Emily DeRuy, a “reporter” for the Mercury News, made no attempt to contact me for comment before publishing this story about my planned appearance at Stanford University:
“Free speech controversy spreads to Stanford,” by Emily DeRuy, Mercury News, November 8, 2017:
The free speech debates that have rocked UC Berkeley in recent months appear to be making their way across the bay to Stanford….
Spencer, whose writing was cited by Anders Behring Breivik, the Norwegian man who killed more than 70 people in 2011, has argued that Islam is a violent religion and that radical jihadists who perpetrate terrorism are just following its teachings. In 2013, the United Kingdom banned him from entering the country after he announced plans to attend a rally organized by an anti-Muslim extremist group.
The club, which called Spencer’s professional credentials “stellar” in the Stanford Review piece, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Spencer Brown, a spokesman for the Young America’s Foundation, which has a history of bringing controversial speakers to college campuses, including Shapiro to UC Berkeley, confirmed that his group is also backing the Spencer event at Stanford.
Now, some students at the school are circulating a petition online calling on the ASSU to defund the speech….
When I saw the story, I tweeted that DeRuy had not asked me for comment. Soon after that, I received an email from her, inviting me to comment even though the story is, obviously, already published. This is what I sent her. Of course it’s quite lengthy, too lengthy to be included in full; it will be interesting to see if DeRuy uses any of it, and what part she does use, if she updates her story.
Breivik actually seems to quote me extensively because he included in his manifesto the text of a documentary film in which I appear. Every time I speak, my name is given in the text, to make it clear who is speaking. That is not really quoting me extensively. Aside from the documentary script, Breivik actually referred to me only a few times. You did not mention that one of those references upbraids me for not calling for violence. Of course, if you had mentioned that, your readers would have realized that your implication, that my work incites violence, was false. You also omitted mention of the fact that Breivik says in his manifesto that he was inspired to commit violence not by me, but by al-Qaeda and Hamas – that is, by two Muslim entities, one of which is funded by the Islamic Republic of Iran. Nor did you mention that Breivik said in that manifesto that he decided to commit a massive act of violence in 1999. I published my first book about Islam in 2002.
No responsible journalist should use the word “extremist” without qualification. “Extremist” according to whom? In reality, the UK Home Office said I was banned for saying: “[Islam] is a religion and is a belief system that mandates warfare against unbelievers for the purpose for establishing a societal model that is absolutely incompatible with Western society because media and general government unwillingness to face the sources of Islamic terrorism these things remain largely unknown.” This is a garbled version of what I actually said, which is that Islam in its traditional formulations and core texts mandates warfare against and the subjugation of unbelievers. This is not actually a controversial point to anyone who has studied Islam. Imran Ahsan Khan Nyazee, Assistant Professor on the faculty of Shari’ah and Law of the International Islamic University in Islamabad, in his 1994 book The Methodology of Ijtihad quotes the twelfth century Maliki jurist Ibn Rushd: “Muslim jurists agreed that the purpose of fighting with the People of the Book…is one of two things: it is either their conversion to Islam or the payment of jizyah.” Nyazee concludes: “This leaves no doubt that the primary goal of the Muslim community, in the eyes of its jurists, is to spread the word of Allah through jihad, and the option of poll-tax [jizya] is to be exercised only after subjugation” of non-Muslims. I supposed Nyazee and Ibn Rushd are “Islamophobic” as well. And there are multitudes of other Islamic authorities who say the same thing. I’ll give you more of their quotes on request.
Anyway, you invoke Breivik and the UK. You do not bother to mention that I used to train FBI and military groups on these matters, have addressed State Department and German Foreign Ministry officials on them, and have published bestselling books about Islam and jihad. I’ve debated, and defeated, numerous imams. You’re attempting to portray me as a marginal crank that no student group should want to speak; hardly the agenda that any responsible journalist should have.
