Saturday, November 14, 2009

Geert Wilders, Robert Spencer Muslim Bashing At "Jihad Watch" & The Non-Muslim Fabricated "Muslims Against Sharia" & The" Reconquista of Anatolia "

The rhetoric of the Islamophobes mirrors that of the Islamic extremists. One merely needs to take out the word “Muslim” and substitute it for “Christian” and “Allah” with “Jesus.”
from Danios at

Is this a movie poster ad for TwinsII Danny Devito Arnold Schwarzenegger-No its two Racist anti-Muslims Robert Spencer and Geert Wilders

"...the real motive for the Dutch politician’s planned visit (to the USA)? Based on Wilders’ record, it is clear that the purpose behind the speech was to convince Americans that Islam as a religion is the root cause of terror and that the United States must seriously consider curtailing the civil liberties of its Muslim population if it wishes to survive as a free nation. We need only to look at some of the many previous comments Wilders has made to come to this conclusion.

"Mr. Spencer espouses a view of Islam as a system of belief which is essentially violent, undemocratic, totalitarian, exclusive and at war with all non-Muslims. Mr. Spencer in fact goes as far as to equate Islam with fascism. According to him,

" The misbegotten term “Islamo-fascism” is wholly redundant: Islam itself is a kind of fascism that achieves its full and proper form only when it assumes the powers of the state.” ("

Muslims Against Sharia Has no Muslim Members !!!

The growth of the Anti-Islamic,anti-Muslim movement since the tragedy of 9/11.
Here's a succinct description from

Murdered By Muslims Plaque by Danios at LoonWatch

On September 11th of 2001, nineteen Al-Qaeda affiliated hijackers coordinated a series of horrific suicide attacks, killing almost three thousand innocent men, women, and children. What motivated these young men to throw away their lives–and take away the lives of others–was a deep-seated and overwhelming hatred towards America.

The 9/11 attacks brought out the best–and at times the worst–in Americans. Whilst certainly the desire to help out victims and their families reflected the best, there were other parts of society who co-opted the situation for their own nefarious hate-mongering purposes. For Islamophobes, it became the casus belli against Islam and Muslims in general. And so, in a horrible irony, the hatred of Al-Qaeda–of Muslim extremists–was internalized by some. It is a truism–as trite as it sounds–that hate begets hate.

The rhetoric of the Islamophobes mirrors that of the Islamic extremists. One merely needs to take out the word “Muslim” and substitute it for “Christian” and “Allah” with “Jesus.” If one listens to the justifications Al-Qaeda gave for 9/11, they are remarkably similar to the justifications given by the Islamophobes to justify the excesses and casualties of aggressive wars.

While researching anti-Islamic anti-Muslim organizations such as Pam Geller at Atlas Shrugs,Robert Spencer's Jihad Watch,The David Horowitz Freedom Center & the Faux group pretending to be Muslims but are not " Muslims Against Sharia" I discovered I had dropped into the middle of an ongoing conflict among the various anti-Islam groups. Some members ( Robert Spencer, Pam Geller , David Horowitz) became so extreme associating with Neo-Nazis and Euro-Nationalists and Fascists such as Geert Wilders, Axel Reitz, Manfred Rous, Christian Worch - see previous post) so the organization came apart forming new organizations but continue to use the internet to snipe at one another when they are not Muslim bashing. Some consider others too extreme while the more extremist accuse these moderates of giving in too much to the Muslim community.

"At (Civil) War with the Idiots he Created"29 April 2009 by Emperor at
If none of you have noticed by now there is a civil war raging in the Islamophobic Anti-Muslim blog-world. We expect to talk about this in greater detail but at least one site has dedicated itself to tracking the ins-and-outs of what they hilariously term the “Great Soap Opera.”

It has gotten to a level where web media outlets such as The Washington Independent have taken notice and started writing about it. Gawker also mercilessly ripped apart the players involved in this melodrama which pits the leader and founder of the so called “anti-jihad movement,” Charles Johnson against his former followers and friends Robert Spencer, Baron Bodissey (!) and loon blogger Pam Geller.

