Lies Against Geller

Pages: 1 2

Justin Elliott of Salon is hopping mad about the New York Times’ slyly contemptuous piece against Pamela Geller: he doesn’t think it contained enough venom, and is eager to supply it himself. And after the time-hallowed fashion of Leftist “media critics,” the “truth” he offers is just more lies. “New York Times runs softball profile of Pamela Geller,” by Justin Elliott for Salon, October 11:

The New York Times on Sunday published a big profile of Pamela Geller, the blogger and anti-Islam activist whose work we have documented, particularly her role creating the “ground zero mosque” controversy out of thin air.

Elliott here is doing what many in the mainstream media have tried to do: blame the entire controversy over the Islamic supremacist mega-mosque at Ground Zero on Pamela Geller, then work to marginalize and discredit Pamela Geller, and viola! No more opposition to the Islamic supremacist mega-mosque at Ground Zero. This tactic manifests their arrogance and disdain for the American people, 70% of whom oppose the mosque; Elliott and his ilk want you to believe that this opposition doesn’t arise from genuine indignation at the calculated insult and declaration of Islamic supremacism that the mosque represents, but that it has been ginned up by manipulative “right wingers.”

That in turn stems from their narcissistic inability to conceive of the possibility that an intelligent person could in good faith come to a conclusion different from theirs — so they must ascribe any opposition to their point of view to a dishonest desire for gain or the effects of demagoguery. In this they resemble their Islamic supremacist allies, who likewise can’t imagine the possibility that someone might oppose the jihad and Islamic supremacism out of the conviction that Sharia is harmful to human beings and societies, and not out of profiteering or a desire for power. In that, of course, the Islamic supremacists are simply following the lead of the Qur’an and Hadith, both of which consistently characterize unbelievers as knowing that Muhammad is Allah’s prophet but rejecting him out of greed or a desire for power.

The Times story exhibits some of the worst tendencies of objectivity journalism. The reporters, Anne Barnard and Alan Feuer, do a middling job laying out some of the outrageous, and racist, things that Geller has written (though they miss a lot too — more on this below)….

The charge of “racism” is extremely tired, but the Left is so intellectually bankrupt that Leftist writers can’t think of anything else to say. Anyone who bothers to consider the issues here will realize after about five seconds that resistance to Sharia’s denial of the freedom of speech and freedom of conscience, and institutionalized oppression of women and non-Muslims, is not remotely racist (Islamic supremacists come in all races) and has nothing to do with race at all. But Justin Elliott hasn’t thought about these issues for five seconds — he is just following along with the other lemmings.

All of that is true — Geller is neither a journalist nor a scholar nor a Washington insider. But none of that is as relevant as the fact that goes unmentioned by the Times: she is a conspiracy theorist, one with a long record of making demonstrably false statements. The best example, which is conspicuously missing from the Times piece, is the time Geller wrote a lengthy post laying out her theory that Barack Obama’s real father is Malcolm X.

Note that for this Elliott links to Gawker, not to Atlas Shrugs. If this eminent media critic had bothered to do some fact-checking, he might have found this statement from Pamela Geller on the actual post in question: “The ‘Atlas says that Barack Obama is Malcolm X’s love child’ charge has gone viral among leftards and lizards. The only problem with it is that it is false. I am not the author of this post, and I posted it because the writer did a spectacular job documenting Obama’s many connections with the Far Left. The Malcolm X claim is one minor part of this story, and was of interest to me principally as part of the writer’s documentation that Stanley Ann Dunham could not have been where the Obama camp says she was at various times. I do not believe that Barack Obama is Malcolm X’s love child, and never did — but there remain many, many unanswered questions about his early life and upbringing.”

So let’s recap: when famed media critic Justin Elliott says that “Geller wrote a lengthy post laying out her theory that Barack Obama’s real father is Malcolm X,” there are just two minor problems with the accuracy of his statement: Geller didn’t write the post, and doesn’t believe that Barack Obama’s real father is Malcolm X. But give Elliott credit where credit is due! He did get one thing right: it is indeed a lengthy post.

Pages: 1 2

  • proxywar

    "which I am not sure Pamela believes or considers an important question in any case, consider this list of Obama’s actions, which she published last June".

    Obviously she does consider it a important question or she wouldn't of wasted her time documenting it. Whether or not she actually believes he is a muslim I can't say with certainty because I am not her. But all the evidence leads me to conclude it is a real possiblity. Which would be a narrow-minded hindsight bias fallacy (based solely off his childhood as a muslim) on her part. If anything Obama is a christian of the liberation theology persuasion (to what degree I can't say) who sympathizes with muslims.

    Another issue that really lowered my respect for Pamela Geller was when you admited she was a Birther. Her analysis is a sign of full blown obama derangement syndrome chuck full of paranoid delusion. If she wants to be taken seriously she better move away from that moonbat alex jones position and quickly.