As for Stanford, what are the students so afraid of? Why are they so desperate that dissenting voices not be allowed to be heard? Despite your defamatory claims re Breivik, I have never called for or endorsed any violence, and have spoken all over the world with no violence ensuing, except when it was done to me. The hysteria over my appearance there is indicative of the fact that the Leftist and Islamic supremacist students who oppose my coming cannot refute the substance of what I say, and do not dare have a rational discussion about these issues with me. Thus they are trying desperately to shut me down, and thanks in part to pseudo-journalists such as yourself, they may succeed. I note in conclusion that forcibly suppressing the speech of someone with whom one disagrees is a quintessentially fascist act.
UPDATE: DeRuy has updated her story with these paragraphs, without noting that she only contacted me for comment after her initial version was already published:
For his part, Spencer said that “forcibly suppressing the speech of someone with whom one disagrees is a quintessentially fascist act.”
“What are the students so afraid of? Why are they so desperate that dissenting voices not be allowed to be heard,” Spencer wrote in an email. “I have never called for or endorsed any violence and have spoken all over the world with no violence ensuing except when it was done to me.”
Max Publius says
DeRuy’s first paragraph is the most egregious example of a cheap, tacky, subliterate smear job I’ve read in years. Does she recognize what a fool she has made herself? She’s the type who wrote tracts smearing MLK for the FBI because it was what her audience wanted to hear. She doesn’t have the cognitive skills to read through propaganda to find truth. She can only propagate propaganda, like a typing drone.
Custos Custodum says
Exactly. A worthy acolyte of the Goebbels cult which is going from strength to strength in the U.S.
larry says
Too dumb to realize how dumb she is. To quote the great Dr. Thomas Sowell, who recently retired from Stanford, by the way: “It takes considerable knowledge just to realize the extent of your own ignorance.”
Dr. Joe B. Drane says
It’s too bad. I remember my own self driving off to college, full of piss and vinegar, ready to tackle the world with my inflated ego.
Fortunately I was “slam-dunked” by my first English professor, long before I had the chance to confirm publicly my vast ignorance of actual journalism,
Poor Emily appears to have bypassed the concept of examination of the facts before publishing. Hopefully Mr. Spencer has guided her in the examination of fact vs opinion.
John Forbes says
Emily DeRuy seems to be a very SLOPPY researcher & poorer journalist !
However this does seem to be a continuing trend pretty much Western World WIDE !
Mark Steyn – actually stated that he found that the PAKISTANI news papers had both better English Grammar & better articles than many of the so called top western papers !
Not really unusual if one looks at many of the TOP DOCTORS in the WEST – many of whom are Indian, Pakistani & Bangladeshi !
This fact that this woman cannot be bothered to even check the facts is not encouraging at all in relation to Journalism at the Mercury News!
mortimer says
A fairer response to the Emily DeRuy hit piece in Mercury News would be to publish a one thousand-word reply by Robert Spencer UNFILTERED, so that it isn’t merely a chance for DeRuy to take another cheap shot at him.
Mercury News can report any way they want. But if they do not let Robert Spencer speak for himself, what they are reporting is merely propaganda that protects jihad-supremacism from criticism and prevents the public from learning what jihad is.
Keys says
This slipshod journalist, too lazy to spend the time to get facts and information about what she reports, is part of the ever growing fake news community.
When one gets their fake news from other fake news sources, one becomes buried in 50 dark shades of fake news.
Robert sure gave her alot to think about. Maybe she’ll call Linda Sarsour to get her facts and information to confirm what Robert so eloquenty wrote to her.
gravenimage says
“Journalist” Emily DeRuy asks Robert Spencer for comment after her story about Stanford event is published
………………….
Well, *that’s* professional…sarc/off And this only came after prompting.
The Mercury actually used to be a pretty balanced paper–but Sand Francisco bay area standards, at least. No more.
gravenimage says
That should have been “by San Francisco bay area standards…”. And to think, I used to work as a proofreader…
Custos Custodum says
Emily DeRanged is a real professional – a professional slime artist.
Then again, DeRanged will be keenly aware that anyone at the San Jose Mercury News who doesn’t toe the Left-totalitarian line may find his life suddenly Webbing away. Emily doesn’t want to end up as another Gary.
gravenimage says
True, Custos–on the other hand, chances are that she is a “true believer” herself.