"LoonWatch Explores the Underworld of Anti-Muslim Blogging" by Devon Moore Aug 24, 2009 at DailyKos

The anti-Muslim blogosphere is a cesspool of some of the most vile hatred and misinformation on the internet. The anti-Muslims cover a wide spectrum though most can be found slithering in the Right-Wing. They range from academics such as Daniel Pipes, self-declared scholars like Robert Spencer and his JihadWatch, to open racists such as Debbie Schlussel, Pamela Geller and the blog Gates of Vienna.

* Devon Moore's diary

It should be noted that the anti-Muslim blogosphere is not a monolith, they come from various, mostly conservative backgrounds but are only united by a hatred of Islam and Muslims. So it is no surprise that this bloc has in the past turned on one another. The most glaring feud being the one between Charles Johnson (Little Green Footballs) and JihadWatch's Robert Spencer; a feud that broke out over whether or not the anti-Muslims should join forces with European neo-fascists.

Various websites have taken up the task of chronicling the exploits and breaking down the hate of the anti-Muslim blogosphere. There is Islamophobia-Watch,, and a few others though none seem to be as organized, or updated as their opponents. However, LoonWatch, a site that I have been following since I learned about it over 3 months ago and which I have featured as an editor of the Islam page on Topix is one site that gives the anti-Muslims a run for their money.

For one, they aren't defensive, instead they satirize and poke fun at the lunacy that is Islamophobia such as: blaming every negative piece of news from the Middle East on Islam, calls for nuking Mekka, the stereotypes of the subjugation of covered women, evil Muslim cells lurking around the corner, leftists colluding with Muslim terrorists, etc.

and more on Geert Wilders from the Southern Poverty Law Center

"Dutch Lawmaker (Geert Wilders) Brings His Anti-Muslim Spiel to U.S." by Sonia Scherr on October 20, 2009 -Hate Watch at Southern Poverty law Center

Geert Wilders, who has repeatedly compared the Koran to Hitler’s Mein Kampf, was for months banned from Britain because of concerns that his anti-Islamic views would trigger violence. He held a press conference there on Friday after a court overturned the no-entry ban.

...he said Europe was “on the verge of collapsing” due to an influx of Muslim immigrants. “The takeover of Europe is part of the global fight of Islam for world domination,” he said... “Islam is not a religion. It is a political ideology. Islam’s heart lies in the Koran. The Koran is a book that calls for hatred, violence, murder, terrorism, war and submission.”

Because Islam is not a religion, according to Wilders, “the right to religious freedom should not apply to Islam.” He called for a moratorium on the building of new mosques and the closure of all Islamic schools because “they are fascist institutions.” He said anyone belonging to a “non-Western minority” should be required to enter into “a legally binding contract of assimilation.” He also asserted that Islamic culture is inferior to Judeo-Christian culture.

“I think he’s arguably the world’s worst Islamophobe, but what is truly scary is his acceptance in the mainstream,” said Brian Levin, director of the Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism at California State University, San Bernardino. “He’s unabashedly retrograde because he exploits deep-rooted fears about citizenship and security. His reprehensible, bigoted stereotyping of Islam completely mischaracterizes the beliefs of the overwhelming majority of the world’s Muslim adherents. [And] his totalitarian proposals are not only practically preposterous, but the most morally reprehensible that one could conceive of next to murder or forced conversion.”

also see:

Geert Wilders as we have seen is an anti-Muslim anti-Islam extremist who talks about Muslims in the way that anti-Semites talk about the Jews as foreign element in Western Society which is a danger to Western traditions and values. Muslims are described not so much as a religious group but as fanatics who hold to a belief in making all nations into totalitarian regimes run by Muslims.They are depicted as merely pretending to be loyal or to have assimilated when in fact they are just biding their time . In the same way the notorious forgery The Protocols of The Learned Elders of Zion made similar claims about the Jews. The Jews were also blamed for helping to create & foster Liberalism which supported diversity and multiculturalism which gave the Jews more freedom and more control over European nations before the rise of Adolf Hitler. In the same way now Robert Spencer ,Pam Geller, David Horowitz and other anti-Muslims claim the stealthily Muslims are working with Liberals and Progressives in America in order to destroy its traditions and basic principles etc.

