How cravenly dishonest are mainstream media “reporters”? Here’s a case study.

Back on November 23, BuzzFeed’s Christopher Massie contacted me:
Hi Robert,
I’m Chris Massie, a reporter with BuzzFeed News. I wanted to ask for your take on Donald Trump’s comments last week and over the weekend on the issues of whether to take in Syrian refugees and on how to treat Muslims in the US.
Specifically, I’m talking about his call for the surveillance of mosques, his remark that he saw Muslims cheering the 9/11 attacks in New Jersey, and when he said that he’d put in place a database to track Muslims. Trump also said he would send Syrian refugees out of the country if elected.
Do the policies he’s proposed last week line up with your views?
I also know you’ve been critical of Trump’s responses to the “Draw the Prophet” contest and also of his unwillingness to answer questions about whether he would uphold the Constitution over Sharia law.
Did his comments last week change your opinion of him at all? Do you think he would follow up on those ideas if he’s elected?
If you’d prefer to discuss this by phone, please give me a call at 914-xxx-xxxx.
Thanks for your help.
-Chris
Massie contacted Pamela Geller as well — she writes about her unpleasant experience with this smear artist here. Since Massie was with BuzzFeed, I had a fair idea that Massie was hoping to get something that he could use to try to defame Trump, or Pamela Geller and me, or both, but I decided to answer anyway, and sent him this:
I’ve called for surveillance of certain mosques for years, as a matter of national security. In April 2013, the American Freedom Defense Initiative, of which I am Vice President, called not just for surveillance, but for the closure of three mosques that have extensive connections to jihad terrorists: the Islamic Society of Boston, the Dar al-Hijrah Islamic Center in Falls Church, Virginia, and the Noor Mosque in Columbus, Ohio. Details here: http://www.jihadwatch.org/2013/04/afdi-calls-for-closure-of-mosques-that-breed-jihad-terror
The freedom of religion is not a blanket permission to plot sedition and violence. It does not infringe upon the freedom of religion of Muslims for mosques that have demonstrably been involved in jihad terror activity to be put under surveillance.
I don’t know what Donald Trump saw after 9/11, and cannot comment upon it. Certainly reports that Muslims were publicly celebrating were widespread at the time.
The database idea is something I have never advocated, and do not support. I believe in the principle of innocent until proven guilty. Even from a practical standpoint, it would be useless, as many jihad plotters have been converts to Islam (Terry Loewen, Christopher Cornell,etc.) who presumably would not be in the database unless they voluntarily registered. Instead of a database of all Muslims, mosques and Muslim organizations should institute transparent and inspectable, honest programs teaching against the understanding of Islam represented by the Islamic State, and teaching against the aspects of Islamic law that conflict with Constitutional values and freedoms.
The Saudis and the Gulf states are taking no Syrian refugees at all. Why? Because there are jihad terrorists among them. The Islamic State boasted last February that they would soon inundate Europe with 500,000 refugees. The Lebanese Education Minister recently warned that there were 20,000 active jihadis among the Syrian refugees in camps in his country. An Islamic State operative boasted in September, shortly after the migrant influx into Europe began, that among the flood of refugees, 4,000 terrorists had already entered Europe. Consequently, it is unwise in the extreme to take any Syrian refugees.
Trump’s comments did not change my opinion of him. He is a thoughtless shoot-from-the-hip blowhard who is degrading American politics: the campaign for President as reality TV. Moreover, I don’t support everything he has recently said, as I just explained. I do not believe he would follow up on these ideas if elected. Right now he is pandering to the frustration that many Americans feel over being constantly lied to by the government and by you people in the media about the nature and magnitude of the jihad threat. But his remarks after the Garland event show that he has no appreciation of the importance of the freedom of speech, and no understanding of how seriously it is threatened today. We don’t need yet another enemy of free speech in the White House to succeed the man who said, “The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.”
Massie followed up with questions pressing me about who I did support, but ultimately didn’t run any piece at all. He probably wanted foaming-at-the-mouth irrational “Islamophobia.” Cogent and rational answers surprised and disappointed him, and had to be deep-sixed. But yesterday he surfaced again:
Hi Robert and Pamela,
I wanted to ask what you guys think of the statement Trump put out today, where he calls for a “complete shutdown” of Muslims entering the United States. I know both of you were opposed to his earlier calls for a Muslim database on constitutional grounds and this proposal would seem to be even more extreme than that. Do either of you have any thoughts on today’s statement?
Thanks again for taking the time to discuss this with me.
-Chris
Warier this time, I responded:
What’s the purpose of your inquiry? Are you trying to smear Trump by association with us (as supposed “bigoted Islamophobes”), or find some fissure among foes of jihad terror that you hope to exploit in order to defeat all efforts to stop the advance of jihad terror?
