Every day, I have to learn humility. I learn that respect needs to be earned by acting in a consistently respectful and honest manner. Trust is earned by being trustworthy. Whatever I amount to I can at least be thankful I've learned, and still learn, these lessons.
It's ultimately our behaviour that betrays our true intentions. Robert Spencer's are obvious. Robert is a seeker for truth, whatever that truth may be, and as such is a rare individual. The truth is a terrible and beautiful thing to behold and seeking it is a dangerous and often thankless task. Any accolades Mr Spencer has received for his work are but a fraction of the reward he deserves.
Some, of lesser intent, are willing to bask in the reflected glory of the truth for as long as it aligns with their own prejudices, soaking up it warmth for as long as the truth doesn't challenge their comfortable position.
Well I'm done rambling now. I hope people take what I've written in the spirit it was intended. I have a rather nice cabernet to hand - at least, what I haven't already consumed (which explains this rambling I suppose) so I'll raise a glass. To Mr Spencer. May he ever find truth.
Posted by: Archonix at November 1, 2008 8:38 PM
awake
:)
No one sent him hate mail, he calls anything that is a little critical of him as hate mail (and no I did not send him anything, what would be the point..).
Posted by: greatcometof1577 at November 1, 2008 8:49 PM
Wellington,
I was in the same position as your Swiss friend when I came to America and was amazed at the blatant racism I saw from Black to White in the case of Black Associations, Black fraternities etc etc, yet none the same for whites. However, I did understand American football as I played the game it came from - Rugby, very well.
It is sad to see that Blacks use the past to complain about the status quo, when in all reality it has nothing whatsoever to do with it. You rightfully state that no man you knew owned a slave or was part of the trading in them and yet white people are continually made to suffer for the past.
I can see where you are coming from with you believing there is no excuse to the BNP not allowing a person in because of their colour. You will recall that I wrote to the BNP stating that allowing British people to join the BNP, of any colour/religion(bar Islam) will greatly help the appeal of the BNP and that they are shooting themselves in the foot on their principles. I also stated quite simply that they should consider changing their name to the White Nationalist Party if this were the case on people of colour not being able to join the BNP as I know people who are Black and very much proud to be British.
Upon discussing with friends, they say to me that when people ask them where they're from, they say "England". They then say, they know that but where are they from and again they say "England". My friends shake their heads and say, they were born here, educated in the schools and grew up on English Culture, not African or West Indian Culture. However, safe to say I also know many Black in London although born here who will never class themselves as English or British. It's all about upbringing and thanks to NuLabour everyone growing up under their regime doesn't want to be English or British as they've successfully managed to indoctrinate them into hating who they are and what they are.
While everyone is arguing with one another about this and that, Islam is growing. In the UK in 2001 the government said there to be 1.6 million and still harp on about that now, adding an extra 200k onto the total for population increase via procreation and immigration. The sad situation is that the figure in the UK of Muslims is probably around the 4-5million mark as there are nearly 2 million Muslims in London alone. With current trends, including polygamy now legal for Muslims in the UK it means that each Muslim male, thanks to multiple wives in Pakistan, Bangladesh, Somalia etc etc will have much more children than the average Non Muslim in the UK, of course supported, via benefits by the British taxpayer. jihad is happening in the UK by birth. They know that the easiest way to take us over is by population growth, become the majority and then start acting as a majority to make life the way they want it. All Muslims, regardless want islamisation - one country under Allah - all countries under Allah - Ummah.
Unless we all put aside our differences and unite together to fight the common foe of Islam, then there will be no UK. The squabbles that we have with one another won't matter then as we won't exist, or should I say the political parties won't exist, nor will democracy, a humanitarian law system and of course freedom, just one big male dominated, Islam worshipping caliphate.
If all the parties against Islam united together then that would be an unstoppable force and the only force to stop Islam, however they won't. We have again not learned from history and about to make the same mistake again. Wellington, you can disagree with my idea, but I'm a realist and if we are not United, we fall. We have tolerance, Islam doesn't. However, Islam will use our tolerance to continue to bring in its intolerance and there is nothing we will be able to do about it. Unless we physically remove Islam from the West, it will just grow and grow and grow and then it will fight. We will by then be powerless to stop it. There is one final word, in 50 years time, Islamic states will definitely have Nuclear weapons, which will be aimed at us. If the UK and Europe falls under Islamisation then the USA will for the simple reason that our Nuclear Weapons will be pointed at America, of course under the control of the Islamists. This situation on Islam should be on top of the list of Objectives for all Western Governments, even higher than Global Warming. I would rather the world blow up than be under Islamic oppression and control, being made to believe in something I disagree with vehemently. This bird will never be caged, ever and I just wish more people saw the future as vivid as I do.
Posted by: Richard the Lionheart at November 1, 2008 9:02 PM
lionheart, dude,
Your black wife and your mixed race kids would be treated as a second class citizens under the BNP, that's your future?
Posted by: leon at November 1, 2008 9:12 PM
A little late in the comment thread I guess. I was online during the ruckus last night and just writing to say I have the upmost respect for Mr. Spencer and the great deal of information he provides here on his site and in his books.
LGF is a good site for political discussions but Charles is getting very sensitive about ID and the European groups like VB.
I have no idea why he delinked this site, the action seems insane given the reasons stated.
I will certainly continue to read Jihad Watch, but read LGF less and less as Charles continues into the deep end of the pool.
Posted by: Fred4D at November 1, 2008 9:17 PM
"It is sad to see that Blacks use the past to complain about the status quo"
You mean the now defunct slavery and the deaths of hundreds of thousands of blacks which ended in 1865 and segregation which ended in 1954?
Those trifle events we should just wash our hands of?
at November 1, 2008 9:17 PM
Leon, why should this generation be held responsible for the sins of those long dead?
Posted by: Archonix at November 1, 2008 9:25 PM
Charles is so transfixed with Fascists that he has become a Fascist. Like Captain Ahab in Moby Dick he fanatically pursues the White Whale because he believes him to be a reflection of himself and inevitably wants to kill Moby Dick.
Posted by: Briars at November 1, 2008 9:43 PM
archonix
Your argument lacks empathy. Segregation was only 60 years ago.
"not my generation" argument is crass. The blacks got b##t f####d over slavery in the USA, imagine not knowing your family history only knowing that your relatives were brought over to the US as slaves. My advice, any European Nationalists who contribute comments on this site, please for the sake of your party, stop talking about race.
Posted by: leon at November 1, 2008 9:47 PM
Of course it lacks empathy. Why should I bear the responsibility for something that I was not responsible for? It's a fundamental injustice to place the burden of responsibility for an act on those who didn't commit that act. Why should I be required to bear that responsibility by you or anyone else?
Posted by: Archonix at November 1, 2008 10:04 PM
"Scotland’s nationalist movement grew out of the idea of not wanting to be even remotely associated with the English. I mean it’s fair, really, because we haven’t been particularly nice to the Scots in the past"
LOL.
Posted by: leon at November 1, 2008 10:07 PM
Charles who? Never heard of him.
Dear Robert,
Of course you know we all support you because of what you stand for, because you put your money where your mouth is and because of who you are. But it is more than that. When I met you two years ago I was impressed by your gracious demeanor, your gentlemanly behavior, and your pleasant personality. I was also impressed with your persistent search for the truth and your willingness to put that light on a tall candlestick rather than hide it under a bushel as the Kool-Aid drinkers, who think they have the upper hand now, demand. When I think of what a modern day Christian knight would look like, I think of you.
Today is the feast of All Saint's Day. In the Gospel this morning it said Blessed are they that suffer persecution for justice' sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. You are now suffering this Robert but be of good cheer. God is watching you and smiling at your sacrifice. In every age he has raised up extraordinary people to help guide those of us who yearn for justice and freedom. I have no doubt you are one of these men.
If you want to feel better immediately, go to the Catholic Encyclopedia and look up ten saints and see that they all went through this. You are in good company, my friend. ; )
Posted by: Isabellathecrusader at November 1, 2008 10:07 PM
"Now Spencer and Charles and bickering over web links.
Grow up the pair of you."
Leon you came on here, this issue did not pursue you anywhere...if you don't like it, don't show up on this site. This situation has relevance in many ways if you care to read.
Posted by: revparadigm at November 1, 2008 10:08 PM
Archonix
Those were your words, written on your website highlighting the injustice done to Scots hundreds of years ago.
revparadigm
It just concerns me that Spencer and Charles are just as pissed with European fascism as they are with Islamism.
What you gonna have me banned? Getting ready to write me up.
Word of advice, stop talking about groups such as the BNP and all posters wont have to defend the BNP and other European nationalists and then we can get on with sorting out this islamic imperialism.
at November 1, 2008 10:13 PM
LOL
Posted by: leon at November 1, 2008 10:07 PM
I hope it can never be said I take things too seriously. :)
Posted by: Archonix at November 1, 2008 10:15 PM
It is sad, as disunity is not what we need, but CJ has been fomenting disunity for over a year now. He is not what he appeard to be.
Robert Spencer is a real scholar. CJ is a man with a popular website. With CJ's excommunication of RS, LGF no longer has any claim to being a website that opposes the decline of Western Civilization. LGF is now a passive bystander to the process. Any pretense it had of resisting this process is gone.
LGF is irrelevant.
Posted by: Wimbledon Womble at November 1, 2008 10:16 PM
"What you gonna have me banned? Getting ready to write me up."
Gee seems you are a little desperate to be a victim here.
Relax Leon.
Whatever "write me up" means in that paranoid thought process you have there, I seriously doubt Mr.Spencer & company wouldn't honor my whining about you to the point of warranting a ban here. Try Little Green Turdballs for Gestapo Moderation.
Posted by: revparadigm at November 1, 2008 10:18 PM
Words have consequences.
I have written words that have fallen on deaf ears, I have written words which have pissed off many and even made me look like an idiot.
But all this banning crap and deleting people's links from web sites is juvenile.
Spencer and Charles need to delete this whole thread and start afresh and as friends.
Posted by: leon at November 1, 2008 10:19 PM
I too must express my dismay at Charles’ decision. From my perspective, I’ve watched the LGF site vacillate wildly in the past six months or so as Charles has wrestled with what his site should represent (jihad vs. creationism vs. technical web design questions).
Meanwhile, JW and DW remain the gold standard in my opinion, never descending into the realms of racism or neo-nationalism/fascism. Additionally, the links and commentary are rock solid in terms of accuracy. In the rare instances where a mistake was made, both Robert and Hugh have jumped to the fore to make corrections and admit their error—a rarity these days.
That said, I read Brussels Journal and Fjordman frequently (daily—hoping for new content), and rarely if ever find anything objectionable. My fear is that Charles has become so obsessed with maintaining a safe distance from anything third parties might criticize him for in the future (rarely done in a fair-minded way) that he finds himself attempting to read into written materials that which does not exist. At root grows the question of whether love of your own culture, and a rational desire to protect it, is racist. That is a question we should all contemplate, as multiculturalism dictates an answer that would surely lead to the elimination of Western inclusiveness and exceptionalism.
at November 1, 2008 10:20 PM
Nuts, I wish there was a way of editing posts. I forgot to add: Leon, I am part scottish myself. I'm also English by birth and, whilst I can understand their reasoning, I don't feel responsible for the suffering scotland went through in the past. I bear no malice, nor do I feel it necessary to debase myself in order to alleviate their suffering.
Like I said, don't ask the picts what they think.
I cna understand a grievance without feeling it necessary to respond to that grievance. It's nothing to do with me. I can choose to respond if I like but there is no obligation to do so. Your assumption is that I should feel an obligation to these people because of what their immediate ancestors suffered. I don't see it.
Posted by: Archonix at November 1, 2008 10:21 PM
Richard the Lionheart: Again I thank you for your response. We agree on almost all fronts. I look with great dismay when I reflect upon what has happened to Britain since the 1960s. Not only was unchecked immigration allowed (not enlightened in the least but in fact quite stupid because it was not accompanied by any kind of emphasis on the importance of embracing and cherishing British achievements through the centuries), but at precisely the same time an unremitting castigation of British heritage was in the works.
