• 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

Sam Harris: Robert Spencer “so fully stigmatized…you just don’t actually know who you’re talking to”

Oct 8, 2016 10:52 am By Robert Spencer

sam-harris

This exchange between Sam Harris and Gad Saad raises important issues regarding “Islamophobia” smear propaganda and its effectiveness even among people who are its subjects and should not be susceptible to it. This excerpt comes from the Harris/Saad conversation, “The Frontiers of Political Correctness,” which you can hear in its entirety here. This excerpt starts at the 35 minute mark. As will quickly become clear, the “someone” to whom he is referring in the first line is me:

Sam Harris: What I’m picturing here is talking to someone who you really should challenge on specific points because they have said crazy, divisive, irrational things in the past, but they’re just not saying them on your show. So you get them there, and it turns out this person’s a Grand Dragon in the KKK, but you don’t know that, and you’re talking about racial differences in IQ or something in a good-natured, academic way, and you don’t realize that this person’s interest in this topic is just the tip of the iceberg, and the iceberg is horrendous.

I think that’s a situation one could be in. Obviously I think that you could have an interesting, a potentially interesting conversation with anyone. You know, I would be willing to go into a prison and talk to a serial killer, because I think that would be a fascinating conversation. There are many questions I would want to ask someone who has killed many people. But at least in that situation, I would understand who I was talking to. And what I worry about with many of the people you name, someone like Robert Spencer, he comes so fully stigmatized that unless you’ve paid enough attention to the kinds of battles he’s fought to be confident that you know that all of that opprobrium is unwarranted, well then you just don’t actually know who you’re talking to.

Gad Saad: Well, one of the ways that I handled specifically the Robert Spencer case is, as people started writing to me saying, “Hey, why are you speaking to this Nazi?” and so on, I said, “Look, the comments section on my YouTube channel is open, why don’t you share some manifestations of some nefariously racist, horrible things that he’s done, and then at least I could be educated?” Guess what: I didn’t see it.

Sam Harris: Hmmm, yeah.

Gad Saad: So I think that’s one of the ways by which you could, I think, take their concerns seriously. I mean, you’re exhibiting that you’re open to having the opinion that they’d like you to have of him, you’re open to that possibility, but the onus is on you to share that information. So I won’t accept that he’s simply a vile, Nazi, Islamophobe at face value and then not bring him on. And I’ve had this even with guys who are less toxic. People said, “Why are you speaking to Paul Joseph Watson on the Alex Jones network?” You know, Alex Jones is this kind of bombastic guy. Do you know who that is?

Sam Harris: I know Alex Jones. I don’t know Paul Joseph Watson.

Gad Saad: The reality is, that to me, I was very pragmatic about it. It’s a forum, it’s a large forum that would allow me to share ideas, and probably a bunch of people who otherwise would have never heard of me now know of my work, precisely because I went on that show, so I think it’s difficult to always run away from folks that come with a dangerous appellation, because then it’ll be just you and I talking to each other all the time.

Sam Harris: Yeah.

Gad Saad: Although, from my perspective, maybe speaking to you is gonna get a lot of hate on me now.

Sam Harris: You never know. (Laughter)

The gist of Sam’s point appears to be this: so many negative things are said about me and some of them may turn out to be true, thereby tarring him by association, whereas with a serial killer he would at least know with whom he is dealing and wouldn’t have to worry about anyone thinking he approves of what the interviewee has done.

Now, whether or not Sam Harris actually ever has a public (or private) conversation with me is immaterial. The point is this: what he says here reveals a great deal about the effectiveness of the “Islamophobia” smear campaign, and illustrates why Leftists and Islamic supremacists generally resort to ad hominem attacks against those whom they hate and fear, rather than engaging them intellectually: because it works. Harris is saying that I am so stigmatized that he would be wary of talking with me unless he had the time to check out the veracity of all the charges against me, and he doesn’t — as he put it on Twitter, it’s a “bandwidth problem.”

In saying this, Sam Harris has unwittingly invited the “Islamophobia” smear machine to step up its campaign against him, until he becomes, as he says of me, “so fully stigmatized” that even fellow critics of Islam and jihad will want to keep their distance from him, and he will be a total pariah. What he says about being wary of speaking with me here is tantamount to his telling those who charge him with “bigotry” and “Islamophobia”: “If you hit me with enough mud, it will be perfectly justifiable for people who share my concerns and talk about issues I discuss to shun me. After all, they just won’t have time to check up on all your charges. It will be a ‘bandwidth problem.'”

Saad, meanwhile, points out that “maybe speaking to you is gonna get a lot of hate on me now.” Harris laughingly agreed, but he doesn’t seem to have grasped Saad’s point. Saad may get hate for speaking with Harris because Harris has been “so fully stigmatized” — because he has been and is subjected to the same campaign of defamation from the same quarters as I have, and he has now signaled to them that if they just keep issuing more charges, however false or outlandish, they will succeed in marginalizing him completely, and be justified in doing so. Sorry, Sam. It’s “bandwidth.”

In an age when the truth is at a premium and false charges and social opprobrium are primary tools in the hands of the authoritarian Left to silence those who tell unwelcome truths, this is extraordinarily short-sighted and self-defeating of Sam Harris. Not to mention extremely disappointing coming from someone who is generally a rigorous thinker.

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: "Islamophobia", dhimmitude, Featured Tagged With: Sam Harris


Learn more about RevenueStripe...

Comments

  1. KrazyKafir says

    Oct 8, 2016 at 11:01 am

    I sure hope Sam reconsider’s his thoughts. He is smarter than this.

    • jihad3tracker says

      Oct 8, 2016 at 12:38 pm

      Hello KK —- I might take get hit with a lot of flak for what I am about to say, but here it is anyway:

      As a 68 year old geezer, over those years reading and watching many carefully stated arguments (the civilized “debate” type) by a wide assortment of very intelligent humans,

      But I find Sam Harris to be excruciatingly bloviational, apparently infatuated with the sound of his own voice, taking three times as long to make points as is really necessary.

      I have not watched the video posted above, with a link, by Robert, but I will get back to you later today — maybe Mr. Harris will surprise me. If yes, an apology will be immediately and sincerely made.

      • JawsV says

        Oct 8, 2016 at 2:21 pm

        Who in the heck is Sam Harris???

        • Al Fabeech says

          Oct 8, 2016 at 4:57 pm

          Your being sarcastic….? Sam Harris has written about Islam, is the second person I followed on You Tube, after finding Robert Spencer. Who hasn’t seen him vilified by Ben Affleck on Bill Maher?…. I know that he has taken self defense courses and has armed himself. I think he is worn down by the attitude of people in this country and world. What a thankless job. Gad Saad is a professor in Canada. He is a Jewish refugee from Lebanon. He has had David Wood, Frank Gaffney, Bill Warner, almost the entire complete list of untouchables, etc. on his podcast. I am surprised anyone has the tenacity, like Robert Spencer has, to keep at it. Risk your life and reputation to have to put up with all of the shit they do, from people they are trying to wake up to what is going on with Islam. Look at what happened to Trump? I am voting for him on this one issue. Islam.

        • Sheykh Yer Weeni says

          Oct 8, 2016 at 5:10 pm

          JawsV,
          Sam Harris is a famous Atheist who (along with Richard Dawkins, Bill Maher, and the late Christopher Hitchens) has in his critique of religion, named Islam as being especially violent and virulent. Harris actually had a separate chapter for Islam in his book, “The End of Faith”. I know that these truly free thinkers get a lot of flak from their PC friends. Bill Maher got some from Ben Affleck during his show, and you can see the results here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aIp-eMrR5T8

          Two things I would like to correct my fellow Islamic critics in, though: those whom they call “extremists” or “jihadists” are Muslims who are just extremely close to their faith. They do literally believe the Qur’an when it says, for example (9.33; 61.9),”the Religion of Truth” should “be proclaimed over all religion, even though the Pagans may detest (it)”.

          They not only say the Shahada with their lips; they follow the example of Muhammad in their lives, and this makes them likely to commit murder, rape, and slavery. They literally believe verses like Sahih Muslim Hadith #2889: “Verily Allah has shown me (Muhammad) the eastern and western part of the earth, and I saw the authority of my Ummah (nation) dominate all that I saw.” It comes down to this: the closer a Muslim is to Islam, the more animosity he/she has toward Kufrs (Infidels, us).

          Secondly, I believe Sam Harris’ estimate of about 20% of Muslims worldwide being either jihadists or extremists is way too low. Even here in America, 25% of Muslims admit they believe that waging jihad against the US is justified. Once again, Muslims more serious about Islam are more likely to want to dominate the world. http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/150612-CSP-Polling-Company-Nationwide-Online-Survey-of-Muslims-Topline-Poll-Data.pdf
          Hope this helps.

        • JawsV says

          Oct 8, 2016 at 6:03 pm

          Nope, not being sarcastic. Except for Christopher Hitchens, I guess I don’t pay much attention to atheists. Mostly I pay attention to Robert Spencer. Thanks for all the info, Al and Sheykh Yer Weeni (heh – love that nic!) Made me laugh!

        • rara says

          Oct 8, 2016 at 6:44 pm

          Sheykh Yer Weeni, good point:

          “Muslims more serious about Islam are more likely to want to dominate the world.”