Custos Custodum says
QUOTE: chances are that she is a “true believer”
You may well be right, but she clearly does have the ability to engage in double-think to help bridge the inevitable cognitive dissonance.
Wellington says
In brief, Emily DeRuy is part of the problem (and just reflect for a moment what this young woman really knows about Islam——–frightening, no?), though I’m certain she thinks she’s on the “solution” side. By contrast, Robert Spencer’s extensive and accurate knowledge of Islam is portrayed, by way of superficial ignorance or willing deceptiveness (or both), as part of the “problem.”
As has been the case so often through the centuries, the general consensus is not only dead wrong but often times as well an enabler of evil. For instance, as exampled by Emily DeRuy. As another example, and a far more major and thus dreadful one, Theresa May when Home Secretary banning Robert Spencer from the UK. Well, at least to date, DeRuy has not been advanced to a higher position. Unfortunately, May has.
Thus is the way of things. Always has been this way and with no change in sight. Except now even worse since so much of the West, a much greater portion than when Hitler became the last European leader to direct world affairs from a European position, has lost its collective balls. (N.B., I don’t consider Russia a part of Europe. It’s magnificent in certain ways but terrible in other ways. Always has been this way. No change in sight. But I digress.)
gravenimage says
Emily DeRuy rarely writes about Islam, Wellington, but she wrote one bizarre piece claiming that “the internet is turning up its nose at Islamic State propaganda”. If only *that* were true:
https://splinternews.com/the-internet-is-turning-up-its-nose-at-islamic-state-pr-1793842384
mortimer says
UNFORTUATELY, Mercury News is typical of news media in their coverage of Islam.
Most news media just send a junior reporter to cover this extraordinarily COMPLEX TOPIC: ISLAM. News editors have no idea how complex Islam is. They must surely think: “Ah-Islam-religion-simple-blah-blah-unscientific-nonsense-foolishness-anyone-can-report-this-not-like-politics-which-is-complicated.
However, Islam is actually MAINLY about POLITICS and that is why a SENIOR WRITER WHO HAS ACTUALLY STUDIED ISLAM is the only choice for this vital and important topic.
It simply WILL NOT DO anymore to send out unread and unstudied reporters to write about Islam. The public needs better reporting on Islam than this.
If reporters don’t understand the JIHAD DOCTRINE and the TAQIYYA DOCTRINE, they have no right to report on Islam.
Wellington says
Thanks for that link, gravenimage. Hmmm. BTW, did you notice the article right below the one you provided me described Gorka as “Nazi-linked,” which of course is a complete lie.
Wellington says
Just spoke to an old, conservative friend today, mortimer. This person, basically sound in their overall instincts, still has never read the Koran, didn’t know what the hadiths and sira are, had no knowledge of the record of Islam in the African slave trade going back to the seventh century; in effect knew virtually nothing about Islam, though this person told me they “sensed” it was screwed up.
And just last year I spoke to another ordinarily sensible friend, one who teaches history at the college level no less and is a devout Christian, and yet this friend has yet to read the Koran. I very gently chastised him for not doing so. I left it at that. Hope it made an impression. Yet another friend of mine only two month ago, when I sent him negative information about Islam, asked me not to ever do so again because, get this, he knows some Muslims who are very nice people.
Here is my overall impression from years and years of dealing with family, friends, colleagues, acquaintances, neighbors, strangers, et al.——————–that the VAST majority of them, many of them very well educated, just won’t take the time to educate themselves about Islam.