"Temple University Rejects Geert Wilders" by Barbel at Oct.18, 2009
Contrary to what those at the ironically named David Horowitz Freedom Center have been claiming, Geert Wilders was not planning to travel to Philadelphia from the Netherlands solely for the purpose of informing Americans about terrorism. The notion that a politician from the Netherlands needed to travel to a city less than two hours away from Ground Zero to inform us about the nature of terrorism or the challenges we face from it in the future would be laughable if it were not such a grim indicator of the state of the world today.

So, we must wonder, what then was the real motive for the Dutch politician’s planned visit? Based on Wilders’ record, it is clear that the purpose behind the speech was to convince Americans that Islam as a religion is the root cause of terror and that the United States must seriously consider curtailing the civil liberties of its Muslim population if it wishes to survive as a free nation. We need only to look at some of the many previous comments Wilders has made to come to this conclusion.

" ....To understand why Wilders’ words should be considered as slanderous, we have to take a few steps back and look at the big picture. Slander involves the speaking of false words that damage the recipient’s reputation (luckily for Wilders, one can not be sued for slandering a religion or ideology). Wilders’ claim is that there are elements intrinsic to Islam itself that promote acts of terror against civilians. To support his position he has crafted a youtube-sized video that cleverly juxtaposes carefully selected passages from the Quran and speeches by terrorist leaders with acts of terror. Ignoring the fact that anyone with more than a cursory knowledge of the Quran could show that the passages Wilders [and his intellectual brethren in Al Qaeda] chose are taken out of context, Wilders has forgotten the very basic of all rules of statistics. Correlation does not imply causation. The significant number of Muslims involved in terrorist actions does not mean that Islam is the cause, nor do most Americans follow that crass logic.

How can Islam as a religion be culpable for causing terror if terror itself has had such a long history of being practiced by people of varying faiths and no faith? When Native Americans attacked and killed all of the inhabitants of Jamestown, what was it but terrorism? When President McKinley was assassinated by an anarchist named Leon Czolgosz, what was it but terrorism? When the Zionist group, Irgun, bombed unarmed Palestinian and British civilians, what was it but terrorism? Any argument that attempts to assert that Native American beliefs, or anarchist beliefs, or the Zionist movement, intrinsically promote terror against civilians is absurd and patently false. Similarly, any argument that claims that Islamic scripture promotes terror simply because Islam is the religion practiced by most terrorist today is just as absurd and just as patently false.

There are more than one and a half billion Muslims in the world today. If Wilders’ assertions about Islam were correct, one in four people would be attempting to kill the other 3 people. Were this to happen, global civilization would quickly disintegrate as we faced a level of warfare that would make World War II look like nothing more than a rough game of beach volleyball. Since this is clearly not the case, we are left with the possibility that the vast majority of Muslims who have condemned terrorism have misunderstood their religion and that Geert Wilders, great scholar of Islam that he is, has uncovered Islam’s true message. Once again, this would be a laughable notion if it were not such a grim indicator of the current realities of political thought."

The unfortunate truth is that terrorism is simply a tool used by peoples who have exhausted all others means of resistance. Fanaticism and terrorism by a people who have had their lives and liberties attacked from every possible direction is a deplorable yet predictable phenomena that is independent from any particular set of religious or ideological beliefs. In the last century alone, those living in the the “Muslim World” have had to face challenges stemming from the decline of formal religious institutions, the abrupt end of colonialism, the imposition of forced dictatorships, the creation and failure of arbitrary nation-states, and the existence of occupying foreign armies on their land. The combined effect of these forces has unfortunately resulted in a rise in the number of people who see acts of terror as the only means by which they can establish a system of social justice that they believe will give them the freedoms they desire. Islamic scripture is used as a way to rationalize the approach these individuals have chosen to achieve their goal, similar to the way Christian scripture was used to rationalize the political and financial ambitions of the papacy during the Crusades.

Until Geert Wilders is able to demonstrate that Islam, and not the numerous other factors that have historically played a role in cultivating terror, is the actual cause for terrorism today–a task as unachievable as it is absurd– his claims amount to slander and defamation and should be treated as such. Temple University was right to rescind their offer to have Wilders speak and Columbia should follow suit. Slander has no place in a free and just society; especially slander that utilizes hate speech to promote discrimination...
and so it goes,

Islamophobes Inc., Robert Spencer and Geert Wilders

"Robert Spencer Rejected by Academics: Still Supports Geert Wilders" by Garibaldi at July 13,2009

Recently the American Library Association & the Ethnic & Multicultural Information Exchange Roundtable was to hold a discussion around the topic of Perspectives on Islam: Beyond the Stereotyping. For all intents and purposes the forthcoming discussion seemed very promising. It would confront and discuss the important issue of stereotypical portrayals of Islam and all that is associated with it such as myths and smears.