          And more likely to succeed in actually succeeding:

          Worth reading this too:

          https://medium.com/@nntaleb/the-most-intolerant-wins-the-dictatorship-of-the-small-minority-3f1f83ce4e15

          “The Most Intolerant Wins: The Dictatorship of the Small Minority – How Europe will eat Halal ”

        • Custos Custodum says

          Oct 8, 2016 at 7:15 pm

          Not being a habitual TV watcher, I honestly had no idea who Sam Harris is. From the piece above, it doesn’t seem as though I missed much.

          Thanks once again to our gracious host for his tireless and good-humored (!) efforts.

        • Mo says

          Oct 9, 2016 at 12:29 am

          @ JawsV

          “Who in the heck is Sam Harris???”

          He’s a Christ-hating, anti-religious bigot. He had said some accurate things about Islam in the past. But now that he’s apparently had some negative feedback on that, it looks like he’s backtracking now. (I’m sure he won’t ever retract any of the vile things he’s written about Christianity. That’s because Christians don’t kill people over it.)

          This is pathetic, but it’s not surprising.

        • Zulu says

          Oct 9, 2016 at 1:21 am

          I have no idea who Sam Harris is either.

      • Caliph says

        Oct 8, 2016 at 2:25 pm

        I am offended that you think 68 is geezer territory.

        Just kidding. Geezer is a state of mind, and so many of your comments are ungeezerly.

        • jihad3tracker says

          Oct 8, 2016 at 2:33 pm

          Hello Caliph —

          Yes, agreed, age IS a state of mind. I like to use old-fashioned vintage retro words in posts at JW, hence the self-descriptor in my reply to KrazyKafir. Robert probably has many fans who are around age 70 — some above it, some below.

        • billybob says

          Oct 9, 2016 at 9:53 am

          I am 68 but I am definitely not a geezer, and such a thought would never enter my mind.

      • KrazyKafir says

        Oct 8, 2016 at 3:08 pm

        Sixty eight? You are an ole’ geezer. Myself, I’m just a young whipper snapper with memories of watching, live in concert, the Beatles singing their new hit song: I want to hold your hand.

        • linnte says

          Oct 9, 2016 at 2:47 am

          I too saw the Beatles in person! I am a real geezer myself. But young at heart.

          So because I hear so many rumors about everyone in the news, Robert isn’t a Grand Dragon of the KKK is he? Hahahahhahaahahahaha! Where would he find the time? Ha! I adore you Mr. Spencer!

      • sally says

        Oct 8, 2016 at 5:18 pm

        Absolutely. Ill leave it to spencer to iron out this rubbish. I read him everyday and his constancy and therefore integrity is one of the very few things i can count on in my life. If he’s stigmatized by the insane, good. Ill stick with Robert.

        • underbed cat says

          Oct 8, 2016 at 9:09 pm

          I agree. I know who Sam Harris is,(atheist) he knows enough to state some facts about Islam, but not the political side, not the organization which funds and support jihad.I am disappointed if he does have respect for Spencer…Does he know about the OIC…the word purge, the true meaning about the deception of words we take for granted, mean what we think they mean. And yes, the more pious the more dangerous, but most still support sharia that is not compatible with our constitution and is a legal system in Islam. And most importantly the verses to deceive is command to protect the religion which is spawns jihad, Isis, al queda boko harem and dangerous. And most importantly the mb that has too much influence of or is the administration, in my opinion.

        • Michael Warden says

          Oct 9, 2016 at 3:34 am

          If the muslims and the left say nasty things about you – it means you are right. Keep it up.

          ps : just another old geezer (75).

          pps : not such a great thing to have seen the Beatles live. I saw Louis Armstrong and Count Basie live. So there !

    • mortimer says

      Oct 8, 2016 at 2:31 pm

      Disagree with KK: Sam Harris is not smarter than this. He is allowing the Islamists to isolate critics of jihad so that they can destroy them one by one.

      Sam Harris will be smeared by them soon AND HE WILL HAVE NO ONE TO HELP HIM.

      • Sheykh Yer Weeni says

        Oct 8, 2016 at 5:27 pm

        mortimer,
        the Infidel Imam says, we must resist all these attempts to silence us. According to the Qur’an, Muhammad believed that his “‘Religion of Truth’ should be proclaimed over all religion” (9.33; 61.9). Also, Muhammad said in Sahih Muslim, Hadith #2889, “Verily Allah has shown me the eastern and western part of the earth, and I saw the authority of my Ummah (nation) dominate all that I saw.” Islam clearly and zealously wants to dominate the world.

        The rise of ISIS and similar groups is actually the Renaissance of Islam. I know that is a ghastly thought, but it is reality. ISIS and other terrorist groups are called, in Arabic, Salafi, which means “early Muslim”. In other words, we are seeing the rebirth of a very old war. Right now, here in the US, it is still largely a war of words. The brave and stalwart Robert Spencer and other Patriots like Pam Geller should be highly praised for their often unpopular and dangerous work of spreading the truth.

      • underbed cat says

        Oct 8, 2016 at 9:11 pm

        Get real Sam , kkk …whoa.

        • underbed cat says

          Oct 8, 2016 at 9:39 pm

          “disappointed that he does not have respect of Spencer” sorry…

    • Westman says

      Oct 8, 2016 at 2:39 pm

      Robert Spencer has provided an educational storehouse from which to learn about the ideology of Islam from its own sources. Mr. Harris has made no such effort and even took a hiatus while Mr. Spencer consistently brought information to his website and honored a hectic schedule of speaking engagements.

      I can think of only one takeaway thought from Harris and that is, “Islam is the motherlode of bad ideas”. Frankly, he is a lightweight in the heavyweight fight against agressive Islam.

      We have read and heard what Mr. Spencer has written for years and it has always been the truth. If that consistency makes one stigmatized, then it speaks volumes about the corruption and laziness within those who throw the stigma.

      • jihad3tracker says

        Oct 8, 2016 at 2:59 pm

        Hello Westman — Please let me parachute into your front yard with an off-topic but important bit of information:

        A couple of days ago Robert posted an item about a “Hey ISIS — You Suck” billboard put up in St. Louis by Tariq Malik’s hashtag group #ActualMuslims. Here is ANOTHER website with an article regarding the same taqiyya deception:

        http://www.spreadit.org/2016/10/08/hey-isis-you-suck-billboard-actualmuslims_n_26588.html

        COMMENTERS ARE CURRENTLY (SATURDAY AFTERNOON) WRITING IN REACTION TO THAT ARTICLE — at the Spreadit website.

        So, if you have a few spare minutes, go there to inject some factual reality about Islam, Muhammad, the Qur’an, Hadith, and how Verse 5:32 is contextually incomplete, and actually has a 180 degree opposite hostile intent against non-Muslims.

        You can also mention, as Robert has often, that there is NO APPARENT EFFORT BY IMAMS IN MOSQUES TO STEER WORSHIPPERS AWAY FROM JIHAD. And THAT is what would be true evidence of sincerity — not some insignificant deception like the billboards going up.

        • Veracious_one says

          Oct 10, 2016 at 4:41 am

          Verse 5 ; 33 clarifies verse 5 : 32

    • hiding says

      Oct 9, 2016 at 3:50 am

      sam harris is not “smart” or even worth wasting time yawning to

      • Ray Sears says

        Oct 10, 2016 at 2:12 am

        Who is Sam Harris ? But I have learned much over the years from Mr. Spencer, and i trust what he has to say, and that it is the truth !

    • cs says

      Oct 10, 2016 at 6:16 am

      Sam Harris has a rigid thought pattern, he is very moronic at times. Although he is brave on tackling Islam, he has a very moronic side to it. He is talking dipshit regarding to Robert, from whom I never saw any shadow of a racist comment, never ever.

  2. gh says

    Oct 8, 2016 at 11:02 am

    For want of an anti-islamic article, the anti-islamic movie was lost.
    For want of an anti-islamic movie, the anti-islamic organization was lost.
    For want of an anti-islamic organization, the anti-islamic movement was lost.
    For want of an anti-islamic movement, the war against islam was lost.
    For want of a war against islam, the western civilization was lost.
    And all for the want of an anti-islamic article due to prior restraint.

    Prior restraint essentially signifies that an act is censored even before it takes place, which results in such pressure, that the person has to apply restraint upon himself preemptively, resulting in inhibition of such acts. What this does is – That which could have been achieved, and required progressive stages of advancement—since was curtailed at the very onset—cannot be achieved now. We see it in action today, when it comes to opposition to islam. Through intimidation by muslims and their allies, religious freedom, islamophobia refrain, and anti-discrimination laws, the western civilization has placed upon itself, prior restraint. As a result –

    If there were no prior restraint, a likely scenario is – Mainstream websites would be regularly producing articles exposing and condemning islam. The momentum generated is likely to give some folks the motivation to create a movie depicting the truth about islam and its history, which may facilitate a large scale movement against islam, which would, in the future, lay the groundwork for the western civilization deporting muslims and eventually warring against islam, saving the western civilization from inevitable defeat at the hands of muslims. But since there is prior restraint, the west might not reach the point of warring against islam until it is too late. And in the absence of a war against islam, islam will ineluctably win.

  3. Sean says

    Oct 8, 2016 at 11:27 am

    “Not to mention extremely disappointing coming from someone who is generally a rigorous thinker.”

    Indeed.

    Harris has a couple of blind spots. I think this is one. Or perhaps he’s aware that many of his followers simply won’t tolerate him conversing with people like Mr. Spencer. He referenced Charles Murray in the podcast too. Another person he’s blacklisted… even though he’s never bothered to read the Bell Curve – not even the controversial chapter on race and intelligence. Same applies to Mark Steyn who he’s referenced a number of times. Harris obviously reads Steyn’s work and no doubt agrees with him on number of important topics. Harris argues that he simply doesn’t have the time to ‘vet’ these people. He’s giving in to the bullies. I was glad to hear Mr. Saad point this out.

