“The word ‘Islamophobe’ is used to label two quite distinct phenomena: vigilante attacks against innocent Muslims which are never justified, and honest analysis of the motivating ideology behind jihad terror, plus opposition to that terror and Sharia oppression. If the latter is to be labeled Islamophobia, as it is in an attempt to discredit it by lumping it in with vigilantism, then everyone who is concerned with human rights and free society should be an Islamophobe.”
The ongoing outrage in Britain over President Trump retweeting videos of Muslims being violent proves my point. He is being excoriated as an “Islamophobe,” with all attention on the heinous crime of his retweets. No one among the British political or media elites is stopping to ask whether Britain may really have a problem with jihad terror.
Order your copy of Confessions of an Islamophobe here.
“Confessions of an Islamophobe,” by Rodney Pelletier, Church Militant, November 29, 2017:
DETROIT (ChurchMilitant.com) – “I am an Islamophobe. It’s true. I’ve denied it for years. But now I admit it,” writes Robert Spencer in his new book Confessions of an Islamophobe.
He tells Church Militant, “The word ‘Islamophobe’ is used to label two quite distinct phenomena: vigilante attacks against innocent Muslims which are never justified, and honest analysis of the motivating ideology behind jihad terror, plus opposition to that terror and Sharia oppression.”
He finishes, “If the latter is to be labeled Islamophobia, as it is in an attempt to discredit it by lumping it in with vigilantism, then everyone who is concerned with human rights and free society should be an Islamophobe.”
As the director of Jihad Watch, Spencer has made a name for himself with his extensive knowledge of Islam, and its effects on Western culture. Not only is he frequently consulted by Fox News and a sought-after speaker but he also served as a consultant to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the U.S. military and the U.S. intelligence communities.
Confessions is Spencer’s 17th book and begins with a personal reflection on how his own family escaped the Ottoman Turk empire in the early 20th century and advocated for the freedom offered by America.
He writes, “For years, I have denied the label ‘Islamophobe’ because it is most commonly used to refer to people who have an irrational bigotry or hatred toward Muslims,” adding, “I don’t. Now, I will own the label.”
“I am what I would call the ‘good’ kind of Islamophobe, someone who is honest enough to call a problem a problem, even when the whole world wishes to ignore and deny its existence,” Spencer clarifies.
He goes on to call attacks on peaceful Muslims “reprehensible,” asserting, “If that’s Islamophobia, then I want nothing to do with it. I have never gotten liquored up and screamed obscenities at random passersby wearing Muslim garb.” He continues, “[N]or do I condone anyone who has done such a thing. I don’t believe in harassment or vigilantism or vandalism or any attacks on mosques or the people in them.”
The Southern Poverty Law Center — known for attacking conservative organizations as “hateful” — has labeled Spencer an “anti-Muslim propagandist,” complaining that he considers Islam to be “inherently violent,” quoting him as saying, “Of course, as I have pointed out many times, traditional Islam itself is not moderate or peaceful. It is the only major world religion with a developed doctrine and tradition of warfare against unbelievers.”
Spencer writes, however, “The crux of the distinction between bad and good Islamophobia is not whether one is being blinded by an irrational fear of Islam but whether such fear is ever rational and reasonable.”
He tells Church Militant the Islamic threat to the West is “As serious as life itself,” adding that “the Islamic jihad imperative is to destroy non-Sharia governments and replace them with Sharia governments,” which he says would institutionalize oppression against women and non-Muslims.
He asserts that Western nations like Great Britain are going to great lengths to accommodate Muslim immigrants while silencing any criticism against them — especially valid criticism because “they have wholeheartedly bought into the idea that Muslims are victims of wholesale persecution and harassment in the West” and that terroristic acts are brought about because of the victim mentality, poverty and lack of opportunity. He adds, “So, they think that by appeasing and accommodating Muslims in every possible way, they will end jihad terror.”
He further maintains the West’s principles of freedom of speech, conscience and the legal equality of all are incompatible with Islam, especially the rights of the Catholic Church and individual Catholics, which he notes would be a “master-slave” relationship as it is for so many Christians in the Middle East…
Steven RSA says
I think in order to describe myself from now on, I will use the term Islamocognisant. I do not fear islam, I abhorr it.
underbed cat says
I prefer that label islamocognisant. But with an Isis flag on the cover of the book, and their the mission to strike terror into the hearts of the infidel and non believers it may make a connection for the uninformed about the connection to terror. Because we all know the original instruction manual was for so long hidden and never described as a warfare doctrine, the exception of course was it’s long brutal history but it now has been relabeled by massive marketing organizations to enter into modern society primed by violent movies for entertainment, leftist ideologies, failed politicians, distracted citizens, drug epidemics. Resulting in the capture of the youth by the use of education at college levels to indoctrinate the sharia message by the term hate speech, islamophobia financed by innocent maligned carbon… that strengthened the dancing war swords and like mind “special groups” warfare.
mummymovie says
It’s not just the “labeling” of those two distinct things, but the conflation of them that makes the term islamophobia so effective, aside from its being repeated over and over ad nauseum and weaponized by groups like the SPLC.
As Mike Flynn said, it is perfectly rational to be afraid of islam.
Funny you are experimenting with new terminology- I was going to throw out a couple just now, myself:
islamoconcerned?
islamoanxious?
islamodreadful?
islamodepressed?
Any takers?
Emmie says
I call myself an Islamorealist.
John Forbes says
ISLAM MUST NEVER EVER BE FREE FROM CRITICISM OR INSPECTION OR BE PROTECTED BY BLASPHEMY LAWS!
THIS IS THE TWENTY FIRST CENTURY & NOT THE SEVENTH CENTURY!
ISLAM MUST BE ACCORDED THE SAME TREATMENT AS CHRISTIANITY OR ANY OTHER FAITH & MUST ALSO BE MOCKED IF NEEDED.
NEVER STAND FOR BLASPHEMY LAWS PROTECTING ISLAM & ISLAM ALONE!
epistemology says
Islam is the only religion that is also a supremacist ideology. Islam wants to rule the world, is anti-Semitic and homophobe to the core and denies women the same rights as men. It’s the same ideology as Nazism, only with a religious twist as Walid Shoebat puts it. So Robert and all his friends can proudly call themselves Islamophobes.
blitz2b says
I don’t know…. It’s the term “phobia” that is the factor that the leftist islamo-pandering idiots make a negative connotation of.
We all know ” phobia” is an IRRATIONAL FEAR of something.
So, maybe i didn’t get the memo, how and when did that change? why are we willingly giving in to the narratives of Muslims defending their religion and leftists who are facilitating them, that a genuine fear, that the evil ideology of Islam really is, is an irrational one? …. No phobias…. Only real fear!
blitz2b says
I wish to coin a new term to indicate that Islam and it’s ideology is a real danger to all humans who will never surrender.
ISLAMOFEAR : A genuine fear of the ideology of Islam that promises death and destruction through its radical adherents on those who will not willingly submit to its barbaric laws.
Abu Nudnik says
A phobia used to mean a fear: of heights, closed spaces, open spaces, crowds, clowns, spiders, the number 13. Suddenly, in particular cases, a fear, a feeling, became the subject of moral scrutiny. Unravel that and you will see a dark story of mind control.
Charles says
Islam OR the creed of Mohammed, has been the bane of all Humankind since it first spewed forth from the anus of SATAN in the 7th Century!
It is indeed, the pimple on the arse of Earth! And now its time to “Pop” this foul, pus filled pimple, then douse the entire area with a powerful disinfectant!
The very worst thing would be for use to allow it to grow back!
Peter says
Islamoprobes or Islamorealists: no fear, or, at least very rational fears.
Benedict says
Robert Spencer, with all respect:
The label “Islamophobe” is somehow self-defeating if you permit others to define you by it. Islam should not be feared, Islam should be hated for the evil that it is and for the bondage it keeps its adherents in.
A fight motivated by fear is weak, but a fight motivated by faith is courageous, faith being the antidote to fear. –
I am sure you are familiar with Hebrews 11 — ?
Steven RSA says
Exactly. I am an islamoantagonist.
Benedict says
#MeToo✋I am an Islammingist.
Vann Boseman says
I call myself a drug legalizer. That is not really what I am, but people are going to understand where I am coming from when I say that. More precisely, I oppose laws that make drugs criminal. But calling myself a decriminalizer does not give the listener or reader the best information about where I am coming from on the issue of drugs.
Likewise, I acknowledge Robert Spencer’s case for using Islamophobe. I am far less troubled that people are going to think that I am advocating irrational fear than by them not understanding that I strongly oppose an alien, inferior ideology invade my country.
Where I take exception to Robert Spencer’s choice of words is his referring to human rights. I cannot be an Islamophobe based on human rights because I do not have human rights. I only have natural rights. The term human rights came about after World War II when the UN was being formed. It brought forward natural rIghts, but began to randomly insert various values describing them as rights for no particular reason. Human rights are the Jerry Springer show of rights
All sorts of rights are referred to in the present, but this is to me a moral defeat of conservatives historically that goes back to the defeat of Jeffersonian America and the rise of Lincolnian America. Where these rights are established with traditional grounding in natural rights, I have no problem with them. But the “discovery” of these new rights every time been used to slip progressive or liberal values in through the back door.
I think a mental paraphrasing of Samuel Huntington a Samuel Huntington quote could be useful if you consider words as institutions.
“No ideational theory can be used to defend existing institutions satisfactorily, even when those institutions in general reflect the values of that ideology. The perfect nature of the ideology’s ideal and the imperfect nature and inevitable mutation of the institutions create a gap between the two. The ideal becomes a standard by which to criticize the institutions, much to the embarrassment of those who believe in the ideal and yet still wish to defend the institutions. … Hence any theory of natural law as a set of transcendent and universal moral principles is inherently non-conservative … opposition to natural law [is] … a distinguishing characteristic of conservatism.”
Andrew says
Ah, relativism and Islam, two sides of the same coin. Strange bedfellows, but both have problems with truth and the source of all truth, Jesus. Even though muslims claim to revere Jesus as a prophet, they do however completely disregard who he really is and his revelation. Liberal lefties on the other hand do not know their right hand from their left and mind bogglinly ignore the reality of what islam is doing and keep persisting in the worn out narrative, that islam is a religion of peace. The blind leading the blind.
islam isn’t really a religion. Religion has to do with God, someone they do not believe in.
mortimer says
If “Islamophobe” is the label of a free-speech advocate who deplores the suppression by Sharia law of human rights and civil liberties… then every rational person should be called an “Islamophobe”.
It is rational, reasonable and logical to deplore, denounce and oppose the ISLAMIC TOTALITARIAN IDEOLOGY.
mortimer says
Most in the UK are in denial about the TOTALITARIAN IDEOLOGY of Islam.
Denying that Muslims adhere to this RELIGIOUS FASCIST IDEOLOGY is not charity, but stupidity.
EDDIE says
BRAVO, MORTIMER,BRAVO
Infidel says
Other than the twin interrelated forces of Global Warming and Climate Change, Islamic terror is the third force that has the potential to completely wipe out humanity as we see it today..
Phil Copson says
“Other than the twin interrelated forces of Global Warming and Climate Change, Islamic terror is the third force that has the potential to completely wipe out humanity as we see it today..”
Correction: the world hasn’t warmed-up in over 20 years, the ice-caps aren’t melting, the sea-levels aren’t rising, the Arctic ice is thicker than ever, and the polar bears are doing just fine.
Focus on Islam – it doesn’t just have the potential – more to the point, many of the most wealthy, influential, and dangerous of it’s adherents have the INTENTION of making humanity conform to it’s pattern-card, whilst our own leaders are paralysed with fear, cowardice, and ineptitude.
rob says
why do you say islam will dominate the world. why do you threaten us?
Grace says
Invade, outbreed, outvote, declare Sharia. declare victory. A war won without a shot fired.
gravenimage says
Robert Spencer: “Everyone who is concerned with human rights and free society should be an Islamophobe”
………………..
Hear, hear!
johan elzinga says
You are talking to the converted! Now let’s all expose the false prophets in the Western world that call themselves “democrats”!
Holy Maduha-Ncube says
I am a honored to be called an ISLAMOPHOBE.. I abhor islam..It is an evil SATANIC CULT straight from the pits of hell..where mahamad the pedophile and his devil god allah will fry
FYI says
islamophrenia.
The cognitive dissonance associated with those who believe in the contrived nonsense of “islamophobia”
{afflicts liberal lefties,snowflakes with sensitivity issues,dhimmiwit popes,rabbis,priests and politicians,media pundits}.
ISLAMOPHRENIA.
FYI says
“islam will rule the world”
It is very,very difficult for muslims to see or understand this but you see he actual TRUE biblical God..
ALREADY OWNS THE WORLD.
allah,{he islamic misrepresentation of the original True revelation of God)and his followers want
a muslim-only world:to do this they have to get rid of the God of love and replace Him with their shadow god of hate.
Oh ..and go after the Jews and Israel.
I don’t care if you are Jewish or Christian but you know that the True God(of Moses,of Jesus Christ)subscribes to the Two Chief Commandments:allah and his moslems don’t.
You know in terms of Biblical prophecy that an islamic caliphate cannot happen.
Why would the true Biblical God need to use violence and war and something as silly and pathetic as a moslem-only planet when HE ALREADY OWNS IT..?
God{the Biblical truth} versus allah{the koranic misrepresentation and distortion of God}
In order to have free will you must be given a choice:Good or Evil,God or allah.
That is why we have allah in opposition to God.You must choose!
Don’t forget if you are Jewish that in islam,the angel jibreel is defined as being “the enemy of the JEWS”
(there’s a very big clue there……)
LeftisruiningCanada says
“Don’t forget if you are Jewish that in islam,the angel jibreel is defined as being “the enemy of the JEWS”
(there’s a very big clue there……)”
He’s the opposer alright, and he’s turned his follower into little ‘accusers’ just like himself.