Massie replied:
No, I was asking for the same reason as before. Both of you are prominent activists in this field and I’m interested in your thoughts on developments in the presidential campaign, in which Trump is currently a leading candidate. As I said in my last email, even though I didn’t write anything about the last time we spoke, I found your comments interesting, which is why I asked your thoughts again today. I’d still be interested in hearing them, if either or both of you gets a chance.
Now, over the years I have learned never to trust mainstream media journalists, as they are never honest, never fair, and never interested in portraying resistance to jihad terror in anything but a negative light. But their inquiries always present a dilemma: does one try to get a word in, knowing that they will probably publish something anyway, or reject the corruption of the whole enterprise? I opted to try to get a word in, and sent him this:
No one has some natural right to enter the U.S. Trump is suggesting a temporary measure, and in view of the intelligence failures involved in Tashfeen Malik’s passing background checks from both the FBI and DHS, and the stated plan of the Islamic State (ISIS) to embed jihadis among the refugees, and the fact that two of the Paris jihadis were recent arrivals into Europe as refugees, it is prudent to call a halt and try to devise some genuinely effective vetting measures — although that will be impossible as long as Obama’s policy of denying the reality of jihad continues. Must our commitment to “multiculturalism” and “diversity” override any concern for national security? Are our elected officials so afraid of being charged with “racism” and “bigotry” that they will remain committed to a program that very likely will result in the entry of more jihad killers into the U.S.? How many Americans must be killed before we consider the security aspects of immigration and the refugee crisis?
After reading this from me and Pamela Geller’s response (again, here), Massie wrote back:
Thanks for these responses. Robert, I assure you I have no intention of twisting your words.
I just want to be clear (so as not to misrepresent your views)–it seems like both of you support Trump’s proposal today? Does this change either of your views of Trump’s candidacy as a whole?
I answered:
Unless some reliable way can be discovered to discern jihadis trying to enter the country, I don’t have a particular problem with this. The Islamic State has explicitly instructed its operatives entering the US to appear “moderate” — don’t wear a caftan, don’t carry a Qur’an, don’t wear a beard, don’t go to mosque. Even if there were any sanity in the Administration’s approach to this threat, which there isn’t, the efforts of ISIS members to conceal their allegiances and intentions make vetting well-nigh impossible.
I will never support Trump for President, even were he to knock on my door, get on one knee, and ask for my vote. I could never support a candidate who advocates kowtowing to violent intimidation and submitting to the Islamic supremacist war against the freedom of speech, as he did after the jihad attack on our event in Garland, Texas.
And that was that. Here is what they published. Pamela Geller’s screenshot shows that a headline on a similar August piece was even worse: “Top Racists and Neo-Nazis Back Donald Trump.” Now they have this: “White Nationalist And Anti-Muslim Fringe Embrace Trump Proposal,” by Andrew Kaczynski and Christopher Massie, BuzzFeed, December 8, 2015:
A coalition of America’s top white nationalists again praised an initiative from Republican front-runner Donald Trump, this time praising his plan to restrict Muslim immigration to the United States….
Then follow fifteen paragraphs recounting how people that BuzzFeed characterizes as white supremacists and neo-Nazis support Trump’s proposal. Only after that do Pamela Geller and I come in. The implication is clear: resistance to jihad terror is just another strain of the hatred and racism that manifests itself in white nationalism and neo-Nazism. The fourteen dead bodies in San Bernardino, and the well over a hundred dead bodies in Paris, and the thousands of other victims of jihad terror don’t concern Massie or his accomplice Andrew Kaczynski in the least: in their narrow little hard-Left world, opposing the ideology that incites such hatred and violence is just like being a racist or neo-Nazi.
Anti-Muslim activists — a distinct group from the white nationalist movement, which has historically directed its racism at blacks and Jews — also embraced Trump’s proposal.
Note the familiar smear of “anti-Muslim.” Kaczynski and Massie apparently believe that it is “anti-Muslim” to oppose jihad massacres, boasts of imminent Islamic conquest, honor killing, female genital mutilation, the death penalty for leaving Islam, etc. It is they who are thus “anti-Muslim,” for even as they no doubt think that Islam is a religion of peace, they assume, or want their readers to assume, that opposing jihad terror, Islamic supremacism and other elements of Sharia oppression is “anti-Muslim.” Opposing the violent and supremacist jihad doctrine is in reality no more “anti-Muslim” than opposing Nazism was “anti-German.”
“No one has some natural right to enter the U.S.,” anti-Islam activist Robert Spencer, director of the site Jihad Watch, wrote BuzzFeed News in an email, adding that Trump was suggesting a temporary measure and citing the role of “intelligence failures” in the attacks in San Bernardino, California, and Paris. “Must our commitment to ‘multiculturalism’ and ‘diversity’ override any concern for national security?”
The anti-Muslim provocateur Pamela Geller also praised the suggestion.