    A Harris/Spencer discussion could be illuminating for a lot of people. The fact that it hasn’t happened is unfortunate. The fact that it can just never happen, based on what Sam said, is infuriating.

  4. Lucienne says

    Oct 8, 2016 at 11:29 am

    If you are taking fire, you are over the target. Keep up the great work Robert, with Love, Lucienne

    • gravenimage says

      Oct 8, 2016 at 1:24 pm

      Another good post. Thanks.

  5. pdxnag says

    Oct 8, 2016 at 11:48 am

    The sheer volume of personal attacks just makes it too hard to say that “all of that opprobrium is unwarranted[.]” All of it.

    One of the attacks must have hit the mark, it must have because there has been soo much, we just can’t say right now which one?

    This is a variation of the theme of famous Hollywood starlets that are famous for being famous. Pile on.

  6. Kurt says

    Oct 8, 2016 at 12:17 pm

    Robert, I think you are being a little thinned skinned here. Gad, Sam, and you are all on the same side. Sam talks on a variety of topics hence the “bandwidth problem”.

    If you and Sam had a discussion I doubt there would be many areas of disagreement.

    • gravenimage says

      Oct 8, 2016 at 1:26 pm

      Kurt, this pair is singling Robert Spencer out, and comparing him to KKK members, Nazis, and serial killers–generally completely beyond the pale. I don’t think one has to be “thin skinned” to take issue with this.

      • Kurt says

        Oct 8, 2016 at 1:38 pm

        Actually Gad defended Robert and Sam’s response was “Hmm, yeah”. Sam can suffer from foot in mouth syndrome with his “thought experiments” like the nuclear first strike idea getting him a lot of flack. And the Bill Maher episode with Ben Affleck.

        I think hearing these two talk would be enlightening but not holding my breath.

        • gravenimage says

          Oct 8, 2016 at 10:28 pm

          Well, that’s true, Kurt–on the other hand, Saad, while claiming he doesn’t necessarily take criticism of Robert Spencer at face value, he nonetheless refers to him as a Nazi over and over again–not exactly a robust defense…

        • Angemon says

          Oct 10, 2016 at 5:49 am

          gravenimage posted:

          “Well, that’s true, Kurt–on the other hand, Saad, while claiming he doesn’t necessarily take criticism of Robert Spencer at face value, he nonetheless refers to him as a Nazi over and over again–not exactly a robust defense…”

          He doesn’t, GI. Saad is recounting what happened when people approached him to ask why he was willing to talk to a “Nazi”. Saad’s reaction was to ask them to prove their claims, which they failed to do so. His placing the burden of evidence on the accuser(s) is a stark contrast with Harris’ implication that, unless you know pretty much everything someone said, you shouldn’t associate with them because the accusation thrown at them might be right. The example Harris used is fallacious as well – sure, a KKK Grand Dragon would give a different significance to racial differences in IQ or something, but that should not mean one should not discuss them (assuming they exist).

        • JD says

          Oct 9, 2016 at 6:16 am

          I actually don’t think that was a bad idea. Mutually assured destruction works because no matter how insane a ruler portrays of themselves they do not want themselves in the country all today. In many Islamic countries they celebrate death, they have children shows singing about how glorious martyrdom is. Mutually assured destruction does not work when death is so celebrated, when it’s looked at as such a good thing. I’m very anti-war but if Iran or any other Islamic country comes close to gaining nuclear capability I would have no problem with us invading and absolutely destroyed all of their capacities. I kind of think we should do it with Pakistan.

    • gravenimage says

      Oct 8, 2016 at 1:33 pm

      Moreover, this is not just about Robert Spencer’s hurt feelings–this vicious stupidity makes it far more difficult for him to get the message out about the threat of Jihad.

      That these two–who are both at least generally Anti-Jihad themselves, are willing to smear a fellow Anti-Jihadist is not just depressing, but says disturbing things about the cohesiveness and effectiveness of the Counter-Jihad in general.

    • jihad3tracker says

      Oct 8, 2016 at 1:34 pm

      Hello Kurt — I disagree, Sir.

      Sam Harris affirmed, in this conversation with Gad Saad, that mud slinging works, and the more mud flung, the harder it is for average Americans to discern lies behind attacks.

      AND WHY DOES MORE MUD EQUAL MORE UNMERITED OPPROBRIUM ? Ah, that is the crucial question. ANSWER: Leftist America-haters in the mainstream media REFUSE TO LOOK AT ISLAM IN A NEUTRAL WAY.

      They refuse for a simple reason, but not an immediately obvious one: Predominantly white (by a huge percentage) Western-world mainstream media persons are intensely RACIST: privately revulsed by Arab physical conformation.

      Ashamed of and feeling guilty for such base prejudice, they do overcompensation foxtrots, finding endless excuses to veer from even easily-gotten facts via an array of experts around the internet.

      Of course, the zenith of absurdity is their complete denial even as jihad piles up slaughtered Infidels all other our planet. As Robert has said, this willful blindness condenses down to “Islam has nothing to do with Islam”..

  7. Lesley says

    Oct 8, 2016 at 12:40 pm

    Disappointed that a great mind such as Sam Harris could give a flip about what anyone would think of him for talking to anybody.

    With the rise of minutae about individuals becoming almost instantaneously searchable information, we seem to be unable to prioritize what is truly important.

    Winston Churchill was instrumental in saving the free world, and he was an alcoholic who liked to be buck naked at inappropriate times.

    Benjamin Franklin wrote some extremely upsetting things about women (the gist of which was that old women are preferable for mistresses because they are past the nuisance of childbearing, discrete, grateful for the attention, and if you put a basket over their body covering the half above the waist, you couldn’t tell the difference between an old or young woman… and below the waist was the only important part of a woman, anyhow).

    The above is repellant, misogynistic logic, and yet it still does not erase his contributions as one of our founding fathers.

    These days, it’s not enough to do anything great, because even if you cook up a cure for cancer, as soon as the establishment finds that you had an awkward moment, or held a controversial view that goes against their tastes or narratives, there is such a threat of being pariah-by-proxy that someone with a great mind such as Sam Harris is worried about the consequences of having a conversation with another brilliant mind?

    Is this what we’ve come to? I am profoundly disappointed, and frankly, a little angry >:-(

    • gravenimage says

      Oct 8, 2016 at 1:39 pm

      Lesley wrote:

      These days, it’s not enough to do anything great, because even if you cook up a cure for cancer, as soon as the establishment finds that you had an awkward moment, or held a controversial view that goes against their tastes or narratives…
      …………………….

      It’s worse than that, Lesley. Robert Spencer is not considered beyond the pale over some beside-the-point personal peccadillo, but over his stance against the threat of Jihad itself.

      • jihad3tracker says

        Oct 8, 2016 at 1:52 pm

        Yes, gravenimage, thank you for drawing an essential distinction on Robert’s courage regarding jihad as being the reason for a ceaseless parade of attacks.

        Lesley did mention something which I find encouraging: “Winston Churchill was instrumental in saving the free world, and he was an alcoholic who liked to be buck naked at inappropriate times.”

        That Prime Minister & Knight of the Realm is my public-utterance AND private-conduct role model, so maybe there is still hope for a Wikipedia article regarding Yours Truly — eventually!

        • gravenimage says

          Oct 8, 2016 at 10:32 pm

          Thanks, jihad3tracker–and I got a kick out of your hopes for Wikipedia immortality!

      • Lesley says

        Oct 8, 2016 at 3:34 pm

        @gravenimage:
        This would be shocking, because I’ve heard Sam Harris be outspoken on the dangers of Islam.

        Unfortunately, I think he’s put off from speaking with Robert Spencer because he’s worried that after he’s agreed with Robert Spencer in public about Islam, he’ll find out that Mr. Spencer is some right-wing monster the association to whom will tarnish his reputation and credibility.

        • gravenimage says

          Oct 8, 2016 at 10:35 pm

          Well, sure, Lesley–but it is not difficult to research Robert Spencer.

          And the truth is that Sam Harris is often tarred with the same brush–he might believe that throwing Mr. Spencer under the bus is apt to make him appear more “moderate”, but it is unlikely to have this effect at all.

        • Mark Swan says

          Oct 8, 2016 at 11:41 pm

          You are right it will not, but will instead leave Him more vulnerable than ever.

          Mr. Spencer covers both aspects of Jihad, the violent and the stealth with the later
          being the more serious threat, and much more prevalent. When all this finally comes
          out and is known, Mr. Spencer will be vindicated and revered, for these very facts.

    • carol says

      Oct 18, 2016 at 1:02 am

      Lesley said:

      “Benjamin Franklin wrote some extremely upsetting things about women …and below the waist was the only important part of a woman, anyhow.”

      Donald Trump is burnished like an angel by comparison. I’d like to see him draw CNN’s attention to this fact in his next debate.

  8. Gary says

    Oct 8, 2016 at 12:46 pm

    And what I worry about with many of the people you name, someone like Robert Spencer, he comes so fully stigmatized that unless you’ve paid enough attention to the kinds of battles he’s fought to be confident that you know that all of that opprobrium is unwarranted, well then you just don’t actually know who you’re talking to.

    I have read this and re-read it several times and I just don’t see this as an attack on you. You have connected dots to the first sentence that may not have been what Harris was thinking about when he opened the subject. I think this paragraph shows Harris as having sympathy for you.

    • aDhimmiSaysWhat? says

      Oct 9, 2016 at 12:41 am

      I think you’re right. Sam is too smart to smear Mr. Spencer. I think when Sam answers to this, there will be a rational explanation.

  9. Richard Paulsen says

    Oct 8, 2016 at 12:47 pm

    Lot of conferences on stopping destruction of the environment. Looking forward to a conference on stopping islam from being spread.

    • Mark Swan says

      Oct 8, 2016 at 11:44 pm

      You bet, the biggest threat to the environment, ever.

  10. el cid says

    Oct 8, 2016 at 12:58 pm

    too many words.

    this conversation, Robert, is very important. Look at what CAIR and ilk succeeded in doing to Hisi Ayaan Ali. At least she has a job at Harvard.

    You have been trashed. And for no reason.

    This should be a topic in a discussion between you, Gad and Tarek bcause ek thinks you are too black and white in your approach. The Canadian panel discussion, no?

  11. Lawrence says

    Oct 8, 2016 at 1:08 pm

    Am not at all surprised from Sam Harris, to be expected. I have always considered him second-rate, a great thinker in his own mind is all, but utterly deluded; and as you put it, he is cutting off his own nose to spite his face. At the end of the day, anybody remotely Leftist has no credibility, is part of the problem. And I’m no conservative. But all Leftists are without any decency or understanding. All of them. There are no exceptions.

    I remember Harris being surprised that Noam Chomsky and Glenn Greenwald misrepresented his positions etc, and my response is uh excuse me??!! Noam Chomsky and Greenwald are hardcore Jihad supporters and Jew haters, get a clue. I remember Harris frothing that a couple of Jewish settlers could start World War 3 because they are uh building homes – that’s classic delusional left-wing anti-Semitism. He also contradicts himself there, as if Jews building homes in a place where Jews have had a presence for millenia somehow makes Palestinians take their own religion of Islam seriously, a religion Harris acknowledges is inherently extremist. How does that work?

    Harris is convinced he is such a brilliant, original, subversive thinker. He isn’t. And his desperation to be loved by the PC Left is not going to work, he will be smeared with the same brush, he already is, by the useful idiots of the Jihad anyhow.

    • jihad3tracker says

      Oct 8, 2016 at 1:40 pm

      Hello Lawrence —

      See my reply (at 12:38) to KrazyKafir, above at the start of this comment thread.

    • livingengine says

      Oct 8, 2016 at 2:34 pm

      Thank you for that Lawrence, I have to agree with you. He is a step up from Stefan Molyneux, but remains a middle brow thinker. Despite being very well educated, and articulate he can not answer a question which should be a no brainer — “should we join forces with Christians in criticism of Islam in the context of human rights”. He can’t answer this question, and rambles off into a discussion of stem cell research, something about which he was never asked. He won’t team up with Christians in defense of human rights, but will team up with Maajid Nawaz. This is not rigorous thought, it is failure, intellectual, and moral failure.
      http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2umfxy

      • Lawrence says

        Oct 9, 2016 at 1:57 am

        Yes good point. And I’m a critic of the Church and the new atheists, but I have no problem allying with both camps when it comes to exposing the truth on Islam. I mean when you face Jihad you ally yourselves with just about anybody (obviously not neo-Nazis) to oppose them. Imagine if during WW2 some Allied airmen, sailors and soldiers who were atheists or Theosophists or what have you refused to serve in the same units with Christians, and Darwinian evolutionists refused to serve in the same units with Creationists, even as the Battle of Britain was raging and France had fallen. Preposterous of course. It wouldn’t have been on the radar. But our world today is mad mad mad mad beyond my ability to articulate. Priorities are beyond skewed and warped.

  12. gravenimage says

    Oct 8, 2016 at 1:19 pm

    Good God–a comparison to a Grand Dragon in the KKK, someone who links IQ to race, a serial killer, and a Nazi–all for pointing out that Islam is a violent creed. And Sam Harris, despite his demurring, appears terrified of being tarred with the same false “islamophobic” brush, and is willing to throw Robert Spencer under the bus in the process.

    Both Sam Harris and Gad Saad have noted that those who oppose Jihad terrorism are often smeared as “racists”–but that does not stop either of them from plugging into the same vicious calumny here in order to distance themselves from someone falsely characterized as a pariah. Moral cowardice.

    • teriakiking says

      Oct 8, 2016 at 5:52 pm

      Wow. These comments are absurd. You appear to be the inverse of offense industry leftists just waiting for the smallest perception of a slight to start attacking. Talk about making a mountain out of a molehill.

      Harris has done more to criticize Islamists than 99.9% of the population, and at great personal cost. Some off the cuff remark on an informal podcast doesn’t even come close to justifying the vitriol in these comments. What a bunchy of reactionary babies. The dude is very, very busy. He said it’s bandwidth problem and that smears work. End of analysis.

      And he didn’t compare Spencer to a Grand Dragon! That’s just so not even close to what happened. Unbelievable.

    • Custos Custodum says

      Oct 8, 2016 at 7:20 pm

      Struck me too – all these bizarre and circuitous remarks are nothing more than “virtue signaling” – showing that the speaker would NEVER be associated with opinions that others regard as UNCOUTH.

      Right or wrong is a not a category that is relevant to the Sam Harris’ of this world.

      • gravenimage says

        Oct 8, 2016 at 10:42 pm

        Sad but true.

    • Ted Tyler says

      Oct 9, 2016 at 8:11 am

      I fear that brainwashed American thinking goes something like this:

      1. Islam is a religion of peace so if you say that Islam is not a religion of peace, then you are an islamophobe – which is just as bad as being a racist.

      2. Robert Spencer is an islamophobe and therefore is an evil bad person.

      3. Anyone who agrees with Robert or who supports his position is also an evil bad person.

      If view of this type of thinking, Sam Harris may be a bit reluctant to support Robert. This is not “throwing Robert under the bus”. I think is it more like trying to avoid being run over by the bus.

      • Michael says

        Oct 10, 2016 at 1:27 pm

        What if the bus is so big and moving so fast that it will assuredly run over all of us if we do not get our collective act together? The time for indulging in intellectual prejudice is well past.
        Mr. Harris can’t take half an hour to find out for himself the true nature of Mr. Spencer’s work? Is he not skilled with computers? Perhaps he is a slow reader?
        More likely he is enjoying the cocoon of the intelligentsia while muslim aggression daily destroys his culture.
        At this moment it is time to fight on every possible front the wickedness of islam regardless of the cost to one’s social standing.

  13. Andrew Meir says

    Oct 8, 2016 at 1:25 pm

    what I don’t understand is why people do not read the Koran before criticising other people. It is all there.

    • Lesley says

      Oct 8, 2016 at 3:40 pm

      @Andrew Meir:
      Agreed. I’m also certain that the most fervent non-Muslim supporters of Islam have never even cracked open the Koran for an instant.

      Shocking in an age of widespread literacy and access to information!

      • Michael Copeland says

        Oct 8, 2016 at 4:21 pm

        Shocking in an age when the Koran is available online, in parallel translations at http://corpus.quran.com/

    • JD says

      Oct 9, 2016 at 6:27 am

      But what about that one passage in the bible that sounds violent but no one actually ever uses to justify violence? See, the Bible and Koran are equally good and bad.

      That’s the jist of the objections that are always raised.

  14. Carmel says

    Oct 8, 2016 at 1:53 pm

    In everything you can see , there is always the appearance and the substance. Sam Harris too. For the appearance , I will be generous . I will give him 10 /10. For the substance , well , maybe it is there , but I don’t see it . Can someone tell me what great idea Sam Harris had bring in any debate since many years.

    Because he speak slowly and calmly doesn’t give him any wisdom . I never could listened to him very . I always end up starting thinking of something else while his mouth goes on. I suspect this man to be very interested in his own image . I suspect him to be quite a bit narcissic. I think he pleased himself a lot and he think he is a great thinker. of our time .

    Does he read a lot ? Does he know so much ? Especially about islam? I don’t think so . He reminds me the pastries we can see in supermarkets. At first ,they seems to be very nice but if you taste them , you realised they are made of milk powder , artificial cream , egg powder etc…You don’t get any satisfaction in eating them. You bought a look. Sam Harris do same effect on me .

  15. Steve Klein says

    Oct 8, 2016 at 2:02 pm

    I have Sam Harris’ book, “The End of Faith: Religion, Terror, and the Future of Reason.” I bought it, not because I am an atheist, but because he seemed to understand the threat posed by Islamic supremacism and totalitarianism. Guess I was wrong. I read Sam Harris’ book. I wonder if Harris has read any of Spencer’s books.

    The following, Sam Harris vs Dennis Prager – Religion – 2007, is I think enlightening:

    https://www.samharris.org/podcast/item/the-frontiers-of-political-correctness/

  16. JIMJFOX says

    Oct 8, 2016 at 2:05 pm

    “stigmatized”… “bandwidth problem”… what the hell is this pseudo-intellectual twaddle?
    Reminds me somewhat of the Sokal hoax.
    FFS, what’s wrong with calling a spade a spade? Harris has gone down in my estimation
    to the level of a dhimmified apologist.
    There IS no great debate to be had- ISLAM is the enemy, by its own declarations and it
    should be treated as such without reserve.
    Pre-emptive nuclear strike? Who is to say it will not happen, when civilization’s survival is
    on the chopping block??

  17. Ronen says

    Oct 8, 2016 at 2:08 pm

    This is sad for Sam Haris, I used to think better of him. And by the way, what is ‘toxic’ about Mr. Spencer?

