Robert Spencer, the notorious anti-Muslim hate blogger, issued an open challenge to a debate:
The list of the Leftist and Muslim academics and apologists who have refused my challenge to debate is very long; they know they can’t refute what I say on the basis of evidence, so they resort to broad-based smears and personal attacks — and haughty refusals to debate.
He has issued similar challenges on numerous occasions, steadfastly claiming that he would be willing to defend his ideas in debate. I had accepted Spencer’s challenge to a debate, saying:
I accept your challenge, Spencer. I agree to a radio debate with you on the topic of jihad and “dhimmitude”, namely chapters 1-4 of your book, The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades). It will then be seen if you can defend your own writing, which I argue is a load of sensationalist crock.
Will you accept my challenge to debate or cower in fear? My guess is that you “know [you] can’t refute what I say” and will “resort to…haughty refusals to debate.”
It’s been 129 days since I accepted Spencer’s challenge, yet he continues to dodge taking me on. That’s no surprise to most of our readers, since I have written several articles refuting his book and ideas, which he has failed to respond to. It is well-known that my articles have stopped Spencer in his tracks, and finally he has been effectively silenced on those issues. For the first time ever, someone managed to spend the time necessary to respond in a thorough fashion. That’s why Spencer is avoiding a debate with me at all costs, even if it means going back on his open challenge to “leftists and Muslims.”
Even so, this doesn’t stop Spencer from claiming that other leftist or Muslim spokesmen are scared of debating him and can’t refute him. Spencer claimed that Muslim-American spokesman Ahmed Rehab “ran from debate with me [Spencer].” Rehab responded, saying:
Spencer, I never agreed to debate you in the first place, and it is highly unlikely that I ever will.
Rehab then mentions Spencer’s hypocrisy, pointing out that Spencer has been dodging yours truly (Danios of LoonWatch) for quite some time:
And now for some irony. Spencer, you are claiming you are ready to debate anyone but that alas no one wants to debate you because no one can. But, is this actually true? Does the name Danios of Loonwatch ring a bell Spencer? You may be burying your head in the sand hoping no one will notice, but a simple Google search on “Robert Spencer debate” reveals your hypocrisy. How come you are ignoring an invitation from another blogger who has challenged you numerous times and whose articles shredding your arguments to pieces are all over the web without a peep of a rebuttal from you? Are you conceding defeat? Are you “running away?”
Of course, this got Robert Spencer worked up in quite the tizzy, and he blogged a furious response. In it, the sociopath Robert Spencer starts ranting about the Soviet Union and Stalin, something all delusional right-wing nut jobs are prone to do some time or the other.
The irony of Spencer’s response cannot be understated. His post is entitled “CAIR’s Ahmed Rehab and the use of ridicule,” and he complains of how Rehab supposedly resorts to “adolescent ridicule and abuse rather than substance.” It is truly special that Spencer can say this with a straight face while at the same time lampooning the very same opponent by posting a photograph of Ahmed Rehab with a caption accusing him of wearing lipstick and eye shadow. His readers take great delight in this picture, gleefully snickering at this “adolescent ridicule and abuse.” The photograph is likely photoshopped, but even if it is not, what relevance does it have to do with the debate at hand? Here, Spencer has lowered himself to the lowest possible schoolyard tactic: accuse your opponent of being gay. To an extremist Catholic apologist like Robert Spencer being called “gay” is a very bad insult. Of course, to a proud “leftist” progressive like myself, I don’t find it a slur to be labeled “homosexual”, which is clearly what Spencer is hinting at. Even if Ahmed Rehab really did wear make up like gay popstar Adam Lambert, so what? What’s your point? Other than expose your underlying homophobia?
Let me be clear though: we here at LoonWatch don’t mind adolescent ridicule. To wit: Robert Spencer is a fat slob. His belly is so protuberant that he can’t see his feet. (Watch Robert Spencer cry about “personal attacks” when he himself has been doing the same to Ahmed Rehab!)
Have you noticed how Spencer has a thing against what he calls “meterosexual guys” like Ahmed Rehab and Reza Aslan? Do I sense jealousy? Both Rehab and Aslan are fairly good-looking guys. In fact, Rehab was involved with the current Miss USA and Aslan with Jessica Jackley. Maybe Spencer’s antipathy towards these chic Muslim spokesmen is that they are too damn good-looking. Compare Spencer’s frumpy body with Rehab’s toned body. That could also explain Spencer’s burning hatred of Dr. Tariq Ramadan, as one user on his site complains about “his handsome lying face.” I wouldn’t be surprised if Spencer’s burning hatred is a reflection of his own inferiority complex…He certainly wouldn’t be the first loser to embrace a hate-filled ideology to boost his own inner lack of self-worth.
The issue is not Spencer’s “use of ridicule”, but his hypocrisy: he cries that leftist and Muslim spokesmen–Ahmed Rehab specifically here–resort to “adolescent ridicule and abuse”, which is what Spencer himself engages in on his hate site, against Rehab no less! He cries about “adolescent ridicule” and in the same post say that Rehab and Aslan “richly deserve lampooning.” So you can’t use adolescent ridicule, but lampooning is OK. Does pointing out how fat and ugly Spencer is fall into the former or the latter?
Anyways, back to the point: I had long ago accepted Robert Spencer’s open challenge, agreeing to a radio debate. So why does Spencer dodge me?
Spencer needs to generate excuses and a way out from debating me. His first attempt was to minimize my importance, which somehow does not fall under “haughty refusal to debate.” He can no longer rely on this excuse, since Ahmed Rehab himself, the Executive Director of CAIR-Chicago, messaged me: “You are amongst the top writers on this topic, far more effective and relevant than 99% of the countless Muslim writers out there.” That’s high praise from the man whom Spencer considers an adequate spokesman for Muslims. Will Spencer refuse to debate someone considered in the top 1%? I suspect so. Spencer says of me:
Debating such a compromised and dishonest individual would be a waste of time
Isn’t that the exact same reasoning that Rehab gave for refusing to debate you, Spencer? The same reasoning you were so opposed to and called cowardice?
Spencer needs another excuse to weasel out of a debate with me. What will it be? Aha! It will be my anonymity! As many of you know, I write anonymously under a pseudonym. Spencer and his fellow fans desperately want to know who I am. Some of them are convinced I am XYZ, and others that I am ABCD. Some have even engaged in textual analysis, trying extremely hard to find out who this cursed Danios is. My question is: who cares? Deal with my arguments, not who I am. Spencer says:
…Since Rehab invokes [Danios] and others have referred to his site [LoonWatch] recently, I am willing: if “Danios of Loonwatch” reveals his real name…
Spencer places this condition on me, knowing full well that I will refuse to reveal my name, since he knows that I like writing anonymously. Spencer asks:
What is “Danios of Loonwatch” afraid of?