And here’s the “kicker” I often use to determine just how much an infidel like myself knows about Islam, to wit, I ask the person to take a rough guess how many DOCUMENTED Islamic terrorist attacks worldwide have occurred just since 9/11. Honest to God, not ONE person I have asked this, and I have asked many, came anywhere near the truth. In fact, quite the opposite. I usually get a response like, “Oh, I don’t know, maybe a hundred.” Sometimes, “five hundred.” When I tell them it’s well over 30,000 and then tell them where to go (thereligionofpeace.com) for information on each and every one of these attacks, I usually get a look towards me as though I had just said, “Men from Mars have landed.” Yes, the ignorance is extensive but so is the unwillingness to accept that a major religion can be rotten to the core. Muslims profit by this dearth of knowledge as I know you know. Boy, do they ever. And boy, do we still have a lot of work to do. Big time.
mortimer says
Thank you for a courteous note, Wellington. A lifelong friend used the ‘I know this nice Muslim’ generalization on me. I told him that the Sira shows Mohammed to be a warlord. He was shocked. I said, ‘How can you know about something without reading the source texts?’ He shrugged. I offered him my copy of ‘The Sira’. He refused.
Mccode says
Wellington, I especially find the comments that you and mortimer post here on JW are well written. Thanks.
Your insight on the profound lack of knowledge concerning the Cult of Mohammed that most of the public reveals is, unfortunately, quite accurate. But, the unvarnished truth will out in the end, made more evident each time another horrific act is added to the list of atrocities committed in the cause of the RoP.
Alain says
Like Ben Shapiro has said many times,”you must be highly educated to be this stupid!”
gravenimage says
Fine posts, Wellington.
I think it is even worse than people not taking the time to learn about Islam, though–I think many of these otherwise decent people just *don’t want to know* that Islam is a threat. I actually had one woman–a well educated and normally dignified person–literally *put her hands over her ears* when I gave a very mild criticism of Islam regarding violence being a core part of its tenets.
If more people let themselves know about the threat of Islam, it would discomfit them–it might also mean that the more principled among them would have to speak out–and expose themselves to the same hysterical accusations of “Islamopobia” that we do, and few of them want that. Existing in a state of willful ignorance is much more soothing…
And, Wellington, I agree with mccode’s estimation of you and Mortimer.
gravenimage says
Alain, I know people with poor educations who are equally clueless about the threat of Islam. I have a family member who did not complete high school who vehemently denied that there had been a single Jihad terror attack since 9/11 in the US, because–as he said–Americans just wouldn’t allow it.
jewdog says
This pseudo-journalistic hit piece betrays the parlous state of today’s academia. Nevertheless, I see a silver lining. I’m hoping that practical people will start realizing that much of the traditional four-year program is overkill, too expensive and laden with tendentious propaganda, and that targeted vocational and professional programs that have greater economic return will gain traction. That will involve a change in cultural attitudes towards education, and the offensive buffoons in today’s colleges are helping.
gravenimage says
I loved university and despite having to work my way through did not consider it in any way a waste.
With all respect, I don’t think the problem is the model of the four-year university, but instead the exercise in indoctrination it has all too often become.
Wellington says
I enjoyed my college days too, gravenimage, but that was back in the days when education, not indoctrination, was the order of the day. I loved my history (and other) classes because they were taught by men and women with no agenda but rather the conveying of the way things were as objectively as possible.
Those days are sadly long over at the vast majority of colleges and universities in America, at least in the area of the liberal arts and I fear that even science is now in its early days of being politicized (as for the colleges of education, they are utterly useless, teaching as they do stupid methodology nonsense with little emphasis on mastering the subject matter; they simply need to be abolished). Then there is the additional problems of far too many administrators and outlandish amounts for tuition (my first year tuition at Penn State was a mere $465.00)
Can we possibly go back? I am skeptical. Damn saddened too. What a waste. And for what? The rot now taught? Perhaps the smartest thing now is to learn a trade like that of an electrician or auto mechanic. Not sure. Perhaps a business or engineering major still makes sense but that’s about it.
gravenimage says
My first quarter’s tuition was about $650, Wellington.
At Berkeley when I was there indoctrination was just starting to seep into the actual curriculum, and was largely limited to the “studies” classes (African-American Studies, Women’s Studies, etc).
The History and History of Art classes were rigorous and had fine scholarship. I wonder how bad it has gotten at our alma maters now?