  18. Rob says

    Oct 8, 2016 at 2:10 pm

    You have my support Robert.

  19. mortimer says

    Oct 8, 2016 at 2:16 pm

    The ‘Islamophobia’ slur is an ad hominem condemnation demeaning all critics of Islam as being mentally ill, but this is obviously not true, since rational inquiry about Islam is highly intellectual. Thus criticism of Islam is proof of one’s sanity. The Islamophobia slander is used to enforce Sharia law’s anti-blasphemy rule without mentioning it. Islam is the only religion in the 21st century that is demanding anti-blasphemy legislation in the West, but only for Islam.

    Islam cannot survive detailed inquiry, critical analysis or close scrutiny. Islamic faith depends on unquestioning, blind acquiescence to the basic documents of Islam. Islam cannot be rigorously tested, so it must be protected by a wall of silence and death threats against its critics. Muslims know this and are touchy about admitting that Islam is a flimsy house of cards.

    Faith in Islam’s teachings falls apart and collapses as soon as the historicity and amoral character of Mohammed are examined.

    • billybob says

      Oct 9, 2016 at 9:00 am

      I think you meant to use the word “doctrines”. Perhaps what you wrote got auto-corrected to “documents”. Anyhow, yes, very succinctly put, “Islam cannot survive detailed inquiry, critical analysis or close scrutiny.”

      For this reason, I would suggest Islam is in a crises today. There is an explosion of information available on the internet these days that must be perceived as a threat to the continued existence of Islam. Islam just doesn’t make any sense as a moral imperative no matter how you look at it, in the cold light of reason.

      So we see the counter reaction to this is the Big Lie, the “Islam is the religion of peace” mantra being repeated over and over again. We see after every jihad attack a rush of concern for the poor Muslims whose “great religion has been hijacked” – “by terrorism that has nothing to do with Islam”. It is really quite bizarre.

      I frequently participate, as we all do in the comment sections of news articles. Thanks to the Google-powered search feature on JihadWatch front page, I often come out with very informed and hard-hitting arguments that demolish any defense of Islam, much like any of us may do here. I am greatly encouraged to find I am far from alone in these comment sections, and there are many others just as articulate or more so. I have the impression that there is now broad understanding developing of what Islam really is under the surface.

      Many of these articles one would think would be of much interest to Muslims, but it often appears there is a very a low level of participation by these same. Of course what can they say in reply to a well articulated argument that directly and properly quote the Quran, Hadiths, and Sunna? There is really no defense for Islam. I often wonder what impact even a cursory glance at the comments would have on a Muslim? It must give them a bad case of cognitive dissonance.

      This to say, they must run into criticism of Islam everywhere they turn on the internet. It would be near impossible to avoid it. The light of truth must be eating away at the edges of Islam like a acid burning everything it touches. At least, I like to imagine that. I like to imagine that this current insanity of the conspiracy of the Big Lie perpetrated by our political leaders in cohorts with the MSM will end some day, falling out of fashion perhaps with the next generation.

      Societies evolve. The social consciousness will eventually arrive at a place where Islam is simply no longer respected as a religion. There will be no more cover ups. I don’t know what’s going to happen next. Of course there will be wars with Islamic nations. These will begin as boundary disputes or a fight over water rights, but they will really be about the death throes of Islam, for Islam cannot prevail. Islam cannot withstand the march of progress and evolution of social consciousness.

      • mortimer says

        Oct 9, 2016 at 11:04 am

        “Documents” refers to the Trilogy: the Sira, hadiths and Koran as well as the canonical commentaries. Most of those who make policy don’t know the names of Islam’s source texts, let alone know anything that’s in them!

        Without the hadiths and Sira, there is no Islam. The Koran alone is not Islam.

  20. mortimer says

    Oct 8, 2016 at 2:18 pm

    https://www.samharris.org/contact

    Write to Sam Harris and tell him why he is wrong.

    • Custos Custodum says

      Oct 8, 2016 at 7:23 pm

      People like that either know they are wrong, or are impervious to criticism.

      Those who know they are wrong usually receive some social or financial benefit from maintaining their wrong positions.

      • mortimer says

        Oct 9, 2016 at 11:07 am

        If you get 1,000 emails on a topic, you will look into the topic in some detail. It is in his interest to know what he is talking about. Otherwise, Harris will lose his audience.

  21. Voytek Gagalka says

    Oct 8, 2016 at 2:25 pm

    “It works because” most people, unfortunately for them and for the society at large, are intellectually lazy, well conditioned for that state by constant onslaught of John Dewey’s “progressive” education system which have already 100 years history in America. Unless and until that will change, not much hope for them distinguishing BS from the truth. They prefer to be told what a truth is instead of finding it (by reasoning) for themselves.

    • Custos Custodum says

      Oct 8, 2016 at 7:27 pm

      Precisely – the callous subjectivism (“Teach the student, not the subject”) leading to ideological indoctrination has festered through our teacher-training and education systems for far too long, and is implicated in 85% of our main social ills.

  22. mortimer says

    Oct 8, 2016 at 2:26 pm

    Tweets by ‎@SamHarrisOrg

  23. mortimer says

    Oct 8, 2016 at 2:29 pm

    The Islamists want to pick off effective, accurate critics of Islam one by one … because truthful, accurate critics are the most devastating to their totalitarian JIHAD.

    Leftists who are co-opted by the jihad are duped into buying rope for their own hanging down the road.

    The Islamists will soon find time to isolate and pick off Mr. Harris.

  24. Searcher says

    Oct 8, 2016 at 2:35 pm

    Mr Spencer, I know what you say about Islam is the truth, because I have read the Koran and Hadith many times, many decades ago. For a long time I thought I was the only one who knew of its evil, because all I ever heard on the TV was drivel. Then I came across your writings and I thought, he is another person who finally gets it. Sadly, there are still only a few who get it. God bless your work and may He protect you.

  25. Anke L. says

    Oct 8, 2016 at 2:39 pm

    Mortimer, I totally agree with what you said there.
    I support Harris and Spencer totally. I came from Harris to Spencer and am grateful
    to have learned so much. I wish the two would have a talk on any item of the subject.
    I think Harris speaks horizontally, while at the same including the vertical depth of
    the subject. Sometimes that may sound tedious, but not to the serious listener.
    I thank both of them for bringing their insights to us.

    • mortimer says

      Oct 8, 2016 at 11:51 pm

      Thank you, A.L. SAM HARRIS IS TOO LAZY TO PICK UP THE PHONE AND TALK TO ROBERT SPENCER.

      Shame on you, Mr. Harris. Laziness is not an option. We have our freedom at stake. DON’T YOU GET IT?

  26. T-900 says

    Oct 8, 2016 at 2:51 pm

    I think that reason why Sam is hesitant is two fold :

    He does not want to become a one trick pony .
    And he seems genuinely concerned about getting associated with the Right wing in America– with him being a staunch Liberal.

    He also claimed that he did not have the time to research… Stefan Molyneux , to see if he was a genuine racist — and while I like Stefan , I don’t have the time to go through almost 10 years of his podcasts to do the same research, so I understand Sam on this .

    Sam is just a different sort of person.
    He’d rather dream and analise a topic from a 100 different aspects then to rush in for the fast conclusions .
    He’s a scientist and a sceptic , and I like him the way he is , even if
    I don’t agree with him always.

  27. Ciudadano says

    Oct 8, 2016 at 3:18 pm

    So basically Harris discovered that propaganda works. “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.” Corollary: when you hear MSM or politicians repeating something over and over, probably they are lieing to you.

    Islamophobia is a false accusation that MSM and some politicians keep repeating over and over. The lie is conflating criticism of Islam with racism.

  28. Marc Roche says

    Oct 8, 2016 at 3:50 pm

    This brohaha is pointless…….I can understand Harris’s not wanting to associate too closely with a Christian apologist, but I think it’s misguided. Both Robert and Sam have done tremendous work alerting the world to the danger of jihad, at great cost to their personal safety.

    • gravenimage says

      Oct 8, 2016 at 11:03 pm

      Marc, Sam Harris is not objecting to Robert Spencer here for his Christian beliefs–Spencer regularly partners with Anti-Jihadist Atheists, in any case–but is leery because he has been smeared as a “racist” and “Islampophobe”.

  29. Tony says

    Oct 8, 2016 at 3:55 pm

    Sam Harris’s rigorous thinking is overrated. Harris take for granted the Judeo-Christian values that makes America such a great place to live, and thinks we are better off without the religious foundation that keeps these values alive. I heard him in two debates with Dennis Prager and among other things, Harris could not come up with a credible atheistic argument against the immorality of murder. Harris then had the arrogance of posting a cartoon on his website of him beating Dennis Prager in a jousting match, implying that he got the upper hand in the debate.

    • Kepha says

      Oct 8, 2016 at 9:57 pm

      I think you are right, Tony.

  30. RCCA says

    Oct 8, 2016 at 4:29 pm

    Listened to most of the interview. Sam Harris isn’t that brilliant, although he does have extraordinary confidence in his intellect. For example, in the discussion Harris argues that we should still import lots of refugees from Muslim countries with high levels of jihad despite the obvious danger with an analogy about how we tolerate texting and driving or driving above the speed limit. He goes on endlessly with this analogy even though it’s readily apparent that there is no equivalent or rational case to be made. We don’t get a thrill or satisfaction from importing refugees the way people get satisfaction from texting or driving fast which causes us to overrule caution. Furthermore, even more importantly Harris obviously missed the warning given twice by Gad Saad about the long term damage caused from Islamization to any culture which values freedom of speech, gender equality, equal rights for all religions, etc. It’s almost like Harris has done the cost assessment in his head and has decided that increased violence towards Jews, LGBTQ and women is an acceptable cost to prove we are not anti-Muslim or xenophobic.

