<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>FrontPage Magazine &#187; robert spencer</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/tag/robert-spencer/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 31 Dec 2014 16:20:06 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>Video: Robert Spencer on the Muslim Brotherhood in the American Heartland</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/frontpagemag-com/video-robert-spencer-on-the-muslim-brotherhood-in-the-american-heartland/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=video-robert-spencer-on-the-muslim-brotherhood-in-the-american-heartland</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/frontpagemag-com/video-robert-spencer-on-the-muslim-brotherhood-in-the-american-heartland/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Dec 2014 05:47:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Frontpagemag.com]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Brotherhood]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mark Christian]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Omaha]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[robert spencer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tri-Faith Initiative]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=247640</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[How Jews and Christians are being dangerously naive about the "Tri-Faith Initiative" in Omaha, Nebraska. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/pk.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-247648" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/pk.jpg" alt="pk" width="258" height="183" /></a><strong>[For more information on the Tri-Faith Initiative, contact Dr. Mark Christian at mark@globalfaithinstitute.org.]</strong></p>
<p>Below is the video of a talk given by <strong>Robert Spencer </strong>in April, 2014, at a <a href="http://globalfaithinstitute.org/">Global Faith Institute</a> event in Omaha, Nebraska. A brief note from Spencer accompanies the video:</p>
<p><em>&#8220;Omaha is the site of the <a href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/joeherring/susie-buffetts-muslim-brotherhood-romance-1/">Tri-Faith Initiative</a>, featuring Jews and Christians being dangerously naive about the Muslim Brotherhood ties of the Muslims with whom they are partnering. But because the initiative is <a href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/joeherring/susie-buffetts-muslim-brotherhood-romance-1/" target="_blank">backed by the daughter of one of the richest men on earth</a>, few dare to take it on — with the notable exception of <a href="http://globalfaithinstitute.org/about/dr-mark-christian/" target="_blank">Dr. Mark Christian</a> of the Global Faith Institute, an ex-Muslim who ran away from certain death for his apostasy to safe haven in America, as have many others who cherish their freedom and liberty — only to find the same oppressive force he fled following him to America’s heartland.&#8221;</em></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><iframe src="//www.youtube.com/embed/KBaZY3cFGuA" width="460" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></p>
<p>Also don&#8217;t miss <strong>Dr. Mark Christian</strong> discuss <strong><span id="fbPhotoSnowliftCaption" class="fbPhotosPhotoCaption" tabindex="0" data-ft="{&quot;tn&quot;:&quot;K&quot;}"><span class="hasCaption">Confronting the Muslim Brotherhood in the American Heartland </span></span></strong><span id="fbPhotoSnowliftCaption" class="fbPhotosPhotoCaption" tabindex="0" data-ft="{&quot;tn&quot;:&quot;K&quot;}"><span class="hasCaption">on</span></span><strong><span id="fbPhotoSnowliftCaption" class="fbPhotosPhotoCaption" tabindex="0" data-ft="{&quot;tn&quot;:&quot;K&quot;}"><span class="hasCaption"> The Glazov Gang:</span></span></strong><span id="fbPhotoSnowliftCaption" class="fbPhotosPhotoCaption" tabindex="0" data-ft="{&quot;tn&quot;:&quot;K&quot;}"><span class="hasCaption"><br />
</span></span><span id="fbPhotoSnowliftCaption" class="fbPhotosPhotoCaption" tabindex="0" data-ft="{&quot;tn&quot;:&quot;K&quot;}"></span></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><iframe src="//www.youtube.com/embed/3gNnqePU5oQ" width="460" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></p>
<p><strong>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </strong><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank"><strong>Click here</strong></a><strong>.   </strong></p>
<p><a href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf"><strong>Subscribe</strong></a><strong> to Frontpage&#8217;s TV show, <em>The Glazov Gang</em>, and </strong><a href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang"><strong>LIKE</strong></a><strong> it on </strong><a href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang"><strong>Facebook.</strong></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/frontpagemag-com/video-robert-spencer-on-the-muslim-brotherhood-in-the-american-heartland/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>6</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Robert Spencer on “Trying to Make Islam Un-Islamic” – on The Glazov Gang</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/frontpagemag-com/robert-spencer-on-trying-to-make-islam-un-islamic-on-the-glazov-gang/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=robert-spencer-on-trying-to-make-islam-un-islamic-on-the-glazov-gang</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/frontpagemag-com/robert-spencer-on-trying-to-make-islam-un-islamic-on-the-glazov-gang/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Sep 2014 04:45:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Frontpagemag.com]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Glazov Gang]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Denial]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ISIS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Islam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jihad]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[robert spencer]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=241587</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The danger of our leaders' attempt to dissociate Islam from the violence committed in its name.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/johnkerry.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-241589" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/johnkerry-450x299.jpg" alt="U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry testifies at the Senate Foreign Relations Committee while on Capitol Hill in Washington" width="289" height="192" /></a><strong>[<a href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf">Subscribe</a> to <em>The Glazov Gang</em> and <a href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang">LIKE</a> it on <a href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang">Facebook.]</a></strong></p>
<p>This week&#8217;s <em>Glazov Gang</em> was guest-hosted by Renaissance Woman <strong>Ann Marie Murrell</strong>, the Editor-in Chief of <a href="http://www.politichicks.tv/">PolitiChicks.com</a> and the co-author of the new book, <a href="https://www.facebook.com/wwrwbook">What Women Really Want</a>.</p>
<p>Ann-Marie was joined by <strong>Robert Spencer</strong>, the director of <a href="http://www.jihadwatch.org/">JihadWatch.org</a> and the author of the new book, <span id="productTitle" class="a-size-large"><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Arab-Winter-Comes-America-Truth/dp/1621572048">Arab Winter Comes to America</a>. </span></p>
<p><span id="productTitle" class="a-size-large">Robert came on the program to discuss <strong>Trying to Make Islam Un-Islamic</strong><em><strong>,</strong> </em>analyzing the danger of our leaders &#8216; attempt to dissociate Islam from the violence committed in its name.</span></p>
<p>Don&#8217;t miss it:</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><iframe src="//www.youtube.com/embed/S8kxWhX0S50" width="460" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe><a id="js_10" class="profileLink _5f0v" tabindex="0" href="https://www.facebook.com/annmariemurrell" data-hovercard="/ajax/hovercard/user.php?id=1258545911"></a></p>
<p style="text-align: left;">Don&#8217;t miss this week&#8217;s second <em>Glazov Gang</em> episode in which Ann-Marie interviews Shillman Journalism Fellow <strong>Daniel Greenfield</strong> about <strong>&#8220;ISIS Rising&#8221;</strong>:</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><iframe src="//www.youtube.com/embed/9E8gGysQZzU" width="460" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></p>
<p><strong>To watch previous <em>Glazov Gang</em> episodes, </strong><a href="http://jamieglazov.com/"><strong>Click Here</strong></a><strong>.</strong></p>
<p><a href="https://www.facebook.com/jamie.glazov"><strong>LIKE</strong></a><strong> Jamie Glazov’s </strong><a href="https://www.facebook.com/jamie.glazov"><strong>Fan Page</strong></a><strong> on Facebook.</strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/frontpagemag-com/robert-spencer-on-trying-to-make-islam-un-islamic-on-the-glazov-gang/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Robert Spencer on the Fog of Jihad-Denial &#8212; on The Glazov Gang</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/frontpagemag-com/robert-spencer-on-the-fog-of-jihad-denial-on-the-glazov-gang/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=robert-spencer-on-the-fog-of-jihad-denial-on-the-glazov-gang</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/frontpagemag-com/robert-spencer-on-the-fog-of-jihad-denial-on-the-glazov-gang/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Sep 2014 04:00:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Frontpagemag.com]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Denial]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ISIS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jihad]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[robert spencer]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=241379</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The heavy price we pay for our culture's delusions on Islam. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/obamaholder.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-241384" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/obamaholder-450x288.jpg" alt="obamaholder" width="258" height="165" /></a><strong>[<a href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf">Subscribe</a> to <em>The Glazov Gang</em> and <a href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang">LIKE</a> it on <a href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang">Facebook.]</a></strong></p>
<p>This week&#8217;s <em>Glazov Gang</em> was guest-hosted by Renaissance Woman <strong>Ann Marie Murrell</strong>, the Editor-in Chief of <a href="http://www.politichicks.tv/">PolitiChicks.com</a> and the co-author of the new book, <a href="https://www.facebook.com/wwrwbook">What Women Really Want</a>.</p>
<p>Ann-Marie was joined by <strong>Robert Spencer</strong>, the director of <a href="http://www.jihadwatch.org/">JihadWatch.org</a> and the author of the new book, <span id="productTitle" class="a-size-large"><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Arab-Winter-Comes-America-Truth/dp/1621572048">Arab Winter Comes to America</a>. Robert came on the program to discuss <strong>The Fog of Jihad-Denial</strong>, analyzing the heavy price we pay for our culture&#8217;s delusions on Islam.<br />
</span></p>
<p>Don&#8217;t miss it:</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><iframe src="//www.youtube.com/embed/S8kxWhX0S50" width="460" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe><a id="js_10" class="profileLink _5f0v" tabindex="0" href="https://www.facebook.com/annmariemurrell" data-hovercard="/ajax/hovercard/user.php?id=1258545911"></a></p>
<p style="text-align: left;">Don&#8217;t miss this week&#8217;s second <em>Glazov Gang</em> episode in which Ann-Marie interviews  Shillman Journalism Fellow <strong>Daniel Greenfield</strong> about <strong>&#8220;ISIS Rising&#8221;</strong>:</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><iframe src="//www.youtube.com/embed/9E8gGysQZzU" width="460" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></p>
<p><strong>To watch previous <em>Glazov Gang</em> episodes, </strong><a href="http://jamieglazov.com/"><strong>Click Here</strong></a><strong>.</strong></p>
<p><a href="https://www.facebook.com/jamie.glazov"><strong>LIKE</strong></a><strong> Jamie Glazov’s </strong><a href="https://www.facebook.com/jamie.glazov"><strong>Fan Page</strong></a><strong> on Facebook.</strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/frontpagemag-com/robert-spencer-on-the-fog-of-jihad-denial-on-the-glazov-gang/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Islamic State is Not Islamic? &#8212; on The Glazov Gang</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/frontpagemag-com/the-islamic-state-is-not-islamic-on-the-glazov-gang/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-islamic-state-is-not-islamic-on-the-glazov-gang</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/frontpagemag-com/the-islamic-state-is-not-islamic-on-the-glazov-gang/#respond</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Sep 2014 04:35:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Frontpagemag.com]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Glazov Gang]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ISIS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Islam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jihad]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Raymond Ibrahim]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[robert spencer]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=240834</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Scholars Robert Spencer and Raymond Ibrahim unveil the true roots of Jihad and the dire danger of denying them.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/koran3.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-240844" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/koran3-450x300.jpg" alt="koran3" width="285" height="190" /></a><strong>[<a href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf">Subscribe</a> to <em>The Glazov Gang</em> and <a href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang">LIKE</a> it on <a href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang">Facebook</a>.]</strong></p>
<p>In his recent speech about his ISIS “policy,” President Obama emphasized one of his favorite themes: that ISIS is not Islamic. “No religion,” he assured the world, “condones the killing of innocents… ISIL is a terrorist organization, pure and simple. And it has no vision other than the slaughter of all who stand in its way.”</p>
<p>In response to the president’s statement on the supposed un-Islamic nature of the terrorist Islamic State, Frontpage is re-running <em>The Glazov Gang’s </em>feature interviews with two of the world’s leading scholars on Islam: JihadWatch&#8217;s Robert Spencer and Shillman Journalism Fellow Raymond Ibrahim.</p>
<p>Both discussions unveil the true roots of Jihadi terrorist groups such as ISIS and reveal the lie behind the statements such as those recently made by Obama denying the Islamic role in Islamic terror. Spencer and Ibrahim both issue a dire warning about the hazardous danger our society faces by deceiving itself about the real enemy we face.</p>
<p>See both interview below:</p>
<p><strong>Robert Spencer:</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><iframe src="//www.youtube.com/embed/MNA-WH-kBzI" width="460" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></p>
<p><strong>Raymond Ibrahim:</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><iframe src="//www.youtube.com/embed/bFkGgNsqQ_4" width="460" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></p>
<p><strong>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </strong><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank"><strong>Click here</strong></a><strong>.   </strong></p>
<p><a href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf"><strong>Subscribe</strong></a><strong> to Frontpage&#8217;s TV show, <em>The Glazov Gang</em>, and </strong><a href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang"><strong>LIKE</strong></a><strong> it on </strong><a href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang"><strong>Facebook.</strong></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/frontpagemag-com/the-islamic-state-is-not-islamic-on-the-glazov-gang/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Robert Spencer on &#8220;Arab Winter Comes to America&#8221; &#8212; on The Glazov Gang</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/frontpagemag-com/robert-spencer-on-arab-winter-comes-to-america-on-the-glazov-gang/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=robert-spencer-on-arab-winter-comes-to-america-on-the-glazov-gang</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/frontpagemag-com/robert-spencer-on-arab-winter-comes-to-america-on-the-glazov-gang/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Aug 2014 04:00:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Frontpagemag.com]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Glazov Gang]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Arab Winter Comes to America]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ISIS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Islam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[koran]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[robert spencer]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=237226</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The director of Jihad Watch unveils the truth about the war we’re in -- and our culture's denial about it. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/robert.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-237228" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/robert.jpg" alt="robert" width="235" height="313" /></a><strong>[<a href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf">Subscribe</a> to <em>The Glazov Gang</em> and <a href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang">LIKE</a> it on <a href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang">Facebook.]</a></strong></p>
<p>This week&#8217;s Glazov Gang was joined by <strong>Robert Spencer, </strong>the director of <a href="http://www.jihadwatch.org/">Jihad Watch</a>, a program of the David Horowitz Freedom Center, and the author of thirteen books, including two <em>New York Times</em> bestsellers, <em>The Truth About Muhammad</em> and <em>The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades). </em>His latest book is <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Arab-Winter-Comes-America-Truth/dp/1621572048"><em>Arab Winter Comes to America: The Truth About the War We’re In</em></a>.</p>
<p>Robert joined the show to discuss <strong><em> Arab Winter Comes to America</em></strong>, analyzing the threat of Islamic Jihad and the West&#8217;s denial about it. He shed light on <em>ISIS&#8217;s Islamic Inspirations</em>, <em>How Jihad Denial Enables Jihad</em>, <em>Why Jihadists are Welcome in the UK But Not Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller</em>, and much, much more.</p>
<p>Don&#8217;t miss it!</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><iframe src="//www.youtube.com/embed/MNA-WH-kBzI" width="460" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></p>
<p>Don&#8217;t miss this week&#8217;s second episode with<strong> Dr. Anna Geifman</strong>,a scholar who has taught in the History Dept. at Boston University for over 20 years and is now senior researcher at the Dept. of Political Studies at the University of Bar Ilan in Israel. Her latest book is <em><a href="Death%20Orders: The Vanguard of Modern Terrorism in Revolutionary Russia">Death Orders: The Vanguard of Modern Terrorism in Revolutionary Russia</a>.</em></p>
<p>Dr. Geifman joined the show to discuss <em><strong>Life in Israel Under Siege</strong>, </em>sharing life in Jerusalem during a state of war &#8212; and what it means to confront a death cult. She also discusses <em>Why Death Cultures Target Children</em>, <em>Why The World Must Accept the Reality of Good and Evil</em>, <em>Similarities Between Bolshevik Terror and Hamas</em>, and much, much <span id="fbPhotoSnowliftCaption" class="fbPhotosPhotoCaption" tabindex="0"><span class="hasCaption">more: </span></span><strong><br />
</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><iframe src="//www.youtube.com/embed/-Rpug8-FL58" width="460" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></p>
<p><strong>To watch previous <em>Glazov Gang</em> episodes, </strong><a href="http://jamieglazov.com/"><strong>Click Here</strong></a><strong>.</strong></p>