Linde Barrera says
A campus reporter or writer who knows the truth about Islam should invite Emily DeRuy to research FGM and research why the feminist groups are not speaking out about it. Other topics which Emily DeRuy should want to know about are that Muslim men can have more than 1 wife in Islam but Muslim woman can only have 1 husband (and all the wives must tolerate each other.) Additionally, Emily DeRuy should investigate aspects of Islamic law where women are not protected as in cases of rape and adultery. I think Emily DeRuy has a lot of catching up to do in her chosen field, and I think she will learn the truth from Robert Spencer at Stanford if she chooses to hear him speak. (I also hope Robert Spencer will mention the Muslim doctor in Michigan who was arrested for performing FGM on young girls and is claiming “freedom of religion” as her defense. ?
Frank Scarn says
Thought bubble over Emily (in the photo above) as she scans old newspapers, “Gee, in these olden days of reporting they really did follow the rules of reporting”
Flavius Claudius Iulianus says
I prefer the term ‘totalitarian’ to ‘fascist.’ It makes clear that those who wish to rule (dictate to) others can come from the entire political spectrum.
Custos Custodum says
Seconded.
gravenimage says
Good point.
eduardo odraude says
Here’s David Wood’s brilliant (and funny) refutation of the slander that Spencer is responsible for Brevik. The core of the refutation comes in the last five or ten minutes of the video, but the whole is worth watching:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3uTPcxLsFo
WorkingClassPost says
It’s a recurring truth, that whenever someone like Breivik does death and destruction, it’s always about his motivating ideology, but when the person has an islamist or socialist motivation, then the ideology is never addressed.
Ted Tyler says
Another great video by David Wood. Breivik may have been very knowledgeable on Islam; however, it is unfortunate that he knew nothing of psychology. If he did, he would have realized that his violent pathway would have undermined his objective.
gravenimage says
Thank you for the link, Eduardo–this is a David Wood video I had actually managed to miss.
SAM says
All JW readers know without these clueless liberals Islam could not survive in America. But our suicidal culture became a fertile ground for evil Islam and leftists. What a shame that a hero like Robert has to go thru this b’s to enlighten our youth so they do not become slaves of Islam.
Such an Irony that probably has never been experienced at this level of stupidity.
We can not thank you enough Robert.
Lydia says
I ditto that comment! Well said!
Truly, once the gospel departs, darkness in many forms enters. We see it all around the world.
Bodega says
I am so sorry this has occurred. Obviously the young woman is not only manifestly very angry but is a liar. I hope the Mercury paper fires here and no publication allows her to publish anymore. She clearly needs a course in ethical journalism.
I agree the paper itself should file a retraction, a front page retraction.
However, this woman may well be a Dhimmis. We should consider that. It is California, after all, soon to be the site of all major jihadists’ efforts.
MFritz says
This “lady” is a nobody with a shitty job at a shitty newspaper. Enjoy your 15 minutes of SJW-fame while they last, Emily!
Custos Custodum says
The “newspaper” itself – like many in its cohort – is a “lady” who has long been reduced to turning tricks for any john offers money for honey.
MFritz says
Yeah, Mercury and the “Bay Area News Group”… if you watch Colin Patrick Flaherty’s YouTube-channel regularly you’ll know them already. They’re “experts” in not making the black kids angry. Or not telling the truth for that matter.
gravenimage says
Actually, the Mercury is generally one of the better newspapers here. More sad proof that this is a relative concept these days.
MFritz says
The problem is the “Biased Area News Group” itself (or more likely Digital First Media “above”).
It is owned and controlled by “interests” that are not into telling the truth in regards to social issues. Be it black mob violence (check out Colin Patrick Flaherty’s videos), the alt left and the alt right or any criticism against islam.
gravenimage says
I agree–I’m just saying they are, sadly, not the worst.
Norger says
“The hysteria over my appearance there is indicative of the fact that the Leftist and Islamic supremacist students who oppose my coming cannot refute the substance of what I say, and do not dare have a rational discussion about these issues with me. ”
Thank you Mr. Spencer. That is precisely the situation. They do not dare to engage with you and are encouraging others not to listen, not to engage, because they know you are quite on this subject and that everything you say about Islam’s core teachings is demonstrably true , by reference to authoritative Islamic sources. Truth doesn’t matter;” Islamophobia” really is a thought crime in the eyes of people like this reporter.