  31. Georg says

    Oct 8, 2016 at 4:31 pm

    I have taken Harris’s point a bit differently…

    It seemed like a musing on the regrettable phenomenon where smearing someone works in that a person unfamiliar with the smeared has to effectively wade through the totality of their statements and character before knowing whether or not the reputation is unwarranted. A person can of course take the time [“bandwith”] to wade through the satatements/character of a smeared until he/she is confident said individual is worth listening to, but the “problem” remains: the smearing has the effect of limiting one’s ability to be confident about the soundness of any smeared person’s views and makes it impossible to become certain about the soundness of the views of all those smeared as it’d take more than one lifetime to become certain the reputaiton of each is unwarranted.

    But it still begs the question that Robert’s argument points to: So we will concede to the smearer’s wish of treating the smeared as pariah (guilty until proven innocent) rendering their arguments/efforts null or worse?

    I felt Harris meant to condemn the smearer and not the smeared, and to simply point out the unmanageability of the whole issue, thus his effectively not engaging with it, but he did work to encourage smearing by acknowledging its effectiveness.

    The whole thing brings to mind a denial-of-service (DoS) attack online.

    With all that said, I’d take Robert over Sam any day and until the end. *sigh* This is an example of the insidiousness of Islam. As Pat Condell said regarding Islam: We wish we’d never heard of it. Or, better still, “We’re sick to the back teeth of hearing about your religion.”

  32. BARBARA BROOKS says

    Oct 8, 2016 at 4:34 pm

    Here’s a good way for conservatives to fight back against Islamaphobia: the Sufis and the Ahmadi Muslims are peaceful, but live in fear of their lives from Sunni’s and Shia’s. We can support political asylum for THEM, and oppose it for Sunni’s and Shia’s since they are the ones involved in extremism. Then the “Islamaphobia” people will be disarmed and furious! They will have to find a new way to attack . . .

    • gravenimage says

      Oct 8, 2016 at 11:11 pm

      BARBARA BROOKS wrote:

      Here’s a good way for conservatives to fight back against Islamaphobia: the Sufis and the Ahmadi Muslims are peaceful…
      ………………………….

      Actually, Barbara, while Sufis are often violently targeted by their more orthodox coreligionists, you are unfortunately mistaken in thinking that they do not embrace violent Jihad themselves:

      “Sufism Without Camouflage”

      https://www.jihadwatch.org/2005/02/bostom-sufism-without-camouflage-beyond-stephen-schwartz

      In contrast, Ahmadis really do reject violent Jihad. But their beliefs are still deeply troubling–they embrace the brutality of Shari’ah law–and only differ from mainstream Muslims in using Jihad to force its imposition.

      But if Muslims were to vote in Shari’ah law, they would still be fine with amputating the limbs of petty thieves and stoning rape victims in the street.

  33. Bradamante says

    Oct 8, 2016 at 5:25 pm

    It’s amazing to me that Sam Harris thinks that it’s actually all that complicated (and I speak as someone who is usually an admirer of Sam Harris). I’ve had no difficulty in assessing Robert Spencer’s work and determining that the smears are simply and obviously wrong. The fact that the smear machine never produces any examples of anything racist, hateful, etc. that Mr Spencer actually said or did ought to give a person a clue. Mr Saad’s suggestion seems good — if you’re that worried about it, invite the hang-wringers to take their best shot and provide examples of all this hateful racism, or racist hatred, or whatever it is they think characterizes Mr Spencer’s work. I’ve actually tried asking, over on DailyKos; of course, no one ever has anything, unless they just quote Mr Spencer’s (accurate) complaints about the horrendous things found in Islamic texts and teachings. I do understand wanting to give people a fair hearing — even people who are foaming at the mouth claiming that someone is a terrible person; if it turned out they had something there, I’d want to hear it. But at a certain point, Mr Harris really ought to notice the complete and total lack of evidence proffered by these people and grab a clue. Especially after he’s been victimized by baseless smears himself (e.g., he was called a terrible sexist after he said that women might be put off by the confrontational tone of some atheistic debates and made a joke about how women probably don’t consider him hot; comments like those are almost enough to get you stoned to death, these days).

    • gravenimage says

      Oct 8, 2016 at 11:13 pm

      Very true, Bradamante–those who smear Robert Spencer *never* cite examples–they just act as if if is so widely known that the he is an “Islamophobe” that they need not bother.

      Good to see you posting again.

  34. Avon says

    Oct 8, 2016 at 6:27 pm

    I have seen his TED speech on AI and I was not impressed. Came across as someone who tries to sound smart but isn’t. I have heard him make some sense about islam in the past. But I think he is liberal like Bill Maher, they are losing their minds right now with their hate for Trump, so they back Clinton instead who refers to people like them as islamophobes.

  35. rara says

    Oct 8, 2016 at 7:18 pm

    I’ve just discovered one quote that I plan to use in the discussions:

    “Reported by Al-Tirmdhi: “The Messenger of Allah said, “Anyone who seeks sacred knowledge to vie with scholars, argue with fools, or win people’s hearts will go to Hell.””

  36. Mark Spahn (West Seneca, NY) says

    Oct 8, 2016 at 7:24 pm

    Sam Harris’s insight into mud-slinging seems to be that mud is a renewable resource that is never depleted. Thus there is an inexhaustible supply of mud that can overwhelm any “bandwidth”. For conformation, ask the poo-flingers at the local zoo how come they never run out of flingables.

  37. Champ says

    Oct 8, 2016 at 7:41 pm

    Robert Spencer is on the right course by bringing us the unvarnished truth and much *needed* awareness to the very real islamic threat. Jihad Watch is dedicated to: “Exposing the role that Islamic jihad theology and ideology play in the modern global conflicts.”

    But people like Sam Harris present dangerous obstacles by attempting to steer folks off course—so don’t fall for it.

  38. warren raymond says

    Oct 8, 2016 at 8:32 pm

    Sam Harris = intellectual lightweight. Robert Spencer knows his stuff. SH couldn’t tie his bootstraps.

  39. Praeceptor Maximus says

    Oct 8, 2016 at 9:30 pm

    I used to have a lot of respect for Sam Harris until I saw his twitter where he twitted that four presidents and ex-presidents (Carter, Bush, Clinton, and Obama [all of whom are the worst presidents in my opinion and have no credibility whatsoever]) have said that Trump will be a disaster for America. Sam hates Trump and he thinks that the Republic will end if he comes to power. Now, here is the conundrum: Sam is critical of Islam, but at the same time he is firmly and squarely on the Left. He wants his cake and eat it too. You can’t stop Islamic terrorism with the Leftist governments. Thus, this makes Sam either stupid or naive, I don’t know which.

    • underbed cat says

      Oct 8, 2016 at 9:49 pm

      Great comment. Very smart.

      I cheered Sam Harris…with Bill Maher but I did sense he was atheist analytical…liberal .. but at least he knew some of the concepts were bad, sort of “a boat load of bad idea’s,” He could read Spencer or Stephen Coughlin and get a further “edjumacation”.

    • berserker says

      Oct 8, 2016 at 9:57 pm

      For a so-called intelligent thinker, he simply repeats the MSM’s talking points about Trump. It is Hillary that will kill the republic. She, is for open borders and mass Muslim immigration, will introduce blasphemy laws, wants war with Russia, is willing to sell anything and everything to the highest bidder, has a close relationship with a Muslim Brotherhood plant, will appoint supreme court justices that will support even more progressive agendas, and so on.

      I have no idea what Harris is smoking. His defense of the Clinton’s private email server is hilarious.

    • JD says

      Oct 9, 2016 at 6:31 am

      He wants to believe that people on the right are bigots, and they are only accidentally correct in their criticisms of Islam because of their bigotry. No matter how intelligent someone maybe everyone is still prone to their own preconceived biases. That’s why his logic can resemble a pretzel at times.

  40. Larry A. Singleton says

    Oct 9, 2016 at 1:50 am

    Posted at My Chat with Sam Harris (THE SAAD TRUTH_262) You Tube.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=80TrXsZSwXo

    One of my first stops in the morning is Jihad Watch. Along with FrontPage magazine. Here’s Jihad Watch on this “interview:

    Sam Harris: Robert Spencer “so fully stigmatized…you just don’t actually know who you’re talking to”
    https://www.jihadwatch.org/2016/10/sam-harris-robert-spencer-so-fully-stigmatized-you-just-dont-actually-know-who-youre-talking-to

    This exchange between Sam Harris and Gad Saad raises important issues regarding “Islamophobia” smear propaganda and its effectiveness even among people who are its subjects and should not be susceptible to it. This excerpt comes from the Harris/Saad conversation, “The Frontiers of Political Correctness,” which you can hear in its entirety here. This excerpt starts at the 35 minute mark. As will quickly become clear, the “someone” to whom he is referring in the first line is me:

    Sam Harris: What I’m picturing here is talking to someone who you really should challenge on specific points because they have said crazy, divisive, irrational things in the past, but they’re just not saying them on your show. So you get them there, and it turns out this person’s a Grand Dragon in the KKK, but you don’t know that, and you’re talking about racial differences in IQ or something in a good-natured, academic way, and you don’t realize that this person’s interest in this topic is just the tip of the iceberg, and the iceberg is horrendous.