    • highpressure

      Obama was never a Christian. His bigoted comments on Saint Paul tells me he would throw over half the New Testament. His rantings on other subjects would claim Yeshua (Jesus) was a liar and bigot. No Obama was never a Christian. Let us not even suggest otherwise. It would be a lie of the first magnitude.

      • highpressure

        Should be "throw out" half the New Testament – not "throw over". I apologize.

      • proxywar

        What did he say?

  • proxywar

    Lastly, refreash my memory… Why did she post up an article linking Obama to malcolm x?
    If the article was written beautifully but contained this misinfromation why would she trust the rest of what the article had to say? Alot of what she does just comes off as guilt by association. Seems to me she posted that article because she wanted readers to make a islamic connection with Obama that leads all the way to Malcolm x. I could be wrong about that but it is the impression i'm getting.

    • flamefront

      Forget your rash and inconsiderate 'impressions' — if you simply would hold down you biases and read the article you would know the answer to that question. But you would rather spout off that actually want an answer anyway. Go away.

  • proxywar

    I have no problem with you robert, because you don't make these sloppy novice claims.
    That being said in the future: You should let her defend herself.

  • Gamaliel Isaac

    The New York Jewish Week wrote a very nasty article about Geller and would not publish my letter refuting it.

  • ApolloSpeaks


    The October 10th publication of the NY Times hit piece on Pam Geller coincided with the 1278th anniversray of the Battle of Tours when Charles Martel defeated and stopped Abdul Rahman and his Muslim hordes from overrunning Europe. This is an unmistakable sign that patriotic, pro-Western Americans like Pam Geller and Robert Spencer are the Charles Martels of our time and that we will prevail in our war with Islamism and save Western civilization and freedom.

    Click my name and read my piece "Charles "The Hammer" Martel Should be the Patron Saint of Anti-Islamism."

  • Ret. Marine

    Many problems are attributed to too many false claims by the leftards and crazies and it should come as no surprise to any if they are paying attention to the issue(s). The thing that really gets at my crawl is it is never really defended in the court of public opinion to a satisfactory position (s). While it is true many try, such as this article implies, far too many on the side of the false witness's have been gaining results of a false hope in their minds. The truth will set you free but, you must have a critical thinking mind in the first place to discern what truth really is. The author of the false witnessing of Ms. Gellar is one with no sense of this truth or rather really is boils down to the he said vrs. she said ideals. It is one thing to be educated and understand the harm to others of their guilt, but yet another to continue to preach what you know to be false out of hatred and think you are getting away with it. I do pity those on the wrong side of the truth because of the great harm they are encouraging to others without the truth even being involved.

  • BS1977

    How can anyone read the NY Times anymore? It is run by leftist wack jobs and shills for everything that is BAD for the US….I think P Geller is HOT….she's right on the mark and is warning Americans to wake up to reality. The New York times is all about submission, appeasement, sanctuary cities, mega tolerance for EVIL and all the rest of the PC liberal drivel.

  • realhumanrights

    The truth is that there needs to be a serious debate as to the direction of the SIOA political group, its leaders, and its supporters. We don't see that in the MSM because they don't take the SIOA seriously. But the links to EDL, SIOE, and other groups linked to violence, extremism should be addressed. The SIOE is the founding organizers of the SIOA and they openly call for "Islamophobia" (their words), and the SIOE has been involved in repeated violent protests in UK and Europe. When the SIOA is promoting an EDL group, there should be discussion. Last weekend at the EDL protest, once again the press reported that EDL protesters threw BRICKS at police officers, with a police officer going to the hospital, in addition Sky News van was reportedly attacked by EDL protesters. Once again, it is reported that establishments were attacked by EDL protesters. The links to SIOA and such European groups should be seriously discussed. But the MSM won't do that, and they write "puff" pieces like the NYTs. It is a big mistake and a failure of the MSM (once again) to genuinely debate the issues as well as the European influence on such American political groups.

    To those who think this is exaggerated, I urge you to look at these two links for yourself, make up your own mind:

    October 9 – EDL Protesters Attack Restaurant

    May 2010 – Video of EDL Protests

    April 2010 – right-wing Daily Mail reports on EDL protesters attacking police

    July 2010 – Press report of EDL protesters throwing bricks at police officers

    August 28, 2010 – Another violent EDL protest

    Video – EDL Openly Display Guns and Knives

    Lets also be clear – the SIOA Executive Director continues to defend and promote the EDL – there is no "interpretation" needed for that – and it is done in her own words, not only is the EDL invited to SIOA protests in the United States, the SIOA Executive Director states "If I lived in England, I would surely be active in the EDL Jewish division."

    Is this your idea of struggling against violent jihad? Attacking the police? Throwing bricks at police? Terrorizing innocent pedestrians? Foul, vulgar comments from the EDL leadership and protesters? Smashing the windows of restaurants and terrorizing women and children? Now that is a TRUTH you need to ask yourselves, as more Americans get linked up with the EDL.

    To those of you who support SIOA, is this what YOU want to be associated with? Because this is a group that is unequiviocally supported by the SIOA and their leaders.

    Now this is type of serious issue that thoughtful news media should be asking. They address the nonsense issues, but the serious issues they duck.

    Or will you be just like the MSM and ignore such issues that require serious debate?

    Which side are you on – the side promoting terrorism against others or the side against it?

    • Richard

      The seemingly endless drive of the left to destroy good people took another step. Sometimes it is enough to make me question freedom of speech. May Pamela arise from this slander stronger than ever.

    • RalphB

      Your pre-cooked video's etc. prove roughly zero. That some neo-Nazis try to attach themselves to the EDL proves as much and as little as the Communists and Black Panthers attaching themselves to the Obama campaign.

      • realhumanrights


        The reports from right-wing Sky News and the Daily Mail are not "pre-cooked videos."

        Sky News Report:
        Daily Mail Report:

        Nor is the report by the Leicester local news that confirms EDL protester attack on a restaurant.

        Let me quote:
        "Before they were rounded up by police a group of EDL supporters attacked the Big John's fast food restaurant, in Humberstone Road. Usman Ali, area manager for the chain, said: 'They smashed four windows and came inside the shop and frightened our customers.' Witness Imtiaz Noor Mohammed, 21, of North Evington, said: 'I was with friends getting something to eat.' 'People saw them coming and someone locked the door. They smashed some windows and one of the EDL people kicked the door open and stood there threatening people.'"

        By the way, lets see that video once again – right?

        I have been to UK and have seen "Big John's restaurant." They are like a British version of McDonalds and serve fast food, including fish and chips.

        There are not "some neo-Nazis" linked to the EDL, the EDL leader can't speak without the "F-word" every other sentence. The EDL protesters attacking news media, police, restaurants are hardly a few fringe, but have been part of nearly every EDL protest.

        Those are the inconvenient facts that the MSM won't report on the SIOA Leader Pamela Geller's promotion of them.

        Those are also inconvenient facts that you won't address as well. But the news media, including the right-wing news media in the UK, will continue to address it over and over. Eventually someone in the U.S. news media will catch on.

    • Peter J

      I'm not sure you've figured out which side is which with any accuracy, realhumanrights. I await your response to the article linked by highpressure a short while ago in reply to some of your questions before commenting further.

      In the meantime, here is an interesting video that you may wish to comment on, of how some Muslims feel about freedom of information, etc. It shows a Muslim exhibition in Dearborn, Michigan being filmed — and the Muslims in charge of security having none of it:
      Yep, it's a Jihad Watch website. But I think the dissemination of such information is a valuable service, even if it is "divisive".

      • realhumanrights

        Actually it shows an Arab Festival. And yes of course, I object to what the people in Dearborn did. I understand that the Acts 17 group is viewed by them as "troublemakers." Anyone who does public events knows that to be effective you need to coordinate with security, police, etc. at public events where they have to manage crowd control.

        Just like when I dealt with the DC police when challenging Hamas in a counterprotest to a group against Israel at the Israeli embassy. I let them know in advance, had my assembly permit, and followed the rules. But that said, I also support freedom of speech for all individuals and it was clear that the Dearborn security overreacted to the Acts 17 speakers, and also did so again this year.

        I have figured out which side is which. I am on the side of human rights for all people, consistently and without question. I am on the side of rejecting violence and hate. It doesn't matter if it comes from left or right, Muslim or non-Muslim, or any other identity group.

        That is what it means to be an American. That is really standing up for the truths that we find self-evident.

        Which side are you on?

        I know that I am NOT on ***THIS*** side (see video)

  • realhumanrights

    So Richard, I notice just like the MSM you reply by ignoring the issues with the SIOA's links and support for European groups linked to violence such as the SIOE and EDL?

    Do you think the Daily Mail is "left wing" now in their reports of EDL attacking the police?

    Is being against those EDL protesters who throw bricks and smoke bombs at police officers a "left wing" concern?

    Is being disgusted by those EDL protesters who smash the windows of restaurants terrorizing innocent people eating their meals inside a "left wing" view?

    Is it "left wing" to be disturbed when EDL thugs try to attack and smash out the windows of a news media van with reporters inside?

    Please explain how that is a "left wing" view.

    • ApolloSpeaks

      Geller, Spencer, EDL and SIOE are driven by the same rational Islamophobia that inspired Charles Martel to confront and stop the Moors from conquering Europe. If Martel were alive today he would be a leader in the Western anti-Islamization Movement.

      Click my name and read my piece on Charles Martel at my Number One blog

      • realhumanrights

        ApolloSpeaks – is it a "rational Islamophobia" that has the EDL protesters throwing bricks and smoke bombs at the police? Is it a "rational Islamophobia" that has the EDL protesters smashing restaurant windows, terrorizing women and children? is it a "rational Islamophobia" that has the EDL protesters smashing the windows of news media vans like the right-wing Sky News? Is it a "rational Islamophobia" that has the EDL leader and protesters that can only speak using the "F" word every other sentence?

  • highpressure

    They are bloody NAZIs. We have them here too. They are fringe. They aren't mainsteam. Just like Democrat Organizations such as the KKK, NOW, Planned Parenthood and the New Black Panthers. Except here the people in power want them to be mainstream.

    • realhumanrights

      If "they are **** Nazis," as you say – what is the SIOA doing inviting them to their protests and promoting them as an organization? I think that is an important part of the news story NOT addressed by either the MSM or the SIOA.

      EDL protesters break police officers legs, throw bricks and smoke bombs at police, terrorize elderly, and smash windows at restaurants – and not even a pause in support of the EDL by the SIOA, let alone a condemnation.

      • Dragomir

        Well then; when in Jerusalem young arabic kids throw "bricks" at Israelis, this is OK with you? I have not seen any on the left who condemn these actions. Will you be the first? One of the biggest News-Paper here had a picture how the kid was run over head over heels" as he was hit by the car. No mentioning that the kid RUN toward the car IN the street. Instead it was claimed the driver suddenly stepped on the gas. Now honestly if I'm met in the street with people covering their faces with rags, then I'm sure they are not up to anything good.
        Personally I am against any violence during protests, No matter what reason.
        So are you against arabic people in Israel throwing stones (and of course use other more lethal weapons) or will you claim theirs is a legit form of protest against an occupation of arabic land.
        If you oppose the behavior of the EDL, then just for fairness sake you must do it on all sides, otherwise there is a word for people like yourself…… And I'm sure you know which one could be applied. :-)

        • realhumanrights

          First of all, why do you think I am "left-wing"? Because I oppose hate and violence? Is that somehow the purvey of the left, now, you think?

          Of course, I oppose those throwing stones and worse against Israelis and violence elsewhere. Moreover, I have publicly protested against Hamas and other groups promoting violence.

          Why is it "hard" to oppose the behavior of the EDL?
          I suggest you look at this video once again – is this the side you are supporting?

          The real question is HOW can the SIOA and Ms. Geller stay silent on this? How can they continue to support the EDL?

          • Dragomir

            I already wrote I oppose violence. No matter who uses it. But I will not let your insistence on the EDL let me loose focus on the more important point: Islamic violence and the spread of Sharia Law. And the problem there is, that Islamic fight against us Dhimmis is laid down as guideline until Judgment Day. Who knows in the not so distant future the EDL and other groups will be gone, while our children might have to choose between death or Islam.
            So while a fringe group like EDL may have no impact here in Austria not ONLY radical Islam may. And I don't want that I or my offspring have to live in a society ruled by barbaric laws which were put down in writing long after MO was gone. That is the issue for me, EDL thugs might be prosecuted by the law if found out, a Islamic Terrorist could be celebrated as Hero by others, do you see the difference? Did I make myself clear.? Thats all I have to say.

          • realhumanrights

            On this very web site in the comments here, you can see EDL terrorists who are celebrated – just like violent jihadists are celebrated elsewhere. What does that tell you?

            The anti-jihad movement has been perverted into a full-fledged anti-Islam movement that seeks to undermine the very human rights that we sought to defend. We can't even get people to condemn anti-Islam terrorism now by the EDL thugs – that shows how the anti-Islam extremists are quickly becoming the mirror image of the Islamic extremists they claim to fight.

      • highpressure

        I think she answers your question on her web site:

  • hijinx60

    "This tactic manifests their arrogance and disdain for the Americanpeople, 70% of whom oppose the mosque."
    It is not unreasonable to believe that 30% of Americans have heard and read so much slanderous material about conservatives, that they are scared of the label "right-wing conservative" and anything with this label, they will robotically turn from.

  • realhumanrights

    ApolloSpeaks writes: "getting out of hand now and then with brick throwing and foul words is understandable"

    So you support violent, criminal attacks on the police and on innocent civilians?

    Then you have clarified your position, in effect, you support terrorism – just when it suits your political views.

  • ApolloSpeaks

    If EDL were a terrorist organization it would be banned in Britain. It's good to know there are still Brits around with backbone and won't tolerate the Islamization of their country. .As the Moslem savages grow more bold and meancing EDL will swell its numbers-as will the Tea Party here in the States which is an American Identity Movement in embryo..