Do I have to be “afraid” of something? I enjoy writing anonymously. Having said that, I do plan on eventually “coming out of the closet” (will Spencer now accuse me of being gay too [although for the record I am not]?), but not just yet…When the time is right and of my own choosing. And when I do come out, I am sure that Spencer will attack my “meterosexual looks”. Ah, why o why was I cursed with such handsome looks?
More importantly, I am currently a post-doctoral fellow at an Ivy League university and instructor at a state university. Coming out of the closet at the present time would pose some logistical problems for me, which is why I have chosen to do it at a later date. Does this answer your question, Spencer?
Then Spencer places his second condition:
I am willing: if “Danios of Loonwatch” reveals his real name, finds a university willing to host the debate and contracts an impartial moderator, I’m ready when he is.
So (1) I have to reveal my real name, and (2) the debate can only be at a university. The second condition is odd, considering that it is Spencer who has no affiliation to any university. In fact, Spencer failed to respond to this point by Rehab:
Spencer claims to be a scholar of Islam, Islamic Law, and Theology but holds no degrees in any of those subjects and has never even published a single peer-reviewed paper.
Why, in your epic rant, did you not respond to this argument against you? How is it, my portly friend, that you consider yourself a “scholar of Islam”–which your site so claims–when you do not even have a single degree in any subject of Islam, let along a single peer-reviewed paper? Exactly what type of scholar are you, then?
Anyways, Spencer’s second condition is tied to the first: a university debate can only be arranged if I reveal my true identity and university affiliation, which he knows that I am not willing to do just yet. Spencer concludes:
But I won’t be holding my breath.
I’m sure Spencer was actually holding his breath, for fear that I might accept his two pre-conditions, and then how to avoid the challenge!?
Of course, Spencer’s two conditions–both of which involve revealing my identity–are completely bogus. I have offered to debate Spencer on the radio. Does Spencer not do radio interviews? In fact, Spencer has appeared on the radio countless times, doing interviews for Jawa radio, Spirit Catholic Radio, Western World Radio, etc. To completely negate Spencer’s generated excuse, here we have Spencer himself saying how he engaged in a radio debate with a CAIR spokesman:
In April 2007, I participated in a heated hour-long radio debate with CAIR’s Hussam Ayloush…
So why does Spencer agree to a radio debate with Hussam Ayloush but now he doesn’t agree to the same with yours truly? What’s that sound? Oh, it’s the sound of a chicken.
UPDATE:
One of our readers Jack raised a great point:
Isn’t Robert Spencer great friends with Bat Ye’or? That’s not her real name… Does Spencer require of her to dispense with the nonsense (everybody knows her real name by now). Does Robert Spencer refuse to quote ‘Fjordman’? ‘Baron Boddissey’? And so on and so forth.
Not to speak of Ali Sina, Ibn Warraq, and countless other fellow anti-jihadists (read: Islamophobes). The truth is: Robert Spencer is scared out of his wits. He will continue to generate excuse after excuse…
October 24th, 2010 at 1:58 pm
Hey guys, I apologize for going MIA for some time…I’m still here. I am incredibly busy, and unlike Robert Spencer I have a real job.
The article refuting Robert Spencer on jihad is still on its way…Sorry for the delay.
October 24th, 2010 at 2:02 pm
Good to see you back!
October 24th, 2010 at 2:12 pm
Let’s see how Spencer will spin this one…
October 24th, 2010 at 2:30 pm
i check loonwatch more than i check my email. great to have you back Danios. all of you at loonwatch are doing an awesome job.
October 24th, 2010 at 2:42 pm
God, I haven’t laughed this much in a while. We miss you, Danios!
October 24th, 2010 at 2:52 pm
Great to see you posting again! Listen, when you do get this twit to set foot in a university, I want it filmed and uploaded. It’ll be hilarious.
October 24th, 2010 at 2:53 pm
I guess he’s worried that he can’t “compile a folder” on you like he has others, so would instead have to deal with your actual arguments.
October 24th, 2010 at 2:57 pm
Danious
Perhaps in refusing to debate you Robert Spencer is unintentionally doing you a huge favor. Then again why would he accept your challenge after smearing him as a sociopathic anti-Moslem fat ugly hate monger loser. If I called you these things would you debate me? Would you debate anyone? I know I wouldn’t.
October 24th, 2010 at 2:57 pm
Hehe-I think Robert could be contender for the Biggest Schlub contest. Regarding an actual debate, if he really is correct in what he says, he should NOT be afraid to debunk you-he should embrace the chance
October 24th, 2010 at 3:05 pm
Thanks, guys. When I bring it, I bring it. If Robert Spencer is going to take a jab at Ahmed Rehab’s looks, I’ll come back with a sledgehammer against Spencer’s looks.
October 24th, 2010 at 3:08 pm
Apollo Speaks,
Then why does Robert Spencer expect Ahmed Rehab to agree to a debate after REPEATEDLY posting a private picture (most likely photoshopped) intentionally designed to lampoon him? Is doing so “scholarly”? Does it befit a man claiming the title of “the acclaimed scholar of Islam”?
And Spencer’s responses to Rehab are full of smears and name-calling. Should I point them out to you?
Oh, JW’s hypocrisy.
My next prediction: Robert Spencer will now generate yet another excuse not to debate him: I hurt his feelings by calling him fat. haha
October 24th, 2010 at 3:10 pm
Danios, check your email!
October 24th, 2010 at 3:11 pm
So Danios, debate him. Anywhere, Anytime. Any Conditions.
October 24th, 2010 at 3:13 pm
good to see you back Danios:)
“And when I do come out, I am sure that Spencer will attack my “meterosexual looks”. Ah, why o why was I cursed with such handsome looks?”
LOL, well they do say, mock modesty is half a sin
the authors here are great, but without a doubt you’re the best “Spencer buster” . You summed it up perfectly above, I too was puzzled at why Geller was using pictures of Rehab in makeup. I mean how desperate can you get.
Spencer using your anonymity as an excuse not to debate and Rehab was spot on, when he said:
“You are amongst the top writers on this topic, far more effective and relevant than 99% of the countless Muslim writers out there.”
That’s true, Ahmed Rehab is right and he himself is a great loon buster. Muslims in America mean well, but they don’t really understand Islamophobia because they don’t bother to study the roots, motivations etc. They either look at from a racist angle, (which it’s not) or they blame Israel for every sin in the world, thus discrediting the cause. Whilst racism does exist of course, the people indulging in Islamophobia are not against other non whites like Chinese, or Indians (from India). Cherif Bassiouni wrote an excellent piece about this, so there a few Muslim writers who understand, but Rehab was right and in any case.
