The Truth about Robert Spencer

rsThe charge: Both the Southern Poverty Law Center and the Anti-Defamation League have labeled the group that Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller founded as an anti-Muslim hate group.

The facts: Robert Spencer is no more “anti-Muslim” than foes of the Nazis were “anti-German.” It has become common, because of the efforts of Islamic supremacist and Leftist groups, to equate resistance to jihad terror with “hate,” but there is no substance to this. Spencer’s work has been entirely dedicated to defending the freedom of speech and the principle of equality of rights for all people before the law.

The SPLC keeps tabs on neo-Nazi and white supremacist groups. And that is good. But the implication of their hate group label is that the group that Spencer and Geller founded, the American Freedom Defense Initiative, is another one of those, which is false. While the SPLC may have done good work in the 1960s against white racists, in recent years it has become a mere propaganda organ for the Left, tarring any group that dissents from its extreme political agenda as a “hate group.” Significantly, although it lists hundreds of groups as “hate groups,” it includes not a single  Islamic jihad group on this list. And its “hate group” designation against the Family Research Council led one of its followers to storm the FRC offices with a gun, determined to murder the chief of the FRC. This shows that these kinds of charges shouldn’t be thrown around frivolously, as tools to demonize and marginalize those whose politics the SPLC dislikes. But that is exactly what they do. Its hard-Left leanings are well known and well documented. This Weekly Standard article sums up much of what is wrong with the SPLC.

The ADL traffics in the same reckless defamation. They have libeled the preeminent lawyer and orthodox Jew David Yerushalmi as an “extremist,” an “anti-Muslim bigot” and a “white supremacist.” The ADL has even condemned Israel for fighting anti-Semitism. According to Charles Jacobs of Americans for Peace and Tolerance: “The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) – biggest Jewish ‘defense’ organization — admits in private that the biggest danger to Jews since WWII comes from Muslim Jew-hatred, but because it fears offending its liberal donors and being charged with ‘Islamophobia,’ the organization remains essentially silent on the issue. In a study of ADL press releases from 1995 to 2011– a good if not perfect indicator of ADL priorities – we found that only 3 percent of ADL’s press releases focus on Islamic extremism and Arab anti-Semitism.” (For the full study, see www.charlesjacobs.org.)

The ADL has defamed many people. The ADL was successfully sued for over $10 million for defaming a Colorado couple, whom they accused of bigotry. The judgment was confirmed by every court that reviewed it, and was ultimately paid by the ADL. This was the largest defamation judgment in the history of the State of Colorado — paid by the Anti-Defamation League.

The charge: Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller were both banned from Britain because of their founding of “anti-Muslim hate groups.”

The facts: The letter to Spencer from the UK Home Office said he 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 Spencer 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.

A Shafi’i manual of Islamic law endorsed by the most prestigious institution in Sunni Islam, Al-Azhar University in Cairo, says that the leader of the Muslims “makes war upon Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians…until they become Muslim or else pay the non-Muslim poll tax,” and cites Qur’an 9:29 in support of this idea: “Fight those who do not believe in Allah and the Last Day and who forbid not what Allah and His messenger have forbidden-who do not practice the religion of truth, being of those who have been given the Book-until they pay the poll tax out of hand and are humbled.” (‘Umdat al-Salik o9.8)

Also, the assumption that the British government is fair, consistent, and judicious in such judgments is false. Just days before Spencer and Geller were banned, the British government admitted Saudi Sheikh Mohammed al-Arefe. Al-Arefe has said: “Devotion to jihad for the sake of Allah, and the desire to shed blood, to smash skulls, and to sever limbs for the sake of Allah and in defense of His religion, is, undoubtedly, an honor for the believer. Allah said that if a man fights the infidels, the infidels will be unable to prepare to fight.”

That was acceptable in Britain. Spencer’s work, which has consistently been in defense of human rights, was not. He has never advocated for or condoned violence. Spencer and Geller are challenging this capricious decision and are confident they will prevail.

The charge: Robert Spencer inspired the Norwegian terrorist mass murder Anders Behring Breivik, who cited Spencer many times in his manifesto.