When I now look upon Monty Python and its ilk, I no longer chiefly see humor but an almost mindless debasement of all things British. Nothing like this has ever occurred in all of history in any region of the world. It is national suicide by guilt and self-ridicule. Just as the mockers of traditional Western culture thought they were in the right (and cool), so now should anyone with sense realize that such an approach was deeply in error and extremely destructive. In short and to be specific, the John Cleese type no longer appears nearly as funny to me as he once did. Arguably, he and his kind have done incalculable harm.
The BNP is in league with many good ideas but still not right in its stance on non-white folks. What a shame that an organization which is correct on many counts still has a glaring error in putting race forward as an insuperable priority. Surely you see this. What really is important is opposing totalitarian thought, and I would strongly argue that the most invidious, long-lasting and destructive of such ideologies is still alive. It's called Islam.
All, including the BNP, should coalesce around opposition to Mohammedan totalitarianism. Putting race on the agenda as a factor is an unnecessary diversion. It's stupid. The evil du jour (in reality the evil du millennium), Islamic supremacism, is here today in full malevolent flower and must be opposed by all sensible and rational folk-----regardless of race, ethnicity, other creed, national origin, etc.
My best to you. I have no doubt we have much more in common than not. I will look forward to future posts of yours. Your inside view of the modern UK is most instructive, even invaluable.
Posted by: Wellington at November 1, 2008 10:24 PM
"I hope it can never be said I take things too seriously. :)"
Writing all these jihadwatch postings has taken too much time away from my Kajagoogoo "too shy" homemade music video remake.....
your up late BTW? 3:24am?
at November 1, 2008 10:24 PM
"Spencer and Charles need to delete this whole thread and start afresh and as friends."
This is a little more serious than just hurt feelings from a few stray words. This has gone to the point of a libel suit in Robert's eyes
Posted by: revparadigm at November 1, 2008 10:25 PM
Its always seemed to me, that Robert Spencer and Jihad Watch wanted to publish their own material and not have to approve or disapprove what other people in the save the West coalition said. Their view is they have their own work and that takes more than all the time and energy they have.
Jihad Watch and Robert Spencer have said they are not responsible for other people's comments, and are not looking for quarrels or fights within our own side. They want to make their statements and defend them from what the other side throw back at them. That's a full day and full night's work.
Posted by: Old Atlantic at November 1, 2008 10:25 PM
leon
I am no fan of the BNP, however I think you lack context in what you say, and it troubles me a little and here is why…
(1) Every culture has had slavery, in fact it was the norm for most of the world well into the 19th century.
(2) Western civilization (Europeans) took part in the slave trade from Africa as well, but so did Africans, Arabs etc.
(3) Most of the Africans sold in the slave trade were captives in war. An African prisoner of an other tribe/nation could expect to be enslaved by them, sold to another peoples (like another African tribe/nation, the Arabs or Europeans) or just killed, heck some were even sacrificed.
(4) Also note it was Western Civilization (Europeans) who ended the slave trade, and they were the first ones to question their own practices. The abolitionist movement was born in the west.
So why must we westerners feel guilt ridden, and no one else on this planet has to? Heck the Arabians ended their slave trade in the 1960s, and some still want to bring it back (if not already in underground markets). In some parts of Africa it still is practiced. I feel proud that as a westerner we admitted we screwed up, and instead of blaming everyone else for what we done, we tried to stop it by force. I don’t feel guilt, but pride in what the west has done. It is not perfect, we of course should not sweep it under the rug, but this obsession to blame the west for all ills, that racist are around every corner, anyone who defends the west in what it has done is some kind of “culture racist” is crap.
Not because I happen to be “white”, whatever the hell that means, but because I am western. I accept the values of the west, of those divided Ancient Greeks, those pesky Christians, those pain-in-the-ass Scientific revolutionaries, those enlightenment revolutionaries, those know-it-all industrialist….they all had a hand in it..
All in all…the full body of work, the only way you can really judge a people…We did really good and still can, if we stick to what got us here in the first place, and not worry about every little mistake we happened to make at the expense of everything we did right, and alas that is what is wrong with LGF.
at November 1, 2008 10:30 PM
"This has gone to the point of a libel suit in Robert's eyes"
Robert, listen to Kate Bush's "Man with the child in his eyes". You will see things differently after this song.
Joking aside. That's Robert's problem. I doubt he wants to be embroiled with a lengthy costly law suit which he may or may not win. Spencer just needs to cut off charles, what is LGF anyway? a crappy website. forget them. who? see i've forgotten them already. easy.
me paranoid? yes. why? not telling.
Posted by: leon at November 1, 2008 10:31 PM
"So why must we westerners feel guilt ridden, and no one else on this planet has to? "
That's their problem.
Dude, I don't wake in the morning and think, oh sheet i feel bad for slavery but gosh when i see the 4th generation slaves wandering around jobless in some southern ghost town then i feel kinda weird. I mean they got there via slavery and are left at the mercy of welfare, drugs and alcohol. No means to leave nor empower their lives. again it's not my fault but i feel for their situation. Yeah, they cannot really relocate back to the african continent if they wanted to.
but, segregation ended in 1954, 1954 in a democracy, the USA. that's effed up.
Plus blaming the west for all its ills?
Colonialism got us into this big s####y mess we are in now.
Posted by: leon at November 1, 2008 10:44 PM
Charles has lost his mind.
Welcome to the Outer Darkness. It's not so bad. We get along.
Posted by: Obi's Sister at November 1, 2008 10:48 PM
"It is sad, as disunity is not what we need, but CJ has been fomenting disunity for over a year now. He is not what he appeard to be."
Hey womble, you could be onto something there. CJ was involved somewhere with far left radicals, i wrote about it somewhere, but that was long ago...........
Posted by: leon at November 1, 2008 10:49 PM
Isn't part of the point of Western civilization to let freedom ring? Aren't we fighting for the right of people to have their own views and to debate with civility?
Posted by: Old Atlantic at November 1, 2008 10:51 PM
"Leon, I am part scottish myself. I'm also English by birth and, whilst I can understand their reasoning,"
I thought that I was pure English for the first 25 years of my life, until my parents told me I was half Irish by blood.
seriously, my wife had to tell me that mother half irish and father half irish makes me half irish.
no wonder why i can't walk past irish pubs without grabbing a pint.
Posted by: leon at November 1, 2008 10:55 PM
leon
Colonialism was superior (despite all its faults) to what existed there before and for its time. That is my point. Let me give you example...
The Spanish Conquistadors could do some bad things, especially by today’s standards, but considering the people they were fighting against, the Aztecs, they were a big time step up. The Aztecs were still performing human sacrifice to their gods. Of course many native Americans ended up dying from disease, like small pox, but that would have happened if the Spanish had shown up with rose in their hands, preaching peace for all man, because the Native Americans had no immunity to those “old world diseases”.
So what if someone wanted to bring back the Aztec religion today, demanding equality for their faith. Is that something as a gilt-ridden evil westerner we should accept? We can have “Human Sacrifice Wednesday”! It will be great….no need for abortions anymore!
at November 1, 2008 10:59 PM
greatcometof 1577
"Heck the Arabians ended their slave trade in the 1960s, and some still want to bring it back (if not already in underground markets)."
It's alive and well in the Eastern European white markets. It's alive and well in London in the drug dens and the massage parlors. All organized by white brits and white eastern europeans.
Arab doesn't mean muslim. Please stop using race and ethnicity.
Posted by: leon at November 1, 2008 11:01 PM
greatcometof1577
"Colonialism was superior "
Muslims believe that Islam is superior to "westernism".
We empowered them.
Posted by: leon at November 1, 2008 11:10 PM
greatcometof1577
You can thank the great colonialists for empowering jihad, ie germany britain and france. Now all 3 are in deep pooh pooh of their own home grown infitada.
America next.
Posted by: leon at November 1, 2008 11:16 PM
"leon', I am assuming the formerly known as "Leon the pig farmer", I must ask.
What is your point? That the UK will fall and so will America?
Nonsense.
Are you attacking GC's comments?
More nonsense. Stop wasting everybody's time here.
America next, like the UK has fallen already?
Posted by: awake at November 1, 2008 11:26 PM
leon
“Muslims believe that Islam is superior to "westernism". We empowered them.”
Your kidding right? Is this for real?
They are empowered by their acceptance of Islam, it has nothing to do with us. We could worship a dead fish, hell we could worship YOU, and it would not stop empowering them.
However, if we want to win we better figure out who WE are. It is clear you need to do some research on that.
Yes, Western Civilization is superior…am I a racist for saying that? It is my opinion that women should be free, people should have the freedom to speak…is that racist? Islam allows for none of that…so yes I dislike Islam.
The reason Germany, Britain and France are in such trouble is because people like you say things like...."Muslims believe that Islam is superior to "westernism". We empowered them.".
I would look into the mirror, Mr. Negative...
Posted by: greatcometof1577 at November 1, 2008 11:28 PM
So Leon, what is it that you want or need to get over the slavery issue? Do you need us to hear you? Do you need us to apologize to you? Or do you need us to feel like shit about it?
Posted by: Isabellathecrusader at November 1, 2008 11:28 PM
Phineas Fahrquar
Ec marm posted a link, thanks ec marm.
I called it a smear against Palin and at first look you may not see any smears, I was part of the LGF “creationist” vs “evolutionist” debacle, so I know what Charles Johnson’s opinion really is with regard to creationist and its not kind.
Charles Johnson likes to point out that Christians that have a non-Darwinian view of creation and Jihadist are alike. And other eccentric moral equivalence crap.
Posted by: Bar at November 1, 2008 11:29 PM
For what it's worth, I had a brief conversation with Charles this afternoon - Defending JW - and did not get banned.
Posted by: RecoveringHog at November 1, 2008 7:48 PM
My take on that is he's beginning to realize he's got only a few minions left.
Posted by: darcy at November 1, 2008 11:30 PM
This is a brief note of respect for your integrity, courage, and considerable dignity during this unfortunate affair. It’s tough enough that those in denial attempt to distort your message to defame you. But to be unfairly smeared by a former comrade-in-arms is painfully disappointing.
We all know there will be differences in judgment and opinion among men of good will. Those that needlessly sow dissention within the ranks will undermine our effort, divert our attention, and drain our resources. Let’s leave them behind and continue the fight without them. Keep up the good work.
I’m glad to see I’m joined by many of my old friends and by my fellow bloggers at the Infidel Bloggers Alliance.
at November 1, 2008 11:35 PM
Darcy said:
"My take on that is he's beginning to realize he's got only a few minions left."
Or only a few minutes left, as his 15 minutes have dilated to more than he can justify.
Posted by: Wimbledon Womble at November 1, 2008 11:37 PM
darcy at 11:30 PM-
"...and did not get banned."
I must have hit a kneejerk at LGF to get zapped and banished so quickly, but Johnson's intolerance for discussion defeats the point of discussing.
One-sided debate is what the fascistic prefer.
Silence! You question US!?! How dare you disrupt the collective nodding.
Little Green Kafkas is more like it.
Posted by: profitsbeard at November 1, 2008 11:40 PM
"It is sad to see that Blacks use the past to complain about the status quo"
You mean the now defunct slavery and the deaths of hundreds of thousands of blacks which ended in 1865 and segregation which ended in 1954?
Those trifle events we should just wash our hands of?
Posted by: leon at November 1, 2008 9:17 PM
On a positive note, Blacks in America have the highest standard of living of all Blacks on the globe. On the globe.
And, slavery still exists in Africa, Middle East, and Asia.
And here you are complaining about America.
at November 1, 2008 11:40 PM
And yet, Miss Darcy, they are getting ready to set themselves back a hundred years by electing Obama next Tuesday and voluntarily submitting themselves to his Socialistic and probably ultimately genocidal tendencies, of their own free will.
Posted by: Isabellathecrusader at November 1, 2008 11:46 PM
Geez, Darth Batman, this thread is almost as half as long as any at LGF! I am registered there, but after reading about the treatment of so many decent people, I have decided to ban myself. I see no point in going back to LGF for any reason.
What you are doing here, with Hugh, Marisol, Raymond and others, is far more important than getting caught up in Charles' recurring tantrums. It is simply unfair to categorize so many decent people as racists and fascists.
I won't be missed, since I am a nobody on LGF, but still. I will miss what was once great comaraderie.
at November 1, 2008 11:48 PM
Is "leon" really "leon the pig farmer" of old? I wondered what happened to him.
Posted by: darcy at November 1, 2008 11:51 PM
Jewell,
Robert mentioned earlier that his longest thread had 495 posts. I think that we, being the stubborn anti-jihadists that we are, are planning to beat that record.
Posted by: Isabellathecrusader at November 1, 2008 11:53 PM
What is it now, Isabella, about 320 posts?
RS may have to start a new thread.
Posted by: darcy at November 1, 2008 11:58 PM
Posted by: darcy at November 1, 2008 11:51 PM
Just a guess on my part, Darcy. I have been known to be wrong on occasion, just don't put a dollar on it in this occasion, OK?
Posted by: awake at November 2, 2008 12:00 AM
greatcometof1577
well, we empowered 20th century Islamism.
Where do you think Saddam got his WMD's from? What about the Muslim SS? The British in Saudi Arabia, the heroic Lawrence of Arabia.
We screwed up big time.
We should've stayed at home.
America's next.
Posted by: leon at November 2, 2008 12:02 AM
OK, awake. I don't think he really sounds like the leon the pig farmer that I recall.
How 'bout .50?
Posted by: darcy at November 2, 2008 12:02 AM
InfidelK9:
"Today there are about thirty blogs that are supporting the BNP, and they all have one thing in common, they all support Israel."
See, this is the point I was making about allowing BNP supporters to post their propaganda here unchallenged. Claiming to support Israel and Jews is merely the BNP’s version of taqiyya, which some credulous JW readers, unaware of the reality, could accept as fact. In truth, the party is riddled with anti-Semites, Holocaust deniers and Jew-haters, with an over-representation of such types in its leadership.
How can any of its supporters have the chutzpah to claim that the party is pro-Israel / pro-Jewish when its leaders have come out with statements like this:
"We will never again involve British troops in any more American 'wars for oil' or neo-con adventures on behalf of the Zionist government of Israel."
( BNP’s 2005 General Election manifesto )
"We are utterly opposed to attempts by American imperialists, the Zionist lobby, the neo-con movement and the US's British puppets in the Labour and Tory parties to drag us into a ‘Clash of Civilisations' with the Islamic world."
( BNP’s 2005 General Election manifesto. Note: this was four years after 9/11 ).
"And it is equally true that assorted Zionists – particularly around President Bush - played a key role both in pushing for the invasion [ Iraq ] and in telling the lies that created a degree of public support for it. It seems that they thought that having the Yanks and Brits go in and obliterate Saddam was a good thing for Israel."
(BNP leader Nick Griffin’s personal blog, 23/9/05)
"The attack [9/11] by Muslims, was caused directly in retaliation to the support given to Israel by the USA, which in turn is driven by the Jewish domination of the American mass media and government. Such attacks are set to increase as long as the White West allows its politics and mass media to be dominated by Jewish groups..."
...This Jewish domination of the mass media and the political decision-making process in the USA and Western Europe, will have increasingly serious consequences for the Whites of these parts of the world as the power and anger of the Islamic world spreads. Gentiles in the West are associated with Jews by the Muslims - and not undeservedly so, given the slavish support which the West appears (through the Jewish-dominated mass media and governmental control) to give to Israel and World Jewry."
( BNP strategist Arthur Kemp in his book March of the Titans: A History of the White Race )
"But who is behind it all? Who are the people who determine what is watched on television and printed in the newspapers? This is not so easy a study because a great many of the people concerned operate in the shadows. And even in the case of those whose names are known, what is known about their backgrounds and their connections? Very little.
For this reason, very few people in Britain are aware of the huge influence over the mass media exercised by a certain ethnic minority, namely the Jews."
( Nick Griffin explaining how a shadowy Jewish media cabal works to “weaken the national spirit and racial pride of the British people” in his pamphlet “Who Are the Mindbenders?)
"There is nothing more nauseating than a racist, extremist , terror supporting front group calling the BNP 'extremist'."
The Board of Deputies of British Jews, a grand sounding title for a clique of self serving Zionist racists, has written an article attacking the BNP in the Totally Jewish newspaper.
Interesting title for a newspaper Totally Jewish - does the title seek to imply that there are different degrees of Jews ? Perhaps the paper believes that the 'Total Jew' is a 'Zionist-Super Nazi' which is the ideal of a Jew whose bloodline is totally Jewish, who is an orthodox religious Jew and who is Jew who supports the concept of the Chosen People and the race state of Israel - in other words the Zionist-Nazi Superman."
( BNP “legal adviser” Lee John Barnes, whose rabidly anti-Semitic posts got him instantaneously banned from Jihadwatch.)
"I'm going to level with you. I'd never say this on camera, yeah, and you can say this to whoever you want, 'cos it's true. The Jews have been thrown out of every country, including England. There's not a single European country the Jews have not been thrown out of. And let's face it, David, when it happens so many times it's not just persecution. There's no smoke without fire."
( BNP Head of Publicity Mark Collett, speaking “confidentially” to an undercover film director in the Dispatches documentary “Young, Nazi and Proud”. )
"I am well aware that the orthodox opinion is that 6 million Jews were gassed and cremated and turned into lampshades. Orthodox opinion also once held that the Earth was flat... I have reached the conclusion that the "extermination" tale is a mixture of Allied wartime propaganda, extremely profitable lie, and latter witch-hysteria."
( BNP leader Nick Griffin, sharing his considered opinion on what he termed “The Holohoax” during his editorship of BNP magazine The Rune, one of the most viciously anti-Semitic publications ever produced in the UK.)
While we’re at it, let’s not forget the view of InfidelK9 himself, posting to JW in his former guise as Shiva, and explaining why he agreed with a BNP writer's view that British Jews should not be considered British:
“Since when has Jewish Tradition been British, the Jewish tradition derives from the middle East, so there-fore it is foreign…The Jews are foreign people and what makes them foreign is they have different traditions than the traditions of the people in whose lands they live”
“…Jews have always keep them selves apart thus making themselves different,alien or foreign, even thought they are British German or whatever. It is not racist to call Jews different,alien or foreign because by being so they have been able to retain their Jewishness.”
http://jihadwatch.org/archives/018805.php
at November 2, 2008 12:03 AM
Awake
The UK HAS fallen to Socialism.
Darcy, who is leon the pig farmer?
surely he's been banned and excommunicated by now?
at November 2, 2008 12:06 AM
How 'bout .50?
Posted by: darcy at November 2, 2008 12:02 AM
After his sad spammish cut and paste, you are probably right.
Just send me the bill, my dear. I owe you.
Posted by: awake at November 2, 2008 12:06 AM
Awake
The UK HAS fallen to Socialism.
Posted by: leon at November 2, 2008 12:06 AM
Not true. Just don't suggest the BNP, and we can move on in the discussion, leon.
at November 2, 2008 12:10 AM
Darcy, who is leon the pig farmer?
Your sarcasm is irksome.
You're not that leon, don't worry about it.
Posted by: darcy at November 2, 2008 12:15 AM
Leon, you didn't answer my question. What will it take from us for you to get over the slavery?
Posted by: Isabellathecrusader at November 2, 2008 12:19 AM
"Not true."
awake
your government is ruled by communists, ex communists, sopcialists, marxists ex marxists. etc John Reid was a card carrying member of the Communist Party and you tell me that the UK hasn't fallen to Socialism????? Go google ever single and past member of the Labour party and you will find Communism, Marxism and Socialism. Incidentally, they rule you. yes. you. the far left rule you.
at November 2, 2008 12:21 AM
Isabella -
It seems that leon has chosen to ignore these pertinent facts I posted earlier:
"On a positive note, Blacks in America have the highest standard of living of all Blacks on the globe. On the globe.
And, slavery still exists in Africa, Middle East, and Asia.
And here you are complaining about America."
Posted by: darcy at November 1, 2008 11:40 PM
at November 2, 2008 12:24 AM
"Leon, you didn't answer my question. What will it take from us for you to get over the slavery?"
a few beers.....
slavery doesn't really bother me, but when pro-European Nationalists promote their parties and speak about slavery as though it were nothing then this is the reason Spencer and Charles go mental. Nationalists stop talking about slavery and race.
at November 2, 2008 12:27 AM
Leon said:
archonix
Your argument lacks empathy. Segregation was only 60 years ago.
"not my generation" argument is crass. The blacks got b##t f####d over slavery in the USA, imagine not knowing your family history only knowing that your relatives were brought over to the US as slaves. My advice, any European Nationalists who contribute comments on this site, please for the sake of your party, stop talking about race.
Slavery sure seemed to bother you at 9:47pm.
Posted by: Isabellathecrusader at November 2, 2008 12:30 AM
I'm with "greatcometof1577." It's sickening continuing to see how Western Civilization is held under a microscpoe for examination while no other civilization or society is. Yes, Western Civilization committed great wrongs, but so has every other civilization. But to WC's credit, it has achieved more than any other civilizaiton in history (e.g., the invention of democracy, the creation of philosophy as distinct from religious interpretations of the universe, the development of the scientific method, the emphasis on the worth and dignity of the individual such as no other civilization has accomplished, the creation of the most enlightened legal systems and the capacity to apologize for its wrongdoings unparalled in the human story). Those seeing the West as no better (and often worse) than any civilization are full of agendas poorly formulated and ordinarily possessed of a victim oriented mentality which insures that happiness can never come their way because it's always someone else's fault.
Posted by: Wellington at November 2, 2008 12:31 AM
"On a positive note, Blacks in America have the highest standard of living of all Blacks on the globe. On the globe."
I'm not ignoring you, i'm drinking beer and watching SNL.
Yes poor people and the working class have the highest standards of living in the world. America is a fantastically beautiful country, dynamic people and has some seriously cool freedom laws ingrained in their unique constitution. I am not being sarcastic. But you are 2 days away from voting in European style Socialism.
The welfare mentality will kick in overtime. Obama will even organise a private "citizen" army to protect his ideology. The west effed up big time by using military imperialism and racial cleansing in their pursuit of land and resources. We are now living in the product of that.
at November 2, 2008 12:35 AM
Wellington-
Well said.
Civilization is founded on the worth of the person.
The Judeo-Greco-Roman-Christian path has moved the farthest toward the greatest respect for the individual.
Failure to teach this fundamental strength has been the cause of the weak defense of it in the West, which has drifted into romanticized multicultural equivalencies.
As if ripping out hearts for Quetzecoatl is on par with the Beatitudes.
Posted by: profitsbeard at November 2, 2008 12:42 AM
Isabellathecrusader
Dude
It bothers me deeply.
Slavery was very bad.
whites did some very bad stuff.
we are now feeling the effects of our bad stuff like it or not.
Yes, Arabs did/do slavery but this doesn't help us as all libs think whites are bad. they read this site, see your comment and save that crap. well done.
clap clap
being anti muslim means = racism because? The MAJORITY of muslims are not white.
Go look at the UK, British colonialism created PAkistani Muslim immigration to the UK.
France = North African
Germany = Turkey
Go figure
This is where I get banned from JW.......as per........
at November 2, 2008 12:42 AM
It's those with the welfare mentality that are pushing the hardest to get Obama elected. It won't take any time at all for it to kick in. It's been with us for a long time.
Posted by: Isabellathecrusader at November 2, 2008 12:45 AM
Which comment are you worried about?
Posted by: Isabellathecrusader at November 2, 2008 12:48 AM
welfare is slavery
at times like this we need cooperation and bonding not a fall out over semantics.
Robert and Charles, shake hands.
We have a socialist in power in 2 days. all your works may be down the drain in a few months time. you both may find yourselves up in court for "racism" and "islamophobia". We all need each other.
even pig farmers..... :)
at November 2, 2008 12:50 AM
" It's sickening continuing to see how Western Civilization is held under a microscpoe for examination while no other civilization or society is."
Welcome to the fall of Rome.
at November 2, 2008 12:55 AM
This isn't the Charlie Johnson I knew...
See you on the strand CJ, it's pretty wet from the rain today. Be safe tomorrow...it can get crowded on Sundays.
I'll be the guy with the "I support JihadWatch.com" jersey.
Posted by: jonas at November 2, 2008 12:56 AM
This is where I get banned from JW.......as per........
Posted by: leon at November 2, 2008 12:42 AM
I might have misspoken leon. It happens. What specificaly is your point or your grief again?
Are you accusing Robert Spencer of aiding or abetting white supremacists?
Enquiring minds want to know.
Accommodate.
at November 2, 2008 12:56 AM
awake
no, Mr Spencer is not a racial supremacist nor is he a neo nazi. I just want everyone to stop speaking about race. Is it possible to get Ayaan Hirsi Ali on board on this site? Seriously.
Charles is pretty crazy but so are all of us for daring to challenge contemporary ideology.
my grief is.......the West will be socialist.
plus admin, chill the hell out with your banning and IP blocking.
at November 2, 2008 1:04 AM
For what it's worth:
I have nothing but revulsion for fascism, racism, white supremacy and advocates for genocide. I am not the type of Jew who accepts, nor wishes to make common cause with, anti-Semites and anti-Zionists of the left or right.
I have read (and own) three of Robert's books. I visit Jihad Watch regularly and have read almost all of Hugh's commentaries. I challenge anyone to prove that their analysis of Islam presented here isn't consistent with the both the historical record and the Muslim understanding of Islam's authoritative texts (and rulings by leading Islamic thinkers from the major schools of Islamic jurisprudence throughout the past 1400 years).
Robert, Hugh and Raymond have never shown any signs of being white supremacists, racists or fascists. The policy suggestions regarding infidel responses to the challenges posed by jihad avoid solutions that have any trace of white supremacism, racism or fascism. While I don't know anything about these men aside from their writings (and a few of Robert's C-SPAN appearances), their work exhibits an exceptionally high level of integrity.
Jihad Watch is the most important website I have found for addressing the key issue of our time. Every politician, journalist, academic and military officer would benefit greatly from taking time to understand, and consider the ramifications of, the material presented here.
Moreover, anyone who spends time at this site can't help but notice the sympathy and compassion in the articles by Robert and Hugh for non-Western infidels who suffer as a result of jihad and sharia. They repeatedly remind readers that concerns about the dangers from Islam threaten all infidels, not just those in the West. Would white supremacists write with such concern for black African Christians and animists, Indian Hindus, Egyptian Copts, Thai Buddhists, Indonesian Christians and so many other "people of color" throughout the world who are threatened by Islamic supremacism? In the West, Hugh frequently compares the Muslim immigrants' economic and social failures, unwillingness to assimilate and hostility to their infidel hosts with the successful integration of non-Muslim immigrants from Latin America, Africa, Southeast Asian and Far East Asia. He is clearly making the point that the problem is the ideology of Islam and not race or ethnicity.
Finally, is it really possible that people who write with such passion in support of Israel, and as Hugh calls it, "the legal, historical and moral rights of the Jews" in the Middle East, could possibly harbor fascist or neo-Nazi sympathies? I think not.
Posted by: 4infidels at November 2, 2008 1:05 AM
Oh and that Jersey with the Jihadwatch.com on it...will forward automatically to Jihadwatch.org...
MUAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHA
Posted by: jonas at November 2, 2008 1:05 AM
For what it's worth:
I have nothing but revulsion for fascism, racism, white supremacy and advocates for genocide. I am not the type of Jew who accepts, nor wishes to make common cause with, anti-Semites and anti-Zionists of the left or right.
I have read (and own) three of Robert's books. I visit Jihad Watch regularly and have read almost all of Hugh's commentaries. I challenge anyone to prove that their analysis of Islam presented here isn't consistent with the both the historical record and the Muslim understanding of Islam's authoritative texts (and rulings by leading Islamic thinkers from the major schools of Islamic jurisprudence throughout the past 1400 years).
Robert, Hugh and Raymond have never shown any signs of being white supremacists, racists or fascists. The policy suggestions regarding infidel responses to the challenges posed by jihad avoid solutions that have any trace of white supremacism, racism or fascism. While I don't know anything about these men aside from their writings (and a few of Robert's C-SPAN appearances), their work exhibits an exceptionally high level of integrity.
Jihad Watch is the most important website I have found for addressing the key issue of our time. Every politician, journalist, academic and military officer would benefit greatly from taking time to understand, and consider the ramifications of, the material presented here.
Moreover, anyone who spends time at this site can't help but notice the sympathy and compassion in the articles by Robert and Hugh for non-Western infidels who suffer as a result of jihad and sharia. They repeatedly remind readers that concerns about the dangers from Islam threaten all infidels, not just those in the West. Would white supremacists write with such concern for black African Christians and animists, Indian Hindus, Egyptian Copts, Thai Buddhists, Indonesian Christians and so many other "people of color" throughout the world who are threatened by Islamic supremacism? In the West, Hugh frequently compares the Muslim immigrants' economic and social failures, unwillingness to assimilate and hostility to their infidel hosts with the successful integration of non-Muslim immigrants from Latin America, Africa, Southeast Asian and Far East Asia. He is clearly making the point that the problem is the ideology of Islam and not race or ethnicity.
Finally, is it really possible that people who write with such passion in support of Israel, and as Hugh calls it, "the legal, historical and moral rights of the Jews" in the Middle East, could possibly harbor fascist or neo-Nazi sympathies? I think not.
Posted by: 4infidels at November 2, 2008 1:09 AM
Darcy, it's at 345 now. I've had enough.
'Night all.
Posted by: Isabellathecrusader at November 2, 2008 1:13 AM
Posted by: Isabellathecrusader at November 2, 2008 1:13 AM
Night Izzy. See 'ya soon, I hope.
leon,
Thanks for the "clarification" though I disagree with your general gist that Robert is a banner.
Holding out hope.
Posted by: awake at November 2, 2008 1:18 AM
Now to watch the doors on youtube.
robert, will this be my last post?
xxx
I love y'all
LTPF
Posted by: leon at November 2, 2008 1:18 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tah0OnS3nBU&feature=related
Will this get me banned?
Posted by: leon at November 2, 2008 1:22 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7GVxB7j7ZL0
This is better, leon.
Posted by: awake at November 2, 2008 1:29 AM
leon
Well, gee golly is Charles really daring to challenge contemporary ideology? What has he challenged? Dan Rather? Is he really going to live off that for the rest of his life? Maybe if he had not supported the war in Iraq, and listened to Robert Spencer, more so called conservatives would be better educated about why Iraq was a stupid policy, and the west would be less socialist, because Obama would not have been our next president. He could have educated people, instead he was too busy sharing photos of purple fingered Muslims in Iraq putting up crosses on churches which were empty (and getting misty eyed about the wonders of the new Iraq), and not enough pictures of why those churches were empty in the first place.....maybe it had something to do with Islam? Oh…perish the thought!
Also the "Doors"? You mean the original "Lizard King"? Well the behavior of a psychedelic nut and drug addict like Jim Morrison is very similar to the one we see from another lizard king...so yes it fits well..good job!!!
at November 2, 2008 1:31 AM
awake
if you dont see me tomorrow then you know that LTPF has been banned. again...
robert...charles is slightly crazy. ignore this latest spat. just do what you do. it hurts being branded as a neo nazi and a Fascist, i know i've been there. as my good army friend who was decapitated by a bomb in iraq was branded as a racist by spencer so i guess lets all be friends and ignore bad comments.
we have more to worry about than who said what or who has the biggest following.
Posted by: leon at November 2, 2008 1:32 AM
The owner of LGF is in the same mold as the guy who runs Free Republic. They both found success then got paranoid and started to purge posters who strayed from the party line. No room for a free exchange of ideas at all.
Posted by: Bingo at November 2, 2008 1:33 AM
Just wanted to add my support for Robert Spencer! I only began my own search for answers after I finally realized that neither our government nor the MSM were spouting anything supported by what these Islamic "radicals" were obviously doing around the world. This was in 2005 and I spent months spinning my wheels trying to weed out the pro-jihadist and liberal anti-American web sites from honest reputable sites on the truth about the so called “religion of peace.”
I had quickly heard of RS but there were so many negative comments about his views that I didn't pursue his work at first. Unfortunately I hadn't even heard of JW in those early days.
During the first months of my carefully following Robert Spencer's work I was very cautious and always looking for any inkling that he was anything less than honest and knowledgeable, let alone a “racist neo-Nazi.” I have since come to trust both his knowledge and his integrity without a doubt.
I have read a number of articles from Charles Johnson and had thought of his LGF site (most of those articles I found at FrontPage Magazine), as among the "good guys" but you can be sure that has now changed. Even this fact I would not have learned with out RS and JW.
I have without hesitation steered dozens and dozens of people to both RS's books and JW. I have learned so much about Islam, sharia law, and sharia finance, that I am now asked to speak to various groups (both civilian and government) myself. I readily attribute this to my mentor RS without whose knowledge, conviction, and great personal courage, I would never have been able to achieve in only 3 years time. When anyone approaches me about all this "Islamic terrorist stuff," wanting to learn more, I always tell them that the "front lines" begin with JW and RS. And the really good news is that just recently I have noticed more and more people seem to be “waking up” and shrugging off what the MSM and our own government would have them believe. This is where JW is becoming ever more valuable with each passing day! There is no other site that presents so much information, from the basics to the ultra advanced, as does Robert Spencer through his books, web site and personal speaking engagements.
As for CJ and his LGF…both are now irrelevant. A rather sad footnote but nothing more. Keep up the great work Robert and when you feel that no one is paying attention and your courage and knowledge is for naught, please remember that there are a great many good people who agree with the adage; "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil, is for good men to do nothing." Keep up the great work!
at November 2, 2008 1:34 AM
I wrote this comment on LGF on Oct. 22 in the thread "Obama's Pal Rashid Khalidi"
"I think it is really sad that the late great Charles Johnson is reduced to fishing for dirt to try to hurt Obama. What is this site, other than a bearpit for Republican whiteboys? The whole site has lost credibility in my eyes."
This is the measured personal response from Johnson
"This creep has now been blocked three times from LGF. He's in Germany, and he's a supporter of Eurofascists, and he keeps coming back with new sock puppets.
And he'll get blocked every time."
This is why LGF is such a joke.
Posted by: CharlesSimmonds at November 2, 2008 1:34 AM
Just for the record
In 2004 several of my posts where deleted by Robert because they linked to Stormfront, also Robert had the decency to E-mail me explaining why.
I am not a supporter of white pride or Stormfront, but at that time, There was an interesting link concerning islam .
Robert also banned me for posting a comment calling for the nuking of Mecca.
I now understand Roberts actions, and I must admit he was correct.
Recently I have been very critical of Roberts stance aginst the BNP, but I have not been banned.In light of this Robert can only be admired, where as King Lizard can only be treated as the joker he is.
Posted by: InfidelK9
at November 2, 2008 1:36 AM
Awake
dude, thanks, nvr heard the doors sing this. where the heck have i been?
hell, we live in a f#####g great society.
Charles, Robert shake hands.
This is BS
Posted by: leon at November 2, 2008 1:37 AM
Also the "Doors"? You mean the original "Lizard King"?
Yeah that one, Jim Morrison, a great American who loved freedom and the 2nd amendment. Can you imagine Jimmy cowtowing to Islam???????
What a dude.
Every beer we take is a shot in their heart, bay, moonlight drive.........
Posted by: leon at November 2, 2008 1:44 AM
...then again leon I've always been partial to "Moonlight Drive".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1vQt6y_2ik
These things happen.
Posted by: awake at November 2, 2008 1:45 AM
awake
was just watching that, firing off pellets in my basement with my air rifle. back to joy division i'm afraid.
oh hell, joy division, neo nazism
Posted by: leon at November 2, 2008 1:48 AM
Goodness! This Charlie Jo has been busy harpooning Bostom, Geller, Bat Ye'or, Diana West(?), to name just a few. The wrath for Bat Ye'or shocks me and so now I've managed to spend more time on this 'degenerate' far longer than I ever have, what a sinuous winding piece of hippy trash. The Fjordman debacle managed to create fiction between some anti-jihadi combatants but this one is bound to backfire, the dead (Fallaci) are not even spared the warped rationalisations of this idealistic spurious weather bitten lout. My elders were right about the meandering generation of the 60's, it has softened and made ready the Free World for harvest...
Posted by: eloivsdiablo at November 2, 2008 1:54 AM
leon-
Here's one division you might enjoy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yu2NqfISm9k
Kosher kraut.
Posted by: profitsbeard at November 2, 2008 1:57 AM
More for the record, I have not be able to comment at LGF since the middle of 2004
Posted by: InfidelK9 at November 2, 2008 1:59 AM
profitsbeard
Leon the Pig-Farmer would've loved that fascist neo nazi dance.
Posted by: leon at November 2, 2008 2:00 AM
"Can you imagine Jimmy cowtowing to Islam???????"
Hendrix would be performing benefit concerts for Obama if he were alive, and if anybody asked him, I don't doubt for a minute he'd defend Muslims and Islam just like purt near most everybody else does.
at November 2, 2008 2:06 AM
"Smelt of pubs and wormwoodscrubs."
been in central london police station. they had to block of charing cross road 'cos of me and dan.
i did something silly.
at November 2, 2008 2:08 AM
denverrodeo
go watch all along the watchtower, "withnail and I". on Youtube.
peace
Posted by: leon at November 2, 2008 2:17 AM
I'm really sorry you have to go through this. Being cast out is not pretty. However, unlike GOV, you will no suffer any penalty. CJ should have thought this one out. Unfortunately, Charles Johnson is no longer capable of thinking for himself.
LGF is going under, Robert. It's a sinking ship.
Posted by: Imperialistu' at November 2, 2008 3:34 AM
Dear Robert,
I have participated in all sorts of fora. Here in Italy they've ranged from extreme left to extreme right, with of course, everything between. I have also expressed my opinions on many international fora.
In Italy I was never banned, not even from the Forum of the ex Communist party (I'm pretty much conservative) when I went there to warn them about the evils and dangers of Islam. Naturally the regulars there ganged up on me and I wore out my fingertips answering them. But they never even considered expelling me.
In all my internet experience, I was banned 5 times. The first by Islam-on-line where after months of clearly anti-Islamic talks, I was suddenly blocked and accused of having an "impure heart." Then at Democratic Underground... after 5 posts... and then 3 times at LGF.
I kept going back, because I loved that place, and simply refused to believe, simply refused to accept that I was a Neo-Nazi, a Fascist, etc. But more importantly, that someone the likes of a Fjordman could be booted out. Or really good people like the Baron and Dymphna of Gates of Vienna.
And now here is the great and wonderful Mr. Robert Spencer. I am tempted to cook up another pseudonym just to rejoin LGF to defend you. But what's the use? CJ is faster, much faster than Islam-on-line, even faster than Democratic Underground, and far less tolerant - at least here in Italy - than the ideological heirs of Antonio Gramsci and Benito Mussolini.
I'm afraid his vision of humanity is similar to those now-primitive DOS videogames in which to get ahead you had to instantly shoot down anything resembling an alien.
So no, I won't try to weasel myself back in to be an anonymous lawyer from nowhere to defend you. At this point - and I'm absolutely certain of it - Mr. Charles Johnson is the one who needs the defense team. I was already certain of this, but you are the ultimate proof. One cannot be serious about tackling the Islamic problem and then de-link from the likes of Robert Spencer.
Posted by: IoshkaFutz
at November 2, 2008 3:44 AM
Little Green Footballs just made a touch down for the other side. Good going coach.
Posted by: champ [TypeKey Profile Page] at November 1, 2008 2:16 AM
I'm thinking Charles is simply desperate to gain respect in the mainstream media and among the Left (yes, that's redundant). With this stunt - along with his vitriol toward ID theory and creationists - he's shamelessly playing right to that audience. Unfortunately for him and the "big picture," it's a pointless exercise, as they're not about to give him the respect he so obviously craves. He loses his friends and gains absolutely nothing for himself OR the anti-jihad movement (which is what this whole thing is about, not him!) with these hysterical witch-hunts. He's completely lost the plot.
Rock on, Robert - serious people know you're the best. Anyone can write a blog like LGF.
Posted by: Beth at November 2, 2008 4:04 AM
Charles Johnson has turned on many fellow conservatives for no
good reason. I think he is becoming a terrorist sympathizer as he didn't even make it to the top 12 Islamophobes list this year.
Posted by: horselady at November 1, 2008 8:28 PM
That's because he has been so busy being a Christianphobe.
Posted by: USS Ben at November 2, 2008 5:03 AM
Posted by Matamoros
I do know of other British former-Jihadwatchers who have dropped away from your site, dismayed by the amount of pro-BNP propaganda posted in comments on here
So how about some names to support this claim.
In the last two years only one person has openly stated here that he dropping out because of BNP commentators. Off hand I can not remember his name, but I do recall he was an Indian Hindu.
Over the last four years several thousand Jihadwatchers have dropped away, so it is very safe to say that the alarming figure of drop outs be of the dreaded BNP supporters,would be less than 0.1%
Nick Griffen has stated that islam is evil, if we can remember another great English man, Winston Churchill also stated that Islam is evil
Supporters of the BNP are not nazis, but are followers of one last true British leaders
Those who dare call for control and common sense in open-door immigration are demonised as “Nazis” and “Racists by the dominant Socialist-communists, and the New Left which took over in the 70.s. This is highly offensive as many lost family fighting Nazism and we had a long and noble tradition of conserving our homogeneity. This negative propaganda worked for a long time and few know Sir Winston Churchill opposed immigration. In 1955 he wanted the Conservatives to adopt the slogan “Keep England White”. The multi-racialists try to make out that those who want common sense in immigration follow Hitler when really we follow Winston Churchill. Biographers, journalists and historians usually leave out his racial views and have created a false picture of him.
The Matamoros, anti-facists, left wing liberals and socialists, all detest a man like Winston Churchill, much in the same manner as they hate Nick Griffen and the BNP
Churchill's deep faith in the English people,and understanding of Hitler pulled them through what could have been the worst disaster in their history. Most people don't know how spectacularly grim a situation England was in during most of 1939 and 1940.
We now face a situation far worse, and Nick Griffen and the BNP are the only people who seem to see the threat,of mass immigration islam and the traitorous Matamoros,s anti-facists, left wing liberals and socialists.
Also in the face of this grim threat, english school are told to dump Churchill.
Yes I am proud to be British, when it was the British under the leadership of Churchill who lead the fight against fascism
I am also proud to be British when it was the British that lead the fight against slavery
Posted by: InfidelK9 at November 2, 2008 5:06 AM
Leon, I haven't seen you here before, but I've read every one of your many posts on this thread. Generally JW is very welcoming to newcomers but posters here become irritated at excessive and pointless argumentativeness. Perhaps there is another blog that is more congenial to your own particular style of writing and "debate."
Posted by: Eastview at November 2, 2008 5:15 AM
I posted my comment above (repeated below) on LGF. It was deleted and my account there suspended. A little close to the bone? Touched a nerve?
"Like a lot of former leftists, Charles never quite left behind the whole notion of "thought crime".
The conservative judges by actions because he knows that people have all sorts of thoughts and motivations - quite often mutually contradictory thoughts and motivations - and so what matters is what a person does.
The left doesn't think that way. In fact it is almost the opposite. The main thing with the left is that people believe in the true way. (ref Arthur Koestler, George Orwell or even Solhzenitsyn). What they actually do is less important.
So a person can be perfectly civil, peaceable and kindly, but if a leftist (or some former leftists such as Charles Johnson) thinks they harbour evil/racist/reactionary thoughts, then that is enough to put them beyond the pale.
And frankly, anyone who could look at Robert Spencer and see anything but the most honest and gentlemanly of men has clearly flown the coop."
Posted by: Brett_McS at November 2, 2008 5:28 AM
When I now look upon Monty Python and its ilk, I no longer chiefly see humor but an almost mindless debasement of all things British.
That bears repeating.
I remember watching it in the early 80's with great amusement, having no idea that putting ideas like this into people's heads would actually be harmful.
Then I returned to watch a Python movie some 6-7 years ago, hoping for a good laugh - and to my great surprise found it utterly revolting. I hope this is a sign that I'm getting better taste with experience :)
Yes, Jim Morrison is the original Lizard King. I used to be a great Doors fan, but time moves on, and what used to seem profound now seems senseless.
Now I'm reading Dalrymple instead. He restores my confidence in separating Right from Wrong, in putting the waiting back into the wanting, and in civilization as a Good Thing.
But my, have we fallen. The worst is yet to come.
Posted by: Henrik at November 2, 2008 5:36 AM
Leon
When you posted here as Leon the pig farmer, I had no problems following you. Here in this thread, due to the multiple levels of sarcasm you seem to be donning, I can't make head or tail of any of your posts - whether you are calling us racists, calling for racism, or what?
I liked you as LTPF, so one small pointer - stop making this mainly about yourself and your previous bans, and discuss the issue at hand, namely LGF as far as this thread goes.
Posted by: Infidel Pride at November 2, 2008 6:08 AM
Dear Robert,
Is there anyone out there who could make CJ aware that his ill thought out comments have done more to assist the global jihad than Bin Laden himself.
The anti-west, anti-civilisation Islamists and their supporters will be whooping with delight at this latest round of in-fighting.
CJ is splitting and dividing the people who want to stop the advancement of Islamism in the west, and making the once united front very weak indeed.
Or was that always his intention?
Posted by: Jerusalem Posts at November 2, 2008 6:22 AM
Anyone who's been on the footballs site has certainly seen Charles become unhinged lately. He's obsessed with being "right", even when his "right" defies logic. He's quick to delete comments from long time posters who disagree with him.
Bully? Without a doubt, but I never thought Charles would stoop to making up his own "facts" in order to bolster his arguments. Alas, he has.
Does he have a medical problem?
Posted by: jawa at November 2, 2008 6:40 AM
Heartfelt thanks to all those who have expressed their support and appreciation of my work. I am grateful to each one of you.
As far as the ongoing discussion of the BNP goes, it is their race-based membership requirement and race-based emphasis that makes me unable to support them. I have explained why elsewhere, more than once.
The libels and misrepresentations of my positions at LGF, and the fascist/Stalinist snap-to of instantly excoriating someone who had been a valued friend as an evil and dangerous foe, should be illuminating to anyone who wonders what is going on. And remember, this all happened not because of anything I said or did, but because of a couple of blog links under a disclaimer.
The LGF commenters, however, have begun -- here again in true Stalinist fashion -- searching for previous signs of my ideological deviation.
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/showc/1145/6142955
In that comment someone quotes something from my 2003 book Onward Muslim Soldiers: "Begin to regard Muslim immigration as a national security issue, and take steps to limit it and end it if possible. (And of course all illegal aliens should be made to leave immediately.)" This is evidence of my secret wickedness.
So apparently Muslim immigration is not a national security issue: the stealth jihad, the sleeper cells, the jihad plots are all chimeras. And illegal aliens should make themselves at home.
Then there is this:
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/showc/1146/6144662
This links to a Gates of Vienna post about the honor killing of the Said sisters in Texas. I am not sure what the point is here -- perhaps it is that it is terrible and neo-Nazi to suggest that there could have been an honor killing in Texas. Unfortunately, the facts demonstrate otherwise.
With comments like these going unchallenged, it is hard to argue against the proposition that LGF has ceased to be concerned about the spread of Islamic supremacism in the U.S.
Those who exhort both Charles Johnson and I to cut the crap should recall that Charles Johnson is entirely, wholly, and solely responsible for provoking this rift, and for the overheated rhetoric of support for genocide, fascism, etc.
Cordially
Robert Spencer
at November 2, 2008 6:50 AM
Archonix:
Sorry -- I didn't mean to insult you.
Cordially
Robert Spencer
at November 2, 2008 6:55 AM
Archonix, Henrik, European Crusader,
Thank you for your answers. In particular, thank you Henrik for digging up that document at the Center for Vigilant Freedom. It was very informative.
As we can see from the many comments above, the question we're tackling is a hard one. Clear answers are hard to come by, except in a few cases, such as Geert Wilders' party. Wish there were more like him.
Best,
Martin
at November 2, 2008 6:56 AM
Is there anyone out there who could make CJ aware that his ill thought out comments have done more to assist the global jihad than Bin Laden himself?
I don't think so. Back in time, a year ago, I discreetly - and politely - emailed CJ that he was making some serious mistakes and ought to step down from what he was doing. He never responded, but complained publicly about getting 'Hate mail' - which I assume means mails, more or less tactful, telling him that he was wrong.
Of course I'll never be able to get an account at LGF. Not that I bother, for I would be banned within the week for the crime of independent thinking, which doesn't go down well at the Court of the Lizard King.
Actually, I believe that what angers CJ is not the thing about euro-fascists (he wouldn't recognize one even if it was to bite him in the leg), but the fact that Spencers' reinstatement of links to Brussels Journal and Gates of Vienna is a powerful assertion that CJ has been wrong all the time. That is damaging to his credibility, which is probably what this fuzz is about in the first place.
The ability to admit error and improve is one of the finest quality of scholars, and humans in general.
Posted by: Henrik at November 2, 2008 6:56 AM
Richard the Lionheart,
I understand your concern for the future of the UK, and I can see why reasonable people could consider supporting the BNP.
My attempt to distinguish the anti-immigration parties that value freedom and human rights ("good guys") from the racists, fascists, and closet nazis ("bad guys") is more than rhetorical. It's not a superficial question of refusing to cooperate with people whose opinions I may find distasteful. It's refusing to cooperate with people who CANNOT and WILL NOT pursue our goals.
For example, people like the Front National's Jean-Marie Le Pen and other vulgar demagogues are driven by their hatred of the Jews and the United States much more than any ideal you and I may cherish. They WILL side with Ahmadinejad, Hamas, or Hizballah anytime. They will harbor sympathy for Al-Qaeda and their ilk for "sticking it" to the Americans.
Le Pen is not the worst. Bona fide nazis have repeatedly and consistently sided with jihadists against Israel, Jews, Americans, Western civilization, Judeo-Christian values, and liberal democracy. They're not only unsavory characters, their goals are FUNDAMENTALLY opposed to mine and yours. They cannot see Islam as a problem since they share their hatred of Jews and the West, as well as their violent, totalitarian impulses.
I'm sure there are many reasonable, good people who support the BNP and similar parties across Europe. But the damning quotes put forward by Matamoros (good job by the way!) show that we should be cautious. If only those parties could get rid of their crazies and move in the right direction.
Best regards,
Martin
Posted by: Martin at November 2, 2008 7:14 AM
The Wall Street Journal's Opinion Journal has endorsed Brussels Journal:
http://opinionjournal.com/federation/
-----------------------
http://www.bravenewsworld.blogspot.com
at November 2, 2008 7:19 AM
Wellington,
We do agree on most fronts but I think that the main difference we have here is understanding of what the BNP really is and can do for the UK.
The BNP is not and I repeat is not anything remotely like the KKK in the USA, oddly enough, the KKK was established by the Scots landowners who left Scotland for a better life in America.
Although you have not mentioned it that they are, many people in America, especially Non Whites will see the BNP as this.
I grew up looking at the BNP as racist and yes I was like many others who feel the same but when the BNP was formed as a breakaway from Jon Tindall of the National Front, it certainly did want to keep Britain as a predominately white country, there's no doubt, but it would not persecute people of another race. The BNP in a Nutshell simply wants to preserve the culture and heritage of the UK, that people are currently doing their best to destroy. And yes, as much as I hate to admit it, that destruction has come from immigrants, who of course have umbrage with Britain for the past.
If you allow people of other cultures, who speak very little English into positions of power, as we have done in the UK, then you set the precedent for the destruction of that society. A little story for you to prove my point; About 12 years ago or so(I believe) Hackney Town Hall(East London) appointed a Nigerian immigrants in a high up position. He then over a period of time started to remove the workers who were British and employ fellow Nigerians, whom he had no doubt got into the country in unsavoury means. This of course is despicable but nothing could be done to stop it. What then happened was the Hackney Fraud Squad came in to investigate corruption, they were then later investigated by corruption from and external Fraud Squad and people were charged with Corruption and Fraud.
One should never, ever, ever put a person of another culture in any position of power in their 'new' country of residence. This is now rife throughout London, where under Ken Livingstone's and NuLabour's equality act, anyone can work in London, regardless of background, beliefs or culture. So in effect it means that Africans will come to the UK, train to be teachers and then start instituting their culture to be taught in schools. I am vehemently against this for the simple reason that if British children are going to learn African Culture then let them go to Africa and study. It is called imposing another's way of life on us and I am completely against this.
If people in the UK ever defend their culture and their heritage immediately the 'racist' and 'fascist' and 'Nazi' jibes come springing forth. We in the UK are now no longer allowed to be British or English, for the fear of upsetting minorities, who live in the UK, benefit greatly from it and are doing their best to segregate themselves and institute their culture over ours. Would this not make you angry in the USA? How would you feel if the government told you to take down your American Flag and not sing the National Anthem? How would you feel if your soldiers were spat upon by Muslim and other Americans while walking through the streets in their Uniform? How would you feel if you Soldiers were not allowed into hospitals in uniform for fear of upsetting minorities? How would you feel if you were not allowed to teach American history and told that you must teach African or another instead?
The latter is all happening in the UK Wellington. We are seeing the complete destruction of British Culture and Heritage.
I could go on and tell you even more but it's too depressing quite frankly. What's worrying is that we in the UK are now having to adopt cultural practices of immigrants who come from hovels around the world that are nothing when compared to the UK. Therefore we are not progressing but very much digressing when it comes to cultural advancement.
It is rather amusing and coincidental that you speak of 'Monty Python' as you do. I wouldn't stop there. The Ironic thing is that I was a musician, a very good one in fact and someone who could have had greatness. The only person who stopped that was myself as I saw just what the Music Industry and music really was. I simply abandoned music, my writing and performing because I saw a far more insidious side to it.
One thing I learned when I was younger and at school that throughout time, the warrior and the teachers were revered in their society, whereas the musicians, actors and artists were not as they were simply entertainment. We have now turned this situation upside down. The people in society who are really controlling society are the musicians, the actors and the artists. If you look at the Obama campaign in the USA you will find that the top actors, artists and musicians are all of course supporting Obama. The same happened here in the UK. And it doesn't stop with Musicians, actors and artists, but also from the comedians and the talk show hosts and in fact anyone who is in the Media.
When Election time comes all the media luvvies(actors, artists, musicians) all come out to support Labour and they couldn't be more hypocritical. They are in the UK nothing more than Champagne Socialists, people who when young were of course in the Anti Nazi League, the Socialists Worker Party, the Communist Party etc etc, denouncing the West, America, supporting Palestine, hating the Jews and of course Capitalism, money and power and yet look at them? They are all comfortably well off with their large Estates in the Country(like the Lords of Old), flats in Hampstead, Kensington and Mayfair, not forgetting property abroad in luxurious surroundings. The whole thing just reeks of hypocrisy and I was sick of it. I realised as a musician I didn't want to associate with any of this as it was corrupt and I also realised that if I wanted to succeed in the Music Industry then I had to be left wing, or else I'd have no career. I chose the latter and do something altogether different now.
The whole indoctrination of our society started in the 60's and of course, by the 'luvvies'. Our country is full of them. There were actors whom I fully respected and now look at them in disgust. Great acting families now mean nothing to me. Take the case of Vanessa Redgrave, a British Institution, who likes bailing out terrorists - here and here. What about the victims' families, did she consider their feelings? She is also a supporter of the PLO as well as the Provisional IRA. A true Socialist if ever there was and definitely a Champagne one as well.
It sickens me to see how many of the people who the world look at as 'Great Britons' who have utilised the best the UK has to offer for themselves, grown up with a wonderful education, in an establishment that has protected them and helped them and what do they do? They help those who want to completely destroy everything that enabled them to be who they are. Vanessa Redgrave is just the tip of the Iceberg as everyone who supports Labour, in the Media World, no doubt has similar feelings to Mrs Redgrave.
The UK is dying, thanks to the Champagne Socialists. It's very much a case of "we've had our wonderful education. We've become fabulously wealthy. we've reached the peaks of our careers and it's all down to the British Establishment we utterly despise. I think it's time we started burning down those Bridges in order to stop anyone else sharing in what made us who we are today"
The biggest problem we suffer from in the UK is ignorance. Ignorance in who we are and what we are. Ignorance in the fact that when it came to many things that are British, you simply can't get that quality anywhere else and yet everyone is doing their best to destroy that, in favour of adopting cultures, that wouldn't be here today were it not from medical, financial and education aid from Britain. I am simply amazed at how quick people are to destroy the very thing that will give them everything they need and make them into the best they can possibly be. Cultural suicide is rife in the UK and that's why I'm leaving. I'd rather my son grew up in another culture that he can be proud of instead of living in one that he's constantly told to hate.
Posted by: Richard the Lionheart at November 2, 2008 7:24 AM
Ugh, I feel horrible that this is happening to you, Robert. It seems that as long as you do the work you do, there will always be forces coming against you to either discourage you in your work or to make others doubt you, and thus, your message. These forces at work are not only of a human element.
It's funy to me that Charles used the phrase "very disappointed in you" becuase that is EXACTLY what I said about Charles some months back to a friend of mine who, like me, USED to be a huge fan of LGF...the source of disappointment in Charles began when he started viciously attacking suporters of creationism and ranting on and on as if the world is coming to an end because people want creationism taught in schools as a valid scientific theory alongside evolution. It seemed odd to me that Charles felt this issue wanrranted the same venom he would use against jihadists, socialists, liberals and other haters of America and American freedoms.
Posted by: Madame Vengier at November 2, 2008 7:31 AM
I see that Charles Johnson is also charging me with personally betraying him by "embracing" people who have attacked him.
It is odd that he would make this charge after allowing his comments fields to become the arenas for repeated libels of me and my work by Kejda Gjermani ("medaura"), Michael Hussey ("mph"), "Killgore Trout" and others.
And even if he had not done that, his charge would only make sense if I had dropped the link to LGF while restoring the link to Brussels Journal etc. In fact, I had links to all sides here, which I had hoped would become the foundation for a gradual reconciliation of people who, let us not forget, had once been friends. That Charles would get so angry about a couple of blog links is reminiscent of a second-grade lunchtable where one kid gets angry with another kid for inviting other kids to sit at the table also.
It was Charles who chose to see these links as a repudiation and betrayal, when there was no necessary reason for him to have done so. Gates of Vienna has criticized me in the past, so I could have followed Charles' path and considered that anyone who even suggested they were not evil was no longer my friend. I have links to other people I don't always agree with and have had public disputes with -- such as "Allahpundit" at Hot Air. Yet no one at LGF is insisting that I must share all of Allahpundit's views because I link to Hot Air. They only insist that I share all of GoV's views because of the link here to them. Why is that? Because insisting on the latter is consistent with the picture of me as a neofascist that they want to paint.
In any case, LGF commenters are now saying I have restored "VB" to my links, when Vlaams Belang was never there, and I have stated above that I have not endorsed VB. And they're saying that soon I will be bringing white supremacists to speak at anti-jihad conferences in the U.S. This is arrant, libelous nonsense, and it illustrates that the commenters there simply aren't interested in the truth, but are here again falling into Stalinist lockstep.
Charles also has stated that he did thousands of dollars of work for this site, for which I never paid him. In reality, he did a great deal of work for which he was duly paid. Then he did some work here and there for which I repeatedly asked him to bill me. (I just found half a dozen requests from me, asking him to bill me, in a moment's search of one email box.) He never did. Ultimately, it seemed clear at the time that he considered the unbilled items minor tweaks, but to imply that I ripped him off his, to put it mildly, untrue.
And finally, Charles has referred repeatedly to my "vicious attack" upon him, yet he has never answered the points I made in the "vicious attack," which could only refer to the above post. For instance, why is it OK for LGF to link to Pajamas Media, which links to Brussels Journal, and Pajamas Media is not fascist, but if I link to Brussels Journal, LGF must delink from me and call me a fascist? Charles Johnson doesn't answer that question, and he can't answer it, because in fact when it comes to a "vicious attack" and a "stab in the back" he has been the perpetrator, not the victim.
Cordially
Robert Spencer
at November 2, 2008 7:36 AM
Oh, and also on the "vicious" attack thing:
Charles Johnson, let us remember, initiated this whole thing and wrote he was "done" with me, etc.
I responded, defending myself, and have added updates responding to his increasingly shrill attacks, most notably that I am encouraging genocide.
This is what constitutes in his eyes a "vicious attack."
Apparently the only way I could have avoided "viciously attacking" Charles Johnson would have been to roll over and allow him to defame me without response.
Cordially
Robert Spencer
at November 2, 2008 7:39 AM
Sixth Update added, incorporating my last few comments here into the main text.
RS
Posted by: jihadwatch at November 2, 2008 7:44 AM
“Since when has Jewish Tradition been British, the Jewish tradition derives from the middle East, so there-fore it is foreign…The Jews are foreign people and what makes them foreign is they have different traditions than the traditions of the people in whose lands they live”
“…Jews have always keep them selves apart thus making themselves different,alien or foreign, even thought they are British German or whatever. It is not racist to call Jews different,alien or foreign because by being so they have been able to retain their Jewishness.”
So Matamoros, explain to us how the above statement is racist.
Posted by: InfidelK9 at November 2, 2008 7:52 AM
Richard,
Much of what you describe is ALREADY happening in the US. The difference might be in our size. In Britain it's magnified. If our country consisted only of the large population areas it would be the same. Small town America is preserving American values but you can see the resistance they face just by looking at coverage of Sarah Palin. Barack Obama called them "bitter", "clinging to their guns or religion".
"If you allow people of other cultures, who speak very little English into positions of power, as we have done in the UK, then you set the precedent for the destruction of that society."
Check. Here those in the higher positions speak English but they are doing their best to remove English as a requirement. Ballots are printed in other languages. Since English is a requirement to attain citizenship and is required to be taught in schools, it's not clear why any citizen - native or naturalized - should require a multilingual ballot.
"We in the UK are now no longer allowed to be British or English, for the fear of upsetting minorities, who live in the UK, benefit greatly from it and are doing their best to segregate themselves and institute their culture over ours. Would this not make you angry in the USA?"
Yes. It's happening here too. Lines of work are being taken over by illegal immigrants. Entire neighborhoods are becoming no-go zones for people whose parents once lived in them. Anyone who doesn't speak Spanish might not get a job. Any questioning of Islamic teachings renders one a bigot. It makes us angry, too.
"It sickens me to see how many of the people who the world look at as 'Great Britons' who have utilised the best the UK has to offer for themselves, grown up with a wonderful education, in an establishment that has protected them and helped them and what do they do? They help those who want to completely destroy everything that enabled them to be who they are. Vanessa Redgrave is just the tip of the Iceberg as everyone who supports Labour, in the Media World, no doubt has similar feelings to Mrs Redgrave."
Same here. Watch talk shows and listen to people who make a living off of small town America deride the country they grew up in and which gave them the opportunities they had then turn around and call George Bush vile names. If anyone did the same to Barack Obama it would be hate speech time. People in Hollywood have little comprehension of what is happening to those who buy their products. I can't give you names because I don't watch them but many of them have called the US the worst threat to the world.
It's not just the entertainment elites. It's the political elites. Most of the senior Democrats came of age in the Great Society. They cannot accept that it was a failure and keep trying to implement the same programs over and over again expecting to get a different result - the definition of insanity.
They also came of age at a time when Democrats ran EVERYTHING. Apart from Eisenhower's presidency, it had been that way almost their entire lives. They couldn't reconcile themselves to the idea they might lose an election. Any time a Democrat loses, it's because the election was "stolen". If they don't win on Tuesday, watch the fireworks.
They have taken over the education establishment and are producing generations who believe this country is the worst thing to happen to mankind.
Britain is not alone. You are not alone. It's not just people on this site. It's people who believe in freedom and justice and are sick and tired of being called racist. They can't celebrate Christmas because it's not inclusive! Meanwhile, their children are expected to learn all about Islam and pray toward Mecca. It might make children of non-European immigrants feel bad to learn about America's history so that history is changed to make the US the evil racist, founded by racist slaveowners. George Washington owned slaves. Thomas Jefferson owned slaves. Thus, the principles of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution and the Bill of Rights are meaningless. They have no more validity than the Koran.
Posted by: PMK at November 2, 2008 8:25 AM
InfidelK9-
Religion, race or nationality are distinctly separate characteristics. Each adds to the whole of the person, but one characeristic does not define the person as a whole.
There is a community of around three thousand Jews here in Liverpool and a very long established one at that. These Jews are Liverpudlians (Scousers) and should you suggest to any of them that they are something 'foreign', I dare say you'll be heading for a smack in the mouth. Scousers are very proud of their identity as such. That some of us happen to be Jewish is no reason to make any attempt at diluting that identity.
Your statement allows no identity beyond that of their Jewishness and, in doing so, does them an almighty disservice at best.
Posted by: Wishbone at November 2, 2008 8:27 AM
Those who exhort both Charles Johnson and I to cut the crap should recall that Charles Johnson is entirely, wholly, and solely responsible for provoking this rift, and for the overheated rhetoric of support for genocide, fascism, etc.
Cordially
Robert Spencer
Posted by: jihadwatch at November 2, 2008 6:50 AM
Right. There are not always "two sides to every story." A person can easily get attacked without provocation and without warrant and for no good reason, whether in real life or cyberspace. I imagine that's happened to all of us at one time or another. And right now it's happening to RS courtesy CJ.
CJ obviously has some kind of "beef" against RS, and it's probably envy and jealousy.
Posted by: darcy at November 2, 2008 8:28 AM
Martin,
Thank you for your reply.
I remember in an earlier posting I spoke of people who were in Extreme Right parties can change. I have seen it with my very own eyes. There have been films about just this with American History X being a classic example and it's all about upbringing and of course the indoctrination.
I remember watching a programme where a television journalist(MacIntyre, well known for undercover journalism and infiltration) did a documentary on Johnny 'Mad Dog' Adaire, a leader of the UDA(Ulster Defence Army against the IRA) responsible for ordering the deaths of 43 Catholics at the time of the 'troubles'. In it he went to Germany to meet a racist, neo Nazi, responsible for the deaths on immigrants and of course blacks. This man was known as 'Nazi' Nick who led gang attacks on of course immigrants in Germany. He is now a born again Christian and the documentary followed him and Adaire travelling to Africa(Uganda) to set up an orphanage. He is now married to a Ugandan woman and of course when he told her that he was a racist and killed blacks she was upset but as a Christian forgave him. What they did speak of though was Islam and Nick said to Mad dog, that the biggest threat to the West was Islam and that they are coming over here to Islamise the West and the battle would be between Christianity and Islam.
This man WAS a Neo Nazi who saw the errors of his ways and is putting his efforts into battling Islam. Maddog, I also believe is stepping up a campaign to stop Islamisation of the UK. Although he has been exiled from Northern Ireland, he hopes to return and simply, if Northern Ireland does become Islamised then when it comes to war, they're going to need a man like him, his skills and of course his ability to lead and unite men for the cause.
Martin, I'm trying to make a point here that no one seems to see or even realise. Too many people are saying that we have to be wary of this and that and not ally with those or them, when what they are doing is further dividing themselves. If a right wing movement is committed to the removal of Islam and the stopping of Islamisation above all else then they MUST be united with.
It boils down to the understanding that if people do not unite together, put aside their differences and battle Islam then there will be no 'groups/parties' after Islamisation. There will be no democracy, no freedom, no scientific breakthroughs, no space advancement and exploration, no human rights and humanity. That will all disappear. At least with uniting together, we can come to some happy medium for all, because one thing's for sure and that's that these parties don't want the destruction of their culture like Islam does and will.
There is no party in the UK, apart from the BNP that will actively stop Islam and Immigration. There is the EDP, Veritas and UKIP but they do not mention anything about Islam and stopping its growth. The BNP does.
The time to act is now Martin. If we falter and continue to allow Islam to grow then kiss goodbye to the West. We will be overwhelmed by Islam and people such as yourself will remember these words I've written and realise that we should have all united together, out aside our differences to conquer Islam and remove it from the West.
Posted by: Richard the Lionheart at November 2, 2008 8:38 AM
P.S. Martin,
The bottom line is, until I see any other party in the UK take the same active approach to the danger of Islam and of course continued mass immigration and destruction of the British Culture, I really have no choice but to vote for the BNP. Lab/Con/Liberal Alliance, Veritas, EDP, UKIP and the Green Party are doing nothing whatsoever to address this threat(although EDP, UKIP and Veritas are concerned with the creation of the EU and the UK's absorption into it) and until any of them do then as I said I have no choice but to go for the only party that will.
Posted by: Richard the Lionheart at November 2, 2008 8:51 AM
Let me step up a bit for the UKIP here, for they have done some interesting things. I met their MEP Gerard Batten last year, who showed me some pretty good folders they were publishing.
And, there's the Charter of Muslim Understanding (PDF version here), written by Sam Solomon, foreword by Batten. This was presented in the British parliament, with some pretty good reactions.
The Charter has a very interesting set of conditions that Muslim organisations ought to fulfill in a Western society. The articles of the Charter are constructed in such a way there is no possible way that a true Islamist openly can adhere to it, it's pure poison to them. Debating it causes them rather obvious embarrasment :)
It's a great tool against the Stealth Jihad. I hope more will use it.
Posted by: Henrik at November 2, 2008 8:51 AM
Working PDF link for the Charter.
Posted by: Henrik at November 2, 2008 8:54 AM
I'm glad to see that Mr. Spencer has posted another update.
What I find amazing -- one thing, anyway -- is that Charles Johnson has buried his slurs in the comments portion of his web site. What's up with that? Maybe because comments are easily deleted, without any trace of the comments ever being present? I know that I can so such editing with my comments system, Haloscan.
Posted by: Always On Watch at November 2, 2008 8:57 AM
Robert! No you didn't insult me, and I'm sorry if that's the impression I gave. It does make my point though: people like me do tend to frame everything in a way that focuses on "me" so in that light it's not a surprise... but I I didn't mean to imply that.
Posted by: Archonix at November 2, 2008 9:11 AM
ALWAYS ON WATCH: "What I find amazing -- is that Charles Johnson has buried his slurs in the comments portion of his web site. What's up with that?"
I tried to find his original statement on the thread comments and couldn't. The only thing I came across was an occasional post in which he claimed to be under attack by Robert.
Can anybody locate the specific thread and time in which Charles informed his lizards of his break with JW?
Posted by: Cornelius at November 2, 2008 9:31 AM
PMK,
Good post.
We both are on the same track as always. We are both Nationalists and proud of who we are and yet the ironic thing is that we are vilified for being who we are and yet when it comes to respect of other countries' cultures and our own, we are leaps and bounds ahead of the Left Wing, who constantly call us racists.
I would like to point out a correction. I wrote "How would you feel if your soldiers were spat upon by Muslim and other Americans while walking through the streets in their Uniform?"
What I meant to say was people
Anyway, I'll continue.
I did not know that the same was so widespread in the USA as it was in the UK PMK. Oh don't get me wrong, I know of the Media & Artist Elites who get 100% behind Obama, influencing the Nation and it sickens me, but when it comes to the other stuff you've discussed I'm shocked. I respected America greatly for its patriotism and I thought that at least whatever happens, America has that. It seems that you don't and with the election of Obama then kiss goodbye to any National Pride.
In today's paper, a Muslim Chef who works in the Met is suing them for having to handle pork products. There is a very high chance that he'll win as well. He is a breakfast chef and I had to laugh because what is a 'Full English Breakfast' without the pork sausages and bacon? This is yet more attempts to Islamise the UK, to remove pork products from the country because it upsets the Muslims.
If they cave into giving this man compensation then is sets the precedent for every Muslim in the UK to sue their employer if they've had to work by alcohol or Pork products. It means yet more forking out of money by the taxpayer, while people in the UK, destroy their culture even more and we pay for it. It's sickening. It also means that it will take away even more power from the Employer as if they don't hire Muslims for fear of being sued over them complaining about having to do the job they're supposed to do, they'll be sued.
This is why today, I'm really, really considering becoming a member of the BNP, in order to stop this madness. It's nothing less and you would think that the Government would do something about it, but why should they, as Brown's off to the Gulf with his begging bowl for more Sharia Finance meaning more Muslims imposing their culture upon us.
I'm waiting for the cancellation of Christmas because it's offensive and Easter and other Christian/Jewish Festivals because it's offensive to Muslims.
It's good to know that this isn't just happening in the UK and also in America, although I mean that from the point of view that it's bad, of course, but it's making other people realise of the despicableness of Multiculturalism. I disagree with it vehemently.
I fully agree that America is losing what it set out to create, a free, democratic society, where everyone can achieve to their hearts content. Islam will destroy this and Obama will bring it in. He's a socialist and what has happened to the UK will happen to the USA under Obama, mark my words on that PMK.
at November 2, 2008 9:37 AM
Robert,
With regards to the Gates of Vienna post, I believe it's been linked, because Dymphna was spouting some "moral equivalence", as it was called many times in the comments. Because we have crimes of passion, and because we(some of us non-muslims/westerners) commited honor killings some 50+ years ago, we can not blame islam, and "We don’t have too much room to judge on this one". Ofcourse, as one of the last commenters pointed out, Dymphna has personal experiences that most likely influence her oppinion of honor killings.
I'm not the one who posted the link, so I can't say for sure if I'm right. But I'd be willing to bet on that being the reason. It's really just another example of someone believing in ideological purity, where dissenting oppinions are to be frowned upon. By the way, has Charles Johnson published a counter-jihad manifesto yet? Would make it so much easier to be ideologically pure.
P.S.
One thing I think you could do is ask people not to contact CJ over this, or atleast to keep it civil if they do. Atleast that way, you've done what you can to stop the "harrasment" of CJ, which he is trying to blame on you.
at November 2, 2008 9:40 AM
Cornelius
Enter this into you browser, CJ has blocked all the links is his typical Napoleonic revenge of the nerds fashion...so don’t click on it because you will not get anything.
In this one he says Mr. Spencer defied his imperial will…
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/showc/556/6139801
and this one he tells RS he has been kicked out of his celestial kingdom…
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/showc/473/6139714
at November 2, 2008 9:43 AM
Henrik,
Regarding the UKIP charter you posted the link to I got as far as the foreword:
"Islamic fundamentalists have however made great gains in the propaganda war by convincing many non-Muslims that they
are the true representatives of Islam, whereas they are not. The vast majority of Muslims that non-Muslims meet in every-day life are decent, respectable, law-abiding and hardworking. Western governments and societies have to offer them their
support while standing firm against the extremists."
I never read any more. This is the reason that I do not support the UKIP party as they are completely oblivious to the threat of 'stealth jihad'. They are unable to see that ideology of Islam, the true Islam, is the Islam that the Islamists promote.
They are completely unable to see that while the Islamists are attacking the free world with their bombs, the 'moderate' Muslims are merely procreating, incidentally with their offspring becoming the jihadists.
As I've said to many people before, there were no doubt many good Nazis(moderate muslims) and bad Nazis(Islamists) but regardless they were still Nazis.
To read many of Robert Spencer's posts on Islam will tell you what it truly is and UKIP are completely unable to see this and therefore completely oblivious to the threat that is Islam.
at November 2, 2008 9:52 AM
Thanks Comet
Posted by: Cornelius at November 2, 2008 10:00 AM
P.S.
It completely amazes me that even though we are on Jihad Watch and have been educated by the writings of Robert Spencer and his study on Islam, people on here, Henrik to name one recently, are still unable to see that the 'True' Islam is actually the Islam as promoted and taught by the Islamists, the Wahabists and the Jihadists. There is not such a thing as 'peaceful' Islam as by its own creation, Muhammad was not or ever will be a peaceful man. He committed atrocities many times over and promoted the oppression of women, other peoples and of course religions under Islam.
Islam is not a Religion of Peace and it doesn't matter how many times people tell you it is it isn't. Like I said above there were no doubt nicer Nazis and there were bad Nazis, but they still believed in the Nazi ideology. The same is for all Muslims, active or passive in their promotion of Islam.
at November 2, 2008 10:01 AM
Posted by Wishbone
That some of us happen to be Jewish is no reason to make any attempt at diluting that identity.
I am not attempting to dilute any identity, in fact the Jews should be admired for being able to retain their Jewishness after all the persecution they have suffered through out history.
Posted by: InfidelK9
at November 2, 2008 10:05 AM
Richard, I did not make a statement about 'True Islam'. It is a fallacy trying to deduce, from my recommendation of a particular tool against Stealth Jihad, that I agree with every wording herein.
For True Islam, read the Sirat. Or Spencers fine analysis thereof. You will find that Islam has no redeeming features, that Islam is a totalitarian system disguised as a religion, and that Islam is, from a humanitarian point of view. broken in every conceivable way.
But it should not be necessary to repeat those fundamentals in every step we make.
Posted by: Henrik at November 2, 2008 10:10 AM
Robert,
I would like to add my name to the long list of those who support and value your work. To accuse you of racism and supporting genocide is baseless and preposturous. By the way I agree about the colour bar to membership in the BNP as the obstacle to their acceptability.
Richard the Lionheart: didn't you recently post here under the name of 'Mark'? I thought I recognized the style. If so, I remember we had a few exchanges on the BNP and other nationalist parties a few weeks ago.
Regards.
at November 2, 2008 10:15 AM
One way we could really help is keep an eye out for Lizards, Lizardoids, and other various minions of CJ who will be flaming things associated, or related to Jihadwatch. Examples: Wikipedia page for Jihadwatch, and Robert Spencer, various youtube videos of speeches by RS, etc.
The point is Charles Johnson has been known to rally his cult into a mob-like frenzy to attack people he don’t like. As long as it was Dailykos it was fine, but get ready for a “blog war”, if it is not already upon us. Get ready for a lot of nasty things in various comment sections throughout the web.
It is clear CJ is not playing with a full deck right now…so keep an eye out for anything when you have some spare time, or just browsing around.
Posted by: greatcometof1577 at November 2, 2008 10:18 AM
Henrik,
You posted the link to the UKIP member Gerard Batten. I quote from your above post :
"Let me step up a bit for the UKIP here, for they have done some interesting things. I met their MEP Gerard Batten last year, who showed me some pretty good folders they were publishing."
And, there's the Charter of Muslim Understanding (PDF version here), written by Sam Solomon, foreword by Batten. This was presented in the British parliament, with some pretty good reactions."
I am rather confused with your viewpoint as you seem to contradict yourself.
On the one hand you support UKIP and their views on Islam, (which I've explained that they are unable to see that the True Islam is the Islam promoted by the Islamists/Jihadis etc etc following in the footsteps of Muhammad) and yet you then post :
"For True Islam, read the Sirat. Or Spencers fine analysis thereof. You will find that Islam has no redeeming features, that Islam is a totalitarian system disguised as a religion, and that Islam is, from a humanitarian point of view. broken in every conceivable way."
Like I said are you behind UKIP or not because what you've written above contradicts UKIP's understanding of what Islam is?
Posted by: Richard the Lionheart at November 2, 2008 10:19 AM
Maramoros: An excellent post highlighting the rabid antisemitism within the BNP. This utterly discredits the party of course and it would be a tragic mistake to support them. I understand fully Richard the Lionheart's despair at the cultural suicide and destruction of the British heritage that is taking place and share his sentiments. I myself left the UK in disgust for the same reasons, as lice abandon a dead animal. But it would be more than foolish to vote for a party out of desperation, turning a blind eye to its inherent Jew hatred. The Jews have always been the canary in the coalmine and their persecution and demonisation has always led to barbarism on a grand scale where Jews are not the only victims. Sadly, the BNP may be the only party with an anti-Islamisation and anti-mass immigration policy but they are far from being the right choice. There is no right choice within the political arena at the moment in the UK. This has to be faced.
Posted by: johndoe at November 2, 2008 10:20 AM
johndoe,
I will be leaving the UK hopefully next year with my family for Ireland(ancestry of myself and my partner).
However, the only party willing to stop the destruction of the UK by immigration, the EU and of course Islamisation is the BNP. There is no other. I've discussed the faults of UKIP, who believe that Islam is a Religion of Peace and are unable to make the connection between the Islamists and Muhammad. I have spoken of the EDP who are too small and Veritas, both also have no radical plan for Islam.
It is a simple case of not voting for the BNP and cultural suicide with Islamisation or voting for them and Britain retaining its sovereignty and culture. I really cannot see any alternative. If there is then gladly point me to it, but at the moment there isn't. I would rather vote for another party, but realistically there is not one there.
thank you
Posted by: Richard the Lionheart at November 2, 2008 10:27 AM
This is just an observation about comments telling Robert to get over it, that they should both grow up, move on, forget about it, etc....
I spent 6 years posting on a very active message board and there is a type of poster who gets off on being "above it all". This type of person inserts themselves into an argument to tell both sides to "grow up". Some truly hate to see conflict, but most do it for very selfish reasons.
They love it. These types live for a good flame war. And they just love to keep it going by telling both sides they should forget it, which only insults both sides. All while they stay above it all.
A persons reputation matters, even on an anonymous message board where nobody knows your real name.
Robert is right and he has every reason to try to set the record straight. He has to. He's being lied about in the worst way by someone who has credibility.
I'm no lawyer, but I doubt the belief that something is true is a defense against libel. But since Robert is a public figure, he probably has to put up with anything anyone says about him. His only defense is to defend himself, which he has every right to do when his very character has been maligned in this way.
Those of us who read his work know it's not true. But that is small consolation when compared to the masses who might believe it because Charles said it.
Posted by: Jaynie59 at November 2, 2008 10:33 AM
Richard, it's not that I subscribe entirely to one party platform or another. I read what I find useful, then make up my own mind. Since I'm not British anyway, I do not need to 'support' one particular party line or another. That's a rather stale way of thinking, anyway, for I don't think any political party has a complete and perfect understanding of the world.
Let's have a closer look at the quotes above:
Islamic fundamentalists have however made great gains in the propaganda war by convincing many non-Muslims that they
are the true representatives of Islam, whereas they are not.
This is the sticking point, and probably what put you off from reading the entire Charter. I would not have put it this way, I would have said "... that they are the true representatives of Muslims, which they are not.
This has several interpretations:
Fundamentalist (Salafist) Islam is defined by the Quran and the Sirat. But the fundamentalists have, traditionally, been a minority in Islam. What has dominated is Traditional Islam, where the original harsh texts have been softened and mitigated by a tradition that sought to emulate Christianity and disguise the vile behavior of Muhammad.
Seen from that point of view, the statement is correct. Islam is suffering a fundamentalist resurgence that is destroying moderate interpretations of the religion.
If you take the alternative view, that fundamentalist Islam is the only Islam, the above statement becomes somewhat misleading, and in that case I can't agree with it.
The vast majority of Muslims that non-Muslims meet in every-day life are decent, respectable, law-abiding and hardworking. Western governments and societies have to offer them their
support while standing firm against the extremists.
I agree with this. Most Muslims do not know their 'holy' texts, and are struggling hard to make it through the day, leaving the 'holy' stuff to their imam. The exact percentage who are law-abiding is subject to debate. But all Muslims are humans, created with equal fundamental dignity as Christians and others. They just happen to be born into a rather unpleasent religion, and need our help to deal with that.
I hope you will change your mind and go back into the Charter. It is written by Sam Solomon, an ex-Muslim who really knows his stuff, and is constructed as to infuriate every fundamentalist, yet be acceptable to even somewhat PC Westeners.
Posted by: Henrik at November 2, 2008 10:36 AM
StephenA55,
That would be my brother who actually, put me onto this website. He sent me a link to a book by Robert Spencer "The truth about Muhammad" and I followed the links to this site. He has posted here I believe but I think he disagreed with a couple of posters and moved elsewhere.
When it comes to the BNP, we are both wary of them, but really at the moment can see no alternative to them, when it comes to stopping the Islamisation of the UK as you can see from my posts on this thread.
at November 2, 2008 10:40 AM
Update#6...400 posts and climbing to the all time record I predicted, or close enough for government work...
FROM UPDATE... "Begin to regard Muslim immigration as a national security issue, and take steps to limit it and end it if possible. (And of course all illegal aliens should be made to leave immediately.)" This is evidence of my secret wickedness.
Well it's evidence of mine too because that's pretty much my opinion as well..
Racism, fascism, h
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)