Charles Johnson

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. Enjoy!

It’s hard to know what to make of Charles Johnson, the batshit crazy founder of Little Green Footballs, engendering the hatred of his even batshit-crazier former compatriots.

Johnson and his recent penchant for heretical thinking has sparked a full-on blogger civil war (and got Glenn Beck all mad), pitting stupid brother against stupid brother. The Washington Independent took a look yesterday:

Since the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, jazz musician and Web designer Charles Johnson has devoted his blog, Little Green Footballs, to exposing Muslim extremism in and outside the United States. His targets have included the Council on American-Islamic Relations, filmmaker Michael Moore, Reuters, Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.), Dan Rather, and the late pro-Palestinian activist Rachel Corrie – who some LGF commenters (not Johnson) call “St. Pancake,” a tribute to the Israeli steamroller that killed her. LGF helped write the lexicon of the self-styled “anti-Jihadist” blogosphere – from “moonbat” (“an unthinking or insane leftist”) to “anti-idiotarian” (“anyone who grasps the significance of and does his or her best to combat the post-9/11 political alliance between the ‘Old Left’ and militant Islam”).

But in the early days of Barack Obama’s presidency, LGF has become better known for the various fights it picks with many on the right – including conservative bloggers, critics of Islamic extremism, and critics of Islam in general who used to be Johnson’s fellow travelers.

At issue is an anti-Islamic conference in 2007 organized by some of Johnson’s acolytes. Among the invited attendees were members of a Belgian political party with ties to neo-Nazism, which is a perfectly natural fit, seeing as how the conference was organized around the idea that you should hate people who are different from you. Johnson took issue with the idea of his beloved anti-Islam movement being associated with neo-Nazis, and used his blog to attack members of the movement who got to cozy with extremists.

The whole thing has gotten out of hand, he told the Independent: “I don’t think there is an anti-jihadist movement anymore. It’s all a bunch of kooks.”

Well imagine that! If you organize people around the notion that all Muslims everywhere want to kill white Americans, some kooks show up at the table.

Johnson’s experience with the nutjobs-of which he is one-on the right is an object lesson in why soft-headed liberals like to keep an eye on seemingly respectable people who flirt with hatred and racism in their political messaging. Because even if those people stop short of actually saying, “Let’s round up the Muslins,” they tend to attract, and lend credence to, the people who are going for that in the first place.

Johnson should be commended for taking a stand against neo-Nazis and Glenn Beck. And he should still be condemned for spending the last eight years giving them ammunition and inspiration. If neo-Nazis are into your ideas, Charles, you might want to rethink them.

Geert Wilders

We recently wrote about the Freedumb of Speech Summit that was held in Delray Beach, Florida hosted by Republican Representative Adam Hasner (!) and republican hopeful Allen West.  The guest of honor giving the main speech was European Fascist Geert Wilders. 

Geert Wilders is a controversial European legislator who has amongst other things called for the Quran to be banned in the Netherlands and for the enacting of discriminatory laws in regards to immigration that would target and exclude Muslims from the West. Wilders has also been prosecuted for “hate speech” and “inciting discrimination” by an appeals court in the capital of the Netherlands: Amsterdam.

In a racist screed that Wilders delivered over the weekend at the summit, he declared:

“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.

Wilders also called for “stopping Muslim immigration to the West, for stopping the building of mosques, for closing down Islamic schools because they are “fascist” institutions.”

The obvious contradictions and hypocrisy seem to be going right over the heads of Wilders and his supporters such as Robert Spencer, Brigitte Gabriel and Representative Adam Hasner. In a summit dubiously dubbed as Freedom of Speech they want to curtail the rights of others to practice Freedom of Religion - a pillar of all self-respecting modern Democracies.

One must consider the implications of Wilders’ call and the collusion of American hatemongers with his project.  How does he want to translate his call for Muslims to be denied religious freedom into practical policy?  Will he ask all Muslims to renounce Islam or face deportation, even those born in the West? Would he and his supporters force Muslims to convert from Islam to Christianity or another religion?

Only in the hate world of the far right are insinuations made that, a religion that has been around for over 1400 years - Islam – is in fact not a religion at all.  It is also a world where one finds no contradiction in proclaiming freedom of speech on the one hand but then proudly declaring opposition to freedom of religion on the other.

Do these loons seriously consider themselves the “defenders of Western Civilization” against the “barbaric Muslim hordes” when they proudly flaunt the very foundations of that civilization?  In light of  this contradiction the more accurate description for this group of loony racists and neo-fascists might be ”defenders of delusions.”