<p><a href="https://www.facebook.com/jamie.glazov"><strong>LIKE</strong></a><strong> Jamie Glazov’s </strong><a href="https://www.facebook.com/jamie.glazov"><strong>Fan Page</strong></a><strong> on Facebook.</strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/frontpagemag-com/robert-spencer-on-arab-winter-comes-to-america-on-the-glazov-gang/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>8</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Dr. Anna Geifman on &#8220;Life in Israel Under Siege&#8221; &#8212; on The Glazov Gang</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/frontpagemag-com/dr-anna-geifman-on-life-in-israel-under-siege-on-the-glazov-gang/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=dr-anna-geifman-on-life-in-israel-under-siege-on-the-glazov-gang</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/frontpagemag-com/dr-anna-geifman-on-life-in-israel-under-siege-on-the-glazov-gang/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Jul 2014 04:26:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Frontpagemag.com]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Glazov Gang]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Anna Geifman]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Arab Winter Comes to America]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[child sacrifice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[death cult]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hamas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Israel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jew-Hate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[robert spencer]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=237155</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The author of “Death Orders” shares life in Jerusalem during a state of war -- and what it means to confront a death cult. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/ispl.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-237157" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/ispl-450x253.jpg" alt="&gt; on July 20, 2014 in Sderot, Israel." width="322" height="181" /></a>[<a href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf"><strong>Subscribe</strong></a><strong> to <em>The Glazov Gang</em> and </strong><a href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang"><strong>LIKE</strong></a><strong> it on </strong><a href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang"><strong>Facebook.]</strong></a></p>
<p>This week&#8217;s Glazov Gang was joined by<strong> Dr. Anna Geifman</strong>,a scholar who has taught in the History Dept. at Boston University for over 20 years and is now senior researcher at the Dept. of Political Studies at the University of Bar Ilan in Israel. Her latest book is <em><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Death-Orders-Terrorism-Revolutionary-International/dp/0275997529">Death Orders: The Vanguard of Modern Terrorism in Revolutionary Russia</a>.</em></p>
<p>Dr. Geifman joined the show to discuss <em><strong>Life in Israel Under Siege</strong>, </em>sharing life in Jerusalem during a state of war &#8212; and what it means to confront a death cult. She also discusses <em>Why Death Cultures Target Children</em>, <em>Why The World Must Accept the Reality of Good and Evil</em>, <em>Similarities Between Bolshevik Terror and Hamas</em>, and much,  much <span id="fbPhotoSnowliftCaption" class="fbPhotosPhotoCaption" tabindex="0"><span class="hasCaption">more: </span></span><strong><br />
</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><iframe src="//www.youtube.com/embed/-Rpug8-FL58" width="460" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></p>
<p>Don&#8217;t miss this week&#8217;s second episode with <strong>Robert Spencer, </strong>the director of <a href="http://www.jihadwatch.org/">Jihad Watch</a>, a program of the David Horowitz Freedom Center, and the author of thirteen books, including two <em>New York Times</em> bestsellers, <em>The Truth About Muhammad</em> and <em>The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades). </em>His latest book is <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Arab-Winter-Comes-America-Truth/dp/1621572048"><em>Arab Winter Comes to America: The Truth About the War We’re In</em></a>.</p>
<p>Robert joined the show to discuss <strong><em> Arab Winter Comes to America</em></strong>, analyzing the threat of Islamic Jihad and the West&#8217;s denial about it. He shed light on <em>ISIS&#8217;s Islamic Inspirations</em>, <em>How Jihad Denial Enables Jihad</em>, <em>Why Jihadists are Welcome in the UK But Not Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller</em>, and much, much more.</p>
<p>Don&#8217;t miss it!</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><iframe src="//www.youtube.com/embed/MNA-WH-kBzI" width="460" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></p>
<p><strong>To watch previous <em>Glazov Gang</em> episodes, </strong><a href="http://jamieglazov.com/"><strong>Click Here</strong></a><strong>.</strong></p>
<p><a href="https://www.facebook.com/jamie.glazov"><strong>LIKE</strong></a><strong> Jamie Glazov’s </strong><a href="https://www.facebook.com/jamie.glazov"><strong>Fan Page</strong></a><strong> on Facebook.</strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/frontpagemag-com/dr-anna-geifman-on-life-in-israel-under-siege-on-the-glazov-gang/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>7</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Robert Spencer on &#8220;The Unasked Question About Islam&#8221; &#8212; on The Glazov Gang</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/frontpagemag-com/robert-spencer-on-the-unasked-question-about-islam-on-the-glazov-gang/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=robert-spencer-on-the-unasked-question-about-islam-on-the-glazov-gang</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/frontpagemag-com/robert-spencer-on-the-unasked-question-about-islam-on-the-glazov-gang/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Jul 2014 04:10:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Frontpagemag.com]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Arab Winter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Islam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jihad]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jihad Denial]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[robert spencer]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=237407</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The director of Jihad Watch sheds light on how Jihad Denial enables Jihad.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/lk98.jpg"><img class="alignleft size-full wp-image-237412" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/lk98.jpg" alt="lk98" width="275" height="197" /></a><strong>[<a href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf">Subscribe</a> to <em>The Glazov Gang</em> and <a href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang">LIKE</a> it on <a href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang">Facebook.]</a></strong></p>
<p>This week&#8217;s Glazov Gang was joined by <strong>Robert Spencer, </strong>the director of <a href="http://www.jihadwatch.org/">Jihad Watch</a>, a program of the David Horowitz Freedom Center, and the author of thirteen books, including two <em>New York Times</em> bestsellers, <em>The Truth About Muhammad</em> and <em>The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades). </em>His latest book is <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Arab-Winter-Comes-America-Truth/dp/1621572048"><em>Arab Winter Comes to America: The Truth About the War We’re In</em></a>.</p>
<p>Robert joined the show to discuss <strong><em> The Unasked Question About Islam</em></strong>, analyzing the threat of Islamic Jihad and the West&#8217;s denial about it. He shed light on <em>ISIS&#8217;s Islamic Inspirations</em>, <em>How Jihad Denial Enables Jihad</em>, <em>Why Jihadists are Welcome in the UK But Not Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller</em>, and much, much more.</p>
<p>Don&#8217;t miss it!</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><iframe src="//www.youtube.com/embed/MNA-WH-kBzI" width="460" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></p>
<p>Don&#8217;t miss this week&#8217;s second episode with<strong> Dr. Anna Geifman</strong>,a scholar who has taught in the History Dept. at Boston University for over 20 years and is now senior researcher at the Dept. of Political Studies at the University of Bar Ilan in Israel. Her latest book is <em><a href="Death%20Orders: The Vanguard of Modern Terrorism in Revolutionary Russia">Death Orders: The Vanguard of Modern Terrorism in Revolutionary Russia</a>.</em></p>
<p>Dr. Geifman joined the show to discuss <em><strong>Life in Israel Under Siege</strong>, </em>sharing life in Jerusalem during a state of war &#8212; and what it means to confront a death cult. She also discusses <em>Why Death Cultures Target Children</em>, <em>Why The World Must Accept the Reality of Good and Evil</em>, <em>Similarities Between Bolshevik Terror and Hamas</em>, and much, much <span id="fbPhotoSnowliftCaption" class="fbPhotosPhotoCaption" tabindex="0"><span class="hasCaption">more: </span></span><strong><br />
</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><iframe src="//www.youtube.com/embed/-Rpug8-FL58" width="460" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></p>
<p><strong>To watch previous <em>Glazov Gang</em> episodes, </strong><a href="http://jamieglazov.com/"><strong>Click Here</strong></a><strong>.</strong></p>
<p><a href="https://www.facebook.com/jamie.glazov"><strong>LIKE</strong></a><strong> Jamie Glazov’s </strong><a href="https://www.facebook.com/jamie.glazov"><strong>Fan Page</strong></a><strong> on Facebook.</strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/frontpagemag-com/robert-spencer-on-the-unasked-question-about-islam-on-the-glazov-gang/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Robert Spencer: We Have Met the Enemy and He Is Us</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/frontpagemag-com/robert-spencer-we-have-met-the-enemy-and-he-is-us/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=robert-spencer-we-have-met-the-enemy-and-he-is-us</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/frontpagemag-com/robert-spencer-we-have-met-the-enemy-and-he-is-us/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Jun 2014 04:45:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Frontpagemag.com]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Arab Spring]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Islam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jihad]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Radical]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[robert spencer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[truth]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=234836</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Anti-jihad warrior warns of the dangers we face when truth becomes forbidden knowledge. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Editor’s note: Below are the video and transcript to Robert Spencer’s address at the Freedom Center’s 2014 Texas Weekend. The event took place May 2nd-4th at the Gaylord Texan Resort and Convention Center in Grapevine, Texas.</strong></p>
<p><iframe src="//player.vimeo.com/video/97581204" width="500" height="281" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></p>
<p>ROBERT SPENCER: Thank you very much. Thanks for coming.</p>
<p>This book, The Arab Winter Comes to America: The Truth About the War We’re In, is necessary because the truth about the war we’re in is so completely obscured these days, such that we’re in a very strange situation.</p>
<p>We are, in this room right now, the children and heirs of the greatest civilization the world has ever known. The Judeo-Christian West has given the world its notions of human rights, freedom of speech, the dignity of all human beings and so on, the concepts of the importance of human rights that are held universally around the world by all cultures, except one.</p>
<p>And so that culture that rejects those understandings of human rights is aggressive, violent, intolerant and more confidently advancing than it has in centuries at this point. And yet we know our ideas are better, what we say is the truth, and that we stand for better principles.</p>
<p>So why is it that the West is, at this point, so confused and, indeed, retreating before the advance of Islamic Jihad, and not only Islamic Jihad, but Islamic supremacism, the spread of concepts of Islamic law into the West and the undermining of the foundations of the civilization that has made the West great? Why is this happening?</p>
<p>In the first place, the answer comes, of course, from the great philosopher, Walt Kelly, the cartoonist who wrote the cartoon, Pogo, which some of you may be old enough to remember, where we said, We have met the enemy and he is us.</p>
<p>Islamic Jihadis would not have been able to bomb the Boston Marathon or to shoot 13 Americans dead at Fort Hood or to shoot two U.S. military men outside a recruitment center in Little Rock, Arkansas, or mount so many of the foiled Jihad plots that we have seen over the last few years were it not for us, were it not for the loss of our societal self-confidence and cultural self-confidence and the blanketing denial and willful ignorance that manifest our response to the Jihad threat in general, even among the people who seem to be taking a strong stance.</p>
<p>Couple of examples. You may have heard a few days ago that Subway, the restaurant chain, in the United Kingdom, in Great Britain, 200 Subway restaurants are no longer going to serve anything with pork in it &#8212; no ham, no bacon on your sub &#8212; and they will only serve halal meat.</p>
<p>Now, they said that they were doing this in response to overwhelming demand from their &#8212; and I quote &#8212; multicultural customers, but if you think about that a minute, what if you want ham on your sub. Well, you can’t go to Subway anymore, at least those 200 Subways in Great Britain. In other words, it was not a concession to multicultural customers. It was not multiculturalism that was served by the decision. It was monoculturalism. It was a single culture. If you are a Muslim or if you are willing to obey and adhere to Islamic food laws, then you can go to Subway in Britain. Otherwise, you’re out of luck. You gotta go somewhere else.</p>
<p>Now, this might seem to be a trivial example, but the fact is that there are still not all that many Muslims in Britain to warrant 200 restaurants of a chain being dedicated solely to their preferences, but they have so much power and influence in Britain now that what Subway did is no doubt just the first of many such decisions by other restaurant chains and represents, in truth, the wave of the future, as is evidenced by a much more ominous example that also happened just a few days ago.</p>
<p>There is a politician in Britain named Paul Weston, who I have had the pleasure of meeting, and he is a fine man who stands for the principles of Western civilization. And he heads up a new political party in Britain called Liberty GB.</p>
<p>And he was speaking, he was giving a speech last week, and in the speech he quoted Winston Churchill. Winston Churchill has said, as you may know, some very critical things about Islam, and he said that Islam is in a human being what hydrophobia is in a dog. And he decried the oppression of women under Islamic law. And he said other things that Muslims have found offensive, although what he said in terms of the oppression of women and the other factual statements that he made were entirely correct.</p>
<p>Paul Weston was quoting Churchill, whereupon a woman in the crowd exclaimed, &#8220;This is disgusting,&#8221; called the police. The police came quickly, arrested Weston, and he is facing trial and could be jailed for two years for the crime of quoting Winston Churchill.</p>
<p>Now, this shows exactly how much Great Britain and how much the West has changed since the time of Churchill. And what it manifests is a sense that the British authorities have that to speak the truth about Islam, to challenge Islamic Jihad, to say frankly that there’s something wrong with Islamic law in its institutionalized oppression of women, in its institutionalized oppression of non-Muslims and its denial of freedom of speech, that is, according to the British authorities, racial and religious harassment and thus to be prosecuted.</p>
<p>Now, the question will become, as Paul Weston faces trial, is truth a defense? And that’s an open question. If Paul Weston can show that what he was saying or what he was quoting from Churchill is factually accurate, he ought to be let off, right? One would think, but things aren’t so easy anymore.</p>
<p>The Grand Mufti and Sheikh ul-Islam of the Caucasus, Allahshukur Pashazadeh, he complained recently that in the West there are some people who even try to identify Islam with terrorism, and he was indignant about this.</p>
<p>Now, of course, it doesn’t really take a rocket scientist to know that the people who are identifying Islam with terrorism are not people like me or Paul Weston. They are Islamic Jihadis, who ascribe their actions to Jihad and Islam on a routine basis.</p>
<p>This is not only happening just in England either. In the United States, after many, many delays, the 9/11 Memorial and Museum is about to open in New York, and some people were invited last week to go in and see the exhibits as they had been prepared. In the course of this, they watched a video that is available &#8212; going to be available at the museum in which the highjackers’ attachments to al-Qaeda are explained, and what al-Qaeda is is explained.</p>
<p>There were some local Muslim leaders who saw that video and were enraged, and they said, &#8220;You cannot have this video here.&#8221; It’s Islamophobic. This video gives the impression that there’s some connection between Islam and terrorism. This video gives the impression that the highjackers were Islamic Jihadis. (Laughter.)</p>
<p>And the museum immediately took the words “Islamic terrorists” off its website. Right now, they’re holding firm about the video, but considering that the museum board is made up entirely of New York liberals, I don’t think they’re going to hold out very long.</p>
<p>But the fact is that what we have is essentially a war on the truth, a war on free speech. If you read the &#8212; There is a letter, actually, that the 9/11 plotters, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and the other plotters, who are still being held and their trial is held up in miles of red tape, they wrote in 2009, when their trial was just supposed to be beginning, a response, called, The Islamic Response to the Government’s Nine Accusations. The Islamic Response to the Government’s Nine Accusations. That is the nine charges that they face for masterminding the 9/11 attack.</p>
<p>And in that they wrote &#8212; Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and the others wrote, Many thanks to God for His kind gesture in choosing us to perform the act of Jihad &#8212; that is, the 9/11 attacks &#8212; for His cause and to defend Islam and Muslims. Therefore, killing you and fighting you, destroying you and terrorizing you, responding back to your attacks are all considered to be a great, legitimate duty in our religion. These actions are our offerings to God.</p>
<p>And yet these Muslim leaders say that if you have a video about how they were in al-Qaeda it will link Islam with terrorism. Obviously, they linked Islam with terrorism. Obviously, they were the ones who said this.</p>
<p>But the Grand Mufti of the Caucasus is not the only Islamic leader or non-Muslim leader, for that matter, who pretends that it is spokesmen like Geert Wilders in the Netherlands and me in the United States and others who I work with in the United States who are actually pretending that this connection between Islam and terrorism is actual, when, really, it’s only incidental, that it’s as if these people just happened to be Muslims and for entirely other reasons they took down the towers, which is belied by their own words.</p>
<p>Now, all this would just be more idiocy and silliness were it not for the fact that the United States Government adopted this as its official policy, and that happened on October 19, 2011.</p>
<p>On October 19, 2011, 57 Muslim and allied organizations wrote a letter to John Brennan, who was then the Homeland Security advisor, and, now, of course, is the head of the CIA, and in it they demanded that counter-terror trainers, including me &#8212; and they named me specifically, and a few others &#8212; because I had been training FBI members in &#8212; FBI and military in the nature and magnitude of this threat, teaching them about Islam and Jihad. Obviously, you can’t defeat an enemy that you don’t understand.</p>
<p>Anyway, they wrote to Brennan and they said, You gotta get rid of Spencer and these other people, and you have to cleanse all counter-terror training materials of any mention of Islam and Jihad in connection with terrorism. And they pointed to things like a PowerPoint presentation that said that people might be on the path to become home-grown Islamic extremists if they are wearing traditional Muslim attire, growing facial hair, frequently attending mosque, traveling to a Muslim country and have increased activity in a pro-Muslim social group or political cause.</p>
<p>Now, those things are manifestly true. It is true that virtually all Jihad terrorists in the United States and elsewhere, before they start plotting their terrorist activity, start to wear traditional Muslim attire, grow facial hair, frequently attend mosque, travel to a Muslim country and increase activity in a pro-Muslim social group. This is true of many secular and ostensibly moderate Muslims, notably Mike Hawash out in Portland.</p>
<p>In 2000-2001, he was known &#8212; He was very popular in his community. He was a big community activist. I mean, I’m talking about in the general community in Portland. A secular, moderate Muslim, he was an executive at Intel, the corporation, had a $360,000 a year salary, wrote some technical books that are still available at Amazon, at least last time I looked, and a pillar of the community.</p>