    I think that’s a situation one could be in. Obviously I think that you could have an interesting, a potentially interesting conversation with anyone. You know, I would be willing to go into a prison and talk to a serial killer, because I think that would be a fascinating conversation. There are many questions I would want to ask someone who has killed many people. But at least in that situation, I would understand who I was talking to. And what I worry about with many of the people you name, someone like Robert Spencer, he comes so fully stigmatized that unless you’ve paid enough attention to the kinds of battles he’s fought to be confident that you know that all of that opprobrium is unwarranted, well then you just don’t actually know who you’re talking to.

    Gad Saad: Well, one of the ways that I handled specifically the Robert Spencer case is, as people started writing to me saying, “Hey, why are you speaking to this Nazi?” and so on, I said, “Look, the comments section on my YouTube channel is open, why don’t you share some manifestations of some nefariously racist, horrible things that he’s done, and then at least I could be educated?” Guess what: I didn’t see it.

    Read the rest at Jihad Watch.

    I run into this All The Time with slimy liberals online. They’ll smear Robert Spencer and I’ll reply “Find me on thing that Spencer has ever said that is either “racist” or “hate mongering”. And I either get adolescent name calling or embarrassing silence in return.

    Usually what I do is post my “Letters” that I list the most important articles, books and essays that I’ve read and videos that I’ve watched and challenge all to read them and then dispute, refute or debunk them. Like Alan Dershowitz’s book The Case for Israel I like to throw at all the Jew haters who cheer for Palestinian terrorists.

    In the almost six years that I’ve been doing this, including posting my “Questions for Muslims” letter, where I write about my Introduction to and knowledge of Islam, I have, Not Once, received a response that in any way, shape or form addresses the ISSUES in my letters. Not One Single Time.

    And I can’t count how many times I’ve typed these very words on just about every venue on the Internet.

    Liberals simply don’t debate. And I’ll give you the reason why: They’re too lazy and too stupid to actually study the issues and READ anything.

    I’m lucky I had a gra’mom who passed on her love of books and reading to me. All my christmas and birthday gifts were books

    At one time I was a rabid racist who used to get jumped in junior high school by black kids. Talk about a “stigma”. My story of how I overcame my racism could almost be used for one of those Hallmark Movie of the Weeks.

    The problem with liberals is they don’t know how to “think”. They can’t debate inside their heads. They have no concept of arguing both sides of an issue. All they do is inhale the propaganda and mindlessly regurgitate it all over the Internet. And when they’re challenged on their nonsense they go running…..or block you on their Fakebook pages and delete/censor your comments. As has happened to me more times than I can count.

    One of the areas this dumb-ass construction worker gets to gloat. When he sees some “academic” who puts this “university” or “college” or “graduated from” on his Fakebook page runs away screaming like a little girl when I post my facts that even the village idiot or town drunk can find for themselves if they only want to look for it.

    • billybob says

      Oct 9, 2016 at 9:31 am

      “Liberals simply don’t debate. And I’ll give you the reason why: They’re too lazy and too stupid to actually study the issues and READ anything.”

      Your very well articulated observations resonate with my own. I think we could say sarcastically “Liberals are too principled to actually study the issues and READ anything”, as they seem to think they are coming from a higher moral plane that their point of view is so self evident as to be beyond questioning. If you give them a reference to a Robert Spencer article they will dismiss it by saying he is a notorious islamophobe or some such, just as the MSM will always dismiss what Robert Spencer says by stating he is on the list of hate groups at the Southern Poverty Law Centre, rather than address whatever was said.

      • billybob says

        Oct 9, 2016 at 9:35 am

        Oops – I failed to close the brackets on the hyper text after the word principled. It sucks that we cannot edit our comments here, especially in a case like this where you cannot see an error until after you post.

  41. Angel Gabriel says

    Oct 9, 2016 at 3:35 am

    It seems to me that Harris is a narcissistic who looks down his nose at potential guests who he deems as not having the proper “high-status” credentials.

    He recently on his podcast has been doing a lot of virtue signaling to the Leftists in an apparent effort to resurrect his “racist” image which he was tarred with by speaking the truth about Islam. It ain’t gonna work — unless he renounces all his prior work and becomes pro-shariah, it will never be enough.

    Some advise to Harris: forget the virtue signalling and just speak the truth unless you want to become an outcast of another sort: the Reza Aslan, Glenn Greenwald type.

  42. The Ginger says

    Oct 9, 2016 at 3:42 am

    If you dolts read the context as well, you would that Harris is actually defending Spencer and complaining about the knee jerk reactions of the whining internet folk and campus ninnies. You have all just proved his point.

  43. August West says

    Oct 9, 2016 at 3:43 am

    “The gist of Sam’s point appears to be this: so many negative things are said about me and some of them may turn out to be true, thereby tarring him by association, whereas with a serial killer he would at least know with whom he is dealing and wouldn’t have to worry about anyone thinking he approves of what the interviewee has done.”

    I read it slightly differently.

    The way I read it was that in Harris’ view Spencer has been stigmatized by so many people that it is impossible (for Harris) to review all of the cases of stigmatization and draw an independent conclusion about each case. Therefore Harris would rather interview an known serial killer than Spencer.

    At the end of the day to me this is the Donald Rumsfeld argument coupled with what appears to be intellectual laziness.

    The serial killer is a “known known”. His or Her status is that of a serial killer and this has been proven by an independent authority: a court of law.

    Robert Spencer is a “known unknown” to Harris. Lots of people say bad things about Spencer, and he does not know if some of them are correct or not. A corollary to this is that he is too lazy to find out about Spencer for himself and draw an independent conclusion. Another corollary is that Harris only wants to interview people that have been independently classified a priori.

    To me this second corollary severely limits the value of any interview by Harris.

    Harris’ self declared desire to only interview “known knowns” seems to be unyielding. Even when faced with a comment like this:

    “Well, one of the ways that I handled specifically the Robert Spencer case is, as people started writing to me saying, “Hey, why are you speaking to this Nazi?” and so on, I said, “Look, the comments section on my YouTube channel is open, why don’t you share some manifestations of some nefariously racist, horrible things that he’s done, and then at least I could be educated?” Guess what: I didn’t see it.”

    Harris had no comment, but does not change his position.

    So there you have it. Harris prefers to deal with “known knowns” only. He is either too lazy, too cowardly, or simply incapable of drawing his own conclusions.

    Also Harris seems to have an interest in serial killers for some reason.

    My conclusion would be that Sam Harris has declared himself to only be capable of interviewing parties which have been independently vetted regarding their acceptability (to Harris) on a given topic. I infer that Harris would confine the scope of his interview to that topic only.

    Furthermore, Harris is not interested in determining whether or not an interviewees accusers are correct or incorrect. That would be a lot of work after all, and who has time?

    To which I reply who exactly is Sam Harris and why would I care about any of his interviews? His interview would have not value to me as I would simply refer to the independent body that vetted his interviewee before he saw fit to accept the interview.

    If I ever want to see the world through the eyes of a serial killer I will look up Harris. Other than that I will skip him.

    For the record, I would like to state my personal preference that serial killers be executed rather than interviewed. Perhaps Harris could interview a serial killer in order to understand his/her personal views on the death penalty. I am sure that will be a page turner. It might even require a sequel.

  44. Vikram Chatterjee says

    Oct 9, 2016 at 3:48 am

    Maajid Nawaz is a fanatical ISIS operative who poses as a liberal in the West. He’d be off in Syria chopping off heads and raping women, but Allah needs him elsewhere, because he’s a smooth talker.

    He knows that Sam Harris is an ignoramus about Islam, and is using Harris, and his underserved reputation as a critic of Islam, as a vehicle for a campaign of mass deception about Islam, delivered in the disastrous book, Islam and the Future of Tolerance: A Dialogue.

    Anyone who thinks he is peaceful should take the time to absorb the following links.

    How Maajid Nawaz threatened the audience at a London synagogue https://youtu.be/QS30IWoChAo

    Maajid Nawaz: Stealth Jihadist Exposed https://vkchatterjee.wordpress.com/2015/12/30/maajid-nawaz-stealth-jihadist-exposed/

    Sinister and Dangerous: The Stealth Supremacism of Maajid Nawaz https://vkchatterjee.wordpress.com/2016/03/20/sinister-and-dangerous-the-stealth-supremacism-of-maajid-nawaz/

    ────────

    Nawaz’s group, Quilliam Foundation, is named after Abdullah Quilliam, a pious and fanatical Sunni Muslim who converted to Islam in the Edwardian era, and founded England’s first mosque. Quilliam called for Sharia law in Britain and a global caliphate to rule the world.

    That’s who his “counter-extremism think tank is named after”. It’s as if a German nationalist claimed to be an ex-Nazi and founded a Joseph Goebbels Center for Aryan-Jewish Understanding.

    By naming his organization after this man, Nawaz signals in dog-whistle fashion to the Muslims in the audience that he remains loyal to Sharia and the caliphate, aka ISIS.

    http://www.andrewbostom.org/2015/12/reformer-maajid-nawaz-and-wm-abdallah-quilliam-caliphate-supporting-namesake-for-nawazs-reformist-organization/

  45. Jan D'haene says

    Oct 9, 2016 at 5:41 am

    Jan says,
    Watching some of his videos and reading Sam Harris’ The End of Faith”, I was taken aback about his comments regarding Robert Spencer as being stigmatized. He who called Islam,” the mother-load of bad ideas,” should know better than to criticize defenders of liberal western values like that. I realize now that he is one of the few leftists who understands the danger of Islam, but is worried that his leftist ideology will be tarnished if he starts supporting people with a different political spectrum. You cannot fight against the Islamic ideas and hope to change it through dialogue. Reform of Islam he says is necessary But Islam is reforming itself, like Christianity did starting with Luther. And that means going back to the original “pure” state of the religion. Meaning the Koran is the work of God which can never be criticized or altered and it is complete, and must therefore be literally interpreted. This is wat ISIS is doing: reform.