And now to other matters……..
JihadBob please comment on the above
bwa ha ha ha ha
October 24th, 2010 at 3:25 pm
Cal, I have agreed to do a radio debate, just as Spencer has done with the CAIR spokesman.
October 24th, 2010 at 3:41 pm
Go for it & empty the hate swamps!
October 24th, 2010 at 3:49 pm
I desperately await a debate between you two. From watching his other debates it seems his main winning quality is to bring along a huge anti-Islam community to support him by laughing at and interrupting the opposing argument (and at times he himself is guilty of doing this).
In the unlikely circumstance that you do reveal yourself and he actually NOT make more excuses, expect the underhanded tactics to take a new high because he will do all he can to shut off your credibility since you’ve done so with him almost effortlessly.
If it is a debate please find those who are willing to record it so that the Islamic community (as well as the Islamophobic) can watch as this hate-filled man crumble and cower from legit facts as opposed to twisted misinterpretations and targeted police blotter that he is always presenting as facts and results of his “long scholarly studies” of Islam.
October 24th, 2010 at 3:58 pm
Great Article! I honestly dislike personal attacks (the act of doing them) even though he himself did them to you. But great points made Danios. Looking forward to a debate soon!
October 24th, 2010 at 4:02 pm
We all know what’s going down. If Danios reveals his identity and it turns out he’s Muslim then he will be branded by Spencer as…a Muslim (and thus a perpetually evil being), and if Danios isn’t Muslim then he’s an equally horrible “Leftist Dhimmi”.
It’s a Catch 22, just like “taqiyya”. You can’t really win with these people. I’m sure when their beliefs on Jihad are debunked just like their beliefs on “taqiyya” and “dhimmitude” were, they’ll still try to desperately cling on to their hateful ideology.
Sociopaths indeed.
October 24th, 2010 at 4:07 pm
Haha, NassirH, that basically describes the thrust of all the major posts and comments we see supporting the Loons’ views.
October 24th, 2010 at 4:08 pm
Remember that they view western academia (Islamic studies and related fields, anyone?) as being the same due to funding etc.
October 24th, 2010 at 4:23 pm
Nice to see my favorite loonbuster back at LoonWatch! Robert “Can’t Stand Ya!” Spencer (Seinfeld reference for those who don’t know) needs to stop making excuses and either man-up or shut up.
October 24th, 2010 at 4:43 pm
DANIOS
Well, if that’s the case why then stoop to Spencer’s level and bludgeon him with your post? Is this how you practice the religion of peace? There’s nothing but contention and tumult in your prose. Do you want to debate the man or kill him (maybe both)? What kind of debate could Spencer have with someone so transported by rage? Can anyone have a rational debate with a hurricane?
October 24th, 2010 at 4:53 pm
Apollo Speaks, nice hate site you got there. You should be the last person to speak. Your website is nutty and full of conspiratorial nonsense, such as:
“It is not I believe mere coincidence that Keith Ellison, the first and only Moslem to sit in the US Congress, the man who took his Congressional oath on the Koran and supports pro-jihadist hate groups such as MAS and CAIR*, shares the same birthday with Barack Hussein Obama”
Haha! They conspired to be born at the same time! You got it on lock down.
You are the last person to talk about being worthy of “rational debate”.
But I see that you are trying to generate yet another excuse for Spencer to dodge a debate. Nice! Now please run along to your conspiracy site.
October 24th, 2010 at 5:02 pm
Note to loons: Trying to defend someone and having your name as a URL that links to your even more kooky Muslim conspiracy site does not help support your argument.
And why do contributors and posters here necessarily have to follow “the religion of peace”? Considering you believe Islam to be a hate-filled, violent religious ideology, why would you expect Muslims to be polite in debate anyway?
October 24th, 2010 at 5:25 pm
Hi Danios. Spencer’s a coward and just needs an excuse to back out of a debate. He’ll just lie and say something homophobic like “you’re attracted to Rehab and I don’t debate with homos blah blah blah”. He’s too scared of you. I don’t trust him so I’m glad you haven’t revealed your identity yet. Maybe you can give him a fake name. lol
October 24th, 2010 at 5:44 pm
Spencer’s hypocrisy is telling, since it’s quite customary in islamophobe circles to go by pseudonyms.
Isn’t Robert Spencer great friends with Bat Ye’or? That’s not her real name… Does Spencer require of her to dispense with the nonsense (everybody knows her real name by now). Does Robert Spencer refuse to quote ‘Fjordman’? ‘Baron Boddissey’? And so on and so forth.
October 24th, 2010 at 5:53 pm
Ibn Warraq too…
October 24th, 2010 at 6:08 pm
Don’t forget the elusive Hugh Fitzgerald. Jihadbob also doesn’t reveal whether he is Spencer or not despite nearly every commenter here asking him that question.
October 24th, 2010 at 6:13 pm
“More importantly, I am currently a post-doctoral fellow at an Ivy League university and instructor at a state university.”
Good job!
October 24th, 2010 at 6:13 pm
DANIOS
Obama and Ellison
Thank you for visiting my blog.
The first black US president who happens to have Moslem family roots happens to share the same birthday (two years apart) with the first Moslem Congressmen who happens to be black. It’s either happenstance or Providence. If the later then it’s a divinely given sign about Obama and Islam which you can interpret according to your faith. Take a shot at it. Discuss it with your Imam. Tell me what you think.
October 24th, 2010 at 6:18 pm
BTW, Obama started out as a Moslem and became Christian. Ellison started out as a Christian and converted to Islam.
October 24th, 2010 at 6:19 pm
Good to see that writing again, danios. Please let the debate take place at a university, everybody will be able to see what Spencer really is. Do what is best for you and yours, do not be goaded in by Spencer. That salad dodger can wait!
October 24th, 2010 at 6:30 pm
Let’s see what new excuses Spencer will generate tomorrow… It’s fun seeing the fear in him.
October 24th, 2010 at 6:36 pm
Apollo Speaks — your website URL has a spelling mistake in:
apollospaeks.blogtownhall.com
October 24th, 2010 at 6:41 pm
Did anyone take a gander at ApolloSpeak’s post on JW?
Danios is a crazed, frustrated jihadist without a sword who murders Spencer over and over in his mind. It is clear from his recent furious post that Spencer has broken his brain. Spencer’s refusal to debate him makes him more unhinged with the passage of time. If Danios keeps it up he could suffer a massive stroke as there could be serious psycho-physical consequences to such rage.