The facts: This charge is meant to imply that Spencer calls for violence and that Breivik heeded his call. This is absolutely false. In all his quotations of Spencer, Breivik never quotes him calling for or justifying violence – because he never does. In fact, Breivik even criticized him for not doing so, saying of Spencer, historian Bat Ye’or and other critics of jihad terror: “If these authors are to [sic] scared to propagate a conservative revolution and armed resistance then other authors will have to.” (Breivik, 2083: A European Declaration of Independence, p. 743) Breivik explains in his manifesto that he was “radicalized” by his experiences with Muslim immigrants in the early 1990s, before Spencer had published anything about Islam (See Breivik, p. 1348).

Breivik also hesitantly but unmistakably recommended making common cause with jihadists, which neither Spencer nor any other opponent of jihad would ever do: “An alliance with the Jihadists might prove beneficial to both parties but will simply be too dangerous (and might prove to be ideologically counter-productive). We both share one common goal.” (Breivik, p. 948). He even called for making common cause with Hamas in plotting jihad terror: “Approach a representative from a Jihadi Salafi group. Get in contact with a Jihadi strawman. Present your terms and have him forward them to his superiors….Present your offer. They are asked to provide a biological compound manufactured by Muslim scientists in the Middle East. Hamas and several Jihadi groups have labs and they have the potential to provide such substances. Their problem is finding suitable martyrs who can pass ‘screenings’ in Western Europe. This is where we come in. We will smuggle it in to the EU and distribute it at a target of our choosing. We must give them assurances that we are not to harm any Muslims etc.” (Breivik, p. 949)

Investigative journalist and author Daniel Greenfield explained:

Jeffrey Goldberg at the Atlantic goes so far as to call a prominent researcher into Islamic terrorism, Robert Spencer, a jihadist. The Washington Post admits that Spencer and other researchers are not responsible for the shootings, but sneers nonetheless. And the New York Times and a number of other outlets have picked and touted the “64 times” that Spencer was quoted in the shooter’s manifesto…

The “64 times” cited by the Times and its imitators reflects lazy research since the majority of those quotes actually come from a single document, where Spencer is quoted side by side with Tony Blair and Condoleezza Rice….

Many of the other Spencer quotes are actually secondhand from essays written by Fjordman that also incorporate selections of quotes on Islam and its historical background. Rather than Breivik quoting Spencer, he is actually quoting Fjordman who is quoting Spencer.

Quite often, Robert Spencer is quoted providing historical background on Islam and quotes from the Koran and the Hadith. So, it’s actually Fjordman quoting Spencer quoting the Koran. If the media insists that Fjordman is an extremist and Spencer is an extremist — then isn’t the Koran also extremist?

And if the Koran isn’t extremist, then how could quoting it be extremist?

The New York Times would have you believe that secondhand quotes like these from Spencer turned Breivik into a raging madman….

Breivik was driven by fantasies of seizing power, combined with steroid abuse and escapism. He used quotes from researchers into terrorism to pad out his schizophrenic worldview, combined with fantasies of multiple terrorist cells and an eventual rise to power.

This is not so different from lunatics who picked up a copy of “Catcher in the Rye” and then set off to kill a celebrity. A not uncommon event, for which J.D. Salinger bears no responsibility whatsoever.

The charge: Robert Spencer denies the Srebrenica genocide and justifies Serbian war crimes against Muslims.

The facts: This charge implies that Spencer approves of violence against innocent Muslims, which is absolutely false. It is based on two (out of over 40,000) articles published at Jihad Watch in 2005 and 2009 questioning whether the massacre of Muslim civilians in Srebrenica in 1995, which was unquestionably heinous, rises to the level of an attempt to exterminate an entire people. Neither was written by Spencer and neither approves of the killing of Muslims or anyone. In “Srebrenica as Genocide? The Krstić Decision and the Language of the Unspeakable,” published in the Yale Human Rights & Development Law Journal, Vol. VIII in 2005, Katherine G. Southwick writes:

In August 2001, a trial chamber of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) handed down the tribunal’s first genocide conviction. In this landmark case, Prosecutor v. Radislav Krstić, the trial chamber determined that the 1995 Srebrenica massacres—in which Bosnian Serb forces executed 7,000-8,000 Bosnian Muslim men—constituted genocide. This Note acknowledges the need for a dramatic expression of moral outrage at the most terrible massacre in Europe since the Second World War. However, this Note also challenges the genocide finding. By excluding consideration of the perpetrators’ motives for killing the men, such as seeking to eliminate a military threat, the Krstić chamber’s method for finding specific intent to destroy the Bosnian Muslims, in whole or in part, was incomplete. The chamber also loosely construed other terms in the genocide definition, untenably broadening the meaning and application of the crime. The chamber’s interpretation of genocide in turn has problematic implications for the tribunal, enforcement of international humanitarian law, and historical accuracy. Thus highlighting instances where inquiry into motives may be relevant to genocide determinations, this Note ultimately argues for preserving distinctions between genocide and crimes against humanity, while simultaneously expanding the legal obligation to act to mass crimes that lack proof of genocidal intent

If Spencer is guilty of “genocide denial,” so also is the Yale Human Rights & Development Law Journal. In reality, neither are. The raising of legitimate questions does not constitute either the denial or the excusing of the evils that Serbian forces perpetrated at Srebrenica or anywhere else.

The charge: Robert Spencer blames all Muslims for the crimes of Islamic jihad terrorists who are condemned by the vast majority of peaceful Muslims.

The facts: This charge is never accompanied by any quote from Robert Spencer, because it has no basis in reality whatsoever. He has never blamed all Muslims for the crimes of jihad terrorists. He has called upon peaceful Muslims to acknowledge the fact that Islamic jihadists use the texts and teachings of Islam to justify violence and supremacism, and to take action to mitigate the ability of these texts to incite violence. This call has not generally been heeded.

The charge: Spencer has argued that there is no distinction between American Muslims and radical, violent jihadists.

The facts: What Spencer actually said was that U.S. Muslim organizations have been slow to expel violent jihadists or report their activities, and so they move freely among peaceful Muslims. He was referring to the fact that there is no institutional distinction between Muslims who reject jihad terror and those who embrace, so jihadis move freely in Muslim circles among those who oppose them and claim to do so. In other words, there are no “Islamic supremacist” mosques and “moderate” mosques. There are just mosques, and there are both peaceful Muslims and jihadis in some of them. The Tsarnaev brothers, who bombed the Boston Marathon in April 2013, were members in good standing of the Islamic Society of Boston. The Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the nation’s most vocal Muslim organization, has counseled Muslims in the U.S. not to speak to the FBI.

The charge: Spencer and Pamela Geller sponsored ads that equated all Muslims with savages.

The facts: In reality, the ad said: “In any war between the civilized man and the savage, support the civilized man. Support Israel. Defeat jihad.” The savages to which the ad was referring, obviously, were those jihadis who have massacred innocent Israeli civilians such as the Fogel family and celebrated those massacres.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.  

  • Hank Rearden

    “[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.”

    Let’s assume this “garbled” version is what Spencer actually said.

    Turn it around. Ask a militant Muslim…”will you declare openly that Islam does NOT mandate warfare against unbelievers?”

    • Guy Fromage

      Caveat: taqiyya.

      • defcon 4

        It’s mind boggling that people would actually EXPECT the truth about islam0fascism to come out of the mouths of muslimes.

  • Hass

    If this Government was all about the people, you’d think (or expect) they would beg to have Spencer as an adviser.

    • defcon 4

      If the US government was all about freedom, justice and equality they wouldn’t be supporting islam0fascist states.

    • Moa

      Spencer used to advise and train. However, he is unwelcome under the current pro-jihad (eg. Syria, Linya, Egypt) Democrat regime.

      • Hass

        I didn’t know that. Thanks mate.

  • Sami Cruz

    The ADL was once considered to be a “Jewish Defense Group” but today it is essentially nothing more than an organization of liberal activism and liberal agitprop

  • monostor

    Mr. Spencer keep up the good work, the decent world needs you!

  • Infidel4Ever

    The Left and Islam, a true axis of evil.

    • defcon 4

      The leftists being the very junior partner. I have a feeling that if musl0-nazis do gain power, they won’t be sharing it w/the leftards, who will probably enjoy the same fate Iranian Communists did in the Islamic Revolution there.