<p>Then, he started to wear traditional Muslim attire, grew his facial hair, started to attend mosque frequently, and, ultimately, he was found to be recruiting people to go join up with the Taliban and al-Qaeda and fight against American troops in Afghanistan.</p>
<p>So, in other words, the presentation was entirely true and reasonable, but it was adduced, without any evidence, as a sign that the government was teaching Islamophobia to FBI and military personnel, and that that had to stop because it was breeding hate and victimizing innocent Muslims and so on.</p>
<p>John Brennan immediately complied. He wrote a letter back to Farhana Khera, who was the author of the letter in question on behalf of the 57 organizations. Farhana Khera is the head of a Muslim lawyers association called Muslim Advocates.</p>
<p>And he wrote back to Khera, and the letter was on White House stationary, as if to emphasize, we take this seriously at the very highest levels. And he told her that they would take care of this immediately. Not only would all counter-terror training materials be scrubbed of any mention of Islam and Jihad, but any agent of the FBI or any other agency who had been trained by Spencer or by any of these other horrible Islamophobes or who had read this material that they objected to would be reeducated.</p>
<p>How pleased Chairman Mao would have been.</p>
<p>Right around that time, and not coincidentally, the Russians told the FBI that Tamerlan Tsarnaev, who was later to become the Boston Marathon Jihad bomber, was a follower of radical Islam and a strong believer &#8212; that was their words, a follower of radical Islam and a strong believer &#8212; who had tried to join underground groups in Dagestan. Dagestan is in the Caucasus in southern Russia. It is a hotbed of al-Qaeda activity. The only underground groups in Dagestan are Jihad terror groups. So they were essentially telling the FBI in 2011 that Tamerlan Tsarnaev was an Islamic Jihad terrorist.</p>
<p>The FBI made a perfunctory investigation and decided that Tamerlan Tsarnaev was no threat, but consider the political culture of the FBI at the time that they received this information from the Russians. In the FBI, at that time, it was forbidden, it was just becoming forbidden to speak honestly about Islam and Jihad in connection with terrorism. So either the agent who received this material &#8212; agent or agents who received this material from the Russians, they either were part of the new regime and thought, Well, he’s a follower of radical Islam and a strong believer. How nice, or, they had been trained previously and they knew that material about Islam and Jihad, especially material referring to Muslims affecting Muslim dress, going to mosque frequently, wearing the long beard and so on, that that was no sign of radicalization, and that it was wrong and Islamophobic to think otherwise.</p>
<p>Whether they bought all that or not, they knew that it was not possible in the current political culture prevailing in the FBI to do anything serious about that, and so they didn’t.</p>
<p>The only time that any investigation or anything close to an investigation was actually made touching on Tamerlan Tsarnaev was when the FBI visited the Islamic Society of Boston, which is a mosque that was founded by Abdurahman Alamoudi, who is now in prison for funding al-Qaeda, and he was a close friend, by the way, of Republican strategist Grover Norquist.</p>
<p>Abdurahman Alamoudi founded the Islamic Society of Boston. It was attended not only by Tamerlan Tsarnaev, but by Tarek Mehanna, who is now doing 17 years in prison for aiding al-Qaeda, and by Aafia Siddiqui, who is serving 86 years in prison for trying to murder American soldiers in the name of Islam and Jihad.</p>
<p>The FBI went to that mosque, but they did not actually go to the mosque to investigate. They went to the mosque for outreach in order to reassure the Muslim community in Boston that their law-enforcement efforts were not Islamophobic and hateful and would not be targeting innocent Muslims. And, of course, innocent Muslims should not be targeted, but the question is should the FBI have concentrated solely on outreach in such an obvious hotbed of Jihad terror as the Islamic Society of Boston?</p>
<p>The Boston Globe loves the Islamic Society of Boston, and the local imam there is named Suhaib Webb, William Webb, until he converted to Islam. And Suhaib Webb has been the subject of several adoring pieces in the Boston Globe tauting his moderation.</p>
<p>You can also go on YouTube and see a video of Suhaib Webb where he says that secularism is a ridiculous ideology and the only way society should be ordered is by the law of Allah; that is, by Islamic law, which mandates discrimination against women, the discrimination against non-Muslims, the denial of the freedom of speech and so on, and is, in other words, inimical to constitutional values and freedoms in numerous ways. But he’s a moderate.</p>
<p>Now, if the FBI had dared or had known to take the &#8212; what they had gotten from the Russians seriously &#8212; And then they complained, of course, that the Russians didn’t tell them enough and that they went back to the Russians and the Russians wouldn’t give them more information. What more did they need? They had enough already. And since when has it become the responsibility of Russia to do our intelligence and law-enforcement work for us?</p>
<p>If they had acted upon it properly, the Boston Marathon bombing would never have happened.</p>
<p>Same thing with Fort Hood. Nidal Malik Hasan, Army Major, murdered 13 Americans at Fort Hood in November 2009, shouting, Allahu-akbar, after he passed out Korans that morning and told a neighbor he was going to do a great work for God. It was very clearly an Islamic Jihad attack.</p>
<p>Of course, probably most of you know that it was classified by the Obama administration as workplace violence. But there’s something else also. I have in the book his performance evaluations from his superiors, and he was given glowing recommendations all the way up the line. Every time he came up for a performance evaluation they said, This is a great officer, who could teach a lot to American soldiers about Islam. And he sure did, but not in the way they expected.</p>
<p>What happened was he got these performance evaluations at the same time when his superiors knew that he was in touch with Anwar Al-Awlaki, in contact &#8212; regular contact with Anwar Al-Awlaki, the Jihad terror leader, and when he had already terrified his coworkers on several occasions by his open talk of Jihad violence, such that many of them expressed the fear that he would himself one day turn violent.</p>
<p>Now, why, knowing all this, did they give him these positive recommendations? It’s very easy to see why. Imagine if they hadn’t. Imagine if they had said, This guy’s nuts. Imagine if they had said, This guy keeps going around talking about Jihad war against the infidels, and he means us. This guy is in touch with Anwar Al-Awlaki who masterminds Jihad terror attacks against Americans. What would have happened?</p>
<p>I’ll tell you what would have happened. You probably already know what would have happened. You would have turned on CNN that night and there would have been a big expose, Islamophobia in the Military. A decent American Muslim Army Major vilified simply for practicing his Islamic faith. New York Times exposes. Council on American-Islamic Relations would have had a field day.</p>
<p>And the careers of his superiors would have been ruined. They would have been ruined for daring to report a Muslim soldier. We want Muslim soldiers, remember? We have to have them to show that we are not at war with Islam and that this is not about religion at all. Remember that the Army Chief of Staff, General George Casey, said, right after the Fort Hood massacre that it would be even worse than the massacre itself if our diversity in the military suffered.</p>
<p>And so 13 people are dead at Fort Hood because we refused to tell the truth and refused to face the reality of the war that we’re in. Both of those attacks, Boston and Fort Hood, could have been prevented.</p>
<p>And there is much more of this kind of thing. Just yesterday, a man in Seattle named Musab Mohamed Masmari &#8212; I think he’s a Muslim &#8212; he pled guilty to an arson attack at a Seattle nightclub on New Year’s Eve, and that was how it was reported. As a matter of fact, the report that I saw just before I came here a little while ago was &#8212; It didn’t even give his first name. It just said, Masmari Pleads Guilty. And in the whole story it called him Masmari, no Musab, no Mohamed, especially.</p>
<p>But what exactly was Musab Mohamed Masmari doing? The nightclub in question was actually a gay nightclub, and he was there on New Year’s Eve. He took a can of gasoline and he poured it all the way up and down the stairway, the only stairway leading out of the club, and then he set it on fire. There were 750 people in the club at the time, and he wanted to kill them all, obviously, because he was concentrating his arson on the place where &#8212; the only way they could get out.</p>
<p>Not only that, but it came to light after his attack that he had said that homosexuals should be exterminated, which is, of course, in line with Islam’s death penalty for homosexuals. Musab Mohamed Masmari, in other words, was the first exponent of violent, vigilante Shari’ah enforcement in the United States.</p>
<p>Violent, vigilante Shari’ah enforcement is something that we see in many other countries, especially in Muslim countries, where, in many cases, where countries are Islamizing &#8212; such as Turkey, Egypt, Syria and so on &#8212; where there &#8212; Iraq &#8212; where there had been relatively secular regimes followed by Shari’ah states or large armed groups that want to create a Shari’ah state. Women who don’t cover their heads are brutalized, sometimes even killed and alcohol shops, liquor stores are shot up and burned and so on.</p>
<p>Even in London last year there was a group calling itself the Muslim Patrol that went around, and people carrying alcohol, they would tell them to get rid of it. They would tell women to cover their heads, and they would threaten them if they didn’t.</p>
<p>Musab Mohamed Masmari was the first time that that happened in the United States, but not, by any means, the last. The problem, however, is that in the news reports about him there was no mention of any of this motivation. There was no mention that he said homosexuals should be exterminated. There was no mention that he was a Muslim or that the attack had anything to do with any other attack in the United States, when, actually, it was a manifestation &#8212; it was yet another attack from an adherent of the same ideology that caused the Fort Hood massacre, the Boston Marathon bombing, 9/11, the Little Rock shooting and so many others.</p>
<p>This denial at the top of government law enforcement and media is obviously self -defeating to the point of being suicidal, and if it continues, then, it’s obvious what’s going to happen. In Europe there are already enclaves, whole cities &#8212; Malmo in Sweden, the Molenbeek District of Antwerp and some areas of London already, as well as Paris &#8212; where non-Muslims venture at their own peril. In Malmo, even the police and firefighters don’t dare to go into the city, and Islamic law prevails in those areas. The secular law has no sway.</p>
<p>The governments of those countries are either, at some point, going to have to crack down and say, There is one law for this land and you’re going to obey it, and then there will be civil conflict, or, they will let these areas grow, as they will certainly grow with unrestricted immigration, and then they will be increasingly aggressive and increasingly assertive over the non-Muslim population, and there will be civil conflict. In other words, there’s really no escaping it now for Europe, but I think that there is still a chance for the United States, but only if there is a drastic change in the political culture.</p>
<p>I mentioned Grover Norquist in passing earlier, and it is important to note that Grover Norquist, as the head of Americans for Tax Reform, is probably the single most powerful power broker in the Republican Party, and you can’t really run for national office as a Republican without his benediction. And, yet, he did take money from Abdurahman Alamoudi, who was also financing al-Qaeda, and he does have numerous ties to groups with links to Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood, and he has stymied the Republicans from forming any kind of effective or coherent alternative to the Democrats’ wholesale capitulation to this multiculturalist fiction and to Islamic supremacist groups.</p>
<p>As a result, there really isn’t any effective opposition in the United States today. There is no party, there are very few politicians &#8212; Congressman Gohmert being a notable exception and a few others &#8212; that even stand up and defend and articulate the reality of what we’re facing. And too long, people who support the Republicans have allowed this to continue, perhaps because they themselves did not understand or grasp the nature and magnitude of the threat that we face.</p>
<p>The most significant aspect of it is the war on free speech, because if we cannot speak out about it, then we cannot do anything about it to defend ourselves. Obviously, the freedom of speech was put into the Constitution as the fundamental bulwark against tyranny. If we can’t speak out against the tyrant, he can do whatever he wants. And, of course, Barak Obama said, The future must not belong to those who slander the Prophet of Islam.</p>
<p>It’s useful to remember, in connection with that sentence, that slander, in Islamic law, refers not to lying about somebody, but speaking truths about them that they don’t want known. That’s the definition of slander in Islamic law. So when Barack Obama says, &#8220;The future must not belong to those who slander the Prophet of Islam,&#8221; he means, if you speak unwelcome truths, such as the link between Islam and terrorism, which is obvious from the Jihadis words and not from those of Islamophobes, then the future does not belong to you. And I think that may be so the way things are going.</p>
<p>Right after the Benghazi Jihad attack, which, of course, we all now know was a Jihad attack by al-Qaeda, probably with weapons that the Obama administration had supplied to al-Qaeda to topple Qaddafi, right after the attack, it was known in the White House and the State Department that it was a Jihad attack, and there were emails that have now just come to light &#8212; you’ve probably seen them &#8212; that show that they deliberately chose to blame this Mohammed video that nobody had ever seen or cared about.</p>
<p>Now, the implications of that are enormous because in choosing to blame the Mohammed video and saying the future must not belong to those who slander the Prophet of Islam, the Obama administration was essentially saying the problem is our First Amendment. The problem is the freedom of speech. The problem is if we just keep saying these things that they don’t like us to say, they’ll keep bombing us. If we shut up and obey Islamic blasphemy laws, then everything will be okay.</p>
<p>And Hillary Clinton told the father of Tyrone Woods, a Navy Seal who was killed along with Ambassador Stevens, We’re going to have that filmmaker arrested and prosecuted. And she did. They found that he was a sort of a shady character, which is completely irrelevant, actually, to this video and what happened to him, but he did &#8212; he was out on probation, and one of the conditions of his probation was that he not go on the Internet. And so they figured, Well, this video is up on YouTube. He must have gone on the internet to upload it. Therefore, he went back to jail.</p>
<p>But he was really a political prisoner and a prisoner of the freedom of speech. It was obvious there are far more serious probation violators walking around. Probably we could find some &#8212; Well, not here in Dallas, but out in Los Angeles they’re crawling with them.</p>
<p>And so why this guy? Because it is becoming illegal to speak the truth about the Jihad threat. That has to be a cornerstone of a new and articulate response to Barak Obama. And if we do not find politicians and elected officials who will stand for this swiftly, then the enemy who is us will win and freedom will lose.</p>
<p>Thanks very much. (Applause.)</p>
<p>So we have time for some questions, comments, death fatwas, whatever. (Laughter.)</p>
<p>UNIDENTIFIED MALE SPEAKER: Start here with [Pat].</p>
<p>Q: Thank you. About six months ago, I watched Representative Michael McCaul give a presentation at the Heritage Foundation. During the Q&amp;A, he said that we would win the war on terror by winning the ideological battle by appealing to moderate Muslims that our ideology is better. Can you comment?</p>
<p>ROBERT SPENCER: That would be nice, but nobody’s doing that. We have never done that. We have never said, Our ideology is better. In Iraq and Afghanistan, the United States Government sponsored and oversaw the installation of Shari’ah constitutions that enshrined Islamic law as the highest law of the land. That is not standing for our values. That’s betraying our values. Our values are equality of rights for all people, the equality of dignity of all human beings, which means that women have rights in the society and are not to be treated as chattel.</p>
<p>We have a tradition of open political discourse and the freedom of speech. Although it is under far more grave attack than most people realize, we still have the long tradition of it. Islam does not. In Islam it is against the law, it is a death-penalty offense to criticize Islam or Mohammed. The future must not belong to those who slander the Prophet of Islam.</p>
<p>And the thing is we put those constitutions there. If we had been standing for our values, the situation would have been very different.</p>
<p>I do believe that Congressman McCaul is correct that if there were a United States that were standing up and saying, Well, anyone who loves the freedom of speech, who loves a free society, who loves equal rights for all people before the law, who loves the idea of making a decision in conscience about what you believe is true and not being killed for it, we stand for that, then many Muslims would support us. But we’ve never stood for that.</p>
<p>Hello.</p>
<p>Q: Could you comment on the Tartars in the Crimea?</p>
<p>ROBERT SPENCER: Well &#8211;</p>
<p>Q: How that complicates the whole Russian &#8211;</p>
<p>ROBERT SPENCER: It’s very complicated, and it does complicate it to a tremendous degree because the Ukrainian Government has been encouraging the Jihadis in the Caucuses because they know that the Jihadis in the Caucuses will hit the Russians. And so it becomes a very complicated situation. It’s not so easy as to say, Well, there’s the big, bad imperialist, Putin, and the plucky, independent Ukrainians. I would love to be able to say that because the idea of the Soviet Union reuniting and oppressing those peoples anew is repulsive.</p>
<p>At the same time, there really aren’t any good actors in this battle, as is so often the case. Just like as with Assad and his opponents in Syria.</p>
<p>Q: (Inaudible) in Crimea?</p>
<p>ROBERT SPENCER: Um-hum. Yes.</p>
<p>Q: (Inaudible?)</p>
<p>ROBERT SPENCER: Yes. Precisely.</p>
<p>Q: (Inaudible?)</p>
<p>ROBERT SPENCER: How might it evolve? I don’t know. I don’t have a crystal ball on that, but I think that you’re going to see far more Jihad activity in that area, because the Ukrainians are, no doubt, going to continue to try to exploit these groups to strike at the Russians. And so that could enflame that whole region, really. I don’t see that as beyond the realm of possibility at all.</p>
<p>Hello.</p>
<p>Q: Hi. There is a mosque in my neighborhood, and after doing some digging, found that it is owned by NAIT, an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood. I also did a little bit more digging and found some literature from Mustapha [Monsur], which, of course, said that it’s the obligation of every woman and man to turn this nation into a caliphate.</p>
<p>So I guess my question is do we have to wait until somebody does an act of Jihad before something is done or can something be done before that?</p>
<p>ROBERT SPENCER: This is the great question. The North American Islamic Trust, in the first place, is NAIT, and they own 80 percent of the mosques in the United States, and they all teach this kind of thing.</p>
<p>There have been four separate, independent surveys done since 1999 of the mosques in the United States, and all found, independently of one another, that 80 percent of the mosques were teaching hatred of Jews and Christians and the necessity, ultimately, to replace the Constitution with Shari’ah law. So Monsur is not singular in this.</p>
<p>Now, the problem is is that there is a law &#8212; And I’m no lawyer and no politician, but I know that there is a law on the books which outlaws plotting or calling for, advocating the violent overthrow of the United States Government.</p>
<p>I think that there need to be political and legal scholars, at this point, who can examine the possibility of a law that could outlaw the non-violent overthrow of the U.S. Government and any kind of action against constitutional values and principles.</p>
<p>Now, how this &#8212; What form exactly this would take and how various pitfalls and minefields would be avoided, I’m no lawyer or a politician, but I think that that sedition law that exists about the violent overthrow of the U.S. Government being illegal &#8212; although it’s hardly enforced today anyway &#8212; would be a pathway that might show us how to proceed in that manner.</p>