The program ran into trouble when without the knowledge of the other panelists, and seemingly without any sort of vetting, the ALA invited a well known anti-Islam and anti-Muslim blogger and writer — Robert Spencer. To say the least this made more than a few people scratch their heads. How could a reputable organization invite a well known Islamophobe who traffics in perpetuating stereotypes to speak at an event that is supposed to go beyond stereotypes?

To understand just how strange this was just imagine if the ALA had invited David Duke as a speaker on matters of race, say on a panel discussing the topic Perspectives on Race: Beyond Stereotyping. Does anyone believe he would be invited?

This was the very reason that a group of librarians, scholars and individuals sent a letter to the ALA protesting the inclusion of Robert Spencer on the panel. In it they detail their reasons and their apprehension at the severe lapse of judgment and error on the part of the ALA,

Even the most cursory overview of Mr. Spencer’s oeuvre makes it clear that in fact he has no place on a panel whose aim is to dispel stereotypes about Islam. Indeed, we, as librarians, scholars, and individuals are deeply concerned by ALA & EMIERT’s choice of Mr. Spencer for such a panel: Mr. Spencer espouses a view of Islam as a system of belief which is essentially violent, undemocratic, totalitarian, exclusive and at war with all non-Muslims. Mr. Spencer in fact goes as far as to equate Islam with fascism. According to him,

" The misbegotten term “Islamo-fascism” is wholly redundant: Islam itself is a kind of fascism that achieves its full and proper form only when it assumes the powers of the state.” ("

Hence a question arises as to the justification for inviting a speaker who cannot see anything positive about Islamic beliefs, cultures, societies, histories, etc. to talk to an audience in order to dispel negative views of Islam. We are indeed saddened and puzzled by ALA’s choice for their panel, especially in that this appears to be a rare opportunity to educate people about Islam against the backdrop of an overwhelming atmosphere of ignorance, and negative stereotyping.

The open letter to the ALA resulted in the other three panelists withdrawing their participation in protest against the inclusion of Robert Spencer who they only learned was going to be a part of the panel a few days ago. This resulted eventually in the ALA canceling the event.

"CAIR’s Honest Ibe Hooper doesn’t have to resort to such circumlocutions. I didn’t actually have anything to do with that conference in Florida, but Hoop could just say straight out that I support Wilders. And so should anyone who holds dear the Western values that are threatened by Islamic supremacists — notably, as I said above, the freedom of speech, the freedom of conscience, the equality of rights of all people before the law." Robert Spencer

...There it is straight from his pen and that’s why Spencer keeps digging himself a hole. His support for Geert Wilders is his downfall because any objective and thorough understanding of Geert Wilders, what he has said and what he represents will prove the lie to the claim made by Spencer that he cares about Democratic freedoms and Rights because if he did he wouldn’t support Wilders and company.

Wilders is on record stating that religious freedom, a cornerstone of the foundation of modern democracies everywhere should not apply to Muslims,

"Islam is not a religion… the Quran is a book that calls for hatred, that calls for violence, for murder, for terrorism, for war, and submission…We should also stop pretending that Islam is a religion…the right to religious freedom should not apply to Islam." Geert Wilders

This is not the only place that Wilders has made this statement he has repeated it to roaring applause at Synagogues and conferences.

It is unbelievable that Spencer would now attempt to posit himself as an objective academic researching and writing on Islam when he unabashedly “supports” odious and reprehensible individuals such as Geert Wilders. Who can take Spencer’s grandiose claim seriously that he is fighting for the freedom of speech, freedom of conscious, indeed for Western civilization itself against “Islamic supremacism” when he supports and calls on us to support one who would infringe on the right of individuals to freely practice their faith.
What can you expect though from one who joined a group that aimed for a reconquista of modern day Turkey, forcibly replacing its Muslim population with a Christian one?