  • Dallas25305

    How about these moronic leftist groups, spending some time watching violent Black Power Racist gangs that beat, rape and murder innocent whites, Asians and Hispanics? They can start by going after the race war hustlers Sharpton, Jackson and Obama. The Black panthers would be a good target. What? they wont do it?? The reason is they are racist crap themselves and only care about their corrupt religion/political ideology, Liberal Socialism. Yes Liberal Socialism the bankrupt, racist ideology that has sent the Western world on a path to destruction ever since it was invented by some of the most evil men in history. Men like Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Soros, Obama and hundreds more. The policy’s of Liberal Socialism, big authoritarian government, taking most of you earnings, telling you how to run your life, demanding you obey their commandments of political correctness and pushing you to abort as many of your children as possible. While how many children does the evil George Soros have? Liberal Socialism iron fisted rule for it’s leaders and a form of mental illness for it’s indoctrinated followers.

    • Omar

      Add hate mongers Wright and Farrakhan to the list of race hustlers and bigots.

  • Danny C

    To my mind, there are few things that are as ugly as ingratitude. It says a lot about the anti-defamation league that they would condemn Spencer, given that he’s one of the rare voices that speaks about Islamic anti-Semitism. But the ADL is a Leftist organization, and as such would rather kiss up to the Islamists than take the side of a “right winger” like Spencer. The ADL is a disgrace.

  • PatriotInk

    The Southern Poverty (millionaires) Law Center and the Anti Defamation League are anti American hate groups.

    • defcon 4

      I’d love to see just what entities contribute the lion’s share of the operating revenue of the SPLC. I’ll bet islam0fascist front groups would figure prominently. Are they still a not-for-profit? Supposedly their donors should be a matter of public record.

      • The March Hare

        Soros

        • defcon 4

          Hmmm, does he really have that much money? I wonder if he has any ties to islam0fascist NGO’s?

          • GODnCOUNTRY

            I’m sure he has both. Muslimeys and NYC Progressives love him and he loves them back 10 fold. He’s what you call a Judenrat traitor, kind of like that other Judenrat traitor Bloomberg.
            NYC progressives are wiping the 911 terrorist attack from history. School kids today are being brainwashed, they’re not being taught Islam was the cause. Makes my blood boil to see what progressives are doing to the educational system.

          • The March Hare

            According to Forbes his net worth is $20 BILLION as of September 2013.

          • PeterSalinas

            Yes,. he does. Soros has a $14 billion personal fortune and another $25 billion in investor assets controlled by his firm, Soros Fund Management. Soros is also rumored to have an estimated $100 billion that he accumulated over 40 years in payoffs, Ponzi schemes, bank bankruptcies, stock manipulations, kickbacks, and a host of other schemes whose proceeds are comfortably locked away in a dozen off-shore accounts.

            George Soros was born to Tividar and Erzebat Schwartz, non-practicing Jews, in Budapest, Hungary on August 12, 1930. When the Nazis occupied Budapest in 1944, Tivadar decided to split up his family so as to minimize the chance that all its members would be killed together.

            His father paid a Hungarian government official named Baumbach to claim George as his Christian godson, and to let the boy live with him in Budapest. One of Baumbach’s duties was to deliver deportation notices to Hungary’s Jews, confiscating their property and turning it over to Germany. Soros got to pocket a lot of Jewish valuables in the process whenever he went with him on his Juden roundups.

            Many years later, in December 1998, a CBS interviewer would ask Soros whether he had ever felt any guilt about his association with Baumbach during that period. Soros replied: “… I was only a spectator … I had no role in taking away that property. So I had no sense of guilt.”

            In a June 1993 interview with “The Independent,” Soros, an atheist, said he saw himself as “some kind of god, the creator of everything.” Two years later, he portrayed himself as someone who shared numerous attributes with “God in the Old Testament.”

            In the same year, he also established the flagship of the Soros foundation network—the New York City-based Open Society Institute (OSI). While OSI’s philanthropy extends to a number of nations around the world, it is chiefly devoted to injecting capital into American groups and causes. But of course, broad open-ended concepts like these, draped in lofty rhetoric, can mean radically different things to different people.

