• Why Jihad Watch?
  • About Robert Spencer and Staff Writers
  • FAQ
  • Books
  • Muhammad
  • Islam 101
  • Privacy

Jihad Watch

Exposing the role that Islamic jihad theology and ideology play in the modern global conflicts

Video: Robert Spencer and Michael Coren on the jihad in Iraq

Jun 22, 2014 5:57 pm By Robert Spencer

On my regular weekly Jihad Watch segment on Michael’s Sun TV program, we discussed the jihad in Iraq and the Obama Administration’s naivete regarding the Muslim Brotherhood.

Video thanks to AlohaSnackbar01.

Share this:

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)
  • Click to print (Opens in new window)
  • Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • More
  • Click to share on Skype (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)

Follow me on Facebook

Filed Under: Islamic State (aka ISIS, ISIL, Daesh), Robert Spencer Tagged With: featured


Learn more about RevenueStripe...

Comments

  1. the Oracle says

    Jun 22, 2014 at 6:01 pm

    Au contraire, if a Sunni mole had been in the WH, he could not have done a better job.

    • John C. Barile says

      Jun 24, 2014 at 9:26 am

      I surmise as much.

  2. Nehemia says

    Jun 22, 2014 at 6:20 pm

    Hmm, I did not fully understand your last answer Robert, Do you think ISIS will take bagdad or not?

  3. Brian the kafir says

    Jun 22, 2014 at 7:27 pm

    I just wanted to say to you Robert Im half way through your latest book and again as all ways your truth about the MB in our government is a valuable insight and couldn’t be more spot on thank you for your wealth of knowledge and fighting for freedom equal rights for all around the world God Bless you and your work thank you.

    • Shane says

      Jun 23, 2014 at 4:24 pm

      The MB has influence on Obama. We need to impeach the dhimmi Obama now!

      • John C. Barile says

        Jun 24, 2014 at 10:25 am

        I expect that impeachment will take place after the next Congress is seated.

  4. John C. Barile says

    Jun 22, 2014 at 9:48 pm

    The Turks under PM Erdogan could, if they willed to, stop the transit of foreign fighters to the jihadists in Syria and Iraq–so why don’t they? Probably because Erdogan is a committed Islamizer busily reviving a neo-Ottoman sphere of influence. He must have thought to use the jihadists as proxies to this end.

    • John C. Barile says

      Jun 22, 2014 at 9:52 pm

      That’s another reason I favor the national aspirations of the Kurds–it runs counter to Turkish, pan-Arabist, and Iranian ambitions–and suppresses Kurdish jihadists of Ansar al-Islam allied with al-Qaida.

    • John C. Barile says

      Jun 22, 2014 at 9:58 pm

      And remember, Recip Erdogan is the foreign leader with whom Mr. Obama feels most personally connected to–thus I distrust the the Turks all the more; almost as much as I do the Muslim Brotherhood here and abroad.

  5. BC says

    Jun 23, 2014 at 6:26 am

    The problem with Syria is that the West in general dithered and were assisted in their dither by Putin. We should have intervened early and hard. Assad should have been kicked into the ICC. Then there would have been no time for
    jihadists to arrive from all over the world. The protesters wanted changes they did not want a civil war, but Assad gave them that. The blame for all this current situation lies in Putin’s and China’s dog in the manger attitude at the Security Council.
    It should either be abolished or its charter rewritten so that a majority vote is
    sufficient. China and Russia both are dicatatorships who are scared to death of setting a precedent because they have potentially restless populations. Yes, Putin is riding high at the moment as he exploits Russian nationaism, just as Hitler did. So they will not accept regime change at any price. Putin blatantly disregards the Security Council when he wants to interfere in another country, like Georgia, Crimea and Ukraine. He is at heart a KGB thug who uses brute force to get what he wants when he wants it.

    • Mirren10 says

      Jun 23, 2014 at 7:51 am

      ”The protesters wanted changes they did not want a civil war, but Assad gave them that. The blame for all this current situation lies in Putin’s and China’s dog in the manger attitude at the Security Council”

      Nonsense. The blame for ”all this current situation” lies with the tenets of islam, and the example of mohammed, and the desire of mohammedans to form a caliphate which will rule the world, and force us all to submit to islam.

      Have you actually *read* the koran ?

  6. PRCS says

    Jun 23, 2014 at 10:56 am

    At 4:14 Coren asks “if naive fellow travelers [in the white house] are ideologically committed to “radical Islam”?”

    1. There is no such thing as “radical” Islam, Michael. There is Islam, as it’s written; amputations and all.
    2. For the sake of argument, if there really were a “radical” version of Islam, why would NAIVE fellow travelers in the White House be ideologically committed to a version which commands the amputation of thieves’ hands if they could choose between that and “moderate” Islam?