Norger says
I meant “quite learned” in the above.
BARBARA BROOKS says
You need to raise $ to put an ad in the Stanford paper with bullets of the talking points refuting the article. Maybe it could be called — shoot the messenger who brings bad news?
gravenimage says
Barbara, I very much doubt the Stanford Daily would take such an advertisement these days.
Jayell says
DeRuy’s future career path is clear. She’s obviously destined for fame and fortune with either the Daily Mail or the Booker prize since both demand a talent for writing fiction.
Bill says
She has an even more lucrative future career as a spokesliar for the Democrat Party.
Matt Hamilton says
Well Robert, as always, at least you retain your integrity. God bless you. The Hamiltons
gravenimage says
+1
Matthieu Baudin says
“…The hysteria over my appearance there is indicative of the fact that the Leftist and Islamic supremacist students who oppose my coming cannot refute the substance of what I say, and do not dare have a rational discussion about these issues with me. Thus they are trying desperately to shut me down, and thanks in part to pseudo-journalists such as yourself, they may succeed. I note in conclusion that forcibly suppressing the speech of someone with whom one disagrees is a quintessentially fascist act…”
Yes, yes, it’s all there in a nutshell. Very good!
Bill says
She is a brazen liar and a manipulator. That is exactly what the mainstream media wants in their hired propagandists. She will not be held to account for her distortions and omissions but will probably garner and award from her fascist propagandist peers.
WorkingClassPost says
Does she even read what she writes?
“ The free speech debates that have rocked UC Berkeley in recent months…”
So it’s true, they can’t handle free speech.
Or is she saying that free speech rocks?
Wonder if she’ll be covering the event? I hope she got an invite.
Ted Tyler says
As I see it, Emily DeRuy is mainly reporting the facts. She is not a liar and she is not intentionally being a manipulator. She is writing – as all of us do – only with the facts that she has available to her. She is most likely not a scholar of Islam – and in view of that – I consider her report to be reasonable. I suspect that if she were more knowledgeable about Islam, she could be a valuable asset.
Jim says
Ted, pah-leeze. She can get her facts from the internet quite easily. Yes, facts from the internet; it is possible. She doesn’t have to use inter-library loans to get a book copy of the Koran and hadiths, she can get it off the internet, and from Islamic sources if she prefers. She can find out about Robert Spencer and Geller by visiting their websites and watching their videos and reading their articles. This “journalist” had easy access to the facts. Was she just too lazy to read them, too afraid to make a phone call, too afraid that they might change her viewpoint? She should take Aristotle to heart when he said, I paraphrase, it is the mark of an educated mind to entertain an idea without necessarily accepting it. These people won’t “entertain” the idea, they prefer blocking it out. Thus, the left is not very educated, despite being in a college environment. When I was a history major decades ago one thing I learned was to go to primary sources, not second hand, edited, abridged versions, but the true source. Don’t trust an editor; they might cut out very pertinent things due to their own biases. But she chose not to be informed. Get educated.
Get out the Koran and hadiths, read and comprehend them, before one speaks on the subject. It’s not difficult, I did it in 1970 when I was in college, and no one told me to read them, I just figured it was the educated thing to do. When the second plane hit the WTC, I knew for certain who would do such a crazy act. I was the only one who guessed correctly. Everyone’s ignorance on Islam annoyed me greatly. It wasn’t until about 2009 that I came across a small handful of people (Wood, Spencer, Geller, and a couple of others) who understood Islam as I had read it.
Ted Tyler says
Jim, Just a note. In 2001 I knew enough about history to know that the WTC attack was motivated by Islam. Initially, that was OK with me, since people of deep religious faith have been killing each other for over 3000 years. But then I kept hearing this “Islam is a religion of peace” nonsense. This did not set well with me. I knew that the propagation of Islam was based on military conquest. Then, many years later, I found videos by Bill Warner. I would rank Bill Warner with Wood and Spencer.
gravenimage says
Ted, there is no excuse for an ignorant journalist to use her pulpit to slander a good man and important thinker like Robert Spencer. It is not as though she is just lazily throwing out some rote “Islam is a religion of peace” soundbite.
Charles says
What I find most perplexing is that Journalists seem unable or unwilling to actually read the literature of early Islam and formulate a picture and timeline of events in the careers of Muhammad. I use the term “careers” is the plural sense because Muhammad’s life can be roughly divided into three parts. There is the biography before the Hira cave revelations, his first following and ministry in the town of Mecca (or Becca), then his transformation into a warlord in exile in Medina where he successfully raised an armed force of bandit believers who used all tactics of warfare including terror.
Part of the oath of Islam is to declare the immutable nature of the Qu’ran and the exemplary status of Muhammad its prophet. If you follow the example of the prophet and the imperatives as written in the Qu’ran, then by definition you will be a terrorist. What is written is what must be examined, feelings set aside. Are the immutable characteristics in the Qu’ran dangerous should be the question she is asked.
Why at this University level are the tenets of Islam, and its historic application not read? Not examined? Is it because the administration is being bribed with petro-dollar rich sheikhs? I have my suspicions.
Ted Tyler says
Charles, I suspect that in some cases, petro dollars do play a role – but for the most part – I believe that the main reason for not demonizing Islam is simply that the idea that “Islam is a Religion of Peace” has firmly taken hold. If you challenge that idea, then you must be an Islamophobe, a Racist and a bad person.
Jim says
Charles: I don’t think oil money has anything to do with it. They tend to be leftists. Deep down they know that to realize that Islam in not like every other religion would undermine their multiculturalist dogma. It would shake their foundation to the core, so intertwined it is. They might start to reflect on other leftist dogmas. It might shake their faith in liberalism being “The Truth”, then where would they be? Outcasts. Nope, safer to stick to dogma than actually learn truth.
gravenimage says
True, Jim. Most Leftists *don’t want to know* that Islam is a threat. It would destroy their ‘narrative’ that all immigrants are wonderful avatars of colorful multicultural enrichment, sorely needed by bigoted, boring, and narrow-minded Westerners.
Ashley says
She is writing – as all of us do – only with the facts that she has available to her.
_________________
This is simply not true, Ted. Emily should have sought FACTS and perspective from Robert Spencer BEFORE tendering her story to The Mercury. Had she done so there would be no need for an update.
Ted Tyler says
Ashley, Well – sort of true. When you are writing a story, you collect the facts, check out the ones you think are suspicious, and then do the write up. If something seams reasonable, and it does not conflict with your view of the Universe, then you go with it. You have a limited amount of time to do this – so you can’t get everything right 100% of the time.
Norger says
Sort of true. She “confirmed” that there were references to Spencer in Brevik’s manifesto and that Spencer was not allowed into the U.K. and therefore strongly implied that it is self-evidently true that Spencer is some sort of deranged bigot who encourages violence against Muslims. It’s just incredibly frustrating that this type of lazy smear “journalism” supersedes the larger issue: if what Spencer says about Islam is demonstrably true (and it is) why should he be silenced, particularly at a university of all places?
Ted Tyler says
Norger, “there were references to Spencer in Brevik’s manifesto and that Spencer was not allowed into the U.K.” These statements are true. It is quite a jump to go from those statements to “and therefore strongly implied that it is self-evidently true that Spencer is some sort of deranged bigot who encourages violence against Muslims”. I also did not see anywhere in her article where she advocated silencing Robert at a University.
However, be aware that It would be difficult for her to present a “balanced view” of the situation. If the bulk of your knowledge is on one side of a debate, you can’t give a fair assessment of the other side.
Norger says
@Ted Tyler
It’s not a jump at all to say that she implied Mr. Spencer is a deranged bigot; that’s the point of the article we are both posting to. She pointed out that Spencer was mentioned in Brevik’s manifesto (true but misleading) and that he wasn’t allowed to enter the UK (without explaining why), then “jumps” to the following: “the club which called Spencer’s professional credentials ‘stellar’ did not immediately respond to a request for comment.” She omitted any mention of Spencer’s extensive qualifications (author of numerous best selling books in this field, former trainer of US military, long history as a lecturer and debater. She could have found any of this in a 10 second google search. Instead, she only saw fit to inform her readers that Spencer was the purported inspiration for a mass murderer, that he was banned from the U.K., and that the group that hired him had no comment on his alleged “stellar” qualifications. The implication that Spencer is a deranged bigot was 100% crystal clear.
And I didn’t say she was actually calling for Spencer to be silenced, but that clearly has a measure of sympathy for those who would silence him. As one of the posters above pointed out, she doubtless views herself as part of the solution,where her studied ignorance, and the ignorance of those like her, is a major part of the problem. The issues with Islam must be confronted in the light of day, not obscured with deceptive nonsense.
Jim says
Ted, hogwash.
Ted Tyler says
Thanks, Jim. It is always good to get specific, helpful information – so that you can learn from your mistakes, correct your errors in thinking, and be made aware of the facts that you simply have wrong. I appreciate the time and the effort that you have put into your response and I hope to be learning many things from you in the future.
Ted Tyler says
I think that Robert Spencer’s response to Emily DeRuy is counter productive. By referring to her as “thanks in part to pseudo-journalists such as yourself….”. Robert unnecessarily insults the woman – (who might actually think of herself as a pseudo journalist and is trying very hard to be a real journalist). Why not make the assumption that she is trying to get the facts straight and then educate her as to what the facts are! Educate her – don’t cane her. We are not dealing with Linda Sarsour here.
gravenimage says
Actually, Ted, I think that Robert Spencer is always amazingly polite consider the constant stream of ugly calumny against him.
Ted Tyler says
Graven, I agree. For the most part, his responses are remarkably restrained.
gravenimage says
🙂
Politicianphobia says
Wellington, How many politicians and news people do you think may have read the Qu’ran The NDP member of parliament in my area, Algoma, Manitoulin, Kapuskasing, Carol Hughes, has informed me by electronic email that many are getting caught up in internet hysteria about Islam, she voted for M-103. No dialogue at all, I am an idiot period
gravenimage says
Grimly true. These fools will shut down any criticism of Islam, without even learning whether any of that criticism is deserved.
DRHazard says
Since the meaning of what being a “journalist” means has evolved to include propagandists and the routine use of quote mining and guilt by association as valid research tools I am now a journalist and have written this article about Emily DeRuy.
“Hack Writer Continues to Provoke Violence Against Non-Muslims
Emily DeRuy who actively supports the murder of gay men, the beating and rape of women and the criminalizing of free speech has written another worthless article regarding an upcoming speaker at the Stanford campus, someone who has endured numerous threats against his life by individuals inspired by her words. It has been reported that she attended an event that was also attended by an accused cop-killer and has refused to public distance herself from him. What other dark, deadly secrets is she hiding? Perhaps some answers lie in her article entitled “Islam and Women; A Marriage Made in Heaven” where she refers to Muhammad as a man of peace while making no reference to his job as a highway robber, his many sex slaves, the hundreds of individuals he personally decapitated and his rape and forced marriage to a 6 year old girl. In the article she is quoted as saying “I have”,,, “the desire”…”to be his”…”sex”…”slave”. While attempting to explain her support for an ideology that would see her silenced, raped and stripped of her human dignity she says, “other people are bad too”.
gravenimage says
I presume this is intended ironically?
More Ham Ed says
“Emily DeRuy, Mercury News, November 8, 2017: Spencer, whose writing was cited by Anders Behring Breivik, the Norwegian man who killed more than 70 people in 2011”
The ‘ol guilt-by-association. According to DeRuy’s “logic” she is associated with THE LEFT, who is associated with James Hodgkinson a left-wing activist who shot congressional members and others at a baseball practice, which means she’s also a terrorist.