Top Menu

Terrorist Inspirer Robert Spencer Compares Muslims to Nazis, Says Muslims Can’t Be Trusted

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

Even if you’re a Muslim who is heading and escalating the drone program against the enemies of the USA (killing many innocents in the process), you risk Spencer labeling you an “evil suspect Mooslim.”

That’s exactly what Spencer did recently on his blog in response to a Washington Post profile on the leader of the CIA’s drone program, “Roger” who also happens to be Muslim. (H/T: BA, JD)

A rational individual may actually criticize the substance of the Washington Post profile of “Roger.” A rational individual may choose to point out that the drone program has killed thousands of innocents, destabilized whole regions, and probably endangered the security of the USA further, maybe for years to come.

Instead, the irrational loony Spencer chose to criticize the “Muslamic” nature of “Roger,” considering the wild possibility that he could actually be an “undercover terrorist.”

This was not the most flagrant looniness from Spencer, he also compared Muslims to Nazis, implying that Muslims are worse:

The question is this: some might liken Roger to a top American official joining the Nazi Party during World War II. Others would liken Roger to a top American official marrying a German immigrant during World War II, and coming under unjust suspicion as a result. German Americans, of course, could oppose and fight against National Socialism unequivocally, without any lingering allegiance to it; Muslims who profess to reject and abhor Islamic terrorism, however, still profess belief in a book and a prophet that have inspired Islamic violence and supremacism worldwide, even among believers who have no institutional connection to al-Qaeda or any other jihad group.

This goes back to the fact that Spencer wants Muslims to take loyalty tests.

Islamophobe Robert Spencer Questions Loyalty Of Top CIA Counterterror Official


The long Washington Post profile this weekend of a top Central Intelligence Agency official contained a remarkable number of details about the man that heads the Agency’s Counterterrorism Center — remarkable because the man remained shrouded in mystery, referenced only by the first name of his cover identity, “Roger.” Roger chain smokes, swears, worked in Africa, was “pudgy” in his youth, and — oh, yeah — he’s Muslim.

This last fact was too much for one of America’s foremost Islamophobes to bear: to an Islamophobe, Islamic extremist terrorism is inseparable from Islam at large, so how could a Muslim head up a counter-terrorism operation? Leave aside that Roger presides over a CIA unit that he expanded from three unmanned drone aircraft to an entire fleet firing missiles that have crippled militant networks — including Al Qaeda — in Pakistan.

Leave aside that Roger presides over a CIA unit that he brought from having three unmanned drone aircraft to a fleet of them that fire myriad missiles which crippled militant networks — including Al Qaeda — in Pakistan. Never mind that retired Gen. David Petraeus, who now heads up the CIA, said of Roger: “No officer in the agency has been more relentless, focused, or committed to the fight against al-Qaeda than has the chief of the Counterterrorism Center.”

None of that was enough to convince Robert Spencer, a long-time ally of anti-Muslim mainstay Pamela Geller, that “Roger” just might be a Manchurian candidate foisted upon the CIA by Muslim extremists looking to destroy America:

[I]f Islamic supremacists wanted to subvert the U.S. defense against jihad terror, they couldn’t do it more easily than by turning someone in a position like Roger’s. The worst part of this story is that no one is even examining that as a possibility.

Maybe the Post’s Greg Miller simply realized that a guy who blows up the actual dangerous “Islamic supremacists” on a regular basis would make an unlikely candidate to be a plant within the system. Perhaps that’s because, under Roger’s watch, “core al Qaida’s ability to perform a variety of functions — including preserving leadership and conducting external operations — has weakened significantly,” according to Capitol Hill testimony by Director of National Intelligence James Clapper.

But Spencer knows all that. He even says so:

The Washington Post, of course, follows the mainstream media line that Islam is a Religion of Peace that has been hijacked by a tiny minority of extremists, and so takes for granted that “Roger” has no loyalty issues, and proffers the drone campaign and the killing of bin Laden as proof.

Why still the questions, then? Because, Spencer says, “It is impossible to tell from this how serious he is about Islam.” The obvious implication in Spencer’s thinking is that “serious(ness)” about one’s faith — when that faith is Islam — means disloyalty to the U.S. Spencer should consider that the “mainstream media” might be right about this one.

, , , , , , , ,

  • corey

    speaking of nazi and muslim comparisons here is a speech by someone name anders gravers at a rallley in denmark or a text of one and I can honestly say you could play a drinking game with this speech by taking a shot for every crap thing you have heard people say about muslims such as comparisons to them being nazis or them wanting to rule the world

  • IbnAbuTalib

    Hatethehaterz: Keep in mind the only legitimate, authoritative “texts” in Islam are the Quran, Sunnah, and Hadith.

    Sorry for the digression, but some groups would consider the Quran as the only authoritative text in Islam. Moreover, in the first generations of Islam, Sunnah and Hadith as texts did not even exist. Additionally, even if hadith were to be considered authoritative, whose hadith counts? The Sunni collections, the shia collections or the Iabdi collections? Also, texts don’t speak as they are inanimate objects. People speak and interpret them, so whose understanding do we go by?

    The point is if Islam is not a monolith, then inevitably the concept of authoritative sources will also be divergent. At least all Muslims will agree the Quran is the Word of God.

  • The Cake Is A Lie


    Well said, it should be troubling that this Roger is a Muslim. If that’s even true of course, we could be hearing fairy tales to try and get Muslims to think that all those drone strikes is for our own good somehow…

    This “Roger” person is exactly what would happen if someone like Zuhdi Jasser gets a position of power within the US government.

  • aiman

    P.S. Read Malise Ruthven who has done some excellent work on the topics of fundamentalism, revolution and so on.

  • aiman

    “Keep in mind the only legitimate, authoritative “texts” in Islam are the Quran, Sunnah, and Hadith.”

    I agree, and would add that it also depends upon an honest translation of the Qur’an. For example, the translations by Maududi and Qutb are deeply erroneous, these so-called scholars were operating within the colonial context and inserted the incompatible idea of “revolution” and “violence” in their understanding of Islam. The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) who was a social critic in his own right argued against many of the ideas forwarded by Maududi et al. In their view women and non-Muslims don’t count.

    Their followers built up interpretations that abet terrorism and are very similar to fascism, violent Zionism and right-wing Indian nationalism. Any truth claim by fundamentalists can be deconstructed by similarities in their thought systems, how they view disadvantaged people and so on. In my previous post I argued how it is these thought systems, not Islamic texts, that inspire Muslim terrorists.

  • Hatethehaterz

    @ relief: Can you provide one authentic quote of a Muslim “terrorist” who CORRECTLY quoted Islamic texts to support his murders? Keep in mind the only legitimate, authoritative “texts” in Islam are the Quran, Sunnah, and Hadith. The vast majority of “Muslims” who commit terrorist actions do so in retaliation against western/non-Muslim aggression such as invasions/theft of their lands, murder of their people, and destruction of their property. Not for religious reasons. I placed Muslim in quotes in this case because terrorism and violence against non-combatants is not allowed in Islam. The people who do this are not following the tenets of Islam.

    Spencer, Gellar, and other promoters of Islamophobia incite hatred and bigotry against Muslims. They are indeed terror inspirers. I believe they do share a measure of blame when hate crimes are comitted against Muslims. Violence against Muslims is the natural, logical progression of their bigoted rhetoric. Have they ever CONDEMNED violence against Muslims? Islamophobic bigots are always going on and on about how we Muslims always need to condemn violence. Well what about you guys? Did Gellar or Spencer ever condemn any hate crimes or violence against Muslims? If you constantly tell the public how evil and bad a group is and make up all kinds of paranoid conspiracy theories, what do you think is going to happen? Stop defending anti-Muslim bigotry.

    When (non-practicing) Muslims commit terror crimes it has nothing to do with Islam or religion or even hate. It has everything to do with revenge and retaliation against war and invasion. If anyone does use Islam as justification, they do so incorrectly. When followers/supporters of anti-Muslim bigots commit hate crimes they are correctly interpreting the words of their masters (such as Gellar and Spencer). They are correctly motivated by the irrationial hate that such individuals incite.

  • Fred

    As long as Spencer gets that big meaty paycheck in his wallet (seeing as some fund him to continue doing what he does)… Spencer is happy.

    No matter how much bile he spews out, no matter how much he criticizes Islam, no matter how much he makes the world a worse place by criticizing others and spreading fear to separate people… Spencer is happy.