    I do hope that Robert took the time, later, to educate Michael about that.

    • John C. Barile says

      Jun 23, 2014 at 11:57 am

      “Radical Islam”–with “radical” as a modifier has its place in informed discourse about the Muslim world. I would use “radical” in conjunction with “Islam” or “Muslim” as an intensifier to denote Islam in undiluted form, Islam as its own means and ends. To distinguish, say, between a Mubarak–or Jordan’s King Abdallah–who would recognize Israel and maintain peace indefinitely, and a Mohamed Morsi, an Ismail Hanifeh, or a Yassir Arafat who would not–who undermine peace and security at every turn so as to advance Islam, even at the expense of their own peoples’ lives and well-being.

      • John C. Barile says

        Jun 23, 2014 at 12:00 pm

        Got that everbody? Yeah, there is arguably such a thing as RADICAL ISLAM.

        • John C. Barile says

          Jun 23, 2014 at 12:05 pm

          The term means “Islam at its root”–that’s what the root word radix is, the root.

          GOT IT?

      • John C. Barile says

        Jun 23, 2014 at 12:02 pm

        Read, “Islam as its own means and end.”

        • PRCS says

          Jun 23, 2014 at 11:14 pm

          You are very wrong.

          The phrase “radical Islam” gives the false and idiotic notion to the uniformed of a corresponding “moderate” Islam.

          The phrase “radical Islam” is used by many to convey to others the equally false and idiotic notion that “radical/radicalized Muslims ” and Muslim “extremists” have hijacked “the religion of peace”.

          The Turkish PM Erdogan said:

          “Speaking at Kanal D TV”s Arena program, PM Erdogan commented on the term “moderate Islam”, often used in the West to describe AKP and said, “˜These descriptions are very ugly, it is offensive and an insult to our religion. There is no moderate or immoderate Islam. Islam is Islam and that”s it.””

        • PRCS says

          Jun 23, 2014 at 11:18 pm

          A better phrase, one which makes the issue and the participants’ motivation clear is “literalist/literalism”.

        • prcs says

          Jun 23, 2014 at 11:26 pm

          And back to Coren’s comment:

          Why, then would NAIVE fellow travelers in the White House be ideologically committed to an “undiluted” form of Islam?

        • John C. Barile says

          Jun 24, 2014 at 9:21 am

          Why do infer that I’m making an unwarranted distinction, positing a “moderate Islam”? I am acknowledging that there are tolerant Muslims, which is why Islamic virulence is often held in check.

          Why do you suppose qualified terms applied to Islam are so bitterly resented by likes of Erdogan or by CAIR (and other Islamists)? Why would an informed man of ideas like Michael Coren–a man free of illusions–use such a term?

          Islamists hate such notions because they invite a closer scrutiny of Islam’s inherent character, and you and I know how revealing and unflattering that is.

        • PRCS says

          Jun 24, 2014 at 10:45 am

          Coren’s question: “if naive fellow travelers [in the white house] are ideologically committed to “radical Islam”?”

          Your assertion: “ I would use “radical” in conjunction with “Islam” or “Muslim” as an intensifier to denote Islam in undiluted form

          My question: Why, then would NAIVE fellow travelers in the White House be ideologically committed to an “undiluted” form of Islam?

          Your response: “They are in fact committed to a diluted, watered-down form of Islam”

          And you responded: “Why do infer that I’m making an unwarranted distinction, positing a “moderate Islam”? I am acknowledging that there are tolerant Muslims, which is why Islamic virulence is often held in check.”

          To make it clear, no matter who uses it, the phrase “radical Islam” gives the false and idiotic notion to the uniformed of a corresponding “moderate” Islam–of which there is NO such thing.

          There is neither a moderate or a radical Islam. There is Islam.

          You are confusing the one and only Islam, as written, with the degree to which individual Muslims attempt to comply with its teachings.

          The word Muslim includes every Muslim man, woman and child. Some of them do attempt to comply (though, as you know, that is an impossibility). Fortunately for the rest of us, most of them either don’t try or have failed the attempt.

          Our fellow kuffar need to know that the Qur’an’s every word is applicable to every Muslim, everywhere, at all times–even in Detroit and to those Muslims who are less than compliant, and that no moderate version of the Qur’an or Islam exists.

        • PRCS says

          Jun 24, 2014 at 11:09 am

          Call them literalists–which will convey to our fellow kuffar that some (most?) are not.

        • PRCS says

          Jun 24, 2014 at 11:19 am

          Consider how others might interpret the following and what would be more appropriately descriptive.