            Entrusted with defining the terms and agendas for the Open Society Institute was Aryeh Neier, whom Soros appointed to serve as president – not only of the OSI, but also the entire Soros Foundation Network. More than 34 years earlier, Neier created the Students for a Democratic Society (SDS), which became the largest and most infamous, anti-American radical group of the 1960′s. The SDS would later break away to form the Weather Underground, a notorious domestic terror organization with a Marxist-Leninist agenda whose goals was the overthrow of the American government. They were led by Bill Ayers, Bernadine Dohrn, and Mark Rudd – all close friends of Obama.

            Following his stint with SDS, Neier worked 15 years with the ACLU including eight years as its National Executive Director. After that, he spent a dozen years as the Executive Director of Human Rights Watch (HRW), an organization he founded in 1978.

            The ACLU has opposed all post-9/11 national security measures, depicting them as discriminatory against Muslims. Moreover, the organization filed numerous frivolous lawsuits that hampered the government’s ability to locate, monitor, and apprehend terrorist infiltrators. It depicts American society as xenophobic that inspires racial injustice. It works overtime to protect illegal immigrants from being deported by the government and also what they need to know to rip off the government for free handouts.

            Between 1999 and 2008, the Open Society awarded $8.69 million in grants to the ACLU Foundation.

            OSI’s total assets today exceed $2 billion. Each year, the Institute awards hundreds of millions of dollars in grants to organizations that—like the ACLU and HRW—promote worldviews and objectives accordant with those of himself.

            Groups like “The Arab American Institute” that impugns many of the “sweeping” and “unreasonable” post-9/11 counterterrorism measures as unfairly “targeting Arab Americans.”

            “The Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund,” “The Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law,” the NAACP, and the racist “National Council of La Raza” (which means, “The Race”) charges that “discrimination severely limits the economic and social opportunities available to Hispanic Americans.”

            “The Sentencing Project” claims that prison-sentencing patterns discriminate against Blacks and Hispanics; “Critical Resistance” contends that crime stems from “inequality and powerlessness which can be rectified through wholesale redistribution of wealth.” “The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights” also complains that criminal laws “are enforced with a massively pervasive bias against nonwhites.”

            Plus, a lot of one-issue groups like

            1. The Gamaliel Foundation that teaches social-change “techniques and methodologies.

            2. The Ruckus Society promotes “nonviolent direct action against unjust institutions and policies.”

            3. The American Institute for Social Justice aims to “transform poor communities” by agitating for increased government spending on social-welfare programs.

            4. The Institute for America’s Future “regularly convenes and educates progressive leaders, organizations, candidates, opinion makers, and activists.”

            5. “People for the American Way,” founded by television producer Norman Lear to oppose the allegedly growing influence of the “religious right,” seeks “to cultivate new generations of leaders and activists” who will promote “progressive values.”

            6. “Democracy For America” operates an academy that has taught more than 10,000 recruits nationwide how to “focus, network, and train grassroots activists in the skills and strategies to take back our country.”

            7. The “Midwest Academy” trains radical activists in the tactics of direct action, confrontation, and intimidation.

            8. “Project Vote” is the voter-mobilization arm of the notoriously corrupt ACORN, whose voter-registration drives and get-out-the-vote initiatives have been marred by massive levels of fraud and corruption.

            and too many to list here.

            For more about Socialist/Marxist George Soros and his plethora of funded left-wing programs,

            visit Discover The Networks:,

            http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=977

  • Wolfthatknowsall

    Concerning the last charge, i.e., that Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller sponsored ads that equated Muslims with savages, any first year philosophy student could see the logical fallacy inherent in this statement. But who ever stated that the devotees of political correctness were logical?

    For the most part, though, savages are rather noble. I haven’t noticed much nobility in Islam …

  • Walter Sieruk

    A claim by Islamic scholars as well as jihadists is that no one can produce something as beautiful as the Quran in the way the words are arranged and thus it can only be of God. This claim should be answered.
    First, all someone has to do is examine some of the great works of literature to fine much written beauty. Such as the Greek epic poet Homer with his Iliad and Odyssey and then Virgil who produced the Aeneid has beauty. Even one of the non-Bible books in the Apocrypha called The Song of Three Children is also very beautiful. Thus just because someone sees a work that is written in great beauty doesn’t mean it’s inspired by God.
    Second, the scholar Edward Gibbon wrote after an examination of the Quran that it is an “incoherent jumble of fable and precept and declamation which seldom excites a sentiment or an idea, sometimes craws in the dust and is sometimes lost in the clouds…” The writer Thomas Carlyle wrote the Quran is “A wearisome jumble, crude, incondite [with] endless iterations [and] longwindedness…” Likewise, the philosopher David Hume was NOT favorably impressed after reading the Quran.
    [Source of the three scholars mentioned – Secrets of The Koran: Revealing Insight Into Islam’s Holy Book .56,66, by Don Richardson]

    Furthermore, the following should be taken into consideration.

    Of course the Muslim who reads the Quran will see great beauty in the way the words are arranged. This is, in part, because of the power of suggestion after being told so many times that the Quran is so beautifully written. That’s an old brainwashing method, repeating and being told that same thing again and again. Since he or she is always being told the same lie will end up believing that lie. In addition to that, the Imams try to discourage their people from reading other works, such as the Bible, so then they don’t have much or anything to compare or contrast the Quran with. Of course there are some Muslim’s that do read other works, but they are exceptions and they read other things only after they were already brainwashed by the Imams. In short, the Muslims can’t read the Quran objectively because their Imams have programmed them to have a strong bias towards it.

    • Porkys2istan

      You are missing an important point that a lot of people don’t understand. The original Quran written in pre-medieval Arabic has a hypnotic sort of cadence. It’s very much like techo music or various mystical repeating mantras in Buddhism or Hinduism. Reading it in this form puts the reader in a sort of hypnotic stupour, where the meaning of the actual words can be poured directly into their soul, bypassing the rational and moral mind. A person thus hypnotized can be persuaded to do or believe ANYTHING.

      This is one reason that islamists across the world are so reluctant to translate the Quran into other languages. When you take away it’s ‘magical’ hypnotizing effects the true horror and filth of the actual words is glaringly obvious to even the most morally bankrupt person.

      • Elwin

        Agreed. Koran is not only vile but a repetitive garbled mishmash. Its primary message is obey or go to hell. I keep my study copy in the downstairs toilet next to my study copy of Mein Kampf.

  • herb benty

    The left are fools, madly in love with totalitarianism, even Islamic fascism that allowed to spread would eventually destroy the West. The left are godless, evil. stupid/pretending to be smart.

  • Silver Gonzales

    “I am outraged and embarrassed that an entity representing Israel would reject Mr. Galliano,” ADL National Director Abraham H. Foxman, said in a statement on Friday.

    Two years ago, Dior gave Galliano the boot over a video that surfaced of him making racist and anti-Semitic comments.

    A French court later ruled he had made “public insults based on origin, religious affiliation, race or ethnicity” in several incidents.

    In one incident, Galliano stated his love for Adolf Hitler at a Paris bar and told people he believed were Jewish that their mothers should have been gassed.

    “To reject someone who has now embraced Israel and the Jewish people is outrageous. This is not the lesson that you give your children. Rejecting someone who gave a sincere apology is not Jewish tradition. We are a people that forgive and this is not the way to overcome bigotry.”

    “Mr. Galliano is a changed man,” the statement continued.

    Abe Foxman apparently earns over $400,000 to masquerade as an honorable human.

    • defcon 4

      Funnily enough the French bastages had no problems successfully persecuting, oops prosecuting, Brigitte Bardot for her “racist” comments about islam0nazis.

  • defcon 4

    All Germans were not Nazis, but all muslimes are islam0fascists.

  • defcon 4

    Are we heading towards a state (an islam0fascist state) that outlaws all criticism of islam as “hate speech”?

    • Moa

      Yes.

      Hillary Clinton co-sponsored UN HRC Resolution 16/18 that seeks to criminalize speech that defames religion. To be applied to all UN Member States.

      Think about that, a then sitting US Secretary of State pushing for a ban on Free Speech – especially truthful Free Speech. This infringes not only on the First Amendment Rights of US citizens, but also undermines Free Speech for people around the World.

      Hillary Clinton is evil. The Democrats are evil. They do not support Free Speech except when they want to speak. They do not support the right of anyone else to speak freely. That is evil.

      • Porkys2istan

        Lucky for us Americans International Law does NOT supersede US law.

        Half the countries in the UN are not even democracies, and the largest voting block is the “Organization of Islamic Cooperation”. Anybody who thinks that America (left or right) would ever follow a UN ‘law’ is hiding from the blue helmeted soldiers in the FEMA internment camp. :P

        • GODnCOUNTRY

          Amen to that brother.