<p>Congressman Gohmert.</p>
<p>CONGRESSMAN GOHMERT: Thank you. I’m intrigued by the notion that all it’ll take is an ideological win of moderate Muslims over the radical Islamists. You and I know that in Afghanistan, the moderate Muslim Northern Alliance defeated the radical Islamists with our air cover, a few hundred of our embedded special ops. But, Robert, you know the history even better than I do, can you think of any time in world history when radical Islamists were defeated or overcome by winning an ideological battle using moderate Muslims?</p>
<p>Well, I don’t know, was that an ideological win in Vienna when they were stopped? I’m trying to remember.</p>
<p>ROBERT SPENCER: (Laughter.)</p>
<p>CONGRESSMAN GOHMERT: But, anyway, can you think of a time ever &#8212; Maybe the Barbary Pirates, maybe that was an ideological win, but can you think of a time when radical Islam was ever defeated by winning an ideological battle with moderate Muslims, unless they were winning the ideological battle with weapons and killing their enemies? Can you think of a time?</p>
<p>ROBERT SPENCER: No, Congressman, you’re absolutely right. There has never been a case where an ideological battle against Islamic Jihadis has ever been won. And the whole thing actually comes down to what one defines as a moderate Muslim, and the United States Government, of course, thinks that if a Muslim is not strapping on a bomb vest, then he’s a moderate.</p>
<p>But as far as reality goes, one of the great difficulties of fighting this conflict is that people use this term, throw around the term moderate Muslim without defining what it is. Most people assume that by moderate Muslim they mean a Muslim who rejects the idea that Muslims should wage war against unbelievers and subjugate them under the rule of Islamic law.</p>
<p>Actually, that is a core tenant of Islam that is taught in the Koran and taught in the Hadith and taught by all the schools of Islamic jurisprudence. The Muslims who would actually explicitly reject that in principle you could probably count on one hand. Juhdi Jasser and then who? That’s it.</p>
<p>Moderate Muslims, on the other hand, might be people who are just ordinary people who might live in a secular culture and are not interested in waging Jihad. They want to just raise their families and have a life and have a job and take care of themselves, and that’s it. There are lots of those people.</p>
<p>But the question becomes then, which side will they side with if it came down to a conflict? And probably &#8212; There doesn’t seem to be any indication that they would not side with their more radical brethren in that case. There has never been a case where this was not done without a shooting war.</p>
<p>At the same time, there is a crisis within Islam, because Western ideas have permeated the Islamic world. They were much more current 100 years ago than they are now, much more prominent, but they still existed &#8212; I’ll wrap up &#8212; but, nonetheless, they still exist. And so I think &#8212; When I was talking about the ideological conflict in reference to Representative McCaul’s statements before, I was referring to the fact that we &#8212; I think we can and should appeal on the basis of notions of human rights that come from the West to Muslims who may not want Islamic law. But that’s not going to win the battle, not going to win the war, not at all.</p>
<p>Q: Okay. What can you tell us about green-on-blue killings in Afghanistan, the insider killings? Is there anything that could be done about that, any sort of profiling on infiltrators in the Afghan security force?</p>
<p>ROBERT SPENCER: No, the green-on-blue killings, the killings of our troops, our personnel by their ostensible allies, there’s nothing that can be done about them, except we should just get out of there.</p>
<p>The fact is that there is no way to distinguish between a peaceful Muslim, that is a Muslim who doesn’t want to kill us, and a Muslim who does. I didn’t use the term moderate Muslim because it is so fraught and likely to create confusion.</p>
<p>The fact is, though, that this is the fundamental problem, that the United States Government assumes that these people are all of good will and doesn’t make any attempt even to profile or discern or screen people who join the Afghan Police or the Afghan Army and so on. They don’t even try. And so then they get these attacks.</p>
<p>But the fact is if they did try, it wouldn’t work, and that’s one of the reasons why this misadventure in Afghanistan is so disastrously wrongheaded. There’s no objective. There’s no goal. There’s not even an enemy. Barak Obama has already told Karzai that he doesn’t think the Taliban is the enemy. And then I think, well, then why are our troops there serving as a shooting gallery for the Afghans? This is nothing short of treason.</p>
<p>Anyway, on that happy note, thanks very much. (Applause.)</p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank"><b>Click here</b></a><b>. </b></p>
<p><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf" target="_blank"><b>Subscribe</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> to Frontpage&#8217;s TV show, <i>The Glazov Gang</i>, and </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>LIKE</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> it on </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>Facebook.</b></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/frontpagemag-com/robert-spencer-we-have-met-the-enemy-and-he-is-us/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>55</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Arab Winter Comes to America</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dgreenfield/arab-winter-comes-to-america/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=arab-winter-comes-to-america</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dgreenfield/arab-winter-comes-to-america/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 May 2014 04:30:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Daniel Greenfield]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Arab Winter Comes to America]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Islam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jihad]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[robert spencer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sharia]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=224761</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Robert Spencer's new book tells us the truth about the war we’re in.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/kh.jpg"><img class="alignleft size-full wp-image-224765" alt="kh" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/kh.jpg" width="331" height="500" /></a><strong>To order &#8220;<em>Arab Winter Comes to America: The Truth About the War We’re In</em>,&#8221; <a href="http://horowitzfreedomcenterstore.org/collections/books/products/arab-winter-comes-to-america-the-truth-about-the-war-we-re-in">click here</a>.</strong></p>
<p><strong>Robert Spencer will be speaking at the Freedom Center&#8217;s Wednesday Morning Club in Los Angeles on Monday, May 12, 2014. For more info, <a href="http://www.eventbrite.com/e/wmc-robert-spencer-tickets-11176771023">click here</a>.</strong></p>
<p>It may be warm outside now, but from colder hearts a winter blizzard is blowing. These cold hearts are frozen in the endless winter of Islam that leaves them empty of mercy for even their own daughters.</p>
<p>The title of Robert Spencer’s new book, “Arab Winter Comes to America: The Truth About the War We’re In” may reference the now infamous Arab Spring, but its focus is more on domestic policy than on foreign policy. This is less of an analysis of what went wrong in Egypt and Tunisia, though that is also addressed, than what has gone wrong with how the United States deals with Islamic terrorism at home.</p>
<p>The problem with Jihad is that we don’t talk about Jihad, as Spencer writes. The first and most effective wave of the Jihad was a political assault by Muslim Brotherhood front groups such as ISNA and CAIR against even discussing the threat. When the next wave of terrorist attacks arrived, policymakers, soldiers and law enforcement officers were left blinded and censored.</p>
<p>Today the situation is worse than ever.</p>
<p><i>Arab Winter Comes to America</i> is less about the past than the present, less about lands abroad than our own streets and cities. The Arab Spring cracked regimes that had sought a middle ground between the unfettered savagery of Islamic law and the modern world. The Arab Winter may take longer to crack the West which is trying to walk the same fine line, suppressing blasphemy against Islam as hate crimes and silencing criticism of Islam as Islamophobia, but the book suggests that it can and it will.</p>
<p>Robert Spencer, a scholar of all things Islamic, dwells less on the texts than on the failure of our own establishment to draw the right conclusions from them. Having faced personal censorship in the US and the UK by governments that should instead have been listening to him, he is ably positioned to describe the process by which groups linked to terrorism preemptively silence those scholars and experts who would denounce them for what they are while using the threat of youth “radicalization” as blackmail.</p>
<p>“The only people who have perfect clarify about who they are and what they hope to accomplish, are America’s foes,” Spencer writes regretfully.</p>
<p>From Nidal Hasan to the Boston Marathon bombings, <i>Arab Winter Comes to America</i> examines wasted opportunities and missed warnings that could have prevented the mass murder of Americans. And even as Obama and his advisers claim that Al Qaeda has been all but defeated, Spencer warns that the real struggle between our civilization and the medieval terror theocracy out of the desert is only beginning.</p>
<p>The Arab Spring was a political and military disaster, but if the Arab Winter of Islam spreads to the West, it could destroy civilization as we know it.</p>
<p>&#8220;The jihad attack in Boston shows that our future in this country could be just as bloody as the present of the Muslim world,&#8221; Spencer writes, linking together the spring violence in Tunisia, Syria and Egypt and the spring massacre of Americans by Muslim infiltrators in Boston.</p>
<p>&#8220;The ideology behind the Boston Marathon bombing was the same ideology ascendant in the Arab Spring uprisings,” he adds.”It is no different from the ideology that motivated a Muslim U.S. Army psychiatrist to slaughter thirteen Americans at Fort Hood&#8230; it is identical to the belief system that inspired the 9/11 hijackers.&#8221;</p>
<p>Islamic violence is a matter of critical mass. The Islamic violence of the Arab Spring was a Jihad of Muslim majorities while the Islamic violence in Boston and in New York and throughout the West is a Jihad of Muslim minorities. However as we study the changing demographic patterns in the West, it is not inconceivable that we too may one day face the violence of Muslim majorities in our own countries.</p>
<p>Spencer demonstrates that while the violence of Muslim majorities and Muslim minorities may differ in scale and tactics, they originate from the same set of religious impulses. The Jihadists in Cairo and Benghazi, in Boston and New York, may have utilized different tactics of terror, but they believed the same things. And it is this belief that unites them into an army, even when scattered into cells or acting in isolation as lone wolves. It is this violent belief that is being hurled against the ramparts of the West.</p>
<p><i>Arab Winter Comes to America </i>explores the intersections between propaganda and terror, how supposedly non-violent Islamic groups work to clear the path for their violent cousins and how the Muslim Brotherhood, which took over entire countries after the Arab Spring, embedded its front groups into American political life and is plotting to do the same thing here.</p>
<p>From the UK to the US, Spencer takes us on a dark journey along a river of denial that flows out of the houses of government and through the columns and broadcasts of mainstream media reporters. This river may be far from the waters of the Nile and yet it moves unknowingly to the same current, the tide of bloody genocidal dreams from murderous monsters like Hassan al-Banna and Yusuf al-Qaradawi.</p>
<p><i>Arab Winter Comes to America </i>warns that understanding the motives that drive our enemies may be our first line of defense. <i> </i>It argues that we cannot begin to fight a war against the enemy that has brought savage carnage into our skies and our cities until we understand his goals and ambitions.</p>
<p>Ideological wars do not begin on the battlefield though they may end there. They are fought in the hearts and minds of men. <i>Arab Winter Comes to America </i>is another<i> </i>contribution to the Counterjihad which Robert Spencer has been fighting for so long. It is not a war that any of us has chosen, but it is a war that we have faced for over a thousand years. And it is not going away any time soon.</p>
<p>The weather outside may carry the warmth of a balmy spring, but as long as a cold wind blows out of the desert where Islam was born, it will continue to freeze souls and minds and whenever a bomb goes off or a Muslim kills in the name of Islam, a chilly strand of that wind blows through our hearts.</p>
<p>This is the oldest war there is; the war between civilization and savagery, between the power of truth and the tyranny of the lie, and between the free man and the vicious slave.</p>
<p>As Robert Spencer writes, &#8220;The truth cannot be successfully obscured and bringing it to light is essential to the survival of this free republic.&#8221;</p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank"><b>Click here</b></a><b>.   </b></p>
<p><a href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf"><b>Subscribe</b></a><strong> to Frontpage&#8217;s TV show, <i>The Glazov Gang</i>, and </strong><a href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang"><b>LIKE</b></a><strong> it on </strong><a href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang"><b>Facebook.</b></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dgreenfield/arab-winter-comes-to-america/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>178</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Mideast Test &#8212; on The Glazov Gang at the West Coast Retreat in Palos Verdes</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/frontpagemag-com/the-mideast-test-on-the-glazov-gang-at-the-west-coast-retreat-in-palos-verdes-2/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-mideast-test-on-the-glazov-gang-at-the-west-coast-retreat-in-palos-verdes-2</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/frontpagemag-com/the-mideast-test-on-the-glazov-gang-at-the-west-coast-retreat-in-palos-verdes-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2014 04:26:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Frontpagemag.com]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[caroline glick]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[glazov gang]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[jamie glazov]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mideast Test]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Raymond Ibrahim]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[robert spencer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[West Coast Retreat]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=222032</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Caroline Glick, Robert Spencer and Raymond Ibrahim grapple with the threats emanating from the Islamic Middle East.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="text-align: left;"><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/hj1.gif"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-222035" alt="hj" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/hj1-450x250.gif" width="405" height="225" /></a><strong>[</strong><a href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf"><b>Subscribe</b></a><strong> to Frontpage&#8217;s TV show, <i>The Glazov Gang</i>, and </strong><a href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang"><b>LIKE</b></a><strong> it on </strong><a href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang"><b>Facebook.]</b></a></p>
<p style="text-align: left;">This week&#8217;s special episode of <strong>The Glazov Gang</strong> was filmed at<b> </b>David Horowitz&#8217;s West Coast Retreat held at the Terranea Resort in Palos Verdes, California, from March 21-23, 2014.</p>
<p style="text-align: left;">The panel, titled <strong>The Mideast Test</strong>, was joined by:</p>
<p style="text-align: left;"><strong> Caroline Glick</strong>, the senior contributing editor to the <i>Jerusalem Post </i>who is the author of the new book,<a href="http://www.amazon.com/The-Israeli-Solution-One-State-Middle/dp/0385348061"><i> </i><i>The Israeli Solution: A One-State Plan for Peace in the Middle East</i>.</a></p>
<p style="text-align: left;"><strong>Robert Spencer, </strong>the director of Jihad Watch who is the author of an upcoming book, <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Arab-Winter-Comes-America-Truth/dp/1621572048/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_1?s=books&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1395903767&amp;sr=1-1-fkmr0&amp;keywords=Arab+Winter+Comes+to+America%3A+The+Truth+About+the+War+We%E2%80%99re+In."><em>Arab Winter Comes to America: The Truth About the War We’re In.</em></a></p>
<p style="text-align: left;">and<br />
<strong></strong></p>
<p style="text-align: left;"><strong>Raymond Ibrahim, </strong>a Shillman Fellow at the Freedom Center who is the author of his recent book, <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Crucified-Again-Exposing-Islams-Christians/dp/1621570258/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_1?s=books&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1395903800&amp;sr=1-1-fkmr0&amp;keywords=Crucified+Again%3A+Exposing+Islam%E2%80%99s+New+War+on+Christians%2C+published+by+Regnery."><em>Crucified Again: Exposing Islam’s New War on Christians, </em><em>published by Regnery.</em></a></p>
<p style="text-align: left;">The panelists discussed their books and how to best confront the threats emanating from the Islamic Middle East:</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><iframe src="//www.youtube.com/embed/vuBjlQz-KhU" height="315" width="500" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p><em>Don&#8217;t miss this week&#8217;s second <strong>Glazov Gang</strong> episode with <strong>Walid Shoebat</strong> on <strong>Islamic Human Slaughterhouses for Christians</strong>:</em></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><iframe src="//www.youtube.com/embed/VXlNhUCZt0o" height="315" width="500" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p><b>To watch previous <i>Glazov Gang</i> episodes, </b><a href="http://jamieglazov.com/"><b>Click Here</b></a><b>.</b></p>
<p><a href="https://www.facebook.com/jamie.glazov"><b>LIKE</b></a><b> Jamie Glazov’s </b><a href="https://www.facebook.com/jamie.glazov"><b>Fan Page.</b></a><b><br />
</b></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/frontpagemag-com/the-mideast-test-on-the-glazov-gang-at-the-west-coast-retreat-in-palos-verdes-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>18</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Preaching &#8216;Islamophobia&#8217; to the Choir at Saudi-Funded Georgetown</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/andrew-harrod/preaching-islamophobia-to-the-choir-at-saudi-funded-georgetown/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=preaching-islamophobia-to-the-choir-at-saudi-funded-georgetown</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/andrew-harrod/preaching-islamophobia-to-the-choir-at-saudi-funded-georgetown/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Mar 2014 05:25:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Andrew Harrod]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Daniel Martin Varisco]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Georgetown]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hofstra]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Islam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Islamophobia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[robert spencer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[salman rushdie]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=220206</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A jihad cheerleader explains why "colonialism" is the cause of Islamist slaughter in Somalia. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;"><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/varisco_daniel.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-220259" alt="varisco_daniel" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/varisco_daniel.jpg" width="280" height="240" /></a>“I don’t have any desire to debate </span><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://www.jihadwatch.org/about-robert">Robert Spencer</a><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">….I would never give someone like that a forum,” Hofstra University Professor </span><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://people.hofstra.edu/daniel_m_varisco/hofdan.html">Daniel Martin Varisco</a><span style="line-height: 1.5em;"> declared at Georgetown University on February 26, 2014.  Addressing the </span><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://acmcu.georgetown.edu/">Prince Alwaleed bin Talal Center for Christian-Muslim Understanding</a><span style="line-height: 1.5em;"> (ACMCU), Varisco’s equally flawed outlooks on Islam and intellectual inquiry had disturbing implications for modern academia.</span></p>
