Evidence means nothing to most of the people who claim this; they have an agenda and are happy to ignore inconvenient facts to put it across. But for those who care about the truth, here is a good critical examination of the Southern Poverty Law Center’s false and defamatory claim that Jihad Watch is a “hate group.”
“Is Robert Spencer’s Jihad Watch a Hate Group?,” by Chris Beck, Splice Today, September 14, 2017:
Robert Spencer, founder of the website Jihad Watch, is no fan of Islam, and is obsessed with the topic. The advocacy journalist has dedicated his life to exposing the religion’s excesses, which has made him a target. Criticizing Islam breaks a modern taboo. That fashionable secular religion known as Diversity tells us that getting along with each other trumps all, so frankness on certain issues is to be avoided for the greater good. Diversity is our strength, we’re reminded, and opinions that make some uncomfortable weaken unity and must be suppressed.
The Muslim world’s capacity for self-reflection and tolerance of religious criticism is limited when compared to the Western world’s. Islam’s not receptive to honest assessments of its practices, values, and doctrines—which are often in direct conflict with the norms of Western civilization—and it’s considered bad form on the political left, which has fully embraced the religion, to candidly air one’s reservations about discrimination against women and gays, and Sharia law. Christians, used to the more open Western culture, are expected to handle criticism in a more mature way than those hailing from less advanced areas of the world, so unloading on their religion is considered fair game. This is the double standard that’s been established.
The Alabama-based Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) has had considerable success in establishing itself as the sole arbiter of what’s allowed and what’s suppressed on the road to the Diversity Utopia. When it singles out groups like the KKK and Stormfront as hateful extremists, it’s on solid ground, but the organization flounders when attempting to evaluate the grayer areas, where it tends to conflate frankness with hatred. When, in 2016, the SPLC named British Islam reformer Maajid Nawaz and Somalia-born ex-Muslim Ayaan Hirsi Ali, another vocal opponent of Islam’s excesses, as anti-Muslim extremists, it provoked a backlash from the non-regressive portion of the Left, while the regressives accepted it at face value. Robert Spencer’s inclusion on that same list of haters, however, hasn’t produced the same level of outrage. Could it be then that he belongs on it?
Inclusion on the list is sufficient evidence of evil intent for the many SPLC devotees who haven’t caught on to the fact that the once impeccable anti-racism organization has lost its moral purchase. None of the alleged anti-Muslim extremists have been given a chance to defend themselves, and the cases against them that the SPLC makes on its website often don’t hold up to anything more than perfunctory scrutiny. Nawaz is now in the process of suing the SPLC for defamation.
The SPLC begins its case against Spencer with an admission that he’s written a dozen books and is often considered an intellectual, but tempers this with the caveat that the author, who received an M.A. in 1986 in religious studies from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, is entirely self-taught in the study of Islam. Spencer, says the SPLC, is also prone to “extravagant, and often provably false, claims that characterize most Muslim-bashers.” The Jihad Watch founder has stated explicitly that he doesn’t think most Muslims are extremists and that his criticisms of the religion are not directed at individual Muslims. On Jihad Watch, he’s written, “Anyone who targets innocent Muslims in the USA is not only evil, but is playing into the hands of the jihadists who are trying to fan the flames of anti-American hatred.” The SPLC makes no mention of this.
The SPLC provides nothing concrete to justify its claim that Spencer is anti-Muslim. It’s conflating criticism of a religion with hating its observers. Yes, he said that “traditional Islam is not moderate or peaceful,” but it’s true. Muhammad was a warlord, not a man of peace, and his message to non-Muslims was that they could have peace, but only if they submitted to Islam. Historically, when non-believers have wanted to live in Muslim nations, they were forced to pay a tax known as “jizya.” There’s nothing moderate or peaceful about that, but that’s “traditional Islam.” More moderate, updated forms of the religion, as you’ll often find in the United States, are more peace-oriented and less literal in their interpretation of the Qur’an.
The rest of the SPLC case against Spencer is equally lukewarm. It’s mostly a collection of quotes taken out of context, a reliable smear tactic. It’s as if the SPLC knows its audience doesn’t require anything rigorous, so it just goes through the motions. For example, Spencer has said that Barack Obama was “the first Muslim president.” They also said Bill Clinton was the first black president, which referred to his advocacy for the rights of black Americans rather than the actual color of his skin. Similarly, as Spencer has explained, he says this about Obama because any decision he made while in office involving Islam inevitably ended up favoring Islam. Ludicrously, the ex-president once said, “Terrorism has less to do with Islam than any other religion.”