        • Moa

          Well, Obama wants Congress to pre-approve him negotiating the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) which would cede US sovereignty to the UN, WTO etc. The usual procedure is for Obama to negotiate and Congress to then consider and ratify, but rat-fink Obama wants to shut that democratic process down.

          Then you have activist judges ruling in cases that pit Sharia against the US Constitution. In at least 29 cases the Constitution has lost out to Sharia. It has gotten so bad that several States have had to pass ALAC (American Laws for American Courts) laws to prevent the judges from doing this. Of course, the Obama regime and Eric Holder’s DoJ has fought ALAC tooth n ‘ nail (eg. in Oklahoma).

          I wouldn’t be so sure about US sovereignty being preserved. It is clear that Obama, Clinton and Holder (as well as many others) are actively working to take down the US Constitution and protections from the predations of the corrupt bodies such as the OIC-dominated UN

          .

          • defcon 4

            It’s not time for ALAC laws anymore, it’s time for secession from a corrupt federal government.

  • dougjmiller

    Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller are true heroes in the struggle to preserve civilization. They should be honored in the battle to save mankind from the genocidal aggression by Islamic extremists.

  • Blake

    why does this group not name islam as a hate group since they definitely qualify

    • The March Hare

      This group running the government or this group on this web site? This government will never do it. This group doesn’t need to do it. We talk about who and what they really are without using an “official” government approved label.

  • tran

    Maybe someone should start a league and list some of the jihadist groups as hate group. And should start lawsuits against them until they go bankrupt. Then maybe they’ll stop publishing and making false allegations.

    • defcon 4

      Interesting idea.

  • Em

    The ADL advocates for the genocidal concept of white privilege, unfortunately.

    They heartlessly do this in the face of the mostly white veterans ad their families who liberated Jews from the camps.

    FrontPage Mag should join with righteous Jews everywhere in calling for the deconstruction of the ADL and their replacement with a non-hateful organization that truly advocates for the anti-defamation of Jews and others alike. They are dangerous to the Jewish people, and treasonous to those who liberated them.

  • MrNice

    Mr. Spencer works under the guise of bringing the truth to the people when in fact he is an artist who has learned the art of misinformation. In addition, he is not qualified to discuss the subject of Islam, for which he has raised a personal campaign against. He has a lack of knowledge of Islamic jurisprudence, Qur’anic hermeneutics and the associated contextual history behind each verse, no personal Arabic knowledge. His degree was in early Christian studies for his masters. The only thing we can say is that he is a self-study – not much merit – on Islam since 1980.

    If a Muslim, scholar or not, began to denounce Christianity, he would not be taken seriously, and possibly be castigated due to his unqualified status as a Christian scholar. Reza Aslan, a New Testament Christian Scholar but follows Islam, was branded as unqualified to discuss the subject of Jesus Christ simply because he is a Muslim. Another point, a person without a doctorate/masters/bachelors in evolutionary biology cannot be a subject-matter expert on evolution of life no matter how much self-study he has done.

    In an article discussing Bat Ye’or’s 2005 book Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis, French academic historian Ivan Jablonka writes that Spencer’s views lack academic seriousness.

    Robert Spencer provides broken references without any context, and most of the time no references at all. He manipulates facts for the purposes of spreading his own crude agenda – unknown. Would you get your medical advice from Dr. Kevorkian?

    He is by definition a hate-monger because he cites his arguments from extremist websites – radical Christian groups., neo-nazis, etc. This is the reason why he was put on the list of the Anti-Defamation league and Southern Poverty of known hate-mongers in the first place, a fact he forgot to mention here.

    He spews politically motivated hate ideology against a faith (apples & oranges) on false assumptions – unknown if it is intentional or through ignorance, you be the judge. He is an extremist and the irony is that his day job is to publicly denounce them.

  • DarthYan

    Oh my god. Six people died? are you serious? Anyone who cites Jihadwatch looses credibility

  • hobbes007

    “Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller were both banned from Britain because of their founding of “anti-Muslim hate groups.”

    In that case Muslims should be banned for preaching and following an ideology of hate against all non-Muslims.