When Marxist Anti-Semitic “Anti-Jihadists” Attack

Pages: 1 2

Maryam Namazie, One Law For All


The One Law For All Campaign has published a new monograph, “Enemies not Allies: The Far-Right” (pdf here), which is essentially a hit piece on me, Pamela Geller, our organization Stop Islamization of America (SIOA), which is actually a program of our American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI), our sister group Stop Islamisation of Europe (SIOE), and several groups that we have never had anything to do with, such as the British National Party, which we have consistently denounced.

Not coincidentally, One Law For All is headed up by Maryam Namazie, a Marxist anti-Semite who claims to be anti-jihad but actually has attacked Israel and spread Palestinian jihad propaganda on numerous occasions. An anti-jihadist who doesn’t support the country on the front lines of the global jihad? Pull my other leg.

In the new report, Namazie includes one quote from me that has long circulated, and misrepresents its meaning — and in light of the intense demonization that is going on lately, I thought it worthwhile to clarify it. This is the quote:

‘There is no distinction in the American Muslim community between peaceful Muslims and jihadists. While Americans prefer to imagine that the vast majority of American Muslims are civic-minded patriots who accept wholeheartedly the parameters of American pluralism, this proposition has actually never been proven.’ – Robert Spencer, Stop Islamization of America

The report adds:

The group’s American branch, currently run by Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer, was set up by SIOE’s leadership. In 2010 Spencer defended his and Geller’s ‘colleague’ Joseph John Jay, who had recommended the ‘wholesale slaughter’ of Muslim civilians, including children. Spencer has also written that there is ‘no distinction’ between American Muslims and Jihadists, and explained that Muslims must prove their innocence or else be considered guilty. Pamela Geller’s web log has featured conspiratorial articles regarding the President of America’s religion, his family, his sexual history, and the circumstances of his birth. Geller and Spencer have also defended Serbian war criminals.

John Jay does not actually have any role in or position with SIOA, but be that as it may, the report is lying about him. In reality, he has written, in his inimitable fashion, “i do not advocate carte blanche killing one’s liberal relative, nor all muslims. to assert differently is a lie.”

Likewise false is the claim that “Spencer has also written that there is ‘no distinction’ between American Muslims and Jihadists, and explained that Muslims must prove their innocence or else be considered guilty.”

This is based on the quote from me above. Yet not only is that not what the quote means, but I have said just the opposite. See, to take one of many examples, here, where I say, in connection with mosques getting extra police protection, “This is a nation of laws, not vigilantes, and the principle of innocent until proven guilty still holds and must hold.” And here, where I said that “everyone is innocent until proven guilty” and “many Muslims are not on board with this supremacist program.”

Pages: 1 2

  • http://www.contextflexed.com Flipside

    Pamela needs to quit her anti-semitism against Muslims. We Americanssee these alphabet soup organizations for what they are: The Jewish Ku Klux Klan.

    • PhillipGaley

      I, uh-h, these two lines, . . . so short, . . . a "Jewish Ku Klux Klan", . . . I've never heard of such a thing; I think that, probably, that is an attempt at incongruousness, using language to indicate something which is not, or could never be, . . . and, an "anti-semitism against Muslims", is an impossible contradiction in terms; but in all, I don't at all see how these lines, could in anywise tie into the difference between the price of tea in Berlin and Cairo, . . . and and yes, if pressed, I would confess and say that, I'm just not all that smart; but, . . .

      • alex bell

        Namazie is a communist (Marxist) so its a bit hypocritical for her to talk about rights. The Marxist regimes that have preceded her have been the most barbarous regimes in the history of humankind. Like the Islamist, communists use the the idea of 'human rights' to get into power…and once they're in – look out! Her movement is also in a Catch 22 situation: she seems to think that there's a distinction between Islamists and Muslims. There's not. What defines a Muslim IS Sharia Law. In other words, no Sharia, no Muslim. By saying she supports 'freedom of religion' but not its involvement in politics, does this mean that she thinks its ok for Sharia to be practiced as part of the Muslim religion as long as its kept out of the political arena? This would do nothing to stop the abuses of human rights associated with it. Does she suggest we 'censor' certain chapters of the Koran? She's STUCK. Her movement has no balls. It will never catch on, especially with the Left, who are doing all in their power to promote islamo-fascism all over the world.