Also included in the SPLC dossier against Spencer is that fact that he was banned in 2013 from entering the United Kingdom for at least three years because his views “foster hatred which might lead to inter-community violence.” The reality is that the U.K. has a serious problem with the sort of Muslim extremism that Spencer speaks out against, while also focusing on inter-community relations to the detriment of individual citizens’ lives. At this time, there are 23,000 jihadists in London, but the city has the capacity to monitor only 3,000. There are also plenty more ideological Muslims who wouldn’t resort to violence, but would support the attacks. From 1997 to 2013, in the northern city of Rotherham, England, there was an almost unchallenged organized sexual exploitation by British Pakistani Muslims targeting 1,400 non-Muslim girls, some of them as young as 11. People charged with protecting the welfare of minors were too afraid of being called racists and Islamophobes to do anything about it. The children were gang-raped, sometimes tortured, and trafficked to other cities while adults in positions of responsibility looked the other way….
Linde Barrera says
Robert Spencer tells the truth. But to some, telling the truth is spewing hate speech. I wonder if SPLC has been bought out by Islamists? Is there a way to find out if Morris Dees of SPLC has a Swiss bank account? ?
jihad3tracker says
Several weeks ago there was an article on JW or elsewhere, about huge amounts of money being stashed in Western Hemisphere offshore bank accounts belonging to the SPLC.
A Google search of relevant words should bring them up on your computer. I am sure that not all of this filthy trail of cash has been discovered. SPLC is, IMHO, utterly corrupt.
mortimer says
AUDIT SPLC right up the yingyang for breech of tax laws.
J_not_a says
To truth obfuscators like SPLC: FACTS = HATE
JFKAR says
Yes — the term ‘hate speech’ has nothing to do with hate. Like political correctness, it is code for anything that disagrees with the Progressive-Islamist agenda.
jihad3tracker says
WOW !!!! Chris Beck is a superb framer of the facts regarding Robert, Jihad Watch, Islam, and the SPLC. I will send him a note of appreciation —- maybe other JW readers would also like to do so.
Jean Terry says
Honesty is not required by the Southern Poverty Law Center. That is what Robert Spencer is. He tells true stories about the effects of Islam. To me, he is doing a public service. We should be aware as radical Islam is a real danger. The mainstream news media does not tell all of the things that are perpetrated by radical Islamists. I don’t get why people like the media cannot see what is happening or refuse to look at it. Southern Poverty Law Center is a joke. They amass millions. For what?
JawsV says
Jihad Watch is about Jihad activities worldwide. How is reporting on them “hate?” The SPLC is nuts.
mortimer says
PROVE IT. There should be a law suit against SPLC. Their claim is merely defamation.
Robert Spencer has never made an unfair accusation against anyone, nor has he ever asked anyone to hate another person. Robert Spencer is the sterling example of the traditional saying, “HATE THE SINNER, BUT LOVE THE SINNER.”
This thought comes from no less than Saint Augustine of Alexandria in his Letter 211 (c. 424) which contains the phrase “Cum dilectione hominum et odio vitiorum”, translated roughly as “With love for mankind and hatred of sins.”
This phrase was made famous as “love the sinner, but hate the sin” or “hate the sin and not the sinner” (the latter form appeared in Mohandas Gandhi’s 1929 autobiography).
So, Robert Spencer is like St. Augustine and like Mahatma Gandhi. Does SPLC want to slander them too?
Under defamation laws it should be easy to show that SPLC:
◦Published or otherwise broadcast an unprivileged, false statement of fact about the Robert Spencer;
◦Caused material harm to the plaintiff by publishing or broadcasting said false statement of fact;
SPLC is a pack of highly paid liars and they should pay substantial damages to Robert Spencer.
mortimer says
Correction: HATE THE SIN, BUT LOVE THE SINNER.
Tom W Harris says
But BAR HIM FROM THE USA.
mariam rove says
SPLC designates anyone who is telling the truth. Period. M
Pablo says
Liberals and Progressives are all about using emotions over evidence to smear those who stand in their way. The SPLC by having Jihad Watch listed on their site as a hate group is engaging in defamatory libel.
Gart says
”At this time, there are 23,000 jihadists in London, but the city has the capacity to monitor only 3,000.” Chris Beck. Those figures apply to the whole of the UK, not London alone.
Emilie Green says
As the phrase goes, Put up or shut up.
More Ham Ed says
Mark says
This documentary needs to be shared as fast and widely as possible. Please give it a thumbs up and subscribe to his email before it is removed from Face book and YouTube. https://youtu.be/t_Qpy0mXg8Y
Pop Seal says
Who made this SPLC the arbitrator of “hate speech”, “hate group” definitions? I suppose morons follow them because their lives are otherwise pointless.
NotAFool says
Even if it IS a so called ‘Hate Group’, so what?. They don’t get to censor people’s political expression when there’s an intense dislike of something. That’s precisely when political expression becomes most important.