From Wilders own mouth:

Geert Wilders

To Freedom of Speech or to Freedumb of Speech?  That is the question. My apologies to Bill Shakespeare but I am actually referring to a real event. Mark your calendars freedom lovers for April 25th — especially if you live near Delray Beach, Florida – for you guys are about to witness a real “love-fest ” in defense of Democracy and Western Civilization.

For $150 you can have the pleasure of listening to one of Europe’s leading Fascists — Geert Wilders – rant about the evils of Islam and Muslims, the need to ban the Koran, its similarities to Hitler’s Mein Kampf and other fun anecdotes.  You’ll also get an opportunity to view his much hyped but universally ignored film Fitna which is just as easily viewable for free online. As you’re passing around the cocktails amongst an audience of the clinically paranoid, wondering what the hell you’re doing there, make sure you at least stay for dinner because for God’s sakes you paid $150 for it.

Bostom Wilders Spencer Geller

Also on the guest list is Robert Spencer who runs that den of hospitality and enlightened discourse known as JihadWatch. Spencer, known for his selective and misleading mangling of Muslim texts, casting aspersions on all Muslims, and general poor scholarship, is also known for joining a White supremacist group on his personal Facebook account called “Campaign for ‘the Reconquista’ in Anatolia” that states as one of its aims:

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.

If some of you don’t know why that’s bad, the Anatolian Penninsula is pre-dominantly populated by Turks and Kurds and is 99% Muslim. As of yet, Spencer has not apologized for joining the group or condemned the group’s mission.

Another participant is Brigitte Gabriel, described by the New York Times as a “Radical Islamophobe.” She can’t make up her mind if moderate Muslims exist or not. In a speech given at the conference for Christians United for Israel she stated,

The difference, my friends, between Israel and the Arab world is the difference between civilization and barbarism. It’s the difference between good and evil [applause]…. this is what we’re witnessing in the Arabic world, They have no SOUL !, they are dead set on killing and destruction. And in the name of something they call “Allah” which is very different from the God we believe….[applause] because our God is the God of love.

She also seems to believe as she stated on her Orwellian named organization Act! for America that “Lebanon…is nearly all Islamic.” This is a much needed dose of laughter to go along with her other inanities. Lebanon has a Christian population that is cited as being 39% according to the CIA Factbook while Muslims (including all sects: Shia, Sunni, Druze) account for nearly 60% of the total population. Lebanon is also known for being not only one of the most pluralistic countries in the Middle East but also one of the most Westernized; Beirut itself is known as “the Paris of the Middle East.”

These are just a few of the characters and headliners of this Freedumb of Speech Summit. Sure sounds like fun! A European Fascist hooking up with an American Fascist hooking up with a Lebanese Fascist who believes Arabs have no soul – all in the cause of defending Freedom of Speech and Western Civilization. Birds of a feather flock together couldn’t be a more apt description here.

On the other hand, you might want to skip this Muslim-Bash summit and go over to Disney World. How much are tickets now-a-days? Can’t be any more than $150 and probably would be money better spent.

Nuclear Holocaust

Loons come in many shapes and sizes but you can usually identify them because they utter stark raving mad things that normal mainstream people would never say and would likely find objectionable.  One of those things that might make you flinch is when someone calls for the application of nuclear weapons upon a whole populace or nation.

In a previous post I exposed Joe Kaufman’s wish to launch nukes onto the Middle East, and how he wonders ” if we got nukes, why aren’t we using them?”  This is not an isolated incident but in fact is part of a larger trend that links many of the Islamophobes and instigators of anti-Muslim agitation. 

In the recent presidential race, former Republican Representative Tom Tancredo from Colorado was on the record stating,

If it is up to me, we are going to explain that an attack on this homeland of that nature would be followed by an attack on the holy sites in Mecca and Medina. Because that’s the only thing I can think of that might deter somebody from doing what they otherwise might do.

Does Tancredo believe that instead of emboldening terrorists and pouring fuel on the fires of conflict, a strike on the holy places of a quarter of the world’s population would be a “deterrence?”  Can someone from Colorado talk to Tancredo and convince him to go on the same quest as the Scarecrow in the Wizard of Oz?

Robert Spencer, the self-described “Islamic expert” wrote in his article Nuke Mecca? Nope that he believes the only reason bombing Mecca wouldn’t be a good idea is because it would become

[a] source of spirit, not of dispirit. The jihadists would have yet another injury to add to their litany of grievances.

Why can’t Spencer who easily proclaims that bombing Mecca is wrong for strategic reasons not come out and denounce the idea of bombing close to a quarter of humanity’s most holiest site for moral reasons? Maybe because Spencer wouldn’t mind seeing Mecca bombed. 