<p>Prior perusal of the opening pages of Varisco’s 2007 <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=Y9TrODwrIi0C&amp;pg=PA73&amp;lpg=PA73&amp;dq=very+sore+plague+and+Venerable+bede&amp;source=bl&amp;ots=0dLFwgzQRw&amp;sig=6gsZ5oIfWaRn5anCgCeyyXT3Xw4&amp;hl=en&amp;sa=X&amp;ei=jpkOU8G7FdLcoAT8n4Fg&amp;ved=0CDQQ6AEwAw"><i>Reading Orientalism:  Said and Unsaid</i></a> did not raise hopes for his briefing “<a href="http://georgetown.localist.com/event/briefing_khutba_vs_khutzpa_islamophobia_on_the_internet_with_daniel_varisco?utm_campaign=widget&amp;utm_medium=widget&amp;utm_source=Georgetown">Khutba vs. Khutzpa:  Islamophobia on the Internet</a>.”  In this book, Varisco analyzes leftwing intellectual <a href="http://www.columbia.edu/cu/palestine/resources/edwardsaid.html">Edward Said</a>’s <i>Orientalism</i> and its legacy, expressing agreement “with most of Said’s political positions on the real Orient.”  Varisco reveals his discipleship of Said with condemnations of post-World War II United States having “become by stealth and wealth the neo-colonial superpower” in which a “neocon clique…engineered the wars” not just “against” Iraq but also Afghanistan. Varisco’s one-sided estimate of historical harms includes a “PhD cataloguing of what the West did to the East and self-unfillfulling political punditry about what real individuals in the East say they want to do to the West.”</p>
<p>Yet, Varisco writes, “Said hardly scratched the surface of the vast sewerage of racist and ethnocentrist writing, art, and cinema that for so long has severed an imaginary East from the dominating West.”  “In particular,” Varisco emphasizes,</p>
<blockquote><p>almost anything that Muslims would consider holy has at one time or another been profaned by Western writers.  Perhaps the frustrated worldwide Muslim anger at <a href="http://www.salman-rushdie.com/">Salman Rushdie’s <i>The Satanic Verses</i></a> was emetic justice for centuries of vicious and malicious verbal abuse from the West, where this controversial best seller incubated.</p></blockquote>
<p>Both matters of principle and practicality deter further reading of Varisco.  “Truth with a capital T does not exist for anyone,” Varisco nonsensically proclaims as one of his “own operational truths,” thereby placing in doubt Varisco’s views. Varisco’s attempts at humor also do not amuse, such as when he describes the book’s “anal citational flow of endnotes” designed to allow a person to “read for entertainment” Varisco’s turgid tome.</p>
<p>Nothing improved during Varisco’s presentation on “Islamophobia,” described in a Powerpoint image referencing a 1991 <a href="http://www.runnymedetrust.org/">Runnymede Trust</a> report as an “<a href="http://crg.berkeley.edu/content/islamophobia/defining-islamophobia">unfounded hostility</a>” towards all things and persons Muslim.  One Powerpoint on “Combatting Islamophobia on the Internet” set a leveling tone with a recommendation of a “[f]ocus on interfaith efforts, noting that all religions have positive and negative aspects.”  This accorded with <a href="http://people.hofstra.edu/daniel_m_varisco/islamism.pdf">Varisco’s prior call for scholars</a> to “be doing all we can to refute the notion that Islam is intrinsically more violent than other religions.”  “I am not saying that these things don’t happen,” Varisco conceded when showing a <a href="http://truthfrequencyradio.com/police-rescue-afghan-woman-from-stoning/">picture of a woman undergoing a sharia stoning to death</a>.  Another Powerpoint, meanwhile, simply dismissed as “fallacy” controversies that “<a href="http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/detail/lawfare-strikes-again-in-germany">Muhammad was a pedophile</a> and Islam is cruel to women.”</p>
<p>Varisco gave a historical overview of longstanding negative Western views of Islam.  He noted, for example, <a href="http://dante.ilt.columbia.edu/papers/dai/">Dante’s depiction of Islam’s prophet Muhammad in the <i>Inferno</i></a> and <a href="http://www.gutenberg.org/files/36486/36486.txt">unfavorable 19<sup>th</sup> century American comparisons</a> of an <a href="http://www.inplainsite.org/html/smith_and_muhammed.html">emerging Mormon faith with Islam</a>.  Varisco’s bias was evident when observing that <a href="http://www.biography.com/people/john-smith-9486928">John Smith</a> fought Ottoman Turks before coming to America without ever analyzing whether Smith might have been justified to oppose Muslim aggression.  Varisco also reiterated his previously written scorn for an “allegedly <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic_figures/bede_st.shtml">Venerable Bede</a>, who condemned invading Muslims of his time as ‘a very sore plague.’”  Why this single condemnation of marauding Muslims in France stopped at the <a href="http://www.raymondibrahim.com/islam/today-in-history-the-battle-of-tours/">732 Battle of Tours</a> discredited this pioneering English historian in Varisco’s estimation remained unexplained.</p>
<p>In discussing the <a href="http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/bar1796t.asp">1797 American treaty with Tripoli</a>, meanwhile, Varisco bizarrely claimed that “we were doing a lot of trade” with the Barbary States.  As any schoolboy should know, though, this treaty, including a tribute payment, was part of <a href="http://www.monticello.org/site/research-and-collections/first-barbary-war">American trade protection efforts</a> against Barbary pirate depredations scourging the Mediterranean for centuries.  Varisco then noted with a Powerpoint image America’s subsequent Barbary Wars resulting from the failure of diplomacy to dissuade the Barbary pirates from their attacks.  “Economics is always in there somewhere,” Varisco stated in a similarly bizarre fashion when discussing the <a href="http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=4574">United States’ first encounter with jihadists</a>.</p>
<p>Turning to the present, Varisco condemned as “Islamophobic” the <a href="http://www.clarionproject.org/">Clarion Project</a> along with its film <a href="http://www.obsessionthemovie.com/"><i>Obsession</i></a>, the website <a href="http://www.answering-islam.org/"><i>Answering Islam</i></a>, and <a href="http://www.samaritanspurse.org/our-ministry/franklin-graham-biography/">Franklin Graham</a> for <a href="http://www.cair.com/press-center/press-releases/688-frank-graham-claims-islam-is-a-very-evil-and-wicked-religion.html">having called Islam “evil.”</a>  One particular focus of Varisco was the anti-Catholic writer <a href="http://www.catholic.com/documents/the-nightmare-world-of-jack-t-chick">Jack Chick</a> who in his cartoon publications had wildly slandered the <a href="http://www.chick.com/reading/comics/0117/0117_allinone.asp">Catholic Church as Islam’s inventor</a>.  Another emphasis for Varisco was evangelical <a href="http://www.joelstrumpet.com/?page_id=2916">Joel Richardson</a>’s website <a href="http://www.joels-trumpet.com/"><i>Joel’s Trumpet</i></a> with its apocalyptic predictions of an “<a href="http://www.joelstrumpet.com/?p=3455">Islamic Antichrist</a>.”</p>
<p>The little discussed elephant in the room for perceptive “Islamophobia” observers during Varisco’s presentation, though, was “Islamophobe” Number One, <a href="http://www.jihadwatch.org/"><i>Jihad Watch</i></a> website founder Spencer.  Varisco cited a <a href="https://cair.com/press-center/cair-in-the-news/8961-robert-spencer-islam-is-a-false-religion.html">Spencer quotation</a> from his book <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Inside-Islam-Catholics-Questions-Answers/dp/0965922855"><i>Inside Islam:  A Guide for Catholics</i></a> listed at the website <a href="http://spencerwatch.com/spenceritis/"><i>Spencer Watch</i></a>.  Varisco once again failed to explain why Spencer’s condemnations of Islam as an “often downright false revelation” and “threat to the world at large” were unacceptable.  Varisco also noted a <a href="http://www.jihadwatch.org/2014/02/indoctrinating-the-youth-at-georgetown-university">recent <i>Jihad Watch</i> entry</a> criticizing his very Georgetown briefing.</p>
<p>Audience questions, however, focused on Spencer.  Varisco discussed his refusal to debate Spencer as “someone who just hates Islam,” yet claimed that in any hypothetical encounter he “would beat the whatever out of him.”  ACMCU head <a href="http://explore.georgetown.edu/people/jle2/">John Esposito</a> concurred with the “Combatting Islamophobia in the Internet” assessment of “little value in debating Islamophobic speakers in academic settings since it gives them a forum.”  Such encounters with Spencer “would be enhancing his credibility.”  Yet in discussing partisan websites, Esposito complained that “nobody accepts the other side as objective.” “Cranks” like Spencer, an audience member meanwhile argued, belonged at Hyde Park Corner.</p>
<p>Although Esposito dismissed Spencer as a scholar, he nonetheless sneered that he wrote “best-selling books” while discussing worries about Spencer’s popularity.  Noting the influence of popular culture, Esposito complained that “Islamophobic websites score very, very high.”  Varisco bemoaned that such websites outperformed his own <a href="http://tabsir.net/"><i>Tabsir</i></a> website and without irony cited a need for people like him to create “more books…that people can read.”</p>
<p>The “Vast Rightwing Conspiracy is better at” advocacy “than our lefty friends,” the audience member who had called Spencer a “crank” agreed.  “Lots of money” also appeared as an advantage for “Islamophobic” groups to Esposito. Esposito did not say whether this money outweighed the <a href="http://acmcu.georgetown.edu/about">$20 million Saudi namesake grant to ACMCU</a> or <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/printgroupProfile.asp?grpid=6709">George Soros funding</a> and <a href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/robert-spencer/the-splcs-ridiculous-hate-group-list/">six-figure salaries</a> at the likeminded <a href="http://www.americanprogress.org/">Center for American Progress</a> and <a href="http://www.splcenter.org/">Southern Poverty Law Center</a>, respectively.</p>
<p>Amidst this uniform opposition to Spencer et al. from fewer than 20 people in the briefing room, one audience member sounded an independent note.  Observing that he was the only black person in the room, the young man discussed how he did not see Spencer’s work as a “race issue” but rather as opposition to Islamic extremism.  Because of this “my country is in ruins now” he said with respect to the Somali homeland of his Muslim father.</p>
<p>Varisco answered by attributing violence in Somalia and other majority-Muslim societies not to Islamic ideology but rather to Somalia’s “colonial experience,” pre-Arab Spring dictators, or Western countries “pumping weapons” into these countries.  Another audience member spoke of Somalia’s “tribal roots.”  “I don’t think you put blame on one individual,” Varisco meanwhile responded to the black man’s query about responsibility for Afghan violence following <a href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/j/terry_jones_pastor/">Terry Jones</a> Koran burning.  Absolving Muslim murderers and other criminals at least partly from their individual responsibility, Varisco analogized to an arsonist setting alight a carelessly tended house.</p>
<p>In all, Varisco’s briefing exposed much of modern academia’s shallowness.  True to multicultural shibboleth, Varisco refused to identify any uniquely disturbing aspects of Islam and dismissed all past aversion towards this faith as prejudice.  Varisco’s minimalist treatment of Spencer, meanwhile, accorded with an unwillingness to respect this <a href="http://juicyecumenism.com/2013/07/27/cutting-through-theological-confusion-robert-spencers-not-peace-but-a-sword-distinctly-divides-christianity-from-islam/">lucidly insightful scholar</a>.  Rather, Varisco grouped Spencer with far more lightweight individuals like Chick and Richardson with whom Catholics like Spencer or his colleague <a href="http://www.americanfreedomlawcenter.org/about/leaders/robert-j-muise-esq/">Robert Muise</a> of the <a href="http://www.americanfreedomlawcenter.org/">American Freedom Law Center</a> have little commonality.  The expressed worries of Varisco, Esposito, and others, however, give hope that their efforts to silence their opposition will fail.</p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank"><b>Click here</b></a><b>. </b></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/andrew-harrod/preaching-islamophobia-to-the-choir-at-saudi-funded-georgetown/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>16</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Southern Poverty Law Center&#8217;s Ridiculous &#8216;Hate Group&#8217; List</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/robert-spencer/the-splcs-ridiculous-hate-group-list/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-splcs-ridiculous-hate-group-list</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/robert-spencer/the-splcs-ridiculous-hate-group-list/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Feb 2014 05:58:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Robert Spencer]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hate list]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jihad Watch]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mark potok]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[robert spencer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[southern poverty law center]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SPLC]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=219730</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It’s risible, but highly profitable, for them to lump conservative groups in with real haters.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;"><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/s000016517-300.gif"><img class=" wp-image-219734 alignleft" alt="s000016517-300" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/s000016517-300.gif" width="305" height="223" /></a>Rest easy: the nation’s watchdogs, patented Hate Detectors gripped in their sweaty palms, are still on the job. The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) has released its latest report on hate groups, and while the numbers of these vile entities has decreased, the SPLC solons assure us they’re scarier than ever: Mark Potok of the SPLC, trying his best to affect a stiff-backed Joe Friday pose conveying grim and unimpeachable authority, </span><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/news/splc-report-far-right-extremist-groups-decline-but-remain-at-near-record-levels">declared</a><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">: “The radical right is growing leaner and meaner. The numbers are down somewhat, but the potential for violence remains high.” In other words, keep those checks coming, folks!</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">And they do. The SPLC took in over $38 million in 2011; the previous year, its CEO Richard Cohen earned $351,648, and its notorious Chief Trial Counsel, Morris Dees, pulled in a cool $346,919. All that to keep you safe from the likes of…me. The SPLC lists my website Jihad Watch (</span><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://www.jihadwatch.org/">www.jihadwatch.org</a><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">) as a hate group, along with the American Freedom Defense Initiative, of which I am vice president, and its Stop Islamization of America program. My colleague Pamela Geller founded AFDI/SIOA; the SPLC also lists her website Atlas Shrugs (</span><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://www.pamelageller.com/">www.pamelageller.com</a><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">), along with our international umbrella group Stop Islamization of Nations, as hate groups &#8212; so Pamela Geller and I are both four hate groups, and between us are responsible for five hate groups. Two people. We are also both the subject of lavish and arguably libelous profiles as “hate group leaders.” The brilliant FrontPage writer Daniel Greenfield’s blog Sultan Knish (</span><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/">http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/</a><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">) is listed as another hate group. That’s six hate groups, three people. “Leaner and meaner,” indeed!</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">This demonstrates how risible the SPLC’s claim that there are 939 hate groups currently operating in the U.S. The very label “hate group” conjures up images of KKK members in robes, their venal and stupid faces illumined by the flame of a burning cross – not columnists, commentators, and human rights activists dedicated to defending the freedom of speech, the freedom of conscience, and the principle of the equality of rights of all people before the law. </span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">But that’s the idea. The SPLC’s objective is not to spur rational discussion or debate about what exactly constitutes a “hate group,” and what are or should be the parameters of acceptable political discourse. It is to manipulate people into thinking that mild-mannered writers such as Daniel Greenfield and human rights activists like Pamela Geller are indeed exactly the same as those cross-burning Klansmen, and to be equally as shunned and marginalized.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">The SPLC’s Hate Groups list is a cudgel, a tool for the use of Leftist enemies of the freedom of speech. When Pamela Geller or I or some other “hate group leader” is invited to speak somewhere, Leftists and Islamic supremacists avid to shut down honest discussion of jihad terror and Islamic supremacism contact the event organizers, tell them that the SPLC classifies us as “hate group leaders,” and all too often, ignorant or cowardly officials, unaware of or indifferent to how they’re being played and anxious to avoid “controversy,” cancel the event. It works like a charm, in just the way it was intended to work.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">These classifications, unsurprisingly, have also become a staple of every report from lazy Leftist journalists. By citing the SPLC as if it were a reliable source, they encourage an uncritical, uninformed public to see its targets as worthy of the opprobrium the Center heaps upon them. It is no surprise that reporters, who tend almost universally to be Leftists, take for granted that the SPLC is some kind of neutral observer, when actually the SPLC is a far-Left attack outfit, using its “hate group” classifications to stigmatize and demonize foes of its political agenda. In these days of the New Black Panthers and the Occupy movement, it lists no Leftist groups as hate groups. Nor does it include any significant number of Islamic jihad groups on the hate group list, and has now even </span><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2014/02/25/decline-in-Ohio-hate-groups.html">dropped an Ohio branch of the racist, violent and paranoid Nation of Islam</a><span style="line-height: 1.5em;"> from the list.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">The SPLC is merely a propaganda organ for the Left, tarring any group that dissents from its extreme political agenda as a “hate group.” And while Potok warns of “right-wing” violence, actually the SPLC itself is more dangerous than its targets: its “hate group” designation against the Family Research Council </span><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://dailycaller.com/2013/09/20/splc-inspired-shooter-floyd-lee-corkins-sentenced-to-25-years/">led one of its followers to storm the FRC offices with a gun, determined to murder the chief of the FRC</a><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">. 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.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">There is a great deal more that is wrong with the Southern Poverty Law Center, as </span><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/king-fearmongers_714573.html">this article</a><span style="line-height: 1.5em;"> illustrates. The organization epitomizes the Left’s hypocrisy and its increasing taste for authoritarianism: its fascist impulse to demonize and smear its foes rather than engage them on the level of rational discourse. If freedom is to be preserved in this country, those who value it are going to have to convince their fellow Americans to pause and ask </span><i style="line-height: 1.5em;">quis custodiet ipso custodes?</i><span style="line-height: 1.5em;"> — Who watches the watchmen? Why is fighting for the freedom of speech and the equality of rights of all people now classified as “hate”? Why is the SPLC an authority that anyone recognizes, given its naked biases?</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">Conservative groups must stop bowing to smear campaigns orchestrated by Leftist groups with a clear anti-freedom agenda. We will never win the country back without challenging – and absolutely refusing to accept &#8212; the authority and reliability of the Left’s self-appointed guardians of acceptable opinion. A good place to start would be to relegate the SPLC to the dustbin of history it has reserved for the foes of Leftist thuggery and jihad terror.</span></p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank"><b>Click here</b></a><b>. </b></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/robert-spencer/the-splcs-ridiculous-hate-group-list/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>178</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Chilling Effect for Me, But Not for Thee</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/andrew-harrod/chilling-effect-for-me-but-not-for-thee/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=chilling-effect-for-me-but-not-for-thee</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/andrew-harrod/chilling-effect-for-me-but-not-for-thee/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Dec 2013 05:09:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Andrew Harrod]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Free Speech]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Intisar A. Rabb]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Islam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[law school professor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[robert spencer]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=213077</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Scholars at Georgetown explain why certain speech against jihad just shouldn't be allowed. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/yh.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-213079" alt="yh" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/yh.jpg" width="270" height="198" /></a>“I don’t apply the same standards” as in the United States, the Muslim Harvard Law School professor <a href="http://www.law.harvard.edu/news/2013/09/17_intisar-a-rabb-to-join-hls-faculty.html">Intisar A. Rabb</a> stated at a November 21, 2013, Georgetown University conference with respect to “hate speech” restrictions and Islam abroad.  In connection with her concern about an American Muslim’s terrorism conviction “chilling speech,” Rabb’s acceptance of “just a different legal regime” abroad revealed troubling double standards towards Islam.</p>