          I’m not saying that you are guilty of all of these–merely that they are in common usage.

          Terrorists or jihadists?

          Fighters or insurgents?

          Radicals or literalists?

          How have “extremists” hijacked Islam?

          What does the Global War on Terror really mean?

          What does being “radicalized” mean?

          We are subjected to misinformation about Islam every day from politicians and pundits. The least we can do–IMO–is to use descriptions which cause others to think.

        • PRCS says

          Jun 24, 2014 at 11:31 am

          “I’m glad that the Western press uses “Islamist” to mean political Islam and “jihad” in its primary sense to denote actual combat. ”

          Unfortunately, the idea of political Islam also gives the false notion of a subset of Islam’s teachings; in truth, as you know, there is no separation of “mosque and state”. It would be better for others to know that Islam is “a complete way of life” that prohibits those man-made laws which permit what Allah and Muhammad have prohibited. IMO–the press just parrots phrases.

          And would “violent jihad” be a more informative description. Also, how about the less violent (for now) civilizational Jihad? And the “stealth” jihad?

          If you were trying to explain these things to an uninformed person, which phrases and words would provide the most impact?

          Did you happen to watch the “Radical Muslims on The March” program on FoxNews recently? So much misinformation there.

        • PRCS says

          Jun 24, 2014 at 3:06 pm

          It’s not about YOU seeing the big picture.

          It’s how you describe that picture to the uninformed.

          When Sean Hannity repeats the phrase “radical Islam” over and over again during his programs, what do you think “radical” means to him?

          The root?

          Most of our fellow kuffar interpret the phrase “radical” Islam as a perversion of Islam.

          And, the Muslim world doesn’t prohibit you from saying whatever you want: here.

          As Islam is a written ideology, that is how I see it. So, literalism is a qualifier that causes the uninformed to think.

          Want a good qualifier?

          Muslim literalist.

        • John C. Barile says

          Jun 24, 2014 at 3:28 pm

          I concede your point. “Literal Muslim” would work as well.

          Time out for a hudna.

        • John C. Barile says

          Jun 24, 2014 at 3:34 pm

          Or literal Islam. Works fine with me.

        • PRCS says

          Jun 24, 2014 at 6:29 pm

          Nice talking to you.

  7. onisac says

    Jun 23, 2014 at 12:17 pm

    After several years of being a Jihad Watch fan. I have learned a great deal about Islam. I also have Muslims living near me in Minnesota. The males have no problem with walking out in front of you as you are driving by in your car. It’s like they are daring you to hit them.

    They have been doing this at all times of the day or night, for years. certainly the local cops see it happening, but nothing has been done or said about it to my knowledge. Not even the locals or gangs dare do that. I can feel it in the air that one day, it will all boil over and there will be big trouble.

    I also know whom the local courts will favor when it does, boil over. For me, I believe things will get much worse, down the road of time. I also believe the cops and courts will take the side of the Muslims, if only because that is the politically correct thing to do.

    We don’t have to get the bad news from over seas, to see that there is a problem here. A problem that has never before been an issue with other immigrants., like Jews, Irish, poles, Germans, Norwegian’s, Brits, French, Latino’s, etc. etc. etc.. Look at the news coming out of Flint, Michigan some time.

    Now lets think about the so called moderate Muslims. I understand there are like 1.3 billion Muslim in the world today. Of those perhaps only 5% are what we’ve been calling radical’s. That means then, that there are 95% moderate Muslims.

    So I ask myself why aren’t the 95% at least speaking out against the 5% that are radical’s? Or they could be helping the administration figure out, what in the world is going on here? And what should the free world be doing about it?

    I hear this has been going on since the 6th century. So how is it, that the majority of free world doesn’t no anything about the Muslim population??..

    • dumbledoresarmy says

      Jun 28, 2014 at 6:43 am

      *I* think, because the Ummah has always been very good at every form of warfare-by-deception: at divide-and-conquer (also known as “split the camp”), at playing goodcop/ badcop, at plausible deniability and use of proxies (as seen in, for example, Pakistan’s act of war against India via ghazi raider “proxies” in November 2008), and at starting fights whilst pretending to be the one aggrieved. Also very good at subversion-and-infiltration, that is, the establishment and use of a Fifth Column, as and when they are not strong enough to engage in full-frontal military invasion of a non-Muslim neighbour or neighbours. Very often, the attacks are “cloaked” – the non-Muslim victim doesn’t necessarily know (until it’s too late) that the real reason for the attack/ insurgency/ civil war is the Muslim doctrine of Jihad.

      For more on infiltration-and-subversion, see Sam Solomon and Elias Maqdisi’s book “Al Hijra: The Islamic Doctrine of Immigration”. It sets the whole thing out.