  • Garibaldi

    @Jai, Spencerwatch has documented the quote you posted, and a plethora of others from Spencer:

    The article needs to be updated but the quotes from Spencer are quite revealing.

  • @Jai

    Your posts are really, really good and I appreciate learning from you.

    I personally think Robert Spencer is using and/or hiding behind the Catholic church. The vast majority of Catholics, including the Pope, would not agree with Robert Spencer.

    Spencer is insideous in his attempt to pit one religion against another.
    His religion is not responsible for his hate, he is.

  • Jai

    Robert Spencer is also currently not being entirely honest about the real motivations for his own actions.

    This has not always been the case; Spencer has previously publicly admitted that his extreme hostility towards Muslims and Islam is actually motivated by his own Christian fundamentalism, specifically his vested interests as a Catholic. In an interview with the Washington Times in 2003, Spencer openly stated that he regards Islam as the (Catholic) Church’s “chief rival in terms of religion” and that this is one of the main motivations for his anti-Islam propaganda efforts:

    “Projection” is indeed an accurate term to describe Spencer’s behaviour.

  • NurAlia

    Regardless of what the loons say about ‘Roger’…Roger is part of the murdering of innocent people if he deployes drone strikes. He is either not relfcting Islamic values regarding life, or have not learned them as a ‘convert’ to Islam.

    I think in this forum…this is what is much more important to touch on…that a person who is claiming to be Muslim is responsible for so many innocent people dying. This ‘Roger’ charater is no better to me than al Quid’a…except for this weapon.

    Personally, I think that what Spencer says on this topic is irrelevent to Muslims.

  • Jai

    Following on from the Youtube video supplied by CriticalDragon1177, here are the actual quotes by SIOA & JihadWatch’s Robert Spencer and Der Sturmer’s Nazi propagandist Julius Streicher, as originally detailed here: :

    1. Muslims/Jews have a religious duty to conquer the world.

    “Islam understands its earthly mission to extend the law of Allah over the world by force.”

    Robert Spencer.

    “Do you not know that the God of the Old Testament orders the Jews to consume and enslave the peoples of the earth?”

    Julius Streicher.

    2. The Left enables Muslims/Jews.

    “The principal organs of the Left…has consistently been warm and welcoming toward Islamic supremacism.”

    Robert Spencer.

    “The communists pave the way for him (the Jew).”

    Julius Streicher.

    3. Governments do nothing to stop Muslims/Jews.

    “FDI* acts against the treason being committed by national, state, and local government officials…in their capitulation to the global jihad and Islamic supremacism.”

    (Freedom Defense Initiative, Robert Spencer/Pamela Geller organisation).

    “The government allows the Jew to do as he pleases. The people expect action to be taken.”

    Julius Streicher.

    4. Muslims/Jews cannot be trusted.

    “When one is under pressure, one may lie in order to protect the religion, this is taught in the Qur’an.”

    Robert Spencer.

    “We may lie and cheat Gentiles. In the Talmud it says: It is permitted for Jews to cheat Gentiles.”

    From The Toadstool, children’s book published by Julius Streicher.

    5. Recognizing the true nature of Muslims/Jews can be difficult.

    “There is no reliable way for American authorities to distinguish jihadists and potential jihadists from peaceful Muslims.”

    Robert Spencer.

    “Just as it is often hard to tell a toadstool from an edible mushroom, so too it is often very hard to recognize the Jew as a swindler and criminal.”

    From The Toadstool, children’s book published by Julius Streicher.

    6. The evidence against Muslims/Jews is in their holy books.

    “What exactly is ‘hate speech’ about quoting Qur’an verses and then showing Muslim preachers using those verses to exhort people to commit acts of violence, as well as violent acts committed by Muslims inspired by those verses and others?”

    Robert Spencer.

    “In Der Stuermer no editorial appeared, written by me or written by anyone of my main co-workers, in which I did not include quotations from the ancient history of the Jews, from the Old Testament, or from Jewish historical works of recent times.”

    Julius Streicher.

    7. Islamic/Jewish texts encourage violence against non-believers.

    “’And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter…’ — 2:191.”

    Koranic verse quoted by Robert Spencer on

    “’And when the Lord your God has delivered them over to you and you have defeated them, then you must destroy them totally: men and women and children, even the animals.’ (Deuteronomy 7:2.).”

    Biblical verse quoted by Julius Streicher