October 24th, 2010 at 6:50 pm
I wanted to sincerely apologize for this post of mine.
It is truly offensive to George Costanza. Sorry, George. Thank you for so many years of laughs.
October 24th, 2010 at 6:51 pm
LOL @ ApolloSpeaks’ post! Their nuttiness is truly awesome. It’s epic nuttiness.
October 24th, 2010 at 6:59 pm
This article is all well and good, but why, oh why did you bring the wonderful George Castanza in the middle of this? :C Not cool, man.
In all seriousness, though, I’m so happy that a site like this exists! I can’t wait to see the excuses Spencer will cook up, next.
October 24th, 2010 at 7:08 pm
Mandy, you’re right. I’m sorry for bringing George into this, lol. But yes, let’s see what his NEXT excuse will be.
October 24th, 2010 at 7:12 pm
DANIOS
“Epic nuttiness?” Isn’t that what 7th century Meccans, Jews and Christians thought about Mohammad’s Islam?
October 24th, 2010 at 7:16 pm
Zing!
October 24th, 2010 at 7:18 pm
LOL.
ApolloSpeaks is officially a self-parody.
October 24th, 2010 at 7:22 pm
*pops popcorn* Apollo is entertaining!
October 24th, 2010 at 7:29 pm
“Epic nuttiness?” Isn’t that what 7th century Meccans, Jews and Christians thought about Mohammad’s Islam?
Is THAT really how your gonna attack Islam? Every religion started out like that..
October 24th, 2010 at 7:31 pm
Danios, good to read you again. I must admit, george castanza? Come on. Kramer would totally not let that fly. Btw, I support you guys greatly. Where is jihadibobby and halaladork(sam shamoun)? They have fallen quiet.
October 24th, 2010 at 7:43 pm
Isn’t Brigitte Gabriel also a pseudonym?
October 24th, 2010 at 8:08 pm
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1323278/Tony-Blairs-sister-law-Lauren-Booth-converts-Islam-holy-experience-Iran.htm
Cherie Blair sister now became one of our sisters. Alhamdulillah ~
October 24th, 2010 at 9:01 pm
ApolloSpeaks, please remember that it was Robert Spencer who threatened to physically harm me:
http://www.loonwatch.com/2010/03/robert-spencer-fuming-over-loonwatch-threatens-danios-with-101-lashes/
October 24th, 2010 at 9:27 pm
Danios is a crazed, frustrated jihadist without a sword who murders Spencer over and over in his mind. It is clear from his recent furious post that Spencer has broken his brain. Spencer’s refusal to debate him makes him more unhinged with the passage of time. If Danios keeps it up he could suffer a massive stroke as there could be serious psycho-physical consequences to such rage.
Read slowly in a sombre voice, it’s like a diary entry of a disturbed mind. Am I crazy for kinda wanting Apollo to stay? He’s so entertaining.
October 24th, 2010 at 9:57 pm
Danios wrote, “It’s been 129 days since I accepted Spencer’s challenge …”
Welcome back Danios! Its been 129 days already?
October 24th, 2010 at 10:01 pm
Syed, I haven’t been MIA for 129 days…but that’s how many days ago I accepted Spencer’s challenge.
Thanks for welcoming me back.
October 24th, 2010 at 10:10 pm
Apollo needs to think before he speaks.
October 24th, 2010 at 10:18 pm
Danios, when’s that piece on Jihad gonna make its way here? Man, I’ve been waiting so long for that.
October 24th, 2010 at 10:28 pm
I think you guys should publish a book: The Politically Incorrect Guide to Robert Spencer (and other Islamophobes). It could have your refutations of Spencer as well as some stuff on lesser Islamophobes.
October 24th, 2010 at 10:33 pm
@Lo
No, it’s not crazy!
Favourite new troll? I think so.
And that’s a compliment. I thought nobody could top halalpork.
October 24th, 2010 at 10:35 pm
There are a ton of carbon copies of him on JW. It’s just that one of them found the balls to venture over here and post.
October 24th, 2010 at 10:35 pm
Danios: Any other refutations in the works? You took down Dhimmitude, taqiyya, Spencer’s assertions on rape in Islamic law, and apperantly Jihad.
October 25th, 2010 at 1:43 am
101 LASHES
So you’re in hiding Danios from big bad Bob? Is it because of his “threat” that you refuse to reveal who you are?
October 25th, 2010 at 1:55 am
LO
Slowly and soberly I am not the mystery man who’s beside himself with rage because someone of prominence won’t debate him. Danios’ entertainment value far exceeds my own.
October 25th, 2010 at 2:11 am
Apollo Speaks .
Are you by any change related to Halad Dork ? Miss lack of Manners or Cheryl “my husbands a vet ” ?
Please keep posting as people need to see examples of loons in real life . Bit like the zoo really
October 25th, 2010 at 2:11 am
NASSIR
On the otherhand, If Danios reveals who he is and it turns out that he’s a nobody (which is probably the case) then who could blame Spencer for refusing his challenge? If Spencer’s challenge was open to every nobody all of his time would be consumed debating them as thousands would line up to do so. Put yourself in Spencer’s place and you would do the same.
October 25th, 2010 at 2:15 am
Bravo and still you witter on ?
Are you paid to do this Applo?
October 25th, 2010 at 2:21 am
If you are being paid Apollo could you tell us how much ?
and who by?
Danios has all the credibilty he needs . Read the many articles he has written on this site . That is his credability .
Read your own blog it identifies you as a compleat nutter no credability.
October 25th, 2010 at 2:37 am
Spencer avoids debate like a vampire does sunlight. Geehad Watch’s Supremo knows he’d get his behing whipped in a real debate.
@ApolloSucks,
Using your own highly intelligent models of reasoning : since nobody knows or cares to know who you are, you’re completely irrelevant. Spencer said he’s debate anybody, go back reread it from the top if it didn’t sink in the first time, brainiac. Oh, and your hate blows chunks.
October 25th, 2010 at 3:17 am
Excellent article on the blog whore Robert Spencer.
October 25th, 2010 at 3:51 am
Apollo Speaks
“On the otherhand, If Danios reveals who he is and it turns out that he’s a nobody (which is probably the case) then who could blame Spencer for refusing his challenge?”
and who defines a nobody? and what is a “nobody?” Anybody who can devote the time to refute Robert Spencer cannot be described as a nobody, therefore Danios is not a “Nobody”, he is “SOMEBODY who made Spencer the laughing stock of the internet”.
A nobody is someone like Robert Spencer, who is PAID to do what he does. What’s going to happen to the likes of Spencer, or Horowitiz, if defamation of religion, becomes a crime like racism is? They won’t be able to find respectable employment because they rely on hatemongers who use their wealth to fund their activies in this Aubrey Chernick being the main culprit. But Jihad Watch is funded by other radicals too.
JihadBob whom we all suspect of being Spencer, spends his time posting here for no apparent reason except to discredit the site by hoping riling members will make them post hate comments, and I bet he also hopes somone here will slip up and reveal who the founders are, or who Danios is.
Jihadbob also objects to the proposed defamation of religion law by the OIC, by pretending that it’s about capping criticism of Islam, which is a lie. Criticism of Islam isn’t what that law is about, it’s to cap special interest groups in paying media whores and “nobodies” to bamboozle ignorant people by manipulating the media and taking advantage of the political climate to instil irrational fear.
The right wing extremist Zionists like Chernick, see people like Bin Laden as a godsend for them. They use the Muslim extremists for their own agenda whilst pretending they’re defending the west, albeit a west which is anti Zionist. (The Vatican issued a speech against the occupation yesterday)
Of course there is nothing wrong with criticism of a religon, if you don’t believe in a certain religion you will criticise it. That is not what that proposed law is about.
So to sum it up, the NOBODIES are those who are PAID to lie.
NassirH
“think you guys should publish a book: The Politically Incorrect Guide to Robert Spencer (and other Islamophobes). It could have your refutations of Spencer as well as some stuff on lesser Islamophobes.”
I agree, i’ve suggested that before to Danios, I even suggested some publishers in London who would definately take up this project, if the big names are not interested, but i’m sure they will be. But i think he should keep this book specifically about Spencer, so that it can be a source on Spencer’s lies.
Other books can deal with other Islamophboes, they all deserve a book to discredit the lies, if only we could find the writers to devote themselves, the loons listed above could be a start but i can think of a number of others who are not so well known. Daniel Pipes is quite moderate compared to what’s out there that many don’t know about. The real Islamophobes consider Daniel Pipes to be a “dhimmi” and a Muslim apologist.
October 25th, 2010 at 5:25 am
Haha, do they really think that the few regular posters/commenters here somehow must know each other to be able to band together against hatemongering?
October 25th, 2010 at 5:39 am
Excellent idea about publishing a book which exposes these islamophobes!
I would buy it! That would expose these loons!
October 25th, 2010 at 5:44 am
I did go onto jihadwatch’s you tube video site! I left a comment about spencer not having any formal Islamic qualifications. I also mentioned he is not an academic and has not had a single peer reviewed paper!
I mentioned loonwatch!
Guess what, I’m now barred from commenting on that page!
So much for debate and free speech!
We need to expose these charlatans wherever we come accross them!
October 25th, 2010 at 6:03 am
Danios, don’t reveal who you are and don’t give these ugly bad-tards any reaction. These Zionists do have much control over our academia unfortunately. So let Spencer and his girlfriend Geller keep on wondering who you guys are.
October 25th, 2010 at 6:36 am
I’ve read some Loonwatch articles with interest in the past, but I have to say Danios went off the deep end with this one. Goodbye (feigned?) objectivity and rational argumentation. The post includes a whole variety of emotive word choices, personal attacks, egoism verging on megalomania, and a disturbing amount of projection.
To point out just a few quickly selected examples of phrases and words: “loser”, “sociopath”, “delusional right-wing nut jobs”, “jealousy”, “worked up in quite the tizzy, and he blogged a furious response”, “truly special that Spencer can say this with a straight face”, “a fat slob”, “my articles have stopped Spencer”, “finally he has been effectively silenced”, “For the first time ever, someone managed”, “Spencer is avoiding a debate with me at all costs”, “your underlying homophobia”, “which is clearly what Spencer is hinting at”, “Spencer’s antipathy towards these chic Muslim spokesmen is that they are too damn good-looking”, “Compare Spencer’s frumpy body with Rehab’s toned body”, “burning hatred”, “inferiority complex”, “hate-filled ideology to boost his own inner lack of self-worth”, “will Spencer now accuse me of being gay too [although for the record I am not]?)”, “why was I cursed with such handsome looks?”, “your epic rant”, “my portly friend”, “cries about”… On and on.
Amazing stuff, and I didn’t even see it coming. I guess I’m that naive! I sincerely thought this site was made to debate the anti-Islam distortions with factual arguments. I suppose the first seeds of doubt were already sown by some of the more antagonistic articles about the anti-Islam flagships, but this piece here made those doubts ripe for harvest. It turns out this is just another biased partisan site where rabidity is virtuous, mudslinging a requirement, and distortion the sign of healthy debating skill.
I think Spencer’s interpretations have an extremist bent, and it is clear his writings are slanted and unbalanced if not necessarily factually wrong. I still don’t know whether that inequity is by design or by hazard because of his subject material and excessive dwelling on extremist literature and specific doctrines rather than studying and presenting Islam as a whole. I tend to think it’s by hazard as he does not strike me as a dishonest person, but maybe I’m naive there too. In any case, I liked this site because it provided reasonable counterarguments about Spencer’s favorite topics. Unfortunately, it looks like this site is just as biased, if not more so, as Spencer’s, just in another direction. Such a disappointment.
By the way, although I can’t locate it right now to give you a precise reference, but the taqiyya refutation either here or at Spencerwatch was not convincing. That article caught my interest because I detest the indiscriminate and disproportionate usage of the word by the anti-Islam polemicists and their fans. One of the enumerated cases of permissible lying noted in that article indirectly affirmed Spencer’s argument by ignoring Islamic doctrines related to warfare and what counts as warfare. That was one of those “hmmm” moments for me when reading this site and Spencerwatch because from an objective standpoint it seemed odd to completely overlook issues of such large significance.
October 25th, 2010 at 6:40 am
BEAUTIFUL MUSLIM DOLL
By “a nobody” in this context I mean an uncredentialed person. What important papers has Danios written? What books has he published? What degrees does he hold? Where has he been interviewed and by whom? Danios may be somebody to you BMD. But until he becomes transparant showing his face and credentials Robert Spencer is right to ignore him as if he’s a nobody.
Good luck with your unconstitutional defamation of religion law. Let’s see the hypocritical members of the OIC impose it on themselves and then rigorously enforce it.
October 25th, 2010 at 7:00 am
DRM:
ApolloSucks (nectar and ambrosia through a straw)
If I’m “completely irrelevant” as you say then why am I the number one blogger on townhall.com? That is, number one of 16,000?
If I’m “completely irrelevant” as you say then why are the following websites posting my blogs:
National Public Radio, USA Today, Dallas Morning News, The New York Post, The San Diego Union Tribune, The Orange County Register, The Times of India, Madison Square Garden, Soccer News, Sky News, Fuse TV, The Press-Enterprise, The Tennessean, wtlx.com, TreeHugger, philly.com, Road Runner, Thoora.com and the list goes on.
Not too shabby for a “completely irrelevant” blogger.
October 25th, 2010 at 7:29 am
Sucks to be delusional. I’m Angelina Jolie btw.
October 25th, 2010 at 8:13 am
Paid shills are “completely irrelevant” in terms credibility, since all they do is troll. And it certainly doesn’t help when they fawn themselves by hiding behind their phony social statuses when challenged, like Spencer.
But in the end, it doesn’t matter, as the fact still remains, that Spencer said he’d debate anyone, and only bothered to add the condition of identity disclosure after Ahmed Rehab publicly brought up Danios to Spencer’s face. But then, dishonesty, sophistry, sensationalism and disingenuousness are all hallmarks of Spencer’s phony scholarship status. I guess now we can add fawning to that list as well.
October 25th, 2010 at 8:38 am
Tell Bobby Spencer I’ll debate him too
October 25th, 2010 at 9:05 am
I liked the part where you tore into Robert Spencer. That was funny. I’m sure he is seething & frothing at the mouth right about now, probably getting ready to write another hateful insult laden rant about how great he is and how everyone is afraid of him, and some other nonsense about leftists and jihadists.
Of course, I don’t blame Rob for not debating you. Everyone knows our good friend Rob has been totally emasculated by the harpy over at Atlas Shrieks, Scamla Geller. He is her bitch.
October 25th, 2010 at 9:35 am
Apollo speaks, and what nonsense,
Spencer is a nobody, you stupid moron, HE DOENS’T HAVE CREDENCE except in the right wing loon sector. Of all developed nations, the USA has the most ignorant people, thats why Spencer does what he does and even has a readership
Don’t you get it? Which university acclaims him? He is no scholar, he is a paid whore.
A paid whore is a NOBODY
That even he is considered a Somebody by the likes of you, shows how low the bar is in the USA, where knowledge is concerned.
October 25th, 2010 at 10:02 am
BEAUTIFUL MOSLEM TROLL
I see. In other words, if Americans were a sensible people they’d surrender to Allah, replace the constitution with sharia law and live happily ever after in this life and the next. In short, people like Spencer are evildoers in league with Satan keeping America from salvation. Is that your message BMT?
October 25th, 2010 at 10:15 am
Majority of Americans already surrender to Allah, as Christians. I assume you are unaware that the God of both of these religions is the same.
October 25th, 2010 at 10:17 am
PollySpeaks, it’s a bit ridiculous you calling BMD a troll, ‘coz this is our site and you are the only one trolling here. Time to get back in that cage Polly.
Awesome to have Danios back!! JW’s biggest loon, duh_swami, seems to think Danios is Dave742. But who really is this Dave742 character? He certainly isn’t Danios, but I don’t really recall him commenting on our site either…seems like he prefers operating on JW ground. I’ve read his comments on JW and we could really use a guy like him on this site…
October 25th, 2010 at 10:41 am
ApolloSpooks,
So basically, you have nothing substantial to say, so you sensationalize, by equating subjects which have nothing to do with each other.
But if you believe that there is an equivalence between promoting credible scholarship, rationality, etc. and surrendering the world to Islam, then that implies that being at the opposite end of the spectrum (i.e. being an irrational, xenophobic, fear-mongering, sensationalizing bigot) means you are somehow supporting the US constitution. If so, then that would also mean you are saying that being a rational, sensible, open-minded and objective intellectual, means that you want to surrender the world to Islam.
That’s actually very interesting, because that would imply that you are associating Islam with rationality, sensibility, and intellect, or just overall intelligence, which would then mean you associating it’s opposition with irrationality, insanity, stupidity and ignorance.
Or perhaps this is just Orwellian speak on your part? Y’know:
“War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, and Ignorance is Strength”.
If that isn’t what you meant, then it might be a good idea for you to avoid sensationizing over here.
October 25th, 2010 at 10:46 am
While all of this name-calling is entertaining, let’s move on-by returning to one of Spencer’s conditions. It seems wholly reasonable that the man would insist that Danios identifies himself. By refusing to do so, Danios effectively ends any chance of a face-to-face debate. In fact, Danios reduces this entire brouhaha to the level of parody. C’mon folks, how many of you would agree to debate someone if that other person refused to even give his name? And is the irony lost on all of you when Spencer is labelled a “sociopath” by one who fancies himself a modern day Batman?
October 25th, 2010 at 11:14 am
ISHERIF
The word “troll” didn’t spring into existence with the internet. Since the mythic creature I was referring to isn’t beautiful it would have been better to call BMD Ugly Moslem Troll.
October 25th, 2010 at 12:04 pm
Apollo Speaks
“I see. In other words, if Americans were a sensible people they’d surrender to Allah, replace the constitution with sharia law and live happily ever after in this life and the next. In short, people like Spencer are evildoers in league with Satan keeping America from salvation.”
I said Spencer is not recognised by any respectable scholars anywhere in the world (that includes USA universties),and you equate anyone questioning his credentials as wanting the constitution being replaced by Sharia law. If he is your defence against that happening, you’ve already lost. Do you really think people who matter in the US cannot see him for what he is? We’re concerned that he misleads the ignorant, not that he will influence the enlighened, they reject him.
Thank you for proving what i said above, about the ignorance.
He is a propogandist for radical right wing Zionists with whom he has forged a bond of convenience because they share his Islamophobia for different reasons. Spencer bears a grudge against Turkey for some presumed wrongs to his family. That does not qualify him to teach or for people to take him seriously as a scholar. He is nothing more than a buffoon, and the right wing radical Jewish Zionists like Chernick like to have a Christian frontman, so they can be absolved of blame. Spencer doesn’t speak for Catholics, as i said he is a paid whore.
To highlight my point further, Spencer would not be able to do what he is doing in an honest way, or even in Europe or other Western countries where people are more educated and can tell when they are being manipulated by paid whores.
Hopper
“Danios effectively ends any chance of a face-to-face debate. In fact, Danios reduces this entire brouhaha to the level of parody. C’mon folks, how many of you would agree to debate someone if that other person refused to even give his name? And is the irony lost on all of you when Spencer is labelled a “sociopath” by one who fancies himself a modern day Batman?”
because Danios or Spencer will not be debating personal issues for which they need to know each others credentials.
What they will be debating will need to be backed up from historical sources. Danios always backs up what he says with proper historical sources, but Spencer just lies.
It’s not about ego’s or knowing each others backgrounds, when Spencer issued his challenge that nobody debates him, he should have made clear, who wanted to debate him.
There is no need for Spencer to pretend that debating anonymous people is below his status, because his status is that he is a paid whore not a scholar.
Danios betters him in one way, though he remains anonymous, and that is the site writes for isn’t a hate site. The sources presented here for references are impeccable.
October 25th, 2010 at 12:12 pm
ApolloSucks said :
“If I’m “completely irrelevant” as you say then why are the following websites posting my blogs:
National Public Radio, USA Today, Dallas Morning News, The New York Post, The San Diego Union Tribune, The Orange County Register, The Times of India, Madison Square Garden, Soccer News, Sky News, Fuse TV, The Press-Enterprise, The Tennessean, wtlx.com, TreeHugger, philly.com, Road Runner, Thoora.com and the list goes on.
Not too shabby for a “completely irrelevant” blogger.”
Probably as a case study in socially inadequate, pimpled, single, slightly seedy, bald, over weight, cauliflower-nosed middle aged men sitting in their mother’s basements posting conspiratorial fables online.
October 25th, 2010 at 12:16 pm
Just ignore him people, we know what he’s trying to do.
Danios, much as I love your stuff I do not partake or support the insulting of people or think it’s right, even if they do it to you. However, I really understand why you did it and it’s still a great piece. Great to have you back
October 25th, 2010 at 12:23 pm
One Reader
“Amazing stuff, and I didn’t even see it coming. I guess I’m that naive! I sincerely thought this site was made to debate the anti-Islam distortions with factual arguments”
Oh come on, get off your high horse! Spencer deserves the truth flung at him no matter how harsh.
“By the way, although I can’t locate it right now to give you a precise reference, but the taqiyya refutation either here or at Spencerwatch was not convincing. ”
even Daniel Pipes, makes clear that Taqiyya is not what Islamophobes say it is. Even he said on his own site that Taqiyya is a Shia concept, as a minority if under threat they can pretend to be something else and not tell people they’re Shia.
“One of the enumerated cases of permissible lying noted in that article indirectly affirmed Spencer’s argument by ignoring Islamic doctrines related to warfare and what counts as warfare. That was one of those “hmmm” moments for me when reading this site and Spencerwatch because from an objective standpoint it seemed odd to completely overlook issues of such large significance.”
Your argument is a non starter. Why? because every religion allows for defending one’s life or going to war to justify some presumed wrong. If anyone feels that their country, people are under threat they will defend it, by justifying it with religious texts. That’s why it doens’t matter that Christian clergy around the world was condemning the deciision to invade Iraq on religous grounds, but the Bible belt Evangelicals (Bush’s party the GOP’s voting block) were supporting it because “God wants it”. They were the only Christians who supported the war. Palin still supports that view by the way.
The point i’m making is that no matter what one Muslim scholar will say, you will find another with a different interpretation of the words. As i showed you above that same problem exists in Christianity, and the Jews have Kahanists and other extremists who use their texts to justify perpertual war and conquest.
Religious texts can be twisted by men to mean anything if they want them to.
October 25th, 2010 at 12:56 pm
“C’mon folks, how many of you would agree to debate someone if that other person refused to even give his name? ”
I would. If its an internet/email debate, the name doesn’t matter — its the arguments. Even in a radio debate like Danios suggested, Robert Spencer should still be able to debate even if he doesn’t know his name. Look, we’re all arguing here but we don’t really know each other at all.
October 25th, 2010 at 2:00 pm
@one reader.
There was basically two taqiyya-refutation related pages. You probably only saw the one posted by Garibaldi. I’ll paste a link to the complete one.
http://spencerwatch.com/2010/08/15/silencing-spencer-taqiyya-and-kitman-are-part-of-judeo-christian-belief/
October 25th, 2010 at 2:16 pm
The Spencerwatch article also has further information in the footnotes which goes directly to the classical sources mis-cited by Spencer which are quoted in Danios’ main article.
October 25th, 2010 at 2:35 pm
And is the irony lost on all of you when Spencer is labelled a “sociopath” by one who fancies himself a modern day Batman?
LoL. Danios isn’t the one posting pictures of himself in red and blue tights on the internet. The reason behind Danios’ mocking of Spencer is quite clear–just read the article.
Here’s an article that shows the irony of your comment.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2010/10/the-counter-jihad-dynamic-duo-rides-again.html#comments
Here’s my favorite comment from that particular JW page:
Love it. It always pays to remember that the muslim infidels have no sense of humour.
It was posted by someone who fancies himself a modern day El-Cid.
I kid you not–it’s his username.
October 26th, 2010 at 2:37 am
ApolloSpeaks
“Good luck with your unconstitutional defamation of religion law.”
Don’t ever use that lie to say the defamation law is unconstituional. The American system already allows special interest groups to manipulate the constitution.
Criticism of Israeli policy and US support for it will lead to charges of anti-Semitism is the reason Walt and Mearsheimer couldn’t find a publisher in the USA and had to go to London. Al Jazeera couldn’t get a licence in the USA, though it’s viewership is available online, and American’s comprise one of it’s largest readership/viewership
That proves your “constituional right” is a lie.
If it’s a question of who can pull strings using lobby groups, let the strongest one win.
October 26th, 2010 at 2:40 am
Danios..Welcome back to the show..We sorely missed you..
October 26th, 2010 at 2:09 pm
Lmao. JihadBob is now for sure bobby spinster for he has not shown up in the comments section. Boo hoo bobby.
October 27th, 2010 at 2:22 am
Hey danios..what’s the progress on the jihad article..Its been a long wait.
October 27th, 2010 at 3:12 am
LOOK AT WHAT WE PREDICTED :SPENCER’S EXCUSES AND HYPOCRISY
Author Profile Page Funky Child | October 24, 2010 9:34 AM | Reply
Robert,
I have nothing but respect for your work, and in making this suggestion I don’t mean to be malicious, but would I be wrong to detect a slight hypocrisy in your insistence that Danios of Loonwatch’ reveal his real name before you debate him? The other conditions are perfectly reasonable, but how can you insist that ‘Danios’ reveal his name, as if it were obviously enough to disqualify the possibility of debate by itself, when you’re absolutely respectful of the pseudonymous writers Ibn Warraq and Ali Sina, who do the same thing?
Granted, they have much, much, much better reasons for doing it, but I don’t know that that’s enough. I worry that if you maintain your stance on that you’ll open yourself up to charges of hypocrisy from more malevolent sources, and if you’d relax this one requirement, those would be easy to deflect. In my experience, you are generally so scrupulous in not being hypocritical at all, in sticking to your principles and living by what you say, that I didn’t want to let this one issue, which could give the jihadists ammo, pass you by.
=========================================================
Spencer’s reader admit his hypocrisy with some respect..ROTFL
watch Spencer’s reply…
Author Profile Page Robert | October 24, 2010 10:28 AM | Reply
Funky Child:
Ibn Warraq and Ali Sina live under Islam’s death penalty for apostates.
“Danios of Loonwatch” does not. Indeed, no one at all is threatening him.
That’s all.
==================================================
Mr Spencer we just want you to concede the point ..You are a “HYPOCRITE”.
“That’s all”
October 27th, 2010 at 3:31 am
Lol @ Aamir.
October 27th, 2010 at 3:33 am
AAmir thanks for that,
The death threats against these paid whores like Robert Spencer, Ibn warraq, Ali Sina (an ex iranian shia current atheist who claims to know all about Sunni Islam ) are all lies.
They send each other emails, issuing death threats, then publicise them by pretending that the highest authorities in Islam issued them.
They’re all liars.
This is a pathetic excuse that shows 100% Spencer’s hypocricy. It’s the excuse they use to avoid debate with those who do not have an agenda or axe to grind.
Day by day, Spencer is becoming the laughing stock of the internet. Thanks to Loon Watch,
October 27th, 2010 at 3:35 am
Notice how all the death threats they receive are anonymous. Nothing that can be verified or traced,
Nothing and nobody can be invisible on the internet. Every threat can be traced.
October 27th, 2010 at 3:39 am
Do we have any lawyers here familiar with American law?
Is there any law, that can force Robert Spencer and these Ibn Warraq’s and Ali Sina to prove their claims about death threats? Surely there must be some way, somebody can file a complaint and get the law enforcers there to force Spencer to reveal his threats so that they can investigate and see if his claims are actually true or fabricated?
Has Ali Sina, Ibn Warraq, or Robert Spencer ever filed complainst with the police for death threats? If not, it means they’re surely lying…
Any suggestions or solutions anyone?
October 27th, 2010 at 3:51 am
Nice and circular… round and round we go. So-and-so can’t reveal their names because they are apostates and the penalty is death – why? – because I (Spencer) say so and damn anyone who says otherwise, even if they are major contemporary Muslim authorities.
October 27th, 2010 at 5:27 am
Actually, Spencer claims that he has reported death threats to the FBI. They told him not to publish them on his website, but he does so anyway. Its just a bunch of childish emails with someone just calling him a Jew. Nothing I would be scared of.
October 27th, 2010 at 6:23 am
@BMd..That sure is a gd way to expose him..and we also have a case on Pam.what’s up with it?
October 27th, 2010 at 7:13 am
Pam can always plead insanity
October 27th, 2010 at 7:39 am
LOL, Sir David, good one
But Robert Spencer cannot plead insanity, because he pretentiously wears the “scholar” mantle, albeit a mantle that seems to get no recognition amongst scholars.
Mosizzle, thanks, is there independent proof that Spencer did report the threats? That he himself said so, is not proof, he could be lying. No threat can go untraced, and someone calling him a Jew is not a threat. I’m not American, so i’m not familiar with US law, but are FBI records confidential ?
Someone with connections can easily access or gain this information, even if it is, but any info obtained like this cannot be used as evidence then. That’s why it would be good to get some input from someone legally qualified.
October 27th, 2010 at 7:42 am
@ every reader and writer at Loonwatch
We should have a day where we go to jihadwatch and flood one of his new articles with links to scholars that condemn terrorism. It’s the perfect plan for IP adress takeover!
P.S. What’s an IP adress?
But seriously think about it, the readers for once will be unable to deny that scholars condemn terrorism, when all the evidence is loaded against them in one flood of articles. Post an article bout and see where it goes
October 27th, 2010 at 7:48 am
I wonder how much Ibn and Ali get paid for lying about so-called threats. Didn’t someone email Danios a threat and that’s why he has to hide his identity? *wink wink*
October 27th, 2010 at 8:54 am
Khusboo, Geller once posted a letter on her website about someone who supposedly was thanking her for her SIAO help Muslims leave the faith, saying that she couldn’t give her real name because she may be klled,
Anybody reading that letter could tell it was con job, she probably got Spencer or someone to send her this from another IP (it isn’t difficult to do for those who know) one that cannot be tracked without professionals onto them. I don’t for a munute believe even her dimwitted readers believed that it was genuine
They rely on people not chasing up or following through with investigations. How many threats remain just threats because the FBI don’t have the manpower to chase up?
I suspect this is what they rely on,
October 29th, 2010 at 6:00 am
So once again we have an outrageous,conscienceless and horrifc article on the anti-muslim website jihadwatch which concludes muslim inbreeding as a cause of their anti-social behaviour..Specer’s source is Nicolai Sennels.a danish psychiatrist..
“Sennels is the author of a book called Among Criminal Muslims, in which he studied Muslim teenagers at a youth prison in Copenhagen. Sennels concluded that their “anti-social” behaviour was attributable to cultural and religious factors”
http://communities.canada.com/vancouversun/blogs/politics/archive/2010/10/28/sennels-says-he-never-talked-to-psychiatrist-about-muslim-inbreeding.aspx
So after “extensive reasearch” at a youth “prison” this unhinged and brainsick psychiatrist justifies his conclsions against muslims and attributes it to religious and cultural factors..
Isn’t this guy worthy to be bombed in his car(anti-social behaviour)
No Mr spencer … u guessed it wrong.I am not an inbreeded product .Im just a muslim.
October 29th, 2010 at 6:20 am
It appears he studied criminals in Prison who happened to be ….er criminals and muslims .Therefore everything he finds applies to all muslims.
Next week he will study global warming by asking the head of BP what he thinks .
Can I have a grant please to do a similar study about Jihad I bwill only ask Pam ‘human rights activist ‘ Geller and Robert ‘the scholar’ Spencer ?
October 29th, 2010 at 6:40 am
@ Sir David..I wonder they never do research on non-muslim prisoners..I actually know what they’ll come up with..”Sennels is the author of a book called Among Criminal Non-Muslims, in which he studied Non-Muslim teenagers at a youth prison in Copenhagen. Sennels concluded that their “anti-social” behaviour was attributable to islamic cultural and religious factors”
October 29th, 2010 at 12:54 pm
Danios, you are the man…We know you can and will rip Spencer and his tree sniffing posse a new one…