“Ant-Islam activist.” “Anti-Muslim provocateur.” So standing for the freedom of speech, the freedom of conscience, and the equality of rights of all people before the law is “anti-Islam” and “anti-Muslim.” Here again, in their haste to smear us, Kaczynski and Massie reveal more about their own assumptions about Islam than they do about us.
“Obama’s negligence and jihad denial necessitates emergency measures. The San Bernardino jihad rampage is a direct result of Obama’s jihad denial,” she said.
Neither Spencer nor Geller, however, supports Trump as a candidate, because they believe he is not anti-Muslim enough. In particular, both broke with Trump after he denounced as “disgusting” a “Draw the Prophet” event hosted by a group the two founded, which was attacked by two gunmen in May.
Geller told BuzzFeed News last month that she preferred Ted Cruz, arguing that “Trump doesn’t understand the importance of freedom of speech.”
Spencer, meanwhile, wrote yesterday, “I will never support Trump for President, even were he to knock on my door, get on one knee, and ask for my vote. I could never support a candidate who advocates kowtowing to violent intimidation and submitting to the Islamic supremacist war against the freedom of speech, as he did after the jihad attack on our event in Garland, Texas.”
So for Kaczynski and Massie, even standing up for the freedom of speech against violent jihadist intimidation is “anti-Muslim,” such that Trump, in opposing our stand, was “not anti-Muslim enough.” Trump denounced our free speech event that was held in Garland, Texas on May 3. For all his braggadocio about opposing jihad and stopping Muslim immigration, he appears to have no understanding of the necessity of standing up to efforts to bully us into silence and to force us at gunpoint to accept Sharia restrictions on the freedom of speech. Our Garland event was responding to the jihad murders of the Charlie Hedbo cartoonists in Paris. Trump would apparently have us kowtow and submit, and self-censor our words to please Muslims, in the face of those murders.
But as far as Kaczynski and Massie are concerned, all that just means that we think Trump is not “anti-Muslim enough.” So BuzzFeed excoriates Trump for advocating something that is perfectly Constitutional — stopping Muslim immigration — but is apparently fine with him standing against a core Constitutional principle: the freedom of speech.
Politely let these “journalists” know on Twitter what you think of their journalistic ethics: @BuzzFeedAndrew and @chrismassie.
Ren says
Is Christopher Massie a troll ? He looks like one.
mortimer says
As a dyed-in-the-wool cultural Marxist, Massie has not read Karl Marx nor communist history nor any Islamic source text that could inform him of the reality of the jihad doctrine or Islamic apartheid nor any Islamic history that could inform him of the reality of JIHAD-IN-PRACTICE during the last 1400 years. He is therefore a complete light weight making light-weight comments about two very convoluted, irrational and doctrines: Marxism and Islam.
Despite his lack of any reading on the subjects upon which he comments, he makes sweeping and very irresponsible slanders based on prejudice.
Leftarded cultural Marxists apparently feel they don’t require verification if facts disagree with their propaganda.
mahghan says
Odd comment. If someone has not read Marx, why is such a person a “cultural Marxist”? Marx’s main work, Capital is essentially a critique of the structure and dynamics of capitalism.Like a mechanic who examines the engine of an automobile to understand why it is not running smoothly or efficiently. That’s all.
People like Massie are just silly liberals who have been frivolous comedians all their lives.
William says
He needs to get a real job. Since leaving mama’s brood, he’s probably never held one.
Westman says
Perhaps these children should be seen and not heard since their mind is not quite mature enough for making intelligent differentiations. Putting the distortions aside, what are they reporting other than a repackaging and mashup of other people’s work?
Westman says
Also, maybe these JV team “journalists” could do some original work and discover why we have “GoProGate”. Original reports, ascribed to SB Police said the San Bernadino murderers were wearing GoPro cameras. Now the Police dept says there was no camera. Then GoPro packaging is found in the car of Syed’s mother. Someone is lying..
wildjew says
I would not give a second thought to this Kaczynski low life. He is a flea; a tick.
Bezelel says
Anti muslim is the same verbal tactic the left uses with illegal immigrants. Anyone in favor of border control is labeled Anti immigration. I have tried reasoning with followers of that mind set and it is futility. I have tried to see things their way and I have concluded that their way is self destructive which is to me wrong. There are standards for immigration in form of code that is on the books. muslims do not meet those standards.
j_not_a says
Trump is like a bull in a china shop. Deeply flawed and shoots his mouth off yes. But there is no doubt he loves his country. And he has enough money so he cannot be bought off. He is surely getting it regarding islamc threat when his rivals still remain totally clueless. Wouldn’t write him off yet.
mahghan says
The main reason why Trump is leading in the Republican polls is that he has inadvertently launched an attack on the structure of the American political system. The system as it is, abuses democracy by allowing Big Business’s paying off politicians with influence to skew American politics and economics for their(Business and politicians) own benefits. Thus, the votes of ordinary people just don’t count that much.