      Reviewed here:

      http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/08/the_hijra.html

      August 16, 2009
      The Hijra
      By Janet Levy

      Modern Day Trojan Horse: The Islamic Doctrine of Immigration

  8. PRCS says

    Jun 23, 2014 at 11:24 pm

    And back to Coren’s comment:

    Why, then would NAIVE fellow travelers in the White House be ideologically committed to an “undiluted” form of Islam?

    • John C. Barile says

      Jun 24, 2014 at 9:34 am

      They are in fact committed to a diluted, watered-down form of Islam–the mass-marketed version–and they believe in countering “bad” jihad and violent Islamism with “good” jihad and nonviolent Islamism.

    • John C. Barile says

      Jun 24, 2014 at 10:33 am

      I’m glad that the Western press uses “Islamist” to mean political Islam and “jihad” in its primary sense to denote actual combat. Because these terms have utility, currency, and have Muslim observers twisting their knickers.

      • PRCS says

        Jun 24, 2014 at 11:21 am

        See above, please.

        • John C. Barile says

          Jun 24, 2014 at 11:46 am

          You don’t seem to get my point, that Islam is expressed in various ways and various measure, and that qualifiers are sometimes needed to describe these facts. Argue the point all you like; try as you might to frame the debate in terms that pass muster with you–“literal” works only if you consider Islam as a pure, immutable abstraction–you can’t enforce application of an approved lexicon on others any more than the MC/PC crowd or the Islamizers can. Utility, currency, and, of course, precision dictate what we say.

        • John C. Barile says

          Jun 24, 2014 at 11:54 am

          As long as I can connect Islam in the abstract with Islam in the particular–something the Muslim world would forbid me to do–then I’m quite capable of seeing The Big Picture.

  9. JIMJFOX says

    Jun 24, 2014 at 8:58 pm

    Someone, somewhere defined ‘moderate muslims’ as the grass and ‘Islamists/extremists’ as the snakes.

    Perfect.

FacebookYoutubeTwitterLog in

Subscribe to the Jihad Watch Daily Digest

You will receive a daily mailing containing links to the stories posted at Jihad Watch in the last 24 hours.
Enter your email address to subscribe.

Please wait...

Thank you for signing up!
If you are forwarding to a friend, please remove the unsubscribe buttons first, as they my accidentally click it.

Subscribe to all Jihad Watch posts

You will receive immediate notification.
Enter your email address to subscribe.
Note: This may be up to 15 emails a day.

Donate to JihadWatch
FrontPage Mag

Search Site

Translate

The Team

Robert Spencer in FrontPageMag
Robert Spencer in PJ Media

Articles at Jihad Watch by
Robert Spencer
Hugh Fitzgerald
Christine Douglass-Williams
Andrew Harrod
Jamie Glazov
Daniel Greenfield

Contact Us

Terror Attacks Since 9/11

Archives

  • 2020
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2019
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2018
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2017
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2016
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2015
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2014
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2013
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2012
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2011
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2010
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2009
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2008
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2007
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2006
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2005
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2004
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2003
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • March

All Categories

You Might Like

Learn more about RevenueStripe...

Recent Comments

  • William Garrison on The Fantasy Islam of Rice University’s Craig Considine (Part 3)
  • Vladimir on Islamic Republic of Iran: Turkey’s Erdogan champions Islam only as a tool to further his own interests
  • John on Muslim cleric: ‘We welcomed the takeover of ISIS because they wanted to implement the Sharia’
  • Vladimir on Muslim cleric: ‘We welcomed the takeover of ISIS because they wanted to implement the Sharia’
  • Linda McGuire on UK: Muslim stabs two women in Marks & Spencer, one in the neck, cops search for motive

Popular Categories

dhimmitude Sharia Jihad in the U.S ISIS / Islamic State / ISIL Iran Free Speech

Robert Spencer FaceBook Page

Robert Spencer Twitter

Robert Spencer twitter

Robert Spencer YouTube Channel

Books by Robert Spencer

Jihad Watch® is a registered trademark of Robert Spencer in the United States and/or other countries - Site Developed and Managed by Free Speech Defense

Content copyright Jihad Watch, Jihad Watch claims no credit for any images posted on this site unless otherwise noted. Images on this blog are copyright to their respective owners. If there is an image appearing on this blog that belongs to you and you do not wish for it appear on this site, please E-mail with a link to said image and it will be promptly removed.

Our mailing address is: David Horowitz Freedom Center, P.O. Box 55089, Sherman Oaks, CA 91499-1964

loading Cancel
Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
Email check failed, please try again
Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.