<p>Raab addressed the final panel of “<a href="http://www.eventbrite.com/e/acmcu-20th-anniversary-conference-muslim-christian-relations-in-the-21st-century-challenges-registration-8854631441">Muslim-Christian Relations in the 21st Century:  Challenges &amp; Opportunities</a>,” a controversial conference (see <a href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/andrew-harrod/karen-armstrongs-911-british-empire-blowback-thesis/">here</a>, <a href="http://freebeacon.com/georgetown-university-hosts-911-truther/">here</a>, and <a href="http://juicyecumenism.com/2013/12/04/georgetown-universitys-one-way-street-of-christian-muslim-understanding/">here</a>) marking the 20<sup>th</sup> anniversary of Georgetown’s <a href="http://cmcu.georgetown.edu/">Prince Alwaleed bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding</a> (ACMCU).  Rabb opposed a recent appeals court conviction affirmation for <a href="http://www.investigativeproject.org/4212/mehanna-ruling-draws-line-between-speech">Tarek Mehanna</a>, as elaborated in an <a href="http://www.orrick.com/Events-and-Publications/Pages/default.aspx?SearchType=Both&amp;Keyword=Tarek%20Mehanna">amici curia brief in Mehanna’s appeal</a>.  Therein Rabb and others warned of a “serious chilling effect” on speech from convicting Mehanna for translating the book <a href="http://www.archive.org/stream/39WaysToServeAndParticipate/39WaysToServeAndParticipateInJihad_djvu.txt"><i>39 Ways to Serve and Participate in Jihad</i></a> for the website <a href="http://at-tibyan.com/"><i>at-Tibyan</i></a>.</p>
<p>The federal government considered the book, website, and Mehanna’s “disfavored political and religious beliefs” all supportive of Al Qaeda.  The <a href="http://www.investigativeproject.org/documents/case_docs/2264.pdf#page=7">appellate opinion</a> noted that Mehanna had a <a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/first_amendment?quicktabs_10=0#quicktabs-10">First Amendment</a> right to praise Al Qaeda, but Al-Qaeda-coordinated advocacy was terrorism support.  “Under the Government’s theory,” amici curia warned, “translating an al-Qa’ida text is lawful, as is espousing beliefs…supporting al-Qa’ida,” but together these “legal acts gives rise to criminal liability,” a particular concern for scholars researching terrorism.</p>
<p>Rabb at Georgetown therefore demanded that action beyond speech underlie any terrorism support conviction.  Yet, unmentioned by Rabb, Mehanna had traveled in 2004 to Yemen, irrespective of any translation work charge.  The appeals court rejected his “rose-colored glasses” presentation as a “devoted scholar…protected by the First Amendment” and found a jury conclusion “virtually unarguable” that Mehanna “went abroad to enlist in&#8230;terrorist training.”</p>
<p>Legal issues aside, amici curiae did not consider Mehanna’s reading and website choices objectionable.   <i>At-Tibyan</i>, for example, “primarily” concerned “<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Muhammad_al-Maqdisi">Abu Muhammad al-Maqdisi</a>…a theologian and a jurist” who “endorses rebellion against…illegitimate Muslim regimes.”  Among “innumerable mainstream theological texts,”<i>39 Ways</i> also involved “basic…Sunni jurisprudence,” namely the “individual duty (<i>fard ‘ayn</i>) incumbent on all Muslims” to “contribute to wars of self-defense.”  “All collections of the words and deeds of the Muslim Prophet Muhammad (<i>hadith</i>) and all Islamic law books” endorsed this “standard position in all Sunni legal schools.”</p>
<p>The amici curiae cited a <a href="http://www.onislam.net/english/ask-the-scholar/international-relations-andjihad/jihad-rulings-and-regulations/174990.html?Regulations">2003 fatwa</a> from “mainstream Muftis” at <a href="http://www.onislam.net/english/"><i>OnIslam</i></a>, “[o]ne of the most popular websites in the English-speaking world devoted to Islam.”  The muftis considered whether for Muslims it is “necessary to fight alongside Afghans” or otherwise resist American-led forces in Afghanistan.  Citing Quran verses legitimating fighting against non-Muslims, the muftis answered that the “Muslim Ummah (nation) is considered one body, which if a single organ aches all the other organs will share the feelings of agony.”</p>
<p><a href="http://www.jihadwatch.org/about-robert-spencer.html">Robert Spencer</a> of the website <a href="http://www.jihadwatch.org/"><i>Jihadwatch</i></a> could not have explained <a href="http://www.jihadwatch.org/cgi-sys/cgiwrap/br0nc0s/managed-mt/mt-srch.cgi?search=fard+ayn&amp;IncludeBlogs=1&amp;limit=20">such doctrines of jihad in a more troubling manner</a>.  Questions in the brief about targeting civilians aside, the cited Islamic doctrine justified the killing of military personnel “attacking” Muslim nations, cold comfort to, among others, beheaded British soldier <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Lee_Rigby">Lee Rigby</a> or the <a href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/f/fort_hood_texas/index.html">13 Americans of the Fort Hood shooting</a>.  Rabb’s brief could only confirm the criticisms of Islam by individuals like Spencer or Holland’s <a href="http://www.geertwilders.nl/">Geert Wilders</a> and incite <a href="http://www.doveworld.org/">Terry Jones</a> to burn another Quran.</p>
<p>Unlike Rabb, though, Spencer has faced <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23064355">exclusion from the United Kingdom</a> and Wilders <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-13883331">criminal prosecution in Holland</a> for their comments on Islam, while <a href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/andrew-harrod/thrown-in-prison-for-shredding-the-koran/">destroying a Quran is prohibited hate speech in countries like Belgium</a>.  Such domestic legal actions accord with the <a href="http://jonathanturley.org/2011/12/13/criminalizing-intolerance-obama-administration-moves-forward-on-united-nations-resolution-targeting-anti-religious-speech/">longstanding international agenda</a> of majority-Muslim nations in the <a href="http://www.oic-oci.org/oicv2/home/">Organization of Islamic Cooperation</a> (OIC) to prohibit criticizing Islam.  This agenda has culminated in the March 24, 2011, <a href="http://www.refworld.org/pdfid/4db960f92.pdf">United Nations Human Rights Council Resolution 16/18</a> with troubling implications for free speech even after Western-induced modifications.</p>
<p>In this context, Rabb’s invocation of the proverbial “<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chilling_effect">chilling effect</a>” on free speech prompted my question about criticizing Islam.  Rabb’s “each regime is different” response allowed for “dignity laws” as a “prerogative” for other democracies dealing with anti-Islam speech grouped by her with Nazism.  Muslim-majority countries also had such laws, Rabb indicated, a worrying statement in light of <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-12621225">Islamic blasphemy laws</a>.</p>
<p>Critical issues involving Islam, however, were not absent from the conference.  <a href="http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/george-soross-evangelicals">George Soros-financed</a> leftist evangelical <a href="http://www.newevangelicalpartnership.org/?q=node/6">Richard Cizek</a>, for example, recalled during a panel how a fellow evangelical had once told him that “insults in Lynchburg produce riots in Lahore.”  Convicted terrorism financier <a href="http://www.investigativeproject.org/profile/100">Sami Al-Arian</a>, meanwhile, discussed with me in the audience viewing the conference’s morning segment before going home to comply with his house arrest.</p>
<p>“Islamophobia” critic <a href="http://nathanlean.com/">Nathan Lean</a> was also in the audience.  <a href="http://www.jihadwatch.org/2013/09/international-islamophobia-conference-promotes-sharia-agenda.html">Called a “stalker” by Spencer</a>, Lean has repeatedly tweeted an article supposedly containing Spencer’s address and wife’s picture, a “clear attempt to intimidate me.”  Addressed by me on this matter, Lean curtly replied that it is “not appropriate” to discuss Spencer at a Christian-Muslim understanding conference and walked away.</p>
<p>Thus Lean, Rabb, and others, concerned about fundamentally necessary anti-terrorism laws infringing intellectual inquiry in the United States, exhibited little principled concern about uninhibited discussion of Islam.  Yet as the conference and Mehanna’s conviction show, the needs of security and liberty demand robust debate precisely with respect to Islam.</p>
<p><i>This article was sponsored by</i> <a href="http://www.legal-project.org/"><i>The Legal Project</i></a><i>, an activity of the Middle East Forum.</i></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/andrew-harrod/chilling-effect-for-me-but-not-for-thee/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Spencer and Geller Banned from Britain for Supporting Israel</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/robert-spencer/banned-from-britain-for-supporting-israel/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=banned-from-britain-for-supporting-israel</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/robert-spencer/banned-from-britain-for-supporting-israel/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Dec 2013 05:56:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Robert Spencer]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Banned]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Britain]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[entry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Islam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pamela Geller]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[robert spencer]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=212329</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The disturbing extent of far-Left domination of the Cameron government revealed. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/ty1.jpg"><img class="alignleft size-full wp-image-212363" alt="ty" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/ty1.jpg" width="400" height="226" /></a>New revelations about why I was banned from entering Great Britain reveal how deeply compromised the British government is to hard-Leftists and Islamic supremacists – including the most virulent haters of Israel.</p>
<p>As faithful FrontPage readers may <a href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/robert-spencer/britain-bans-freedom-fighters/">recall</a>, last June I was banned from Britain because, as a letter from the U.K. Home Office told me, “your presence here is not conducive to the public good.” Why not? Because I said (quite factually) that 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.” And also because, the letter said, “you are the founder of the blog Jihad Watch (a site widely criticized for being Islamophobic),” and “you co-founded the Freedom Defense Initiative and Stop Islamization of America, both of which have been described as anti-Muslim hate groups.”</p>
<p>Note the passive voice: the Freedom Defense Initiative (actually the American Freedom Defense Initiative, AFDI) and Stop Islamization of America “have been described as anti-Muslim hate groups” by whom? The letter didn’t say. And Jihad Watch has been “widely criticized for being Islamophobic” by whom? The letter gives no hint, instead attempting to establish these charges as the judicious assessment of neutral observers.</p>
<p>Now, however, newly released documents relating to our case, as Pamela Geller discussed in a <a href="http://dailycaller.com/2013/12/01/documents-reveal-british-banned-geller-and-spencer-because-of-their-pro-israeli-views/">recent Daily Caller article</a>, reveal that the Home Office’s decision was guided by far-Left agitation groups with a deep animus against Israel.</p>
<p>Of course, this was already obvious from the Home Office’s repetition of the charge that Jihad Watch is “Islamophobic” in its letter to me. “Islamophobia” is a manipulative and propagandistic neologism designed to intimidate non-Muslims into thinking that there is something “bigoted” and “racist” about resisting jihad terror and opposing Sharia oppression of women, non-Muslims, gays and others. The only people who use it at all are Islamic supremacists who want to clear away all obstacles to the advance of jihad, their Leftist allies, and those whom they have bamboozled into thinking it is a legitimate term of discourse – such as the British Home Office.</p>
<p>So it was obvious already who was whispering into the Home Office’s ear, but now it is confirmed. As Pamela Geller noted, in the newly revealed documents “all reference to the identities of those who asked that we be banned have been blacked out.” However, “their black marker missed one reference, revealing that one of the groups complaining about us was Faith Matters. Faith Matters was founded by a Muslim named Fiyaz Mughal, who also heads up Tell Mama, a group dedicated to tracking ‘Islamophobia.’ <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/journalists/andrew-gilligan/10108098/Muslim-hate-monitor-to-lose-backing.html">Tell Mama lost government funding in June</a> after making false claims of waves of attacks ‘Islamophobic incidents.’”</p>
<p>So around the same time that Tell Mama was being stripped of its government funding for lying about the prevalence of “anti-Muslim hate crimes,” that same government was accepting its advice and counsel in favor of banning Pamela Geller and me from the country. Was the Home Office unaware that Tell Mama was wildly exaggerating “Islamophobia” in Britain, and was thus an untrustworthy source for any information related to it, or did it simply not care?</p>
<p>As the Home Office makes its case against us, it also cites as authorities two pro-jihad smear sites, Loonwatch and Islamophobia Today – both of which have published numerous false charges, distortions, and outright lies about me, my public stands on various issues, my activities, and my associations. Both are devoted to completely discrediting anyone who dares to criticize jihad and Islamic supremacism, and to portraying those who oppose jihad terror as just terrible, terrible people. Generally they do this in the context of lurid ridicule of and furious hatred and contempt for their targets, larded with risible pseudo-scholarly “refutations” of their works recalling nothing so much as <i>Der Stürmer</i>. And true to their Nazi prototype, both are relentlessly anti-Israel, retailing Palestinian jihad propaganda with the same clownish fury and disregard for the facts that marks their analyses as a whole.</p>
<p>That anyone regards such sites seriously, with their gleeful flouting of accuracy and genuine analysis, and willingness to retail any smear to discredit their targets, is strange enough. That the British Home Office would be among those who do is a telling indication of just how thoroughly David Cameron’s Conservative government has been compromised, and how abjectly it has capitulated to a far-Left agenda.</p>
<p>The prime confirmation of this comes from one email from the Home Office’s massive team investigating Geller and me. The author (name redacted, of course) notes that the subject profiles that were prepared on us cite our “pro-Israeli views,” and argues that this material be removed, lest the wicked Zionists Geller and Spencer “argue publically that their exclusion is on the basis of their support for Israel.”</p>
<p>Well, that let the cat out of the bag. So here goes: I am hereby arguing publically that my exclusion was on the basis of my support for Israel, along with my “Islamophobia.” In banning me from the country, the British government capitulated to far-Left and Islamic supremacist pressure groups that are both virulently anti-Israel and enraged about the trumped-up phenomenon of “Islamophobia,” while making excuses for or ignoring altogether the reality of Islamic jihad and the numerous human rights abuses perpetrated daily in its name.</p>
<p>Were this a Labour government, this capitulation might be understandable – after all the Leftist/Islamic supremacist alliance has been noted in numerous quarters for years, and people nowadays more or less expect liberals and Leftists to be anti-Israel and anti-counterjihad, if not outright pro-jihad. But the Tories?</p>
<p>The Conservative government of David Cameron has failed the British people as thoroughly and resoundingly as the Republican Party has failed the American people. Both could have and should have constituted themselves as a loyal opposition, departing from the Leftist line. Instead, they have parroted it in innumerable ways, and disenfranchised millions of their constituents by offering no alternative to the dominant paradigm.</p>
<p>Whether or not I ever get into Britain again, the Conservative collapse revealed in the Home Office documents relating to my ban reveal a ruling party, and a society, that is profoundly confused, deeply compromised, and facing far greater crises to come.</p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank"><b>Click here</b></a><b>. </b></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/robert-spencer/banned-from-britain-for-supporting-israel/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>256</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>UK Banned Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller for Pro-Israel Views</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/uk-banned-robert-spencer-and-pamela-geller-for-pro-israel-views/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=uk-banned-robert-spencer-and-pamela-geller-for-pro-israel-views</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/uk-banned-robert-spencer-and-pamela-geller-for-pro-israel-views/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Dec 2013 14:38:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Daniel Greenfield]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[The Point]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Islamization]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pamela Geller]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[robert spencer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UK]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=212248</guid>
		<description><![CDATA["They do not expect that there would be any reaction from the US Administration."]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/pamela-geller.jpg"><img class="alignnone size-medium wp-image-212249" alt="pamela-geller" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/pamela-geller-450x299.jpg" width="450" height="299" /></a></p>
<p>In part. At any rate. To the Dhimmi crowd, <a href="http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2013/12/pamela-geller-dc-caller-documents-reveal-british-banned-geller-and-spencer-because-of-their-ardent-s.html">being pro-Israel is just another way of offending Muslims</a> and when you offend Muslims, then bombs start going off.</p>
<blockquote><p>The British government tried to cover its tracks. But a new cache of documents Robert Spencer and I have received in our battle to overturn our being banned from Britain reveal that a chief reason why we were banned from the country was because we strongly support Israel. As part of our lawsuit against the Queen of England and the Home Secretary et al, we have received numerous documents between the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, the Office of Security and Counterterrorism, and the Home Secretary. In one of them, an official in the Foreign &amp; Commonwealth Office whose name was redacted wrote this letter on May 7 to a recipient whose name was also redacted:</p>