"M. Cherif Bassiouni Rips Fake Scholar Robert Spencer"from our friends at Loonwatch)Aug. 19,2009

Robert Spencer crawled out of the wood works and into the relative limelight circa 2003 when he started Jihad Watch. Ever since then it has been a long journey into the bizarre ranks of the pantheon of right wing blog stars with an occasional foray to bless the mere mainstream mortals with his personal knowledge of Islam. He receives stupendous applause and adulation from the cult following that has sprung up since his site was created — the little “counter-Jihadis” who in the late middle of their lives have found a new purpose to life; hate of Muslims as defense of the West.

His blog, JihadWatch, has served as a portal into the realm of propaganda against Islam and Muslims. It works at one and the same time to confuse and conflate issues and news related to Islam and Muslims. A man murders his wife and for Spencer it is not a question of domestic violence but honor killing that derives its roots from the Quran. Recently, a mass wedding in Gaza in which a picture was taken of the grooms holding hands with their nieces was egregiously misconstrued by Spencer as an instance of mass pedophilia. These are the type of Gobbelsesque tactics employed by Spencer that highlight the pre-set prejudiced conclusion he begins with; the maxim he seems to be working from is Muslims are guilty, before proven innocent.

His employing of this highly disingenuous maxim is starkly on display in his most recent crusade of attempted character assassination. It involves M. Cherif Bassiouni a distinguished Muslim scholar, lawyer, professor and human rights activist, titles which Spencer almost mocks derisively. Oddly enough it is almost fitting that Robert Spencer would mock Bassiouni’s qualifications because again who really needs to go through the hard work of scholarship, qualifications and peer reviewed work when you can do your own study without peer review and come up with your own conclusions?

Spencer proclaims that it was “false” for Bassiouni to write that “a Muslim’s conversion to Christianity is not a crime punishable by death under Islamic law.” Even when Bassiouni pointed out that the document was his (and a large number of other scholars’) opinion and that it was submitted to a court in Kabul dealing with a case in which the death penalty was being considered for apostasy he didn’t backtrack but continued to attempt to castigate the professor. Not a smart move it seems.

After some 300 years of Muslim occupation in Turkey/Anatolia a group has formed including Robert Spencer to reconquer the area for Christianity by legal means through the United Nations or by force. What Robert Spencer, Geert Wilders, David Horrowitz and Pam Geller and their fellow travelers are aiming at and proposing is an all out war /Crusade in the name Judeo-Christianity to take back all those lands lost over the last 300 or last thousand years to these so-called foreigners.

"Robert Spencer Joins Genocidal Facebook Group" at littlegreenfootballs Feb 11, 2009
At Facebook, we find this group: white nationalists who advocate conquering Turkey and expelling/slaughtering the entire Muslim population—150 million people: Facebook | CAMPAIGN FOR THE ‘RECONQUISTA’ IN ANATOLIA!

"Once the former East Roman capital is recaptured every single brick, pavingstone, copper wire, bolt nut & screw, piece of ceramic, shard of glass, plank of wood and fleck of paint, placed within this city after May 29th 1453 will be systematicallly demolished, melted burnt and ground down into a fine dust, shipped out to the middle of the North Atlantic Ocean in oil tankers and sporadically scattered over a wide area, so that there will be no physical remains of the city of Istanbul whatsoever.
The main aims of this group are to:

. Advocate the total Reconquest and complete reassymilation of the Anatolia penninsular, eastern Thrace, northern Cyprus, Greater Armenia, The Pontus and Antiochia through the medium of Greek, Armenian, Cypriot, Byzantine, Pontic and Syriac National Sovereignty and on an unconditional basis.

. The complete unilateral and unnegotiable permanent ethnic transformation of theses territories in order to coopt the first aim.

. And the establishment of a National coalitionary Greater European confederative super state in order to secure the first two aims, with guaranteed sovereign borders, fixed permanent garrisons and the necessary military means to ensure alien repatriation with a view to permanent long term resettlement.

* This group entirely understands and accepts that this project will require the displacement of up to 150 million persons, an armed and paramilitarily active settler rediaspora of at least 15 million economically viable semi-civilian colonists, an occupation force consisting of at least 2 million professional troops, a military presents in all territories between Anatolia and West Turkestan and anything between 0.5 and 5 trillion dollars worth of fiscal capital in order to complete. Furthermore this group also realises that the territories for resettlement in lower central Asia may not be currently suitable for such a large demographic intake and that therefore, mass sterilisation via sexual segregation and voluntary euthenasia programmes (may for the time being), need to remain on the table in order to prevent a latter humanitarian disaster.

* This group is not a hate group and it entirely recognises the fact that the majority of Turks currently living on the Anatolian peninsular are not responsible for the actions of their ancestors. However, they ARE in possesion of stolen land and property that does not rightfuly belong to them either as a Nation or as individuals, which essentialy makes them a Nation of squaters.

Therefore this is a group for the expression and advocation of national, racial and civilizational patriotic duty (no matter how unpleasant that duty might be) and for the principle of ethnic primogenture (particularly among civilized Nations that have either been destroyed or severely ravaged by culturaly inferior Nations)

(Non) Muslims Against Sharia at Chasing Evil, March 9,2009

If you dig deeper into the “blog”, you’ll find lavish praise for Ann Coulter and George Bush, articles by a lot of Fox pundits like Bill Gertz, extensive condemnation of Islam in ALL its forms, of Democrats, and of every Muslim country on the planet. In an hour of searching, I didn’t find a single entry…not one…that said anything positive about Muslims. I did find this entry, which actually argues that “moderate Muslims” pose a greater threat to mankind that Jihadists. What a strange argument for a site called “Muslims Against Sharia” to make.

In fact, the articles posted on the blog are once again completely indistinguishable from the sort of URQ Muslim-hatred one expects from the likes of Shaidle, McMillan, Sentinel, and the emerging neo-Nazis.

So…who EXACTLY are Ezra’s new little friends, these “Muslims Against Sharia”? We’ve figured out that they really like Republicans, don’t like Democrats, are single handedly rewriting the Koran, seem to rely on an awful lot of extreme right wing sources for their blog content, and don’t really seem to have much actual Muslim input at all. It’s hard to tell, of course, because, as noted above, they carefully give us NO governance, Board, management, corporate or membership information whatsoever.

Selections from website "Muslims Against Sharia" to get a flavor of their unwarranted attacks on Islam and all Muslims from trivial localized concerns to national and international concerns.

British Government Latest recipient of The Dhimmi Award as explained in this article:

Islamists who want to destroy the state get £100,000 funding

Members of a group regarded as an 'organisation of concern’ by the Home Office has secured large government grants for schools, reports Andrew Gilligan.

Leading members of a group that wants to bring down the British state and replace it with a dictatorship under Islamic law have secured more than £100,000 of taxpayers’ money for a chain of schools.

Accounts filed at the Charity Commission show that the Government paid a total of £113,411 last year to a foundation run by senior members and activists of Hizb ut-Tahrir - a notorious Islamic extremist group that ministers promised to ban.

The public money helped run a nursery school and two Islamic primary schools where children are taught key elements of Hizb’s ideology from the age of five.

Chris Grayling, the shadow home secretary, last night described the disclosure as “astonishing and outrageous” and accused the Government of “sleeping on the job”.

Hizb regards integration as “dangerous” and says that British Muslims should “fight assimilation” into British society. It wants to create a global Islamic superstate, or “caliphate”, initially in Muslim-majority countries and then across the rest of the world.

It says that “those [Muslims] who believe in democracy are Kafir”, or apostates. It orders all Muslims to keep apart from non-believers and boycott “corrupt” British elections and political processes. It has a tiny following and its views are rejected by most British Muslims(my emphasis added). Hizb, which operates worldwide, insists it is non-violent and condemned the London bombings.

In this next article about Muslims in Britain upset about sex education classes so What's the big deal American Evangelicals are also against sex education and never stop going on about how evil it is and that it is part of some"Liberal" "progressive" and Homosexual Agenda.

Friday, November 13, 2009
UK Muslims to challenge compulsory sex education
David Sapsted, Foreign Correspondent

LONDON: The British government’s plan to make at least one year’s sex education compulsory for all schoolchildren is facing a legal challenge from the country’s largest Muslim organisation.

Roman Catholics, too, are considering a high court challenge to government proposals to introduce a new, national curriculum course for all children aged between five and 16 in two years’ time.

Under the new plans, the lessons would be compulsory for all 15-year-olds, meaning that each child would have at least one year of sex education, including detailed instruction on contraception and about homosexuality.

and so it goes,

No comments: