Top Menu

Robert Spencer in Damage Control After Terror Attack in Norway

Spencer is working hard to disassociate himself from one of his fans

The anti-Muslim loons of the world are in a major bind right now. Their intolerant anti-Muslim attitude and constant fear-mongering is responsible for the horrible terrorist attack that occurred in Norway at the hands of self-professed Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller supporter Anders Behring Breivik. Recent reports suggest that Breivik was inspired by the writings of anti-Muslim bigots like Spencer and Geller, as well as others in the anti-Muslim circle such as Bat Ye’or and Fjordman.

Spencer himself has come out and attempted to dismiss the connection between Breivik’s violence and his own anti-Muslim bigotry, saying “no one has explained or can explain how this guy’s supposed anti-jihad views have anything to do with his murdering children.” A fair question in light of the tragic violence that Breivik was responsible for.  Did the anti-Muslim hatred inspire the violence in Oslo?

Spencer lays out his version of the logic this way, saying:

1. Freedom fighters preach free speech, freedom of conscience and equality of rights for all people, against Sharia and Islamic supremacism that denies those rights, advocating only legal means of protest and dissent.

2. Some nutcase who allegedly expressed allegiance with the freedom fighters kills people, none of whom are preaching Sharia or Islamic supremacism.

3. Media assumes that #1 caused #2 and blames freedom fighters.

The obvious problem with Spencer’s logic is that it does not include his and other anti-Muslim loons’ consistent denunciations of “leftists” as jihad-enablers. This is a key tenant of the so-called anti-jihadist movement. They hate the left, or more specifically, anyone who treats Muslims with a smidgen of fairness and tolerance. Spencer and Geller consistently and constantly portray the left as those who would sell out the West to the scary Mooslems. Spencer’s hate site Jihad Watch is filled with posts denouncing the “Leftist/Jihadist alliance,” warning his readers of how the left will happily allow the Mooslem hordes to overthrow the West and “dhimmify” its population.

Breivik adopted this view of the left.  Paul Woodward notes that Breivik argued “that cultural conservatives should not identify their main opponents as Jihadists, but instead should focus their attention on those he regards as the ‘facilitators’ of Jihadists, namely, the proponents of multiculturalism.” It was these liberals and “multi-culturalists” that were the target of his rampage.

Therefore, a more logical set-up would be as follows:

1. Anti-Muslim bigots vilify Muslims as a threat to Western culture and civilization, and argue that the left is most responsible for allowing Muslims to undermine Western civilization.  In fact, the left is more the enemy than the anti-jihadists themselves!

2. A right-wing self-proclaimed anti-jihadist chooses the capital of a famously liberal, leftist, and socialist country as the target for his attack.

3. Media is perfectly justified in establishing a link between #1 and #2.

When you preach bigotry and fear on a daily basis, don’t be surprised when one of your followers takes the next logical step.  But Robert Spencer has a reason to feign surprise and indignation over what his hatred has incited, as the link between his hate-writing and this act of terrorism becomes clear:  Richard Silverstein notes that the right-wing terrorist Anders Behring Breivik cited Robert Spencer 46 times in his manifesto.  He was clearly quite the fan.  This certainly seems to be right-wing anti-Muslim terrorism inspired by the king of Islamophobia himself, Robert Spencer.

, , , , , , , , ,

  • Pingback: 25 July 2011 - CASTE SYSTEM – CASTE SYSTEM()

  • Pingback: A Crazed and Unstable Pamela Geller Bad-Mouths Victims of Oslo Terrorist Attack |

  • Pingback: In Defense of Demonization: Frontpage’s lame defense of Robert Spencer | Spencer Watch()

  • Truth Hurts

    Spencer et al are the radical Hate-preachers, who provided the motivating ideology in order to put this terrorist on the escalator towards his actions.

    The ideology is Kulturkampf i.e. Culture Wars.

  • corey

    knowing them islamaphobes would want a senate investegation on this site along with people who so much as glanced at it and with people like peter king and his show trials yielding results in making people hate muslims and those who sympathize with them it would probably be accommodated.

  • safak


    Of course, I’m not saying they’re responsible. But I do take issue with the hypocrisy of constant blaming of Muslims with even the most vague and random connetions, and downplaying such obvious connections as mere coincidence when its the loons themselves. Think of it this way, if Breivik was a Muslim bomber who quoted out of Muslim writers such as Reza Aslan and frequently visited Loonwatch, what would have been the reaction then? Do you think they would have extended this courtesy of drawing a distinction? I highly doubt that…

  • Khushboo

    I think that Spencer’s and Geller’s sites should be under surveillance due to many threats made against Muslims by the crazies. I wouldn’t be surprised if one or more of them ended up helping out Anders. We are now hearing that Anders did not work alone. FBI/CIA should look into these hate sites.

  • Zach

    That’s fair, but I take issue with Loonwatch when they claims that “[Spencer and Geller’s] intolerant anti-Muslim attitude and constant fear-mongering is responsible for the horrible terrorist attack that occurred in Norway.” They qualify this in no way and don’t even acknowledge the possibility that Breivik’s motives were well beyond his anti-Islamic sentiment.

    Luckily for us, we actually do have an idea of what’s in the mind of a terrorist, seeing as he left us a manifesto. It does not exclusively cite Spencer and Geller, nor does it exclusively deal with his anti-Muslim beliefs. Loonwatch should have the integrity to clarify the point that Spencer and Geller are “responsible” for what happened only in so much as they influenced Breivik’s opinions on Islam and the left. To claim otherwise is irresponsible.

    Spencer and Geller’s words speak for themselves. They are full of hate and falsities. We shouldn’t have to pin the murder of innocent people on them in order to bring this fact to light.