Trump as a self-funder is not part of that structure. Hence the broadside attacks from the career politicians. Big Business is also very upset with Trump because he threatens its control of the U.S. political and economic life. The masses see that and many opt to support a politician who is not a hired hand of Big Business. Who knows how this will turn out?
E Ward says
Well, Spencer suspected he might be “punked” and took a chance at a fair portrayal and he lost that bet. However, I did hear Spencer being quoted favorably on an afternoon talk show today that reaches many more people than these kids ever will.
Sam says
Truth will set us free. Keep telling all that Islam is evil. We are fighting the ideology. Those media rats should read the books of Robert and Pam.
Evil and enablers will always twist words and defame truth tellers as Islam and Liberals can not handle truth as it is against their belief system.
Pam and Robert thanks for fighting for us. ( I don’t know how you can face daily such a sick army of Islam and liberals) and other enablers)
JAR says
Thanks to Mr. Spencer for all his hard work.
In his first reply to Massie he wrote this:
Robert might add to his quiver the following evidence, in case he hasn’t seen it by now:
http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2015/12/02/trump-100-vindicated-cbs-reports-swarms-on-roofs-celebrating-911/
http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2015/12/01/7-pieces-of-documentation-that-vindicate-trumps-claim-of-911-muslim-celebrations/
abad says
14?
Looks more like 12.
Who’s going to listen to a kid on what he has to say about Trump, Mr Spencer and Miss Geller?
That’s like listening to Jenny McCarthy and her views on vaccines and autism.
Come on now.
Michael says
I fail to understand why Westerners don’t just go online and read the qu’ran for themselves, or study the life and deeds of Muhammad. The Truth is just a mouse click away so there is no excuse for ignorance.
Though I’ve long known the mainstream media to be nothing but the propaganda arm of the state, whose job it is not to inform the people, but to mold public opinion along lines favorable to said state, it has never been more blatantly obvious than it is today, and it is still shocking to see examples like this of such a disgusting lack of journalistic integrity. I don’t know how these “journalists” can have any self-respect.
Their constant tabloid use of the worn out phrases “Racists” (what race is islam?), and “Neo-Nazis” (ironic since sharia is the ultimate in fascism) is just nauseating.
Well more and more people are waking up Kaczynski and Massie. They are no longer believing the lies of the politicians, msm and tv talking heads, who practice Goebbels time-tested techniques in constantly repeating the false mantra “religion of peace” ad nauseum. Telling us one thing, while our eyes and common sense constantly show us the exact opposite. Literally trying to tell us that black is white and up is down. The people aren’t buying it anymore, as evidenced by the fact that Robert Spencer’s book “The Truth about Muhammad” has recently shot into the bestsellers list on Amazon.
Part of me feels the likes of Kaczynski and Massie (and their Buzzfeed readership) deserve to find themselves living under the sharia, and history has shown again and again how kuffar like them will be treated if and when that day comes.
Get ready to convert or pay the jizya boys. But that probably won’t be hard for you guys, you’re already traitors and sell-outs.
“Allah is the only God, and Muhammad is his Prophet (Peace and blessings be upon him)”. Get used to saying it guys, cos if your ilk have your way you will be saying it a lot.
epistemology says
Two little stupid twats twist your words, Robert. It’s unbelievable, they completely misrepresented your and Pam’s. You warned against Trump on various occasions. I agree he’s a shoot-from-the-hip blowhard, a very erratic person who’s by no means reliable. He does so much business in Muslim countries such as Abu Dhabi, Azerbaijan and Indonesia. He’s not the kind of guy who’ll ruin his own business just to fight against jihad and defend our values.
On the other hand he excoriated the Garland Motoon contest. That was a clear attack against free speech. Somebody who thinks like this is unbearable. These little boys pretending to be journalists need some lessons in fair reporting. All the best to you,Robert
marc says
this comment of his…
“Neither Spencer nor Geller, however, supports Trump as a candidate, because they believe he is not anti-Muslim enough.”
and your quote
“I could never support a candidate who advocates kowtowing to violent intimidation and submitting to the Islamic supremacist war against the freedom of speech..”
sum it up pretty well.
so “not standing up for free speech” = “not being anti-Muslim enough” i can see how a rodent like him might confuse the two.
Cecilia Ellis says
Though Massie’s and Kaczynski’s distortions are appalling, neither alleged journalist merits realistic consideration. As I glance at my bookshelves, I see every book and pamphlet authored by Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller. I see none written by Massie nor Kaczynski. (Admittedly, I do see the name Kaczynski, but that is Ted Kaczynski, the Unabomber . . . hopefully no relation.). I have viewed innumerable live news programs in which Robert and Pam have appeared. Whether in writing or orally, Robert and Pam have not once distorted any fact; both Massie and Kaczynski have done so in the one time I have read their words. Indeed, I had never heard of either before reading this article. I do not expect to hear of them again in any honorable venue.
Robert and Pam, you are superb speakers of the truth. Millions know it. The same can not be said about Massie or Kaczynski, and millions know it. Thank you.
TheBigOldDog says
Seems this is a perfect storm case where a member of America’s dumbest generation is also a member of the corrupt media establishment.
If there’s a silver limning it’s that America has reached its tipping point and dishonest, corrupt ideologues like this are going to increasingly find themselves without an audience and hence, jobs.
Wellington says
Instructive again how the totalitarian ideology which is Islam continues to quite effectively hide behind its religious veil. There is really no phenomenon in all of history which is so malevolent, so long lived, so well disguised as is Islam. And clueless twits like Massie and a well educated person like the present Speaker of the House, Paul Ryan, who should know better, continue to make excuses for the monstrous wickedness which is Islam.
Beam me up, Scottie, or, in the alternative, let me go to the Land of Oz where I’ll take my chances with the Wicked Witch of the West. Earth is crashing, first and foremost because of ignorance of evil and the disinclination not to stop evil early on in its tracks, rather like Russia in 1917 and Germany in 1933. And we all know how this turned out, now don’t we? Damn it, mankind never learns.
PRCS says
“I also know you’ve been critical of Trump’s responses to the “Draw the Prophet” contest ”
Moses?
Smith?
Jeffs?
Arthur says
Robert–I’d consider your responses a victory. This youngster is clearly aiming to be a spin-master in his career. The only thing an interviewee can do is supply factual statements which, themselves, stand honest and complete. What the “journalist” writes outside the quotes is always beyond the interviewee’s control and purely a reflection of that “journalist’s” bias.
You are a hero to many of us here on your site. Keep up the heroic efforts!
As general advice to JW readers, I’m not sure I’d ever elaborate on an answer given to a “journalist”. When they ask again and again it means they didn’t catch the fish they were looking for and they are hoping for a misstep (and Robert made none). (It doesn’t mean you failed to answer the question the first time.) The less that is said, the fewer choices they have to print and misinterpret. So deliver the sound bite you want printed and then you’re done. Journalists aren’t going to print, “He responded, ‘I believe I fully answered your question in my previous response.’ “
Saleem Smith says
We ex-Muslims living with Islam’s formal and informal death penalty for apostasy know that Islam is evil because Muhammad was a malignant narcissist. The great ex-Muslim Ali Sina’s on-going $50,000 challenge to Muslims from Faith Freedom.org:
THE CHALLENGE
I receive many emails from angry Muslims, who sometimes beg me, and sometimes order me to remove this site. I consider both, pleading and bullying, signs of psychopathology. Argumentum ad baculum and argumentum ad misericordiam are both logical fallacies.
If you do not like this site and want me to remove it, instead of acting as a bully or as a victim, disprove my charges against Muhammad logically. Not only will I remove the site, I will publicly announce that Islam is a true religion. I will also pay
$50,000 U.S. dollars
to anyone who can disprove the following accusations that I have made against Muhammad. I accuse Muhammad of being:
a narcissist
a misogynist
a rapist
a pedophile
a lecher
a torturer
a mass murderer
a cult leader
an assassin
a terrorist
a looter
…These charges are irrefutable. You simply can’t disprove them because they are reported in Islamic sources and as such they are as good as confession…
http://www.faithfreedom.org/the-challenge-2/
Wellington says
I really enjoy when you post this challenge, Saleem, as you periodically do, and one which you know, I know and so many others know can’t be met. Hope you’re doing well and have had a Muslim-free day.
marc says
Lol, the only way they can win that bet is by agreeing the koran is a lie and the pirate mohamed never even existed as you read of him in the koran.
Ed says
Very clever.
Michael Copeland says
Reward is now $100,000: Ali Suna has doubled it.
http://www.faithfreedom.org
Jeremiah says
We need to be clearer yet.
We are fighting Islam. There is only the Islam of the Koran.
We are not fighting Muslims but we are fighting the Islamic education centers including the mosques.
We need to close down all mosques in order to win this 1400 year war and to end violence and to end sharia.
This gives us a clear goal. It tells us not to arm anybody who supports a mosque.
Anything else is fiddling around the edges. However, in light of the above, Donald Trump’s idea of keeping Muslims from entering America is helpful while we close the mosques.
mortimer says
The jihad doctrine, the Kafir doctrine, the Islamic apartheid doctrine, the Islamic misogyny doctrine, the Islamic disinformation doctrine, the Islamic Dhimmitude doctrine, the Islamic blasphemy doctrine…all are enemies of freedom.
All doctrines of POLITICAL ISLAM are all incompatible with modern, free, open, pluralistic societies.
More Ham Ed says
Time for a Draw Chris Massie contest. He can be depicted hugging Mo’ as he’s beheading an infidel, or be depicted embracing the unholy ko ‘ran, or be depicted asking questions while his shadow behind is plotting against freedom etc. A Draw Chris Massie contest to irk the leftists.
Ed says
““I will never support Trump for President, even were he to knock on my door, get on one knee, and ask for my vote. ”
Seriously, what is the purpose for such immature statement?
“I do not support Trump’s _______ because (or until) _____________ .” (And stay objective and professional).
Robert Spencer says
Sometimes livening up one’s writing makes it more pleasant to read.
Dave J says
Muslims are just people, most of them didn’t join, they were just unlucky enough to be born into a primitive criminal death cult. (The joiners are even more dangerous, however).
Mosques are just buildings, brick and mortar, they could be used for good purposes – after the turrets, minarets and call to prayer speakers are removed and the place is searched for weapons and pipe bombs.
However the Koran is something different, it is a vicious call to murder, an eternal malevolent force, a self-replicating DNA of hatred, an inspiration toward and legitimization of man’s most evil impulses.
We should leave the Muslims and Mosques alone, under close watch, while proceeding to expose, question and ultimately Ban the Koran. Maybe they could find a better book, it wouldn’t hurt to look, there are definitely a few out there.
mortimer says
Adolf Hitler’s nephew, Patrick Hitler, was granted entry to the US when he denounced his uncle and espoused the US Constitution with freedom of speech, freedom assembly, etc.
Muslims coming to Western countries are not asked to denounced their TOTALITARIAN, MISOGYNISTIC, SUPREMACIST IDEOLOGY! No Islamic supremacism is TOTALLY IGNORED as a threat to democracy by immigration departments! How do you test for it? The only answer would be LIE DETECTOR TESTS for ALL Muslims.
Failing that, we would have to stop Muslim immigration until a method could be found to ensure no Muslim would perform JIHAD…but that is not possible. Islam CLEARLY and INDISPUTABLY calls for warfare against disbelievers until they are under the totalitarian control of Muslims. This is called supremacism.
No Muslim can abandon religion-based totalitarianism without leaving Islam.
mortimer says
DID MUSLIMS CELEBRATE 9-11??? Yes…in a few locales.
http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2014/oct/08/bill-oreilly/oreilly-no-muslim-government-called-out-those-who-/
On Fox News, host Bill O’Reilly delivered one of his Talking Points commentaries on the question of whether Islam is a destructive force in the world. To a significant degree, O’Reilly answered in the affirmative. Among his reasons — the governments of Muslim-majority nations have “failed to confront Islamic terrorism (and) have not attacked violence in the name of Allah.”
O’Reilly then played video that featured Palestinian youngsters jumping and smiling as news spread of the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, 2001.
“Thousands of Muslims, regular folks, celebrated in the streets,” O’Reilly said. “They were happy that more than 3,000 innocent people, including Muslims, were murdered. Again, these people are a minority but they were not called out in any official way by Muslim nations around the world.”
O’Reilly is correct that public demonstrations in support of the 9/11 attacks took place. They largely occurred in the Palestinian territories, although we also found reports of one in Egypt. Middle East specialist Peter Mandaville, associate professor of government and politics at George Mason University, recalls them as “small scale and localized.”
But our fact-check is focused on the question of whether Muslim nations repudiated the celebrations.
“There was a report of (the) Palestinian Authority information minister at the time, Yaseer Abed Rabbo, appealing to Palestinians to not show happiness in response to the attacks, but no specific condemnation that I know of,” Mandaville said.
We found a couple of compilations of Muslim reaction in the immediate aftermath of the attacks. In addition to Mandaville, we contacted several researchers who study the Middle East. We found no instance when the government of a Muslim-majority nation chastised or condemned the people who were elated by the toppling of the World Trade towers and the other deadly events of that day.
It should be noted that INITIALLY Muslims working in the State Department joined together to express satisfaction at this ISLAMIC VICTORY…but soon after, they realized they were enjoying an attack on the country they worked for and lived in. The mood apparently, then changed.
Yes. Muslims did initially celebrate 9-11, then they realized it was a public relations SET BACK for Islam…only then, did they regret it.
mortimer says
Message from Andrew Kaczynski and Christopher Massie: “Lie down and let the jihad roll over you…personally, we’ll just wait until we and our families are shot by jihadists before we react to Islamic supremacism and misogyny. We don’t care to learn anything about the canonical jihad doctrine of classical, foundational Islam. Marxists never let facts get in the way of Marxist dialectic.”
Vae Victis says
No matter what detractors, apologists and so called experts say, truth is, and will always be the “elephant in the room”. Donald Trump is simply saying “Hey, what is that over there?”.
Keep up the good work Robert & Pamela.
Rob says
Remember the 2nd part of Trump’s statement still holds crystal clear and true. It was the condition to the ‘Keep Muslims out’ statement.
The 2nd part was: ‘Until our leaders figure out what the hell is going on’.
Surely anyone critical of Trump must say;
‘I know what is going on and here’s how I’m going to fix it’
As someone recently posted: ‘If you’re playing a deadly game of ‘Whack a mole, you stop importing more moles’.
Champ says
Here is how you vet a muslim …
Draw a picture of mohammad and wait for their response.
Spot On says
To be friendly you could offer them a nice ham sandwich. If they don’t like ham, maybe a BLT?
Hi Champ, Good to see you.
Shane says
The traitorous left is destroying Europe, particularly Sweden, through totally ignoring the many problems due to allowing large numbers of Muslim immigrants. They mislabel those of us who want to greatly reduce Muslim immigraton as racists, though, Islam is a religion and a political system, not a race. The Tsarnaev brothers were White Muslims and so are many other Muslims living in the USA.
The left wing writers and commnentators are absolutely ruthless when it comes to attacking those who disagree with them and one of their favorite despicable tactics is the straw man argument. Example – If you state that you don’t want to take in Muslim refugees, the lying liberal puke will ask – “So you agree with Trump that we should put all Muslims in concentration camps and kill the families of Muslim terrorists?”
Kathy Brown, Esq. says
My brother-in-law (quite the wag) had the answer right after 9/11.. “If we’re worried about violent muslims boarding our planes, have a ‘hot-dog line’! ” Jerry said. ‘Whoever won’t take a bite out of a hot-dog, they can’t board!’.
But I like The Donald’s idea better. No muslims in here. Zero, nada, zilch. Bye-bye. And don’t let the door hit you in the a_s as you’re deported!
Edwin1683 says
Chris Massie is 12 years old and his birthday is coming up soon. It’s hard to believe he is almost a teenager! He’s in Grade 8 this year and so far he hasn’t had a bad year.
He’s always had a lot of problems with his writing skills but this year he has begun to really master writing in sentences, which has been a big improvement.
His teachers report that he’s going through a phase right now where he challenges adults about everything, which is annoying but totally normal for a kid his age.
John Magne Trane says
You made me sorely miss the the absence of “upvote Arrows” in this commentary Field 🙂
eduardo odraude says
Newt Gingrich’s December 1 address to the National Defense University uses the expression “Islamic Supremacist” seven times.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/12/07/newt-gingrich-new-words-new-world/
Peter Robins says
Dear Robert,
I just posted this by email to both these ‘journalists’.
“Hello,
As one who has worked in the media for many years, I took the time to research some of the background of your article, titled as above, Dec 9th 2015.
Your deliberate use of euphemisms designed specifically to denigrate those quoted, is classic ‘journalist-speak’. Descriptions designed to engender specific and negative responses from the reader, aimed at sensationalizing the topic and the person quoted, are frankly, irresponsible and gutter ‘journalism’.
Unfortunately, these practices have become mainstream in the modern media, where, instead of reporting a subject fairly and appropriately, allowing the reader to make up their own mind, the modern ‘journalist’ assumes it is their right and responsibility to mold the reader’s perception, and direct the reader into a specific pattern of thought, without room for critical appraisal.
I find your methods specifically in this instance, and those of ‘journalists’ throughout the media, unconscionable and manipulative, deserving only to be labelled tabloid trash.
You do have the right to free speech and to express an opinion, but this article is presented as news, not an op-ed piece.
If you have any personal integrity, I challenge you to present your next article in the third person completely, giving no thought to your personal opinions, unless you are writing op-ed.
I won’t be holding my breath though.
Sincerely,”
balafama says
just give them a meal of rare pork with a glass of beer ,that should do the vetting
Ian H says
“rare pork”?
No! Just … no! Not even with a beer to wash it down! Cook your pork properly for Christ’s sake.
William Maclay says
Great abolitionists Horace Greeley and William Lloyd Garrison were against Abraham Lincoln in 1860. Both Greeley and Garrison thought very ill of Lincoln. He wasn’t where they were on the issue of the day. Remember their smears about Lincoln because at the time he merely wanted to stop slavery’s advance: boob, rustic, coarse lout, ignorant.
Life isn’t a casting call. There’s no conservative James Stewart, Henry Fonda, Raymond Massey, or Gregory Peck who perfectly embraces and articulates the ideas of Mr Spencer and Mrs Geller. But we don’t. We have whom we have, not whom we wish.
Further, people on the correct side of issues don’t have to like each other. Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer can go their own way. Mr Trump isn’t stopping them. It’s unlikely he’s even thinking at this time about them.
With the power of this new well-played gambit, Donald Trump is probably to be the next United States President, and we shall see what we shall see. Will Robert Spencer help him and thereby help all of us overcome the menace of islam, or will he go on with fantastical rubbish about Mr Trump crawling to him
on bended knee?
There is a cultural phenomenon here. Mr Trump is a typical New York City kind of guy, bold, brash and in-your-face. It’s a manner that can cause misunderstanding and irritation. So Mr Spencer and Mrs Geller, herself a New York City kind of woman, are irritated. Instead of the parties clearing things up, they further get their danders up. Nothing new. It’ll work out or not in the fullness of time.
Jim Peters says
Liberals have dug-in their heals. It’s all about “winning” to them. Win the argument, win the election and lose the country. Trump is being tough and saying it like it is. We know it, liberals know it. Time to get going, no time to waste.
Mike says
The word is “heels.” Rest of your comment is absolutely awesome and correct. America’s political as a whole has turned evil. Go Cruz.
Oppressaphobe says
Why engage these people at all?
Angemon says
Carolyne says
So Pamela Gellar is a “Provocateur?” I’d love to be a provocateur in this fight against murderous Islam. How does one get to be a provocateur? Surprised that kid can even spell the word.
Barry Goldberg says
Dear Mr. Spencer and Ms. Geller,
It is clear to me, from reading the article by Andrew Kaczynski and Christopher Massie that you have both been libeled. I would strongly recommend that you both take legal action, and believe since you are both nationally prominent that your suit(s) could include claims for substantial punitive penalties. My advice: each of you should individually file suit.
Best to both of you—and bless you!
UNCLE VLADDI says
Re: “Opposing the violent and supremacist jihad doctrine is in reality no more “anti-Muslim” than opposing Nazism was “anti-German.”
UTTER NONSENSE!
Not all Germans were Nazis, but all Nazis were Nazis.
Not all Italians are Mafiosis, but all Mafiosis are Mafiosis.
Not all Arabs are muslims, but all muslims are muslims.
BOTTOM LINE:
Not all people are criminals, but all criminals are criminals.
ALL MUSLIMS ARE TERRORISTS!
“Terrorism” is really only the simple crime of “extortion” writ large!
(Extortion is “threats!”)!
All group rights must come with group responsibilities.
When you describe yourself as a criminal gangster who asserts it’s his holy right and duty to extort, enslave, and murder all the non-members of your gang, you get judged for that threat, because death-threats are already crimes.
And that sums up islam.
ALL Muslims are MURDERER-GANG MEMBERS. Their Quran COMMANDS murder. Therefore the only good Muslims are dead ones. Unless they only only commit “moderate” murder. Then only give them “moderate” executions.
ALL muslims are criminals, simply by being members of the world’s largest and most ancient yet ongoing crime-gang.
By their own sharia “law” (crime) rules, ALL muslims are supposed to be seen as “Objects of Fear” by ALL infidels, all the time!
Being a member of a crime-gang is a crime, even if the member hasn’t committed any specific crime beyond that of their general membership, because they represent the inherent public threat the crime-gang presents.
It’s the LAW.
Everything muslims pretend to believe is “holy” is already a crime!
Islam is a monolithic crime-creed, with instructions in their war and crime-manual applying to all aspects of their holy mobster “muslim” minions’ lives. Its management is not a top-down affair.
Each and every one of them knows their obligations to the tribe and knows they are at war with us. The Qur’an sentences us all to “Death By Muslim!” for our “crime” of simply not being muslims ourselves!
Would we bother to separately arrest and try each and every individual member of a crime-gang or ARMY which had officially declared war on us and was openly attacking us?!
UNCLE VLADDI says
Furthermore (as others have already noted):
The Immigration and Nationality Act passed June 27, 1952 revised the laws relating to immigration, naturalization, and nationality for the United States. That act, which became Public Law 414, established both the law and the intent of Congress regarding the immigration of Aliens to the US and remains in effect today. Among the many issues it covers, one in particular, found in Chapter 2 Section 212, is the prohibition of entry to the US if the Alien belongs to an organization seeking to
overthrow the government of the United States by “force, violence, or other unconstitutional means.”
This, by its very definition, rules out Islamic immigration to the United States, but this law is being ignored by the White House. Islamic immigration to the US would be prohibited under this law because the Koran, Sharia Law and the Hadith all require complete submission to Islam, which is antithetical to the US government, the Constitution, and to the Republic.
All Muslims who attest that the Koran is their life’s guiding principal subscribe to submission to Islam and its form of government.
Now the politically correct crowd would say that Islamists cannot be prohibited from entering the US because Islam is a religion. Whether it is a religion is immaterial because the law states that Aliens who are affiliated with any “organization” that advocates the overthrow of our government are
prohibited.
😉
Foolster41 says
I’m pretty sure you have a credible law suit case here, since he says your racist against “blacks and Jews”, which there’s no way he can prove since it is false. He should have to pay and retract. the only way Journalists are going to stop behaving as they do is if people fight back.