    Look how he also criticizes Milo and Trump who at least, if he is elected, is going to stop the islamization of America. Trump is the only one around at the moment to arrest the decline of western civilization and Harris should welcome this.

    • JD says

      Oct 9, 2016 at 6:36 am

      On an interview with Dave Rubin he went on to say that he believed he misspoke by saying “the mother load”, he said he should have said “a mother load”. He said that Christianity had some really bad ideas as well. He may not have been very articulate and his reasoning but it looked to me like he was trying to equate some kind of false equivalency between Islam and Christianity. From what little I’ve seen the bad things about Christianity he talks about he’s completely wrong about.

  46. berserker says

    Oct 9, 2016 at 5:54 am

    Eventually, when the inevitable violence comes as is the case with every Islamic invasion, it will not be Harris fighting on the streets. It will be Tommi Robinson. And Harris will never associate with someone like Tommi. I am finished with academics and their clever little arguments.

  47. JD says

    Oct 9, 2016 at 6:45 am

    This is exactly how I thought of Tommy Robinson. I never gave it much thought or attention, but the image in my mind of him was of some kind of Neo-Nazi fascist person. Then I saw him interviewed by Dave Rubin. Then I try to find anything racist he’s ever said or done, and I couldn’t find anything. I understand why there is such a stark contrast between my perception of him before I actually investigated and my perception of him after. Still the degree of contrast is shocking.

  48. Angemon says

    Oct 9, 2016 at 7:24 am

    Speaking of “bandwidth problem”, I’ve always considered Sam Harris more of a shallow thinker, generally uninformed about religion, and as someone more concerned on looking good while saying something that sounds smart and makes him look cool than an actual informed thinker with an extensive knowledge of the issues he’s trying to tackle and the will to stand up for what he believes no matter what. I keep hearing people praising him but, because I have other things to occupy my time with, I barely listen/read anything of his. And when I do read/listen to him, I see no reason to change what I think of him. Much to the contrary.

  49. Allan Mandrowski says

    Oct 9, 2016 at 9:18 am

    Atheists of the brand like Sam Harris, Maher and Dawkins are allies to people like Robert Spencer. Unfortunately, the disgusting smear campaigns and attitude towards people calling a spade a spade is indeed proving effective in the sense that people are scared of further character assassination by associating themselves with people who hold similar beliefs about the same subject, but are of a different denomination or hold different ideological views.

  50. 7%Solution says

    Oct 9, 2016 at 10:02 am

    Sam Harris a rigorous thinker? Maybe in some contexts, but most of his criticisms of the Bible and towards Christian faith in general (and the concept of faith itself) are totally fallacious and reveal that his “rigorous thinking” takes a back seat to what amount to emotionally-based objections, or ill-understood or ill-researched ideas about Christianity, philosophy and history. (David Wood has a video of just one example that can be easily be found on YouTube.) He gets away with a lot of this because most of his audience is atheist/anti-theist, so he’s essentially preaching to the choir.

    Not only that, but Gad Saad (also an atheist) shows an important difference between himself and Harris; Saad at least investigated Robert himself and was not afraid to have him on the show to speak for himself. Moreover, Harris is ostensibly a “skeptic” (as if only atheists can be skeptically minded), so he should be automatically skeptical of the stigma that Robert has around him, and, at the very least, investigate it for himself before he starts giving in to what other people say about Robert.

  51. Norger says

    Oct 9, 2016 at 10:52 am

    Sam Harris is the last person who should be suggesting that the sheer volume of ad hominem attacks on Spencer means that at least one of them must be justified. This could happen to you too, Sam.

    Robert Spencer is vilified because he is extremely effective in demonstrating, with citations to scriptural authority, precisely how the texts and teachings of orthodox Islam are used to justify jihad terror. Why bother to engage Spencer in dialogue or debate (where the truth of his analysis inevitably jumps out) when you can smear him, thereby completely avoiding the substance of his points.

    That’s what I can’t stand about the MSM on Islam; we live in the Information Age, yet they refuse to undertake an intellectually honest analysis of what Islam actually teaches.

  52. billybob says

    Oct 9, 2016 at 10:54 am

    I found this interesting and very much on topic…

    Gad Saad Interview: Sam Harris, Atheism, Political Correctness
    The Rubin Report Published on Aug 8, 2015
    Gad Saad and Dave Rubin discuss Sam Harris, atheism, political correctness, free speech and more.

    https://youtu.be/k6yNBSxQ_tE

  53. Joshua A. says

    Oct 9, 2016 at 12:31 pm

    I am a big Sam Harris fan. I am also a Robert Spencer fan. On this, I think Robert is clearly correct. Sam needs to stop wanting people to like him so much. CAIR and ISNA and SPLC and all the rest of the islamophobia brigade shouldn’t be allowed to dictate anything to anyone, let alone who one can (or is willing to) speak to.

  54. Nick says

    Oct 9, 2016 at 12:43 pm

    Shocked at how many people are commenting here that they do not know who Sam Harris is. That is not a good thing – for you.

  55. Barry Hewitt says

    Oct 9, 2016 at 3:23 pm

    Contained within Sam Harris’ Wiki entry:

    Harris is considered a member of the “Four Horsemen of New Atheism,” alongside Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, and the late Christopher Hitchens

    Yeah, right, all three of those guys would have eaten Harris for breakfast and spit out the pips!!

  56. Twerzig says

    Oct 9, 2016 at 9:37 pm

    As I understand it, a phobia is an irrational fear of something. The fear of Spiders for instance, they are territorial, they are inquisitive. I think they can count to eight and their fangs can readily puncture skin.
    Homophobia is of course the irrational fear of the Homosexual.

    • Champ says

      Oct 9, 2016 at 10:24 pm

      The fear of spiders is irrational? …not for me! 😀

  57. Anne Smith says

    Oct 10, 2016 at 11:40 am

    It is like comparing Sherlock Holmes (Robert Spencer) to inspector Clouseau. Mr Spencer has far more knowledge of the history of Islam and insight.

  58. Savvy Kafir says

    Oct 10, 2016 at 3:35 pm

    As a religious skeptic & a political Lefty myself (for the most part), I have a huge amount of respect for Sam Harris, who I consider to be one of the most intelligent people on the planet, and who is one of the VERY few liberals/progressives who is knowledgeable & honest regarding Islam & the threat it poses to the civilized world.

    But I’m really disappointed in the position Sam has taken here, in regards to Robert Spencer. And I bet he will reconsider this issue, and offer a retraction. (He’s a very sensible & honest guy!)

    I know Sam has received a HUGE amount of hate & vitriol from the PC Police in the liberal community, and he’s always struggling to counter the accusations of bigotry, Islamophobia, etc. I’m sure that’s what has caused him to become shy about who he associates with in the counter-jihad movement. But I’ve followed Robert Spencer’s work for years, and he’s never said anything about Islam that I wouldn’t say myself (if I were as knowledgeable on the subject as he).

    I’ll be very surprised if Sam doesn’t re-think this point, and offer a manly apology. He understands how important fearlessness is in this fight. I think he just gets beaten down, from time to time, by the sheer weight of ad hominem attacks coming from his fellow liberals.

    For anyone wanting to become better acquainted with Sam & his ideas on Islam, there’s a playlist devoted to some of his relevant videos on the Savvy Kafir YouTube channel. Or, better yet, read his book, The End of Faith, which has a chapter on “The Problem with Islam”.

    • Norger says

      Oct 11, 2016 at 12:28 am

      I hope you’re right. I have read fair amount of both Spencer and Harris, I think they see eye to eye on Islam.

      I’m just disappointed that Sam Harris would potentially dismiss Spencer out hand, for being too outspoken about Islam. Harris knows full well what a load of BS the “Islamophobia” label is.

  59. Ron Lewis says

    Dec 14, 2016 at 4:37 pm

    I was noticing some of the same things myself during his criticisms of Donald Trump during the election. I re-tweeted this by the way on Twitter @RonLewisAuthor and am currently working on a new blog post which is sort of related, after a fashion, to the reasoning mentioned above in this eloquently worded article.
    The blatant refusal for liberals to acknowledge that their policies have failed never ceases to amaze me. This ties in to how their constant slandering and demonizing of anyone who has the balls to stand up to them and call them on their b.s. isn’t working very effectively anymore (but it sure did wonders during the 1990s and early 2000s).
    The story of the little boy who cried wolf should have been paid attention to by those on the Left much more carefully.

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

  • Walter Sieruk on Iranian top dogs approve bill to end UN nuclear inspections, increase enrichment
  • Dude on Muslim cleric: ‘We welcomed the takeover of ISIS because they wanted to implement the Sharia’
  • Infidel on Uighur leader: ‘We’re actually quite worried’ about what Biden might let China get away with
  • Infidel on Uighur leader: ‘We’re actually quite worried’ about what Biden might let China get away with
  • Mojdeh on Audio: Robert Spencer on Muslim Brotherhood influence in a Biden/Harris administration

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.