  • Khushboo

    Zach, who knows what’s in the mind of a terrorist and no one is saying that Geller & Spencer are DIRECTLY responsible for killing. Ofcourse Anders is responsible but that doesn’t mean Spencer and Geller are excused for not contributing like you said. From Anders manifesto, it is obvious that Anders was influenced by what Spencer said which confirmed his reasons for hating on Muslims that caused him to commit terrorism. Thus, Spencer and his ilk are INDIRECTLY responsible.

  • Loon Watch,

    This Islamophobic, Israeli American based in New York, called Daniel Greenfield, who runs the blog called “Sultan Knish” should be featured by you. He has written this piece defending Robert Spencer, just look at the lies, and check his blog for more distortions, total fibs, fabricated nonsense and Islamophobia.

    In this piece, he is saying Brievik was actually inspired by Jihadists.

    In Defense of Robert Spencer

    Not only did Breivik not target Muslims, but he considered collaborating with Muslim terrorists.

    “An alliance with the Jihadists might prove beneficial to both parties,” Breivik wrote. “We both share one common goal.”

    Breivik dreamed of obtaining WMDs from jihadi terrorist groups for use against European targets. And emphasized that, “Knights Templar do not intend to persecute devout Muslims or enslave them under puppet leaders in their own Islamic countries like today’s EU/US leaders are doing.”

    Rather than being driven by Islamophobia, Breivik was fantasizing about collaborating in mass murder with the same Salafi terrorist groups that researchers like Robert Spencer have worked so hard to expose.

    Had Breivik succeeded in contacting jihadist groups and arranging for a transfer of WMDs, then the very people that the media is now damning might have proved vital in exposing the threat.

  • Max

    Breivik says that nine years he has worked in the piece. In their own words was his dissatisfaction with the Norwegian government through the support of his country to the NATO bombing during the Kosovo war. Breivik was against it because “our Serbian brothers Islam wanted to expel the Albanian Muslims to reduce Albania ‘. His greatest enemy is the Western collaborators who open the door for islam.Deze offender has turned against his own people, government and country turned because of the multicultural society in which he had leven.Ik hate Muslims. I have many Muslim friends had. This does not mean I accept an Islamic presence in Europe. Muslims who in 2020 not 100 percent have changed will be deported when we took power. “That the war against Islam by a psychopath violently abused is disgusting and a slap in the face of the global anti-Islamic movement. Writes that PVV leader Geert Wilders released a statement on the attacks in Norway. We believe in the power of the ballot box and the wisdom of the voter. Not bombs and guns. “” We fight for a democratic and nonviolent means against the further Islamisation of society and will continue to do, “continues the PVV leader.

  • Zach

    You’re assuming that Breivik lived in a vacuum in which he only read/was influenced by Spencer, Geller, and Co.. That’s clearly not what happened, nor was anti-Muslim sentiment his only motivation for the attacks. He obviously had a lot of other things on his mind. As I said before, Spencer and Geller are certainly voices that contributed to Breivik’s beliefs, but holding them “responsible” for what happened in Norway is irresponsible and ignores reality.

  • Apollo I feel you sum your self up perfectly in the following:

    “No doubt that Breivik reads Spencer and Geller. No doubt bin Ladin read the Koran and Hadith. No doubt that Breivik’s world view is influenced by Spencer and Geller as is mine. But whereas bin Ladin was acting on the violent words, deeds, and predatory principles of the Prophet Spencer and Geller are civilized people (both religious humanists) with a peaceful liberal democratic outlook who’ve neither killed nor harmed anyone to advance their cause. To be sure some of Breivik’s thinking can be traced back to them, but not his murderous rage. The divide between them is so great you could drive Obama’s budget through it.”

    Let’s do an autopsy…

    Apart from the funny bit about Spencer and Geller being civilized people this is odd. First of all, you are quite right to say that Spencer and Geller are very similar to Bin Ladan; Bin Ladan never killed anyone that he bragged about, he was merely a spokesman and source of material, just like Spencer and Geller can safely sit there and preach, just as Bin Ladan safely sat in a house for years. Sir David likens them to Lady Macbeth; they can wash their hands as much as they like but that spot is still there.

    Secondly, the stuff about the Prophet; sure someone can take violent stuff from it and in fact Breivik goes *at length* in his writing to ‘prove’ that what he does is in line with Christian principles. All it proves is that you can get nutters anywhere and from anything; I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again but I could probably draw some hate stuff out of Harry Potter and start a cult on it. If the job fails I might just do that…

    Thirdly, Breivik was very much acting on the words of people like Spencer and Geller (who as has been shown calls for the nuking of Mecca for example). They call for things like the expulsion of Muslims (one of his main goals), they pardon mass murderers in Serbia, they preach hate… anyone reading the comments section of these peoples sites can see what sort of thing this produces. Don’t BS me. Going back to Bin Laden; Bin Laden was never there directing people, he just provided material.

    Also, I think that both Spencer and Geller will love that you called them liberals…

  • corey

    spencer and geller peaceful I call bullshit, on that what part of “nuke mecca” is peaceful, or is promoting a video of a girl calling for pakistan to be wiped off the map what you were talking about when you said peaceful please tell me because I don’t remember promoting nuclear annihilations of entire cities part of being promoting world peace.

  • NassirH

    Using ApolloShrieks superb logic, “jihadists” are more anti-Muslim than anti-American because most of those they kill are Muslims. Or as ApolloShrieks would put it, “JIHADISTS MORE ANTI-MOSLEM THAN ANTI-AMERICAN!”

    Breivik was clear about his motivations, regardless of how many desperate arguments loons use to defend their precious Islamophobia.

Powered by Loon Watchers