  • StephenD

    How tiring it must be to be constantly vigilant for accusations thrown at you. It seems they get a thought and run with it. Fling it against the wall and see what sticks. There is nothing to loose. Just look at the previous post by that Dolt “Flipside.” He accuses Ms. Geller but doesn't site one example ~ Typical. If he did site one, Dollars to Donuts says it will be out of context. The only reason you are still able to function is that you have not liabled anyone. In other words, YOU TELL THE TRUTH. Some people can't stand the light of the truth. Kind of like bugs….Keep up the good work Mr. Spencer. There are many of us that look forward to hearing from you and Ms. Geller.

    • http://www.contextflexed.com Flipside

      Trying to "Stop the Islamization of America" so that it can continue to be Israelized is one reason. Also where she says "I have no problem with Islam. I have a problem with political Islam."

      If I were to say "I have no problem with Judaism. I have a problem with political Judaism," that is seen as a war cry by the barbarians who run Hasbaras and she is one of them. She supports P.W. Botha and Slobodan Milosevic, because they have so much in common with Ariel Sharon.

      She wants to vandalize the Dome of the Rock which makes her THE SAME THING as the Taliban. It is my opinion that Zionist clerics and imams should be denounced.

      • StephenD

        And your opinion is so very valuable to me…. :-)

        Do yourself a favor and don't bother replying to a post of mine. If it were on paper, I'd use it in the bathroom.

        • http://www.contextflexed.com Flipside

          Can't afford Playboy?

      • PhillipGaley

        But you mention "the Dome of the Rock", I have sometimes wondered, that, as a monument to a criminal ideology operating under a mere religious guise, why the Israeli people haven't removed that G0D d_ed thing, . . . and, they could probably pay for removal of it, by selling chunks of it—bricks or whatever, . . .

      • ajnn

        huh ?

        'political judaism' ? 'vandalize the dome of the rock' ?

        flipside is looking for a special award for creativity in jew-hatred.

        • tekow

          he is just flipping your sides… when you get as good as you give, you cry jew-hatred.. actually i dont think you deserve to be taken serious

  • David M

    Maryam Nemazie is a Marxist and we remember how Iranian Marxists were acting as Khomeini's intelligence and executioners. When Khomeini turned on them it was the time to flee Iran and spread their poison in the West. She has a record of smearing freedom-loving people among them the late Oriana Fallaci. Maryam Namazie is as “anti-jihad” as Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

  • g_jochnowitz

    The Left licks Islamic ass. However, Fidel Castro has changed his mind. This story has been underreported: http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/

    • StephenD

      I read the article you posted. I must tell you; firstly, I couldn't care any less what Castro thinks. Secondly, the author calls Fidel a "Great Man." The fact that he was a Mass Murderer seems of little import. Right now, he is against anti-Semitism. I'm sorry, but I can't go along with the idea that "the enemy of my enemy is my friend." The man is a vile murderer with tortured and imprisoned fellow Cubans low these many years that happened to have disagreed with him. To now view his opinions valid ~ for ANY reason, is not acceptable.

  • steven l

    One law only: Freedom of the human spirit. Any system trying to enchain the human spirit is doomed to fail. More than a billion of Muslims are enslaved and we all see the results. Large scale poverty and ignorance, Muslim genocides that the West mass media IGNORE. Communism did not do better. Socialism is failing. For all of them the enemy is the Jew.

  • JacqueShellaque

    This article arrives one day after I cancelled my subscription to Maryam Namazie's One Law for All newsletter. I had kept receiving it in recent years despite not being in agreement with some of the statements made in it as I agreed with her fight against sharia in the UK, but things got just too disquieting lately. Marayam Namazie needs to question the consistency of her principles and positions. I guess I must not be the only subscriber she has lost of late.

    • ObamaYoMoma

      as I agreed with her fight against sharia in the UK,

      There is only one way to fight sharia and that is to ban and reverse Muslim immigration, as you can’t import Muslims into your country and not at the same time also import sharia and jihad, because both sharia and jihad are intrinsic to Islam, as sharia is the will of Allah and jihad is the sixth and most important pillar of Islam.

  • tanstaafl

    There is no fun in bigotry.

  • ObamaYoMoma

    And here, where I said that “everyone is innocent until proven guilty” and “many Muslims are not on board with this supremacist program.”

    What I would like to understand from Mr. Spencer, since Islam is a toxic ideology that first and foremost demands total, complete, and unconditional submission to the will of Allah, is how a Muslim cannot be on board with Islam’s supremacist program and remain a Muslim at the same time, especially since such a stance would constitute blasphemy and blasphemy and apostasy are capital offenses under Islam? Indeed, in Islam there is no freedom of conscience.

    In addition, I certainly understand and believe in the concept that everyone is innocent until proven guilty, but that is mutually exclusive from Islam. What I can’t understand, however, is how a Muslim can remain a Muslim but yet at the same time reject his or her obligatory duty to fight jihad in the cause of Allah, as jihad is the sixth and most important pillar of which Islam stands. Understanding, of course, that by far more non-violent stealth and deceptive jihad, relative to violent jihad, takes place in the world today.

    In fact, just because a Muslim that lives in America, for all intents and purposes, outwardly appears to be perfectly law abiding and peaceful, it doesn’t mean that Muslim is not a jihadist and is a so-called moderate Muslim instead, as demographic conquest is probably the most prevalent variety of stealth and deceptive non-violent jihad that takes place in the world today.

    Indeed, without the presence of millions of Muslim stealth jihadists living in America with their thousands of mosques and madrassas as a fifth column, the 9/11 jihad attacks would have been completely impossible

    In addition, we cannot continue to open the floodgates to mass Muslim immigration and not at the same time also import jihad and sharia into our country, as jihad and sharia are intrinsic to Islam. As jihad is Islam’s sixth and most important pillar and sharia is the will of Allah.

    In fact, no matter how many laws we create to attempt to stymie sharia in this country, it is a losing proposition, as it will not be stymied unless Muslim immigration is reversed and banned. Indeed, eventually the vast overwhelming majority of Muslim immigrants will form segregated Muslim no-go zones ruled by sharia as they have done so already previously everywhere in the world where mass Muslim immigration has been happening for decades. Eventually, that reality in due time will inevitably manifest itself over here as well.

    What I am saying in the quote is that the “extremists” are not one sect and the “moderates” another, such that they go to different mosques and have no truck with one another. In fact, they are all mixed up together, as numerous jihad plots in the US show — the jihadist turns out to have attended a local mosque, which quickly disavows him. This is simply a fact. What exactly is either false or racist about that?

    You see I disagree with that analysis. All devout Muslims living in America are jihadists by virtue of living in America, since they wouldn’t be living here in the first place if it weren’t for the purpose of eventually making Islam supreme in America via demographic conquest.

    Indeed, Muslims are forbidden from living in the Dar al Harb (the realm of unbelief) unless it is for the specific purpose of jihad. Thus, all Muslim immigrants living in the West are jihadists, a few of them are violent jihadists, most of them are non-violent stealth and deceptive jihadists, and the ones that are not jihadists are not Muslims at all, but blasphemous apostates that must be executed per the dictates of Islam.

    Indeed, there is no such thing as so-called extremists and so-called moderates in Islam, unless you want to use those political correct terms to designate violent jihadists from stealth and deceptive non-violent jihadists. Thus, that would mean that violent jihad is unacceptable, while the non-violent stealth and deceptive varieties of jihad, as long as it remains non-violent, is perfectly acceptable, but that is suicidal and abject dhimmitude.

  • http://dailybooth.com/noradrenalinsvenska/17629005 adhd drugs and behavior problems

    O8Barh hey, just wanted to comment :)

  • chimoio

    do false flag anti jihad blogs exist?