He grudgingly suggests that due to the exigencies of Realpolitik we can’t do it because it will become a source of “spirit for the Jihadists” but without condemning it he leaves the possibility that we might be capable of doing it in the future.  He never stops to consider that this might anger more than just the Jihadists but also every single Muslim in the world.

One must ask Spencer how he would feel if someone proposed that the only reason bombing the Vatican might not be a good idea is because it will become a source of spirit for extremist Catholics? Wouldn’t he think that Catholics of all stripes and shades would be angered and not just the extremists targeted amongst them?

Michael Savage

In one of the most recent episodes of using the nuclear card we have Michael Savage echoing Kaufman by asking on his radio show the Savage Nation, ”if we got nukes, why aren’t we using them, what are they good for?”

CALLER: We in the Western world and the United States — I don’t see how we’re gonna win this, because we do not have the guts, we don’t have the stomach to do the things it takes to be violent enough, to fight fire with fire and give these — I mean, basically, we need to exterminate them like rats, and we’re so worried about –

SAVAGE: Yeah, we know where they’re coming from, we know they’re coming out of the — the training, at least, is probably coming out of the area where Osama bin Laden is hiding. If we can believe our intelligence agencies — of course, we have no real knowledge as to whether they’re really intelligent intelligence agencies — they’re in the tribal areas of western Pakistan. What the heck do we have nuclear weapons for? What are tactical nuclear weapons for but to wipe out an enemy? The enemy lives there — kill them and their families, and show them that the terror they inflict on the West will come home to roost and will be inflicted on them. Why must we sit here waiting for the New York subways to go up in flames?

CALLER: Yes, sir, but what are we gonna do? Instead of what you just said, what we’re gonna do is we’re gonna cut our nuclear arsenal.

[...]

SAVAGE: The only way to defend ourselves against these fanatic Islamists is with strength. Not with hand-wringing, not with the United Nations, but with a strong and swift attack on the tribal regions of western Pakistan. Now, I will not quibble with you as to whether they should be with nuclear — that is, tactical nuclear weapons, which are limited in their scope and limited in their power — or with cluster bombs or with weapons I’m not even aware of. But there’s no question that entire region needs to be annihilated and stripped off the earth.

Such statements are the logical end of the extremist thought of the anti-Muslim crowd and one wonders considering the evidence how prevalent this apocalyptic call is amongst those who think nuking countries, regions and holy places is a swell idea.

Daniel Pipes

Avigdor…

No that’s not the name of a new tablet for erectile dysfunction or sleep deprivation.

It’s the name of the new fascist on the block, Avigdor Lieberman, founder of the ultra-right wing Yisrael Beiteinu party, the new Israeli Minister of Foreign Affairs, and Deputy Prime Minister of Israel.

Avigdor Lieberman’s past is troubling to say the least. He is reported by the Israeli newspaper Haaretz to have once been a member of the racist Kach party founded by Rabbi Meir Kahane. The movement which advocates violence against civilians has since been declared a terrorist organization both in the United States and Israel. He admitted to have been involved in at least two violent incidents against Arab students as a member of the student group Kastel.

Larry Derfner, senior writer and columnist with the Jerusalem Post, wrote that Lieberman is “a politician who, with his appeal to racism, militarism, fear of alien ‘subversives’ and the yearning for a strong leader, fits the classic, textbook definition of a fascist.”

Israeli Labour minister Ophir Pines-Paz has stated that Lieberman was tainted “by racist declarations and declarations that harm the democratic character of Israel”.

British Investigative journalist, Robert Fisk, wrote about why Avigdor Lieberman is the worst thing that could happen to the Middle East drawing parallels between Avigdor’s language and that of the Serbian genocide masters, Mladic and Karadzic and Milosevic.

Avigdor Lieberman

Avigdor Lieberman believes that Israeli Arabs are the enemy within, he does not believe in an open and free pluralistic democracy as the West understands and appreciates it; instead he envisions a state that would penalize citizens who did not agree with its (his?) idealogical disposition.

Avigdor and his party wish to socially engineer the demographic make-up of the state of Israel: reduce the number of citizens of Arab extraction by transfering them out, and increase those of Jewish extraction via increased immigration. In the true vein of fascism, Lieberman advocates mandatory loyalty to the “state” and a revocation of citizenship for those who fail to comply. He envisions Israel as a Jewish supremacist state not as a democracy.

“The vision I would like to see here is the entrenching of the Jewish and the Zionist state…I very much favour democracy, but when there is a contradiction between democratic and Jewish values, the Jewish and Zionist values are more important.” (Scotsman, October 23, 2006)

Activist Ali Abunimah reported that “when [Lieberman] served as minister of transport in a previous government, Lieberman called for all Palestinian prisoners held by the Israeli occupation authorities to be drowned in the Dead Sea and offered to provide the buses (“Lieberman blasted for suggesting drowning Palestinian prisoners,” Ha’aretz, July 11, 2002).

Hebrew University professor Ze’ev Sternhell, a leading Israeli academic specialist on fascism and totalitarianism, was quoted by the Scotsman newspaper as terming Lieberman “perhaps the most dangerous politician in the history of the state of Israel.”

“The only difference between Lieberman and [the late Austrian politician Jörg] Haider and [the French politician Jean-Marie] Le Pen is that they were against immigrants, while Lieberman is an immigrant inciting against the natives,” a spokeswoman for an Arab Israeli Knesset member, Ahmed Tibi, said.

And it goes on and on and on…

In short, Lieberman’s extreme world view and disturbing rhetoric has left many observers around the world, including many Israelis, shocked and frightened.

Not so, Daniel Pipes. Avigdor has him “elated.”

Interestingly, he freely acknowledges the adverse reaction this man has had on moderate people. And yet in the same breath as if to finally admit his own extremism, he makes no attempt to hide his admiration or contain his excitement for Avigdor Lieberman. And so, the day after this dangerous and divisive supremacist delivered his first speech as minister, Daniel Pipes raced to his computer to warmly welcome the world’s newest fascist in a blog entry entitled “Avigdor Lieberman’s Brilliant Debut“:

Avigdor Lieberman became foreign minister of Israel yesterday. He celebrated his inauguration with a maiden speech that news reports indicate left his listeners grimacing, squirming, and aghast. The BBC, for example, informs us that his words prompted “his predecessor Tzipi Livni to interrupt and diplomats to shift uncomfortably.”

Too bad for them – the speech leaves me elated.

It’s official people. But then again, we knew it all along!

Robert Spencer

In observing and chronicling the Loon world one finds that the subject of history comes up frequently and a lot of times the loons revisit history and distort it so they can manipulate it to fit their ideological worldview. In rare cases however do we have a situation in which history is revisited in such a manner as to blatantly align oneself with ancient pogroms and modern campaigns of complete annihilation and ethnic cleansing.

Yet, this is exactly the case that we have with the completely self-taught, pseudo-Islamic Scholar Robert Spencer. Spencer is the progenitor of the hate site Jihadwatch which is host to some of the most vile anti-Muslim and Islamophobic hysteria on the internet. Spencer himself claims that he is just objectively working to expose the fact that Islam is “extremist,” “violently expansionist,” and sometimes not even a religion at all but a “political ideology.”

Do Spencer’s claims to be an objective analyst of Islam hold water?

Recently, Charles Johnson of Little Green Footballs, a former ally of Spencer’s and not an individual sympathetic to Islam exposed Spencer’s partnership with fascist European politicians as well as brought to light the fact that Spencer, on his personal Facebook account joined a group which seeks to reconquer present day Turkey, effectively expel and slaughter 150 Million Muslims and replace them with Christians.

The group Spencer joined is called The Campaign for the Reconquista in Anatolia. If you recall the Reconquista was that delightful campaign undertaken by Queen Isabella and King Ferdinand of Spain which lead to the murder, expulsion and forced conversions of all of Spain’s Muslims and Jews. It also set the stage for the Inquisition. Is it a coincidence that this self described “expert” on Islam would join a group named after a campaign that resulted in the ethnic and religious cleansing of a whole nation? Sure sounds like impartial scholarship to me!

The Campaign for the Reconquista in Anatolia’s lofty mission statement:

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 systematically 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 reassimilation 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 nonnegotiable permanent ethnic transformation of these territories in order to co-opt the first aim.

. And the establishment of a National coalitionary Greater European confederativesuper state in order to secure the first two aims, withguaranteed 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 para-militarily active settler rediasporaof 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 euthanasia 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 possession of stolen land and property that does not rightfully belong to them either as a Nation or as individuals, which essentially makes them a Nation of squatters. 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 culturally inferior Nations), so please keep comments above the intellectual level of the average 5 year old’s!

Looking at Spencer one might be tempted to think: this guy couldn’t be part of a Reconquista, his flabby physique suggests he would have a hard time lifting a pocket protector let alone a sword. You would be correct to think that but it seems the proof is in the pudding, Spencer in the footsteps of old Don Quixote De La Mancha dreams to be a chivalrous white knight but instead of fighting wind mills Spencer has set his sight on conquering and “liberating” Constantinople which for over 500 years has been known as Istanbul.

What’s more is that this isn’t the first time that Robert Spencer has delved into the topic of reconquering Turkey and changing the demographics of the entire nation. In an article he posted on his hate site titled, The Nakba, May, 29, 1453 he posts the following header:

Calling Robert Spencer an objective analyst and scholar of Islam it turns out is like saying Danny DeVito is an NBA All-Star, the fact is that he joined a group seeking to expel and kill 150 million Muslims, to any sane individual that would indicate otherwise.

If you live near to, or are a student at a university you might be interested in knowing that the Three Stooges are touring college campuses nationwide, but before you get your hopes up just know that it’s not the three stooges that you might be familiar with.

We’re talking about the three stooges of the Christian Right: Walid Shoebat, Kamal Saleem and Zachariah Anani.

These three aren’t comedic geniuses in the usual sense but rather are funny in the same way that televangelists who steal money from gullible viewers searching for a cure to their ills give you fits of laughter while at the same time making you feel sick to your stomach. You know its a charade, a concocted myth but you watch to see the theatrics of the show and the usual ‘planted’ caller who declares how the televangelist’s powers cured them of their incurable disease.

So now we have another group of individuals using and abusing Christianity in the name of profit. Former New York Times Middle East Bureau Chief and expert on Christian Fundamentalism Chris Hedges describes them to a tee:

These self-described former Muslim terrorists are regularly trotted out at Christian colleges—a few days ago they were at the Air Force Academy—to spew racist filth about Islam on behalf of groups such as Focus on the Family. It is a clever tactic. Curly, Larry and Mo, who all say they are born-again Christians, engage in hate speech and assure us it comes from personal experience. They tell their audiences that the only way to deal with one-fifth of the world’s population is by converting or eradicating all Muslims.Their cant is broadcast regularly on Fox News, including the Bill O’Reilly and Neil Cavuto shows, as well as on numerous Christian radio and television programs. Shoebat, who has written a book called “Why We Want to Kill You,” promises in his lectures to explain the numerous similarities between radical Muslims and the Nazis, how “Muslim terrorists” invaded America 30 years ago and how “perseverance, recruitment and hate” have fueled attacks by Muslims. (emphasis added)

In fact their tour isn’t simply limited to Christian colleges but extends to colleges and universities that have no affiliation with religion. As noted above they have spoken at the Air Force Academy and most recently (minus Anani) at Western Michigan University.

The fundamentally obvious question that seems to escape people is, “If these guys really are ‘ex-terrorists’ why are they allowed to roam free, campus to campus, lecture hall to lecture hall without being monitored or questioned by the FBI?” The logic of a lot of their supporters in answering this concludes that: if a terrorist repents and accepts Christianity they should be spared prosecution for any crimes committed beforehand.

The looniness in the case of these stooges doesn’t require a great deal of research but can be gleaned from their own words as the best material for their hilarity comes from their own mouths.

For instance, Zachariah Anani claim’s in his biography posted on Shoebat’s hate-site that:

“Every time I killed someone and two or three fighters witnessed it, they would give me a point on my chart. I carried 223 points.”Even his comrades feared him. “Although we had a sense of loyalty to each other,” he says, “we were ready to take out enemies or friends.” When a fanatical Muslim joined his regiment and began knocking on doors to wake the others for prayer at 3 A.M., Anani warned him: “I don’t want to pray. Don’t come and wake me.” When he heard the knock early the next morning, Anani picked up his gun, shot him, and went back to sleep.

LoonWatchers, we can’t make this stuff up!

According to his own admission he has killed at least 223 people and that’s only in those cases in which there were two or three witnesses. You’d think the FBI, CIA and Homeland Security would be all over this murderer but no one knows who he is or what he’s talking about. Also, what kind of insane and pathological individual non-chalantly shoots someone and then simply goes back to sleep; Anani it seems!

The other two stooges are just as bad if not worse in attempting to sell their outlandish and fantastical stories.

Kamal Saleem and Walid Shoebat

Kamal Saleem claim’s to be the descendant of someone called the “The Grand Wazir of Islam,” which  Hedges points out is ”a title and a position that do not exist in the Arab world.” It can be further noted that the religion of Islam has no clerical hierarchy similar to the Catholic Church with defined positions such as the Pope, Bishops, Priests, etc. Kamal’s blooper in his bio is either a result of an ignorance of Islam and its structure or an attempt to manipulate the ignorance of his audience.

Shoebat may be the most outlandish of them all, he is also the most well known. He has in the past equated Islam with “Satanism” and “Nazism.” He also stated in front of an audience at the University of Wisconsin at Milwaukee that ”Palestinians keep Jewish testicles and breasts in jars.”

He claim’s to have planted a bomb at Bank Leumi in Bethlehem but his story has been debunked by several sources including the Jerusalem Post and Shoebat’s own family members. Bank Leumi itself states that they have no record of a bomb attack for the time period asserted by Shoebat.

Simon Altaf, a former Muslim and a convert to Christianity was a close friend of Shoebat and along with him co-authored a book titled This is our Eden, This is our End. Altaf states that,

Walid wanted to be an ex-Terrorist to make money, pure and simple.

In the end the goal is to make money off of these speaking engagements, television appearances, and Church gatherings. This is an easy sell, after 9/11 many Americans were rightly afraid of another terrorist attack;  in this climate Anti-Muslim and Islamophobic sentiment grew making it a ripe time for someone to capitalize on the growing fear and paranoia in the country.

These three stooges hit on the jack pot and saw that there was a cottage industry developing to bash Muslims and Islam and so jumped on the bandwagon, taking their loony lies and hate-caravan all the way to the bank.

Which begs the question can “an Arab” be “a decent family man”? Hmm, the taxing questions of the 21st century…

Joe Kaufman

Joe Kaufman, has been on the Anti-Muslim scene for quite a while now and is dubbed by the far Right-Wing FrontPageMag as, you guessed it…another one of their ”Investigative Journalists.”  That he has been influenced by Meir Kahane and the Kahanist ideology is well documented, as is his love and angst for Kahane.

In the past he has been accused of contributing to the terrorist organization founded by Kahane known as JDL (Jewish Defense League) while others accuse Kaufman of at the very least holding views that parallel JDL positions.

Kaufman’s unsavory associations and views are quite real and they are only dangerous to America if you’re stupid enough to swallow his conspiracy theories but other than that he is simply a half-baked paranoid conspiracy theorist, some what along the lines of the “9/11 Truthers.”

In every nook and cranny there is a “Mooslim”…hiding and ready to get ya…so beware and be afraid. Be veryyyy afraid goes his story.

In this special LoonWatch series we will detail the exploits and punchlines that Krazy Kaufman throws out there and attempts to pass on as serious journalism, commentary and investigation.

Kaufman-O-Meter #1

We went into the way-back-loonwatchers-time-machine and came up with this dandy quote which Kaufman made a month after 9/11:

Question: If the decimation of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was the right thing to do, in response to Pearl Harbor, then why the heck are we saving our nuclear weapons now? And furthermore, if we’re not using them, why do we have the nukes in the first place? After all, there is no more Soviet Union to compete with. If the attacks are not a good enough reason to use them, then what are we holding on to them for?!!! Now, at this point, you may think of me as being no less than a madman, but hear me out, for I have a method to my madness.

I said this in another post but I’ll repeat it, I CAN”T MAKE THIS STUFF UP! These loons pretty much write the material for us.

I guess we can tell that geo-strategic political planning and military strategy is not Kaufman’s forte. Maybe we should help him out and let him know why the above is such a bad idea.

First of all Joe, unfortunately many nations in the world still have nuclear weapons which is one of the reasons we still have them (though happily President Obama has moved to reduce Nukes with the goal of eliminating them). It’s something known as deterrence and in the age of the Cold War was called Mutually Assured Destruction, or M.A.D. a policy that contributed in pro-longing the status quo between the Soviet Union and the USA, resulting in the Soviet Union’s eventual collapse.

Secondly Joe, who exactly do you want to use these Nukes against? Alqaeda? So will you nuke Alqaeda in Iraq or Afghanistan? Maybe Pakistan? How about Algeria or Germany?  Maybe you want to nuke all these countries? The problem with that Joe is that it will probably lead to the deaths of Millions of people and the end of civilization as we know it, something that most Americans with the exception of yourself don’t want to see happen.

Douglas Farah

In a blog entry titled, “The MB Inroads Into the Obama Administration,” Douglas Farah, yet another so-called “investigative” consultant, sets out to link American Muslim organizations to planet Zorbex, that global superpower which is able to operate in perfect coordination yet secrecy toward “sneaking in” an evil empire in the United States — Zorbex is also known as the Muslim Brotherhood, or affectionately as MB.

Douglas Farah throws a few punches around at the usual American Muslim organizations, but hones his venom in this piece at Prof. John “the architect” Esposito, and Dalia “the insider” Mogahed.

Let’s start with Esposito:

Farah: “The architect is Dr. John Esposito, a long time defender of the MB and the head of the Saudi-financed Georgetown University Prince Alwaleed bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding at the Walsh School of Foreign Service.”

Why is Douglas Farah threatened by the concept of Muslim-Christian Understanding?

Because it actually gets people talking to each other, rather than secluding from each other and retiring to wild speculation and demagoguery about one another. The latter is what the Douglas Farah’s, Daniel Pipes’, and Steven Emerson’s of the world desperately need in order to stay in business.

For most people, universities, especially well-established and credible top institutions like Georgetown University are a service to society. Not so to the conspiracy loons like Douglas Farah. He is willing to argue that Georgetown with all of its gargantuan bureaucracy and what that may include in checks and balances is but one sweeping front for the Muslim Brotherhood. In a similar vein, all of the national American Muslim organizations (Farah’s blog piece mentions CAIR, MPAC, and CSID by name) are but one sweeping secretive front for that same ominous superpower, that struggling Egyptian party, the Muslim Brotherhood.

But hey, Douglas Farah is no dummy. He is sure to provide proof for his arguments. You ready? Georgetown, presumably like those orgs, is….. “Saudi-financed!”

Who is he talking about? Well, Prince Al Waleed bin Talal. Who is Prince Al Waleed bin Talal, that prince of darkness and anti-Americanism? Well, we’ll get to that in the last of three points that explain the major problems with Douglas Farah’s argument:

1. The much larger picture. Has he ever heard of philanthropy? That thing that tends to be a long and strong legacy in the United States. How does he think most US private institutions receive a good chunk of their assets? There are hundreds of examples of wealthy financiers of US academic institutions both American and foreign. Does he pin an agenda on each depending on where they were born or the faith they espouse? For example, does he look at a Jewish Hungarian philanthropist who donates to an Ivy league school and scream “Zionist agenda?” Not only does he not do so, but if others did, he would be blogging about anti-Semitism. Good, but then why does he engage in the reverse?

 

2. The slightly larger picture. Georgetown is Saudi-financed? As in Georgetown exclusively? How about the United States is Saudi-financed? Try on the order of $860 billion in Saudi investments to the U.S. economy. Now one may legitimately have an issue with that. It’s a good debate to have. But Douglas Farah is being hypocritical when he cherry picks Georgetown for criticism on that point.

 

3. The full picture. Much has been made about Prince Al Waleed bin Talal’s donations to Georgetown and American Muslim organizations. The donations are made out to be some sort of dubious evil secretive Wahhabi endeavor. But again, anyone familiar with reality can see through the bull. The conspiracy theorists happen to neglect a few small facts that may give an entirely different picture. Georgetown and these American Muslim organizations are in the same league with AOL, Apple Inc., Worldcom, Motorola, News Corporation Ltd, the Four Seasons hotel chain and the Plaza Hotel in New York, London’s Savoy Hotel, Monaco’s Monte Carlo Grand Hotel, Euro Disney SCA, Fairmont Hotels – and yes, President George H. W. Bush. Al-Waleed who is a major investor in all of these companies donated $500,000 to the George Herbert Walker Bush Scholarship Fund, established by Phillips Academy in Andover, Massachusetts, to honor the former President.Or how about the epitome of Western intelligensia: Harvard University. Al-Waleed donated $20 million to Harvard, one of its 25 largest donations. Al-Waleed donated $10 million to Cornell University to study complex genomic and cellular systems as they relate to medicine and biology by using mathematical models, physics and high-speed computing. Al-Waleed donated $20 million to the Louvre Museum in Paris, the World’s top temple of art, its largest gift ever.Now if Al-Waleed is part of an undercover Wahhabi front to establish a caliphate in the West, he is one dumb bastard. I mean that would be one heck of an expensive route with way too much irreversible contradictions on the way. Here’s a whopping $30 million in financing for “Western” halmarks like liberalism, art, and genomes — oh but then here’s a tiny fraction of that amount given to the evil Muslim organizations that will trump all of that – and some – with their impending anti-Western Caliphate. It’s fool proof. Ingenious! Nihohaha.

Next is Dalia Mogahed:

There is no need to even get into Doug’s off-point hate there. Hussein Ibish hit it on the head in a comment on the same blog:

OK, so let’s review, then, the case against Dalia Mogahed:

1. Born in Egypt
2. Worked for Gallup
3. Wrote a book with a Georgetown professor
4. Had a co-worker who used to work for MPAC
5. Used to work for a mosque in which one person lost a security clearance and another person has immigration issues
6. Father is associated with a different mosque, whose website links to American Muslim organizations
7. That mosque was headed by a guy who now has a job with one of those groups.

Egypt, Gallup, Georgetown, a former coworker, some guy’s immigration problems, a mosque’s website, some other guy’s new job. Wow. Case closed. She is definitely an operative of the Muslim Brotherhood. Another brilliant piece of reporting, Doug!

— Hussein Ibish Apr 14, 03:27 #

As you seem to not know, the MB is a web of relationships, including and particularly Georgetown and Esposito. Sorry that was lost on you.

— Douglas Farah Apr 14, 09:07 #

oooh. Doug got you there Hussein! How can the web be lost on you? How can anyone with a name like Hussein be trusted to get it right anyway…

The serious question though is, why does Douglas Farah, an investigative consultant (whatever that means) fail to “investigate” and disclose the full facts to his readers? Why does he do the sloppy cut-and-paste thing, giving a tiny portion of the facts, and then filling in the rest with conspiracy theories?

Because that is the modus operandi of the Loons. And that’s why there’s a loonwatch.

Like Steven Emerson and Daniel Pipes, Farah is not interested in uncovering the real terrorist threat, he is committed to a different agenda: delegitimizing credible and mainstream Muslims, under the guise of fighting terror while taking advantage of everyone else’s genuine concerns about real terror.

While these “investigative” loons are busy with their politicization and keeping others busy with them, real terrorists will slip by as they have in the past.

Brigitte Gabriel

Brigitte Gabriel is a notorious apologist for the fascist Phalange group, Kataeb, and the terrorist group, the South Lebanon Army (SLA), who were responsible for the Sabra and Shatila massacres that slaughtered 1700 to 2000 Palestinians (mostly women and chidren).

Her story is that she grew up during that nation’s long, and bloody civil war.  It was a war that claimed many lives and saw many factions shift alliances and allegiance. Groups that were enemies in the morning became allies at night. Indeed, Muslims fought Muslims and Christians fought Christians.

She seems to play up this milieu to justify her views, as if we should – moved by her “alibi” – automatically excuse and accept them. But her alibi is objectionable since most Lebanese who grew up during this same war did not turn out as rabidly racist as she did.

Gabriel believes Arabs “have no soul!”

The difference, my friends, between Israel and the Arab world is the difference between civilization and barbarism. It’s the difference between good and evil [applause]…. this is what we’re witnessing in the Arabic world, They have no SOUL !, they are dead set on killing and destruction. And in the name of something they call “Allah” which is very different from the God we believe….[applause] because our God is the God of love.

(No soul? An oddly dehumanizing thing for an alleged Christian to say, don’t you think?)

It is no wonder then that theThe New York Times Magazine describes her as a “Radical Islamophobe.”

Brigitte’s self-contradiction is notable. At times she seems to acknowledge that “moderate” Muslims exist,

It’s the duty of all moderate Muslims to speak against the hate, against the Jihad… the people in the West must support the moderates.

The same Brigitte Gabriel on another day scoffs at the notion that a Muslim can be moderate,

America and the West are doomed to failure in this war unless they stand up and identify the real enemy: Islam. You hear about Wahabbi and Salafi Islam as the only extreme form of Islam. All the other Muslims, supposedly, are wonderful moderates. Closer to the truth are the pictures of the irrational eruption of violence in reaction to the cartoons of Mohammed printed by a Danish newspaper…derived from one source: authentic Islam.

And she spills out to the Australian News her bizarre definition of a radical Muslim:

a practising Muslim who goes to mosque every Friday, prays five times a day, and who believes that the Koran is the word of God, and who believes that Mohammed is the perfect man and (four inaudible words) is a radical Muslim.

Let me get this straight, so a Muslim who essentially observes the basic five pillars of Islam is a radical? That leaves us with 1.4 billion radical Muslims, so who gets to be the “moderate” Muslim, I’m confused.

So Brigitte, what is it? Are there any moderates or not? Brigitte seems to be telling us that the only acceptable Muslims are the ones who don’t practice Islam altogether? Or perhaps, she’s even implying that the only good Muslim is an ex-Muslim? 

The question becomes, how can someone so blatantly clueless get airtime anywhere other than on America’s Funniest Home Videos?

The answer, Brigitte has found her very own litte niche to settle within the lucrative business of Muslim-bashing. Her forte is to parlay her “otherness,” and so-called “insider knowledge of the Muslim world,” (the “I’ve been there, I know” line) into a cash cow. Meanwhile we are supposed to be duped into freaking out and running back to her for more “expert” advice brought to us from our loyal friend who ventures into the other side on our behalf.

Gabriel started two organizations, American Congress for Truth (ACT) and (she seems to be running out of ideas)  Act! for America  that receive plenty of funding and “donations” from the likes of the goonish Christians United for Israel and others. Maybe she thinks Americans are gullible or maybe she is a true hypocrite as Andre Gide said,

The true hypocrite is the one who ceases to perceive his deception, the one who lies with sincerity.

This very well may be the case with our merchant of intolerance and misunderstanding, Brigitte Gabriel.