Daniel Martin Varisco and John Esposito are afraid. They are very afraid. What are they afraid of? Me. And this website. And yet while they could try to put their fears to rest by doing one simple thing, that remedy is the very one they fear to take.
I laughed more than once reading “Preaching ‘Islamophobia’ to the Choir at Saudi-Funded Georgetown,” by Andrew Harrod at FrontPage today, which provides an in-depth look at the abject fear of the “Islamophobia” mythmakers, and the corner into which they have painted themselves. Harrod attended the “Islamophobia” seminar on which I published a report from another attendee here. “Audience questions, however, focused on Spencer,” Harrod reports: “Varisco discussed his refusal to debate Spencer as ‘someone who just hates Islam,’ yet claimed that in any hypothetical encounter he ‘would beat the whatever out of him.'” Yet Esposito “sneered” that I “wrote ‘best-selling books’ while discussing worries about Spencer’s popularity. Noting the influence of popular culture, Esposito complained that ‘Islamophobic websites score very, very high.'”
Heh. This is high comedy. There is a very simple remedy of which Varisco and Esposito could avail themselves, but won’t: one or both of them could take me on in debate, “beat the whatever” out of me as Varisco boasts that he could do, and thereby strike a huge blow for their claim that their views of Islam and jihad are accurate and mine are not. They could go a long way toward ending the popularity of Jihad Watch and substantiating their dismissals of my work by doing this.
But they won’t. Why not? Because in reality, they know they would lose. They know their “Islamophobia” construct is a manipulative, propagandistic farrago, and that what I say is true. And they know I would establish that in debate with them. So they wring their hands over my “popularity” while refusing to take an obvious course of action to end it. Instead, they hope they will be able to demonize and smear me sufficiently so that decent people will turn away from me and listen to them just because they don’t know any better.
That is the one way they can stop the truth: using unscrupulous and frankly mendacious attack dogs such as Reza Aslan’s gunsel, Nathan Lean of Aslan Media, and the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations, they intimidate people into being afraid to discuss these issues for fear of charges of “Islamophobia,” and into canceling events featuring counter-jihad speakers, for fear of “controversy” that the smear merchants manufacture. Meanwhile, their cyberterrorist allies throw all their cyberskillz into trying to take down this website (to the applause of dull-witted thugs like Aslan and Lean, who don’t realize that one day they could find themselves on the wrong side of a world without free speech), out of the abject fear that someone might learn the truth about jihad terror and Islamic supremacism.
Their endeavor is foredoomed. Their problem is not just Robert Spencer. Their problem is that the truth cannot be hidden. Their problem is truth and reality, and the fact that multitudes of people beyond me know what that truth is, and can see reality for themselves. Their “Islamophobia” campaign is a huge Big Lie operation. They won’t debate me because they know I would expose it. But it is already exposed. Every day’s headlines expose it further. And there is nothing they can do, even if they hold a thousand seminars like this one, to prevent that.
“I don’t have any desire to debate Robert Spencer….I would never give someone like that a forum,” Hofstra University Professor Daniel Martin Varisco declared at Georgetown University on February 26, 2014. Addressing the Prince Alwaleed bin Talal Center for Christian-Muslim Understanding (ACMCU), Varisco’s equally flawed outlooks on Islam and intellectual inquiry had disturbing implications for modern academia.
Prior perusal of the opening pages of Varisco’s 2007 Reading Orientalism: Said and Unsaid did not raise hopes for his briefing “Khutba vs. Khutzpa: Islamophobia on the Internet.”…
Nothing improved during Varisco’s presentation on “Islamophobia,” described in a Powerpoint image referencing a 1991 Runnymede Trust report as an “unfounded hostility” towards all things and persons Muslim. One Powerpoint on “Combatting Islamophobia on the Internet” set a leveling tone with a recommendation of a “[f]ocus on interfaith efforts, noting that all religions have positive and negative aspects.” This accorded with Varisco’s prior call for scholars to “be doing all we can to refute the notion that Islam is intrinsically more violent than other religions.” “I am not saying that these things don’t happen,” Varisco conceded when showing a picture of a woman undergoing a sharia stoning to death. Another Powerpoint, meanwhile, simply dismissed as “fallacy” controversies that “Muhammad was a pedophile and Islam is cruel to women.”…
The little discussed elephant in the room for perceptive “Islamophobia” observers during Varisco’s presentation, though, was “Islamophobe” Number One, Jihad Watch website founder Spencer. Varisco cited a Spencer quotation from his book Inside Islam: A Guide for Catholics …Varisco once again failed to explain why Spencer’s condemnations of Islam as an “often downright false revelation” and “threat to the world at large” were unacceptable. Varisco also noted a recent Jihad Watch entry criticizing his very Georgetown briefing.
Audience questions, however, focused on Spencer. Varisco discussed his refusal to debate Spencer as “someone who just hates Islam,” yet claimed that in any hypothetical encounter he “would beat the whatever out of him.” ACMCU head John Esposito concurred with the “Combatting Islamophobia in the Internet” assessment of “little value in debating Islamophobic speakers in academic settings since it gives them a forum.” Such encounters with Spencer “would be enhancing his credibility.” Yet in discussing partisan websites, Esposito complained that “nobody accepts the other side as objective.” “Cranks” like Spencer, an audience member meanwhile argued, belonged at Hyde Park Corner.Although Esposito dismissed Spencer as a scholar, he nonetheless sneered that he wrote “best-selling books” while discussing worries about Spencer’s popularity. Noting the influence of popular culture, Esposito complained that “Islamophobic websites score very, very high.” Varisco bemoaned that such websites outperformed his own Tabsir website and without irony cited a need for people like him to create “more books…that people can read.”
Ha. You guys don’t write books that people can read.
The “Vast Rightwing Conspiracy is better at” advocacy “than our lefty friends,” the audience member who had called Spencer a “crank” agreed. “Lots of money” also appeared as an advantage for “Islamophobic” groups to Esposito. Esposito did not say whether this money outweighed the $20 million Saudi namesake grant to ACMCU or George Soros funding and six-figure salaries at the likeminded Center for American Progress and Southern Poverty Law Center, respectively.
Amidst this uniform opposition to Spencer et al. from fewer than 20 people in the briefing room, one audience member sounded an independent note. Observing that he was the only black person in the room, the young man discussed how he did not see Spencer’s work as a “race issue” but rather as opposition to Islamic extremism. Because of this “my country is in ruins now” he said with respect to the Somali homeland of his Muslim father.
Varisco answered by attributing violence in Somalia and other majority-Muslim societies not to Islamic ideology but rather to Somalia’s “colonial experience,” pre-Arab Spring dictators, or Western countries “pumping weapons” into these countries. Another audience member spoke of Somalia’s “tribal roots.” “I don’t think you put blame on one individual,” Varisco meanwhile responded to the black man’s query about responsibility for Afghan violence following Terry Jones Koran burning. Absolving Muslim murderers and other criminals at least partly from their individual responsibility, Varisco analogized to an arsonist setting alight a carelessly tended house.
In all, Varisco’s briefing exposed much of modern academia’s shallowness. True to multicultural shibboleth, Varisco refused to identify any uniquely disturbing aspects of Islam and dismissed all past aversion towards this faith as prejudice. Varisco’s minimalist treatment of Spencer, meanwhile, accorded with an unwillingness to respect this lucidly insightful scholar. Rather, Varisco grouped Spencer with far more lightweight individuals like Chick and Richardson with whom Catholics like Spencer or his colleague Robert Muise of the American Freedom Law Center have little commonality. The expressed worries of Varisco, Esposito, and others, however, give hope that their efforts to silence their opposition will fail.
jeffpresidentlo says
Any video or clips of this forum? really wanna hear what sort of intellectual garble these guys were able to offer on the table.
Roger says
Most people like these are not afraid , their pockets are filled by petro-dollars money .
mortimer says
Esposito’s department was started with $12 million from his Saudi employers.
EYESOPEN says
Absolutely. Varisco and Esposito are nothing more than paid wh0res for their Wahabbi pimps. And they SURE as hell would not even attempt to debate Robert Spencer – because they know they would be exposed for the liars and frauds that they truly are.
Tradewinds says
Did you know that Dhimmi Varisco is President of the American Institute for Yemeni Studies? Check it out (website):
http://www.aiys.org/contact-aiys.html
Tradewinds says
Did you know that Dhimmi Varisco is President of the American Institute for Yemeni Studies? Website:
http://www.aiys.org/contact-aiys.html
duh_swami says
Bevis and Butthead are alive and well in Georgetown. Anyone afraid to back up their word, doesn’t have a word, just annoying background noise. Cowards usually attack from behind because they know they will lose a direct confrontation. There is a name for this, it is called ‘back stabbers’. Whenever I see anyone engaging in Back Stabbing, BS, I know I am looking at a coward. So gird up your loins, and man up John/Daniel, debate Spencer directly or take your place in the Hall of Shame as a ‘Girly Man Back Stabber’…
Robert4 says
Robert Spencer is himself a greater coward. He blocks and blocks and blocks on Twitter. And runs away from legal charges!
Salah says
“Robert Spencer is himself a greater coward. ”
Greater than…this one?
http://crossmuslims.blogspot.com/2011/03/muhammad-coward.html
Defcon 4 says
Hasn’t Mr. Spencer received volumes of islamic death threats?
robert4 says
The coward Robert Spencer is afraid to face dissent. My previous comment was deleted. The coward Robert Spencer will quite likely delete this comment as well.
mortimer says
You’re foolish.
EYESOPEN says
Hey Nathan! Is that you?
Mr Shinkicks says
This is half the problem, and you sir, are a fine example of the problem that the rest of the freedom loving world face. You see, you are an idiot; an imbecile; an uneducated person that unfortunately for everyone around you, must withstand your inability to understand reason and logic. You are like a child. But you have no parents to help you now with your stunted mind. If you weren’t so dangerous I would feel sorry for you. As it stands, I only hope you tweak the blue wire and paint yourself onto the walls around you in a blaze of irony.
No Fear says
Imagine if “Islam” was swapped for , as an example, “Scientology”. Imagine the outrage of the USA and the world if Scientology followers behaved like the more extreme Mohammedan devotees. If so, Scientology would NOT be tolerated for one minute.
What is there to like about Mohammed and the Quran? Beats me.
mortimer says
Excellent comparison! And you are right. Scientology is illegal in Germany because of the similarity to the master race theory.
Islam is more like Scientology than at first meets the eye. Islam also has a master race theory…Arabs are allegedly the chosen rulers of the earth.
Michael Copeland says
Is there a word for unfounded fear of Robert Spencer?
duh_swami says
That’s a really good question. You may have started something with that. I can think of several, but none of them are fit for mixed company.
thomas_h says
Why of course, Veritophobia!
voegelinian says
Years ago on Jihad Watch, Spencer noted that John Derbyshire coined the term “Islamophobophobia” —
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2009/06/islamophobophobia-and-the-stoning-of-soraya-m
Logically the term should mean the irrational fear of “Islamophobia”; however, Derbyshire’s thinking about the whole matter is a muddle of asymptotic mush:
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/222229/islamophobophobia/john-derbyshire
Still, the the term is nicely and appropriately comical.
mortimer says
Phobic or not, what are the facts? Can the facts be discussed by ACADEMICS and verified or falsified by them?
If not, they must prove that SPENCER’S facts are not true.
That is the question: TRUE or FALSE?
They are afraid to debate SPENCER because his facts are VALID and TRUE.
Tradewinds says
“They are afraid to debate SPENCER because his facts are VALID and TRUE.”
Exactly. Dhimmis V and E are are such Cowards.
badmally says
Let’s construct a new word then.
“Spencerphobia”: an irrational fear of Robert Spencer, of debating Robert Spencer and his published works.
Frank Scarn says
“Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest?”
Esposito et alia complain of their turbulent priest, and beseech the world to rid itself of Islamophobia (sois-distant), to not listen to Spencer, and apparently to not watch current events as Muslim after Muslim commits murderous acts on infidels justifying it all on the tenets of Islam.
But in their very own hands, at least they so claim, they could “beat the whatever out of [Spencer],” and in the process silence him.
But they don’t. More significantly, they won’t.
Refusal means impotence. If I had a nuisance in my backyard, lets say a sizeable hornets’ nest, I would be the neighborhood’s biggest fool, as well as endangering my family and neighbors, if I simply muttered to myself that I could stop those bees cold with a variety of tools, and did nothing.
Here, Esposito claims he could easily best Spencer. That’s entirely doubtful. Unless he likes having the presence of a turbulent priest and learning bee-readers becoming quite knowledgeable about Islam.
eib says
Esposito’s claims about his debating abilities are contemptible.
He is an anti-democratic shill.
Should be persona non grata at every academic institution in the West– banished to Al Azhar for good.
Inchoate says
Re:
“Esposito et alia complain of their turbulent priest, and beseech the world to rid itself of Islamophobia (sois-distant), to not listen to Spencer,….”
Do you mean,
“soi-disant – definition of soi-disant by the Free Online Dictionary …
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/soi-disant
TheFreeDictionary.com
soi-di·sant (swä′dē-zäⁿ′). adj. Self-styled; so-called. [French : soi, oneself + disant, saying.] soi-disant (swadizɑ̃). adj. 1. so-called; self-styled. [literally: calling …
Anushirvan says
“Although Esposito dismissed Spencer as a scholar, he nonetheless sneered that he wrote “best-selling books” while discussing worries about Spencer’s popularity. Noting the influence of popular culture, Esposito complained that “Islamophobic websites score very, very high.” Varisco bemoaned that such websites outperformed his own Tabsir website and without irony cited a need for people like him to create “more books…that people can read.”
Now surely, being a genuine academic AND being popular at the same instance must be the worst insult imaginable to someone who consistently appropriates the sanctimonious air of moral virtue without ever knowing what he’s talking about.
Esposito and Varisco must be on the verge of exploding by now.
Boo-hoo !
mortimer says
Esposito and Varisco must be on the verge of losing funding from their Saudi paymasters.
EYESOPEN says
ROFLMAO!!!
jamesC says
try “Spencerphobia””
badmally says
Beat yah to it James.
mortimer says
Well written, Robert.
Querulous Paranoia or Persecutory delusion affects Muslims and Islam in general. Muslims believes they are being persecuted unfairly without evidence: The two central elements are: 1.The individual thinks that harm is occurring, or IS GOING TO occur. 2.The individual thinks that the perceived persecutor has the intention to cause harm.
Neither of these conditions is present in the counterjihad, because we are criticizing the well-foundedness of Islamic IDEOLOGY.
The ideology of Islam is that kafirs are evil because they don’t believe Mohammed is a valid prophet and that Muslims are commissioned by Muslims to be bounty hunters to crush them.
TrueVoice says
Christians whom are suffering from the ‘Blasphemy Laws.’ These laws are used by Islamic extremists to make up charges against innocent Christians in order to steal their property and stir up violence against the Christians population. We supply food, medicine, safe houses, legal help for visa applications, and in extreme circ
mortimer says
They use the POISONED WELL FALLACY. “I don’t listen to people like YOU.”
How about discussing FACTS? How is it ‘bigoted’ to mention FACTS? Are the facts accurate or not?
mortimer says
Correction: The ideology of Islam says that kafirs are evil because they don’t believe Mohammed is a valid prophet, and that Muslims are commissioned by Allah to be bounty hunters to capture and crush them.
john spielman says
I’m not surprised that Esposito et al are afraid. Their conscience must be seared by the truth which they have been denying for the sake of filthy lucre. Just like Judas Iscariot, they realize that they have sold their souls to Satan/ Islam for the price of their salaries from their rich Saudi princes. They realize they are nothing more than academic whores, for which, unless they repent, the penalty is perdition.
Al Hepburn says
Amen.
King Dave says
Islamophobia : An embarrassing nonsense word, created by fascists & used by cowards to manipulate morons.
Tradewinds says
Someone really needs to cure Beavis and Butt-Head Varisco and Esposito of their Spencerphobia! Oh, their JihadWatchphobia, too!
Tradewinds says
Beavis and Butt-Head V & E need to be cured of their Spencerphobia.
RodSerling says
While it is an acceptable and practical policy not to give cranks a platform by debating them, Varisco and Esposito have failed to show that Spencer is a crank. (If someone really is a crank–someone who says crazy and false things–it’s very easy to demonstrate. That V and E haven’t done so is conspicuous).
The we-don’t-debate-cranks excuse is also dubious here because V and E wouldn’t have to give Spencer a platform. They are academics, professional writers. All that these Islamic experts would have to do is read Spencer’s work, cite the important claims, and demonstrate with evidence that his claims are false.
Esposito states, in his Islam: The Straight Path that “As Islam penetrated new areas, people were offered three options: (1) conversion, that is, full membership in the Muslim community, with its rights and duties; (2) acceptance of Muslim rule as ‘protected’ people and payment of a poll tax; (3) battle or the sword if neither the first nor the second option was accepted” (p. 35)
…but when Robert Spencer writes the same sorts of things, reports on jihadists’ stated application of the jihad policy toward non-Muslims, and objects to the policy, it’s “Islamophobia.”
Tradewinds says
V and E are the cranks. Idiots.
Tradewinds says
The cranks are V and E. Idiots.
Wellington says
Never underestimate how snobbish and delusional academics can be. So many of them live in a make-believe world of their own construction. The Variscos and Espositos out there look cowardly to the rest of us but in their own minds they are highly principled and knowledgeable individuals, above the fray, and fully justified in not debating an inferior human being like Robert Spencer.
And they almost certainly will go to their grave thinking this. Their ignorance is insuperable. They will never learn.
mortimer says
Universities all try to avoid controversy if they have wealthy patrons with a different point of view from the truth. In the circumstance, those patrons are oil sheikhs who have NO interest in free speech, academic research or human rights. The sell-out of E & V is sordid and nauseating, but the university governors have sold out too.
voegelinian says
Although Esposito dismissed Spencer as a scholar, he nonetheless sneered that he wrote “best-selling books” while discussing worries about Spencer’s popularity. Noting the influence of popular culture, Esposito complained that “Islamophobic websites score very, very high.” Varisco bemoaned that such websites outperformed his own Tabsir website and without irony cited a need for people like him to create “more books…that people can read.”
…
The “Vast Rightwing Conspiracy is better at” advocacy “than our lefty friends,” the audience member who had called Spencer a “crank” agreed.
I have oft noted this curious disconnect from reality on the part of the subcultures of Leftists and atheists (the two subcultures often overlap): they wring their hands at the influence of their ideological opponents, when all around them thrives and flourishes an overwhelmingly dominant and mainstream super-culture of Modern Secularism that has, culturally and psychologically, conquered the entire West if not most of the Rest of the world.
Here, Dhimmi and Dhimmierer (Esposito and Varisco) exhibit the same cognitive dissonence in the context of “Islamophobia”. Are they really that oblivious to the massive, mainstream fact that the West (and most of the Rest of the world) is cluelessly on their side, and that the Counter-Jihad remains — according to any terms of measurement — a beleaguered minority subculture?
There are only so many possible explanations for their irrational concern:
1) their concern is accurate, and the Counter-Jihad really is a demographically, culturally and sociopolitically supereminent phenomenon (while I dearly wished this were so, I see no evidence of that at all)
2) their concern is irrational and they are indulging in a fantasy-based neurosis (quite possible)
3) they are feigning concern, in the spirit of “nipping in the bud” what they fear may in some future grow to be a real concern.
#3 seems the most likely.
Incidentally, this irrational concern of PC MCs and Leftists is echoed by Muslim Islamopologists — but with them, one reasonably does not conclude they are sincere(ly confused), but rather that they are trying to manipulate the conversation through taqiyya.
EYESOPEN says
Hey LemonLime! I think you hit the nail on the head there.
voegelinian says
Thanks, EYESOPEN!
voegelinian says
that should be “dissonance” (before my second cup of coffee, I spell like a 20-something airhead on the Net)
eib says
What is Esposito doing in the West?
Why doesn’t he take a permanent vacation in Teheran and leave the West to us?
Tradewinds says
Dhimmis V and E should both move to Yemen where they belong.
Tradewinds says
Both dhimmis V and E should move to Yemen where they belong.
Henry says
Jihad Watch readers appreciate the truth above all, so a heart felt thanks to you Robert for dishing it to us day in and day out.
mortimer says
The way to bring the university back to its true values of pursuing TRUTH and EXCELLENCE (rather than lies and mediocrity) is to PROTEST, PICKET and PROVOKE comment. They must be embarrassed before they will change anything. Many profs at Georgetown no doubt support American values of FREE SPEECH but are afraid to say so.
Boston Tea Party says
One of my favorite quotations, and very appropriate pursuant to this and to Robert Spencer’s work in general:
“Without education, we are in a horrible and deadly danger of taking educated people seriously.” —G.K. Chesterton
Bezelel says
Part of the problem is that the Atrocities committed by islam are so horrific that it’s unbelievable. Unbelievable yet verifiable yet so disgusting that alot of people refuse to look at the evidence. Not being a “shrink” I can’t classify the islamodenialists without using offensive adjectives and of those I have many. Robert Spencer to me seems to be more of a Rapid recall specialist who does have his priorities in order as far as what to recall and when. If that’s debating, so be it, The man’s damn good at it.
PGuud says
Alethophobia
1. A crippling fear of truth.
2. The inability to accept unflattering facts about your nation, religion, culture, ethnic group, or yourself.
Islam: where freedom ends and slavery begins.
mortimer says
Exactly. The argument of the sword is Islam’s main argument: “Believe this or we’ll hurt you.” Truth is not the goal of a bullshitter, but his AGENDA is. The Muslim agenda is world dominance. Mohammed’s first goal in the agenda was to control communications. All his opponents left Arabia after several were assassinated in mafia-style hits.
The Georgetown dons are assassinating the character of highly ethical, highly cultured people like Robert Spencer.
voegelinian says
“2. The inability to accept unflattering facts about your nation, religion, culture, ethnic group, or yourself.”
Actually, the West has far too much of this — White Guilt, Shame at our “Colonialist” Past, etc. ad nauseam. This is indeed the #1 reason why we are bending over backwards to salaam Muslims ushering them sim-sim-sala-bim into our House of Hijra by the droves of millions.
Inchoate says
Re-posting this which was incorrectly clicked-posted elsewhere ….
Inchoate
March 6, 2014 at 8:04 am
Follow the Big Money into Georgetown Univ. backwards to its sources.
Who specifically inside Georgetown Univ.’s administrative offices is actually seeking this money? Does their Bursar [nice, 19th Cent. word] have a procedure for vetting large donations, asking about political aims, are they in keeping with a Christian educational institution?
Isn’t Saudi Arabia the major benefactor to Georgetown Univ.?
Privacy shriekers and howlers will have a field day with these questions.
There is massive hypocrisy here, and “evasion ops” for the nervous and coy
mortimer says
Well said. The fact this conference exists is a sign that the university is being manipulated for the supremacist political agenda of a foreign government, and a repressive dictatorship that allows no free speech whatsoever. The Georgetown University needs to ask those questions. What is the value of running such a ‘conference’ since it is merely a political attack on American freedom of speech and academic freedom?
Tradewinds says
Georgetown – you have really gone down with the likes of dhimmi esposito.
Karliner says
Please let these “seekers of truth” which is what colleges are all about righ? Please let them read, wash away their prejudices and learn who is cutting a swath of blood through Africa and other CONTINENTS. Please let them see the fear and the intolerance of their decision being “punked” by a cult masquerading as a religion,of pEACE that seeks blood always more blood.
This is not my view from Jihad watch, this is fact as evidenced by their own actions. If Georgetown U is so fearfull of the truth then that means their arguments for the debate are so poor their fear of losing is proof of their cancelling.
As in math, physics, the sciences one needs to oppen the eyes just as all of a sudden negative numbers enter the number line in second grade and the number line disappears altogether later on in math so it is with this religious debate of the cult of blood. Open the eyes a little one sees the number line, then negative integers, fractions etc and then the whole spectrum comes into existence and if one cannot SEE Islam ( or math) for what it is then they will merely be relegated to the number line never to see the incredible truth that goes far beyond the MSM milquetoast watered down math/Islam they propagate in the news and these slow witted activists groups. Georgetown U is still existing in”Flatland,” so sad, too bad, bock bock, undereducated chickens!
Reality Check says
“Noting the influence of popular culture, Esposito complained that “Islamophobic websites score very, very high.”
Well, this is the best news I’ve heard all my life! You see, I was so worried that too many of the people out there shrink back at the sight of the sites like “Jihad Watch” but if the above complaint comes from the mouth of someone like Esposito, his situation and the situation of his ilk must be abysmal!
Keep up the brilliant work, Mr Spencer! If it weren’t for the people like you, the world of today would have slipped in the traps set by Islam a long time ago.
Tradewinds says
Hah! “islamophobic” – No such thing! What you mean dhimmi demon esposito is TRUTH-TELLING WEBSITES ABOUT ISLAM. Like Jihad Watch. And you can’t stand it! Move to an Islamic crapistan where you belong. And make sure to wear your hijab!
gravenimage says
That these apologists for Muslim savagery are scared of the civilized, soft-spoken, rational, peaceful, entirely decent Robert Spencer *speaks volumes*.