<p>I have received initial feedback from Post to say that they do not expect that there would be any reaction from the US Administration to these exclusions.</p>
<p>We do have concerns with some of the reasoning in the sub, particularly citing pro-Israeli views and. [sic] Pro-Israeli views (and also support for waterboarding) apply to a large number of Americans, including former Presidents. If, for instance, Geller and Spencer were to request details of their exclusion under FOI/DPA or other mechanism, that being pro-Israeli is cited as a reason may be problematic and they could argue publically that their exclusion is on the basis of their support for Israel.</p>
<p>I may get further advice from Post later tonight which I will send to you first thing in the morning. Meanwhile, we advise removing references to being pro-Israel from the main body of the sub as this is not grounds for exclusion.</p>
<p>The “sub” is the “Subject Profile” – one was drawn up on each of us. There is no way to tell how much about our being pro-Israel was removed, but mine still says, “She strongly supports Israel and is an ardent Zionist.” And also: “Pamela Geller’s outspoken support for Israel may also attract pro-Palestinian groups to attend, further complicating the policing operation on the ground and making it harder to keep opposing groups apart.”</p>
<p>So now we know the real reason why we were banned.</p></blockquote>
<p>European foreign policy, in no small part, is hostile to Israel to avoid offending Muslims. Banning pro-Israel views is the logical extension of that same policy and the overall policy of banning anything that offends Muslims and might &#8220;incite&#8221; them to commit acts of terror.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/uk-banned-robert-spencer-and-pamela-geller-for-pro-israel-views/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>9</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Ten Years of Jihad Watch</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/robert-spencer/ten-years-of-jihad-watch/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=ten-years-of-jihad-watch</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/robert-spencer/ten-years-of-jihad-watch/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Oct 2013 04:50:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Robert Spencer]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Islam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Islamophobia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jihad Watch]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[robert spencer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[supremacism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=208937</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[An ever-expanding chronicle of jihad savagery and Islamic supremacism.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/jw.jpg"><img class="alignleft size-full wp-image-208942" alt="jw" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/jw.jpg" width="320" height="320" /></a>Ten years ago, on October 28, 2003, I started Jihad Watch. Since then I’ve been at it every day (except for two or three days out of 3,650, missed due to travel), putting up 34,056 posts (out of a total of 44,415) containing news and commentary about jihad activity, domestic and international, violent and stealthy.</p>
<p>I have done what I set out to do: document and chronicle a certain level of violence and thuggery, as well as supremacist calls for and predictions of conquest and domination, and show how they derive their inspiration and impetus from Islamic texts and teachings. The point of doing this was not (as the relentless cliché has it) to “demonize” Islam or Muslims, but to prove that there is a problem within Islam that needs to be addressed by people of good will, Muslim and non-Muslim &#8212; a problem that would not be solved by concession, accommodation, or appeasement. By refusing to address this problem, and instead defaming those who have dared to raise it, Muslim and Leftist organizations in the U.S. and Europe have demonized themselves.</p>
<p>While I was impatient with George W. Bush’s “Islam is a religion of peace” posturing, it seemed so self-evidently absurd to me and so many others at the time that it never occurred to me when I started this site that the broad mainstream of the public discourse would ever consider the Jihad Watch effort, or the three books I had published about Islam before starting the site, to be remotely controversial. The point was blazingly obvious; it just had to be reinforced since it was being so brazenly denied, in the face of so much evidence.</p>
<p>Now, 44,415 Jihad Watch posts later, the evidence has been marshaled with numbing repetition, and yet the point is more elusive than ever &#8212; smothered in an avalanche of propaganda from well-heeled Leftist and Islamic supremacist propaganda mills loudly claiming that to discuss this issue, to amass this evidence, to make this blazingly obvious point, is “hatred” and “bigotry.” The timid cower and scuttle away, afraid of being connected with something so “controversial.” The opportunistic mouth the currently acceptable pieties, and climb the ladder of success to the extent that they’re willing to sell their souls.</p>
<p>Much of the last ten years has revolved around controversies regarding “Islamophobia.” Critics of Jihad Watch tar the site with this term and leave it at that. For that reason among others, I’ve devoted considerable attention over the years to exposing the concept of “Islamophobia” for what it really is: a term used by Muslim Brotherhood organizations to intimidate non-Muslims away from criticizing or resisting the jihad and Islamic supremacism. The Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) has billions and uses them to bury us in hot steaming piles of nonsense about how Islam teaches peace and tolerance and “believe us, not your lying eyes.” They use them also to continue to demonize and marginalize everyone who dares speak out in defense of human rights against Sharia.</p>
<p>Their Big Lie is designed to obscure the Islamic motivations behind jihad terror, and to disarm resistance to jihad and Islamic supremacism, by blaring the Big Lie everywhere.  But there is one thing they will not do and could not do even if they wanted to: they will not stop jihad terror attacks committed in the name of Islam. They will not stop people from waving Qur’ans and shouting “Allahu akbar” before cold-bloodedly murdering innocent people, including children.</p>
<p>That is why their campaign, for all the money behind it, is doomed to fail: they will never be able to stop people from seeing that there is something violent, something supremacist, something that needs to be reformed and rejected from within Islam, but that Muslim organizations are dissembling about instead of confronting. Every day the truth comes out, somewhere, in the form of mangled bodies, terrified children, and horrified bystanders suddenly awakening to reality as they make their way on a ground slippery with blood. Every day people die not because of “Islamophobia,” but because of Islamic jihad. And every day, media and government elites cover for that jihad and do everything they can to shift the focus away from the real cause of the violence.</p>
<p>That’s why Jihad Watch remains necessary.</p>
<p>In the face of the moneyed propaganda barrage demonizing truth tellers and pushing the “Islamophobia” myth, the task is sisyphean, and perhaps pointless. At the same time, because of the ubiquity of this propaganda barrage, the task has to be done more than ever. The truth remains as obvious as it always was; it is the minds of human beings that can be so clouded that they cannot see it. And so here’s to another ten years &#8212; or as much time as we have &#8212; of truth and clarity.</p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank"><b>Click here</b></a><b>.   </b></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/robert-spencer/ten-years-of-jihad-watch/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>36</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Truth about Robert Spencer</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/jihadwatch-org/the-truth-about-robert-spencer/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-truth-about-robert-spencer</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/jihadwatch-org/the-truth-about-robert-spencer/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Oct 2013 04:30:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[JihadWatch.org]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[false charges]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Islam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Muslim]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[robert spencer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[truth]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=207992</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Rebuttals to false charges.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div>
<div>
<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/rs.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-207996" alt="rs" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/rs-450x299.jpg" width="270" height="179" /></a><b>The charge:</b> <i>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.</i></p>
<p><b>The facts:</b> Robert Spencer is no more &#8220;anti-Muslim&#8221; than foes of the Nazis were &#8220;anti-German.&#8221; It has become common, because of the efforts of Islamic supremacist and Leftist groups, to equate resistance to jihad terror with &#8220;hate,&#8221; but there is no substance to this. Spencer&#8217;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.</p>
<p>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 &#8220;hate groups,&#8221; it includes not a single  Islamic jihad group on this list. And its “hate group” designation against the Family Research Council <a href="http://dailycaller.com/2013/09/20/splc-inspired-shooter-floyd-lee-corkins-sentenced-to-25-years/" target="_blank">led one of its followers to storm the FRC offices with a gun, determined to murder the chief of the FRC</a>. 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. <a href="http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/king-fearmongers_714573.html" target="_blank">This Weekly Standard article</a> sums up much of what is wrong with the SPLC.</p>
<p>The ADL traffics in the same reckless defamation. <a href="http://www.newenglishreview.org/blog_display.cfm/blog_id/33504" target="_blank">They have libeled</a> the preeminent lawyer and orthodox Jew David Yerushalmi as an “extremist,” an “anti-Muslim bigot” and a “white supremacist.” The <a href="http://www.haaretz.com/jewish-world/jewish-world-news/adl-outraged-over-israel-banning-eurovision-contestant-from-wearing-galliano-1.515216" target="_blank">ADL has even condemned Israel for fighting anti-Semitism</a>. According to <a href="http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2013/04/adlcondemnspamelagellerandisrael.html" target="_blank">Charles Jacobs of Americans for Peace and Tolerance</a>: “The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) – biggest Jewish ‘defense’ organization &#8212; 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 <a href="http://www.charlesjacobs.org" target="_blank">www.charlesjacobs.org</a>.)</p>
<p>The ADL has defamed many people.<a href="http://www.jweekly.com/article/full/13237/judge-fines-adl-10-5-million-in-colorado-defamation-suit/" target="_blank"> The ADL was successfully sued for over $10 million for defaming a Colorado couple, whom they accused of bigotry</a>. 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 &#8212; paid by the Anti-Defamation League.</p>
<p><b>The charge:</b> <em>Robert Spencer</em><i> and Pamela Geller were both banned from Britain because of their founding of &#8220;anti-Muslim hate groups.&#8221;</i></p>
<p><b>The facts:</b> The letter to Spencer from the UK Home Office said he was banned for saying: &#8220;[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.&#8221; 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 <i>The Methodology of Ijtihad</i> 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.</p>
<p>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.” (<i>‘Umdat al-Salik</i> o9.8)</p>
<p>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, <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/06/19/saudi-preacher-mohammad-al-arefe_n_3465941.html" target="_blank">the British government admitted</a> Saudi Sheikh Mohammed al-Arefe. <a href="http://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Saudi-clerics-use-social-media-to-spread-hate" target="_blank">Al-Arefe has said</a>: “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.”</p>
<p>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.</p>
<p><b>The charge:</b> <em>Robert Spencer</em><i> inspired the Norwegian terrorist mass murder Anders Behring Breivik, who cited Spencer many times in his manifesto.</i></p>
<p><b>The facts: </b>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, <i>2083: A European Declaration of Independence</i>, 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).</p>
<p>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)</p>
<p>Investigative journalist and author <a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2011/dgreenfield/in-defense-of-robert-spencer/" target="_blank">Daniel Greenfield explained</a>:</p>
<blockquote><p>Jeffrey Goldberg at the <em>Atlantic</em> goes so far as to call a prominent researcher into Islamic terrorism, Robert Spencer, a jihadist. The <em>Washington Post</em> admits that Spencer and other researchers are not responsible for the shootings, but sneers nonetheless. And the <em>New York Times</em> and a number of other outlets have picked and touted the “64 times” that Spencer was quoted in the shooter’s manifesto…</p>
<p>The “64 times” cited by the <i>Times</i> 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….</p>
<p>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.</p>
<p>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?</p>
<p>And if the Koran isn’t extremist, then how could quoting it be extremist?</p>
<p>The <i>New York Times</i> would have you believe that secondhand quotes like these from Spencer turned Breivik into a raging madman….</p>
<p>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.</p>
<p title="">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.</p>
</blockquote>
<p><b>The charge:</b> <em>Robert Spencer</em><i> denies the Srebrenica genocide and justifies Serbian war crimes against Muslims.</i></p>
<p title=""><b>The facts: </b>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 <a href="http://www.jihadwatch.org/2005/06/jatras-playing-the-devils-advocate.html" target="_blank">2005</a> and <a href="http://www.jihadwatch.org/2009/08/after-14-years-of-investigating-events-that-took-place-in-srebrenica-in-1995-i-can-attest-there-was.html" target="_blank">2009</a> 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 &#8220;Srebrenica as Genocide? The Krstić Decision and the Language of the Unspeakable,&#8221; published in the <a href="http://www.law.yale.edu/documents/pdf/LawJournals/southwick.pdf">Yale Human Rights &amp; Development Law Journal</a>, Vol. VIII in 2005, Katherine G. Southwick writes:</p>
<blockquote><p>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</p></blockquote>
<p>If Spencer is guilty of &#8220;genocide denial,&#8221; so also is the Yale Human Rights &amp; 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.</p>
<p><b>The charge:</b> <em>Robert Spencer</em><i> blames all Muslims for the crimes of Islamic jihad terrorists who are condemned by the vast majority of peaceful Muslims.<br />
</i></p>
<p><b>The facts: </b>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.</p>
<p><b>The charge:</b> <em>Spencer has argued that there is no distinction between American Muslims and radical, violent jihadists.</em></p>
<p><strong>The facts:</strong> 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 &#8220;Islamic supremacist&#8221; mosques and &#8220;moderate&#8221; 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.</p>
<p><strong>The charge:</strong> <em>Spencer and Pamela Geller sponsored ads that equated all Muslims with savages.</em></p>
<p><strong>The facts:</strong> 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 <a href="http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4041237,00.html" target="_blank">the Fogel family</a> and <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XXUagyT78yo" target="_blank">celebrated those massacres</a>.</p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank"><b>Click here</b></a><b>.   </b></p>
</div>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/jihadwatch-org/the-truth-about-robert-spencer/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>44</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>What&#8217;s in a Word?</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/bruce-bawer/whats-in-a-word/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=whats-in-a-word</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/bruce-bawer/whats-in-a-word/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Jul 2013 04:45:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bruce Bawer]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Christians]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[First Martyr Parish]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Islam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Register]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[robert spencer]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=196729</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[What counts as “controversial” where Islam is concerned? ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/spen.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-196818" alt="spen" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/spen-450x299.jpg" width="315" height="209" /></a>I&#8217;ve only just now caught up with a July 3 <a href="http://napavalleyregister.com/news/local/location-moved-after-bishop-cancels-appearance-of-jihad-watch-blogger/article_1944bc44-e40b-11e2-880c-001a4bcf887a.html%20">article</a> from a newspaper called the <i>Napa Valley Register </i>(which, I must confess, is not a publication I ordinarily check out on a daily basis)<i>. </i>The article reported on a lecture about Islam by Robert Spencer that had been scheduled to take place at a Roman Catholic church in Sacramento. The event, according to the <i>Register, </i>would still go on as planned, but the venue had been changed after orders came down from the Diocese of San Francisco that Spencer was not to be allowed to speak on church property. Plainly, diocesan officials did not wish to invite criticism – or worse – from those who might be offended by honest talk about Islam.</p>
<p>It was interesting to note that the church at which Spencer was to give his talk is called – of all things – St. Stephen the First Martyr Parish. The lesson being that some Christians, while more than glad to honor their martyrs, are desperate to do everything they can to avoid the slightest chance of becoming martyrs themselves.</p>
<p>Anyway, to get to the point: I couldn&#8217;t help noticing that the author of the piece in the <i>Register,</i> one Isabelle Dills, had a fondness for a certain word. In her first sentence, she described Spencer as “a controversial writer about the threat of Islam.” A few lines later she noted that he&#8217;s “the director of Jihad Watch, a controversial blog that focuses on terrorism and violence committed by Muslims.” And a bit further on, she observed that “Spencer’s writings about Islam — particularly on his blog — have stirred up controversy around the globe.”</p>
<p>The <i>mot du jour, </i>obviously, was “controversial.”</p>
<p>I certainly don&#8217;t mean to single out Ms. Dills for censure. She&#8217;s only playing by the current unwritten rules of respectable journalism. These days, after all, anyone who dares to speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth about Islam is by definition trafficking in controversy.</p>
<p>Controversy! Google the words “Islam”  and “controversial” and see what you come up with. As it turns out, it&#8217;s a highly instructive exercise. The main takeaway is that there are two distinct types of Islam-related activities that the media routinely label as “controversial.” Here are some examples of Type A:</p>
<p>• An <a href="http://www.globalmbwatch.com/2013/06/10/controversial-speaker-uk-islamic-student-society-umbrella-annual-conference/">article</a> from last month about “a controversial speaker” who&#8217;d been “scheduled to address the upcoming annual conference of the Federation of Student Islamic Societies” in Britain. What makes the speaker in question controversial? Well, among other things, he&#8217;s called “for Allah to destroy the enemies of Islam” and said that anyone who “goes out to fight to uphold the word of Allah&#8230;is the one on the path of Allah.&#8217;”</p>
<p>• An Australian academic&#8217;s <a href="http://dtl.unimelb.edu.au/R/CPC91MLUIP4I6DNMTHGQLI868E4I51BY7MHUVEXXHPXR61QK1X-01554?func=dbin-jump-full&amp;object_id=282557&amp;local_base=GEN01&amp;pds_handle=GUEST">account</a> of Tariq Ramadan, whom he describes as a “controversial moderate.” It will be recalled that Ramadan, who has presented himself as a modern-minded bridge-builder between the Islamic and Western worlds, has refused to condemn the stoning of adulteresses, among other illiberal acts enjoined by sharia law.</p>
<p>• An <a href="http://www.opendemocracy.net/sana-ajmi/visit-of-controversial-muslim-to-tunisia-sparks-debate">article</a> from last February about the visit to Tunisia of a “controversial Muslim” named Nabil Al-Awadhi. The article didn&#8217;t make it clear why this individual was so “controversial,” but a quick Google search turned up a few quotations, of which the following was typical: “We Arab Muslims must start thinking of producing nuclear bombs&#8230;.Our prophet Muhammad ordered us, ‘to prepare everything possible to fight the infidels.’ These people understand only the language of power. We’ll tell the world: either you submit to Islam, or you’ll have to die.”</p>
<p>• A Fox News <a href="http://video.foxnews.com/v/2517496353001/wh-defends-meeting-with-controversial-muslim-scholar/">video</a> about a White House visit last month by a “controversial Muslim scholar,” Abdallah bin Mahfudh ibn Bayyah, who supports Hamas and, according to Wikipedia, has “urged the U.N. to criminalize criticism of Islam as blasphemy.”</p>
<p>OK, so when it comes to people who are “controversial” about Islam, that&#8217;s Type A. And Type B?</p>
<p>Well, to start with, several of the Google hits for “Islam” and “controversial” led to <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/anti-muslim-ad-campaign-san-francisco-buses-causes-170336170.html">articles</a> about Pamela Geller&#8217;s <a href="http://www.buzzfeed.com/copyranter/new-controversial-anti-islam-ads-in-the-dc-metro">D.C. Metro</a> and San Francisco bus ads, which – conceived in response to the Council on American-Islamic Relations&#8217; “MyJihad” campaign (in which smiling Muslims are shown saying that their “jihad” is to “stay fit” or to “build friendships across the aisle”) – told the truth about what the word “jihad” really means. Geller&#8217;s ads, in these articles, were universally deemed “controversial.”</p>
<p>In addition, Google turned up several articles <a href="http://www.christianpost.com/news/anti-islam-filmmaker-blamed-for-benghazi-attacks-vows-to-finish-controversial-movie-97769/">about</a> <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/sep/15/us-police-question-film-maker">the</a> <a href="http://www.forbes.com/sites/dorothypomerantz/2012/09/27/alleged-filmmaker-behind-controversial-anti-islam-film-taken-into-custody/">film</a> <i>The Innocence of Muslims, </i>which, it will be recalled, was falsely claimed to have provoked the jihadist attack on the U.S. Embassy in Benghazi. The film, whose director is still in prison, consists of nothing but facts about the Religion of Peace. Yet the word “controversial” was attached to it everywhere.</p>
<p>Then there&#8217;s an Al Jazeera <a href="http://stream.aljazeera.com/story/fbi-training-manual">piece</a> about the FBI&#8217;s “controversial Muslim manual” (which, you may recall, the FBI stopped using because it turned out to be too honest about Islam for some people&#8217;s comfort). Also, a Huffington Post <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/20/vatican-islam-serious-discussion_n_1990573.html">item</a> about “a controversial video” entitled <i>Muslim</i> <i>Demographics</i> that was screened last year at “a Vatican-organized synod of bishops.” Plus a <a href="http://www.irfi.org/articles/articles_1351_1400/taslima_nasreen_a_controversial.htm">rant</a> on an Islamic website about Taslima Nasreen – a Muslim-bred gynecologist whose eloquent criticism of Islam was the product of her moral outrage over its treatment of women. The headline? “Taslima Nasreen: A Controversial Writer.”</p>
<p>And let&#8217;s not omit the <a href="http://www.saintpetersblog.com/pinellas-gop-wisely-cancels-err-postpones-speech-from-controversial-anti-islam-professor">article</a> from last month about “a controversial anti-Islam professor” who&#8217;d been invited by the Pinellas, Florida, GOP to speak about “Islam&#8217;s Threat to America.” In response to an e-mail from a local GOP activist who protested that the party&#8217;s job “should be to encourage every voter&#8230;to vote Republican” regardless of religion, the Pinellas party leader “postponed” the talk, telling a local newspaper : ”I looked up the guy, I vetted him, and he has a point of view that perhaps someone may not appreciate. I understand that. That’s education.” (In other words: I&#8217;ve learned my lesson; I won&#8217;t invite critics of Islam to speak to us again.)</p>
<p>Finally, along the same lines, there was a <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/news/channel-4-cancels-controversial-screening-of-islam-the-untold-story-documentary-after-presenter-tom-holland-is-threatened-8125641.html">piece</a> about the “controversial screening” of a documentary, “Islam: An Untold Story,” that was cancelled last September by Britain&#8217;s Channel 4. Why? Because the program&#8217;s truth-telling (for example, it “examined claims that rather than Islam&#8217;s doctrine emerging fully-formed in a single text,” dictated by Allah to Muhammed, “the religion instead developed gradually over many years”) was too much for hundreds of angry callers who flooded Channel 4&#8242;s switchboard with complaints.</p>
<p>So let&#8217;s break this down – short and sweet. According to the media, two types of people are to be considered “controversial” when it comes to the subject of Islam. One type consists of those Muslims who have made crystal clear their ardent support for violent, murderous jihad against infidels and for the brutal, merciless punishments laid down by sharia law – in other words, Islamic orthodoxy. The other type consists of those non-Muslims who, often at the risk of their own lives, dare to spell out the plain fact that Islamic orthodoxy does, indeed, consist of the above.</p>
<p>One small difference, however, should be noted. “Controversial” is probably the strongest word that most mainstream media will ever apply to the likes of Nabil Al-Awadhi and Abdallah bin Mahfudh ibn Bayyah. When it comes, on the other hand, to people like Spencer or Geller, “controversial” is the closest some media organs will ever come to showering them with praise.</p>
<p><strong>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: <a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n%3A133140011%2Ck%3Adavid+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n%3A133140011%2Ck%3Adavid+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank">Click here</a>.</strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/bruce-bawer/whats-in-a-word/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Britain&#8217;s Powerful Enemies of Freedom</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/bruce-bawer/britains-powerful-enemies-of-freedom/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=britains-powerful-enemies-of-freedom</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/bruce-bawer/britains-powerful-enemies-of-freedom/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Jul 2013 04:39:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bruce Bawer]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Britain]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hope Not Hate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jihad]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pamela Geller]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[robert spencer]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=195996</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The hatred of the U.K.'s group "Hope Not Hate."]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/HopeNotHate.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-196031" alt="HOPE not Hate" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/HopeNotHate-394x350.jpg" width="276" height="245" /></a>While ignored by all but a handful of major media, the decision to ban Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller from Britain received considerable coverage at the relatively small number of websites (this one, it seems, more than any) where it was recognized as an outrage. One detail that has perhaps been given insufficient attention, however, is the fact that this disgraceful betrayal of the traditions of British democracy came in response to a complaint by an organization called <a href="http://www.hopenothate.org.uk/?page=home">Hope Not Hate</a>. (Or, as the group writes its name, “HOPE not hate.”)</p>
<p>What is Hope Not Hate? Founded in 2004 as a “positive antidote” to the British National Party, it “has the support of the Daily Mirror, trade unions, celebrities and community groups across the country.” I wrote about it <a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2012/bruce-bawer/the-scandalous-lies-of-hope-not-hate/%20">here</a> last year, after it issued a particularly odious piece of propaganda and character assassination entitled <i>Counter-Jihad Report. </i>The “report&#8217;s” release was timed to coincide with the trial of Anders Behring Breivik, for its whole point was to link the Norwegian mass murderer with the several dozen people around the world (myself included) who were included in the report&#8217;s list of critics of Islam – the idea being that those critics were purveyors of hate, pure and simple, and that Breivik&#8217;s killing spree was a natural consequence of their vile rhetoric. About jihad itself – about 9/11, 7/7, and every other jihadist atrocity of recent decades – the “report” had absolutely nothing to say; on the contrary, the picture it painted was of a bunch of out-and-out hatemongers all of whom, in recent years, had resolved, for perverse reasons of their own (or, perhaps, without any reason at all), to despise and denounce a quarter of the earth&#8217;s population. An uninformed reader of the report might easily have concluded that these hatemongers&#8217; common preoccupation – this thing they called jihad – was nothing more than a product of their twisted, feverish minds.</p>
<p>Was this counter-jihad movement an immense international conspiracy, whose participants had secretly connived to produce dozens of books, all within a brief period, about harmless people whom they had all decided to falsely and maliciously depict as a threat to everything they held dear? Or had these haters, in what could only be viewed as a staggering coincidence, all decided independently to target the exact same group of innocents with their bile? Whatever the case, the “report&#8217;s” bottom line was that it isn&#8217;t jihadist ideology that&#8217;s the problem (not that the report even acknowledged this ideology&#8217;s existence) – it&#8217;s the <i>criticism </i>of jihadist ideology that leads to violence, and thus represents a deadly danger to civilization. To underscore this point, Hope Not Hate actually juxtaposed, on the first page of the report, a picture of Breivik aiming a gun with photos of David Horowitz and Geert Wilders. As I observed at the time, Hope Not Hate&#8217;s document “turn[ed] reality on its head,” responding to messengers of truth – people who&#8217;d spent years alerting the public to a clear and present danger – by representing <i>them </i>as the real danger, and, at the same time, all but removing from the picture the people who really <i>are</i> the danger. The whole thing was absurd. Yet Hope Not Hate&#8217;s “report” was taken seriously on both sides of the Atlantic by journalists who – apparently uncomfortable dealing with the reality of jihad – welcomed the opportunity to depict jihad&#8217;s critics as the <i>real</i> menace to social harmony.</p>
<p>You&#8217;ve got to hand it to Hope Not Hate. It&#8217;s done an amazing job of getting the world to accept that it is exactly what it says it is. (The Wikipedia entries for many individuals and institutions that deal with controversial issues generally mix cheers with jeers; but Hope Not Hate&#8217;s <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hope_not_Hate%20">Wikipedia page</a> reads like a press release: “Hope Not Hate is an anti-hate, anti-racist and anti-extremist civil rights campaign based in the United Kingdom&#8230;.”) Still, one can be forgiven for being surprised at the readiness of British authorities to do this preposterous posse&#8217;s bidding. Granted, we&#8217;re talking about a country where you can <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2317332/Ex-serviceman-Brian-Fairfield-ordered-Union-Flag-neighbours-complained-noisy.html">get in trouble</a> for <a href="http://vladtepesblog.com/2013/05/26/woman-arrested-in-oldham-for-carrying-a-union-flag/">flying the nation&#8217;s flag</a> (and where a gypsy family can <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2026723/Gypsies-immigration-officers-home-Proms.html">move into</a> your house and trash your stuff while you&#8217;re away for the weekend and <i>not</i> get into trouble); where preachers (only Christian ones, of course) risk <a href="http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/cristinaodone/100225249/banning-the-term-gay-is-an-insult-to-free-speech/">arrest</a> for criticizing homosexuality; and where police and social workers <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2324386/Police-chief-constable-council-chief-executive-refuse-stand-despite-catalogue-errors-Oxford-sex-ring-scandal.html#ixzz2TM8E6bo8">hesitated</a> for years to save young girls from gangs of brutal Muslim rapists for fear of offending the latter&#8217;s co-religionists. Even so, some of us weren&#8217;t entirely prepared for the spectacle of the United Kingdom taking its marching orders from the likes of Hope Not Hate, and thereby utterly spurning age-old British principles of liberty in favor of Hope Not Hate&#8217;s monstrous ideology.</p>
<p>And what exactly <i>is</i> that ideology? A spokesman for the group, Matthew Collins, spelled it out in a statement congratulating the Home Office for its ruling: “There is a line in the sand between freedom of speech and the right to use hate speech. Freedom of speech does not guarantee you that right&#8230;.People will now quote Voltaire but he never had the benefit of going to the gates of Auschwitz and seeing where unfettered free speech ends up.” In other words, forget “I disagree with what you say but would defend to the death your right to say it”; now it&#8217;s “I will do everything I can to silence you, because the kinds of things I have to say are good for society while the kinds of things you want to say resulted in the Holocaust.” In the eyes of Hope Not Hate, then, freedom of speech engenders tyranny, and the tyranny of speech suppression strengthens freedom.</p>
<p>Could it be more Orwellian?</p>
<p>Not only did the Home Office kowtow to Hope Not Hate; most of the media that deigned to cover the Spencer/Geller story dutifully followed Hope Not Hate&#8217;s script. The <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/06/26/pamela-geller-banned_n_3503307.html%20">Huffington Post</a>, for instance, described the controversy as pitting two “far-right activists” against “anti-fascist campaigners.” <a href="http://liberalconspiracy.org/2013/06/21/campaign-to-stop-two-us-bloggers-joining-edl-rally/%20">Liberal Conspiracy</a><i>,</i> a classical liberal website in the U.K., accepted without question Hope Not Hate&#8217;s self-designation as “anti-fascist” while echoing the group&#8217;s dismissal of Spencer and Geller as “American bloggers.” (Virtually all<i> </i>the articles I saw about the case refer to them as “bloggers”; none mentioned that Spencer is the author of more than one <i>New York Times </i>bestseller.) Patrick Hayes of Spiked Online, a British libertarian site, did <a href="http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/13736/%20">criticize</a> Hope Not Hate for its “Doublespeak,” yet he, too, bought into the absurd notion that this gaggle of left-wing fascists are in fact “anti-fascist” and went along with the group&#8217;s portrayal of Geller and Spencer, saying he&#8217;d never heard of them but that “[a]pparently, they are right-wing bloggers from America.” (Did it never occur to him to Google them?)</p>
<p>One article after another credulously transmitted Hope Not Hate&#8217;s claim that Geller and Spencer had run ads “calling Muslims &#8216;savages.&#8217;” Not one journalist seemed to have bothered fact-checking this calumny – and certainly it didn&#8217;t to any of them that it&#8217;s Hope Not Hate, not Geller and Spencer, whose <i>specialité de la maison </i>is name-calling. Similarly, the letter that started it all, in which Hope Not Hate accused Geller and Spencer of “incit[ing] hatred,” was quoted by a number of reporters – none of whom gave any indication of grasping the irony of the fact that the very people behind this charge had produced, in the <i>Counter-Jihad Report, </i>a consummate example of the incitement of hatred. Simply put, no media figure outside the “counter-jihad movement,” as far as I could tell, was clear-eyed enough to recognize that Geller and Spencer, like many of the others slandered in the “report,” are in the business of telling objective truths about Islamic theology – period – while Hope Not Hate, unable to refute those truths and therefore unwilling to debate the truth-tellers openly, has chosen systematically to respond to those truths with smears and lies and slander, misrepresenting the truth-tellers&#8217; message and striving to destroy their reputations and careers. And it is this despicable crew, with their mendacious and malevolent <i>modus operandi,</i> who now have the ear of officials at the very pinnacle of British power.</p>
<p><strong>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: <a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n%3A133140011%2Ck%3Adavid+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n%3A133140011%2Ck%3Adavid+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank">Click here</a>.</strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/bruce-bawer/britains-powerful-enemies-of-freedom/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>32</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>What is Exceptional About America? &#8212; on The Glazov Gang</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/frontpagemag-com/robert-spencer-and-pamela-geller-banned-from-the-u-k-on-the-glazov-gang/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=robert-spencer-and-pamela-geller-banned-from-the-u-k-on-the-glazov-gang</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/frontpagemag-com/robert-spencer-and-pamela-geller-banned-from-the-u-k-on-the-glazov-gang/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jul 2013 04:00:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Frontpagemag.com]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jamie Glazov Productions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Glazov Gang]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ban]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom fighters]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jihad]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pamela Geller]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[robert spencer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UK]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=195005</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[What Obama will never say.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/am.jpg"><img class="alignleft size-full wp-image-195704" alt="am" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/am.jpg" width="192" height="136" /></a>This week&#8217;s Glazov Gang had the honor of being joined by <strong>Ann-Marie Murrell</strong>, the National Director of <a href="http://politichicks.tv/">PolitiChicks.tv</a>, <strong>Nick Adams, </strong><a href="http://www.nickadamsinamerica.com/">Australia&#8217;s de Tocqueville</a> and <strong>Morgan Brittany, </strong>a Conservative TV and Movie star.</p>
<p>The Gang gathered to discuss <em>What is Exceptional About America? </em>The discussion occurred in <strong>Part I</strong> and focused on <em><a href="http://www.nickadamsinamerica.com/">Nick Adams&#8217; romance</a></em> with what he considers to be the greatest country in the world. The dialogue was followed by a spotlight on <em>Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller Banned from the U.K.. </em>The guests wondered why Jihad supporters are welcome in Britain &#8212; and why freedom fighters and truth tellers are not.</p>
<p><strong>Part II</strong> put a spotlight on <em>Obama&#8217;s Brotherhood Odyssey</em>. The discussion shed disturbing light on why Obama is sending U.S. troops to Egypt to prop up the Muslim Brotherhood and to help suffocate the democratic opposition.</p>
<p>See below to watch both parts of the two-part series:</p>
<p><strong>Part I:</strong></p>
<p><iframe src="//www.youtube.com/embed/Z4UYpXRXrgw" height="325" width="425" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p><strong>Part II:</strong></p>
<p><iframe src="//www.youtube.com/embed/DtXKoEh7pko" height="325" width="425" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p><strong>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: <a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank">Click here</a>.  </strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/frontpagemag-com/robert-spencer-and-pamela-geller-banned-from-the-u-k-on-the-glazov-gang/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>21</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Object Caching 1460/1603 objects using disk
Content Delivery Network via cdn.frontpagemag.com

 Served from: www.frontpagemag.com @ 2014-12-31 13:07:37 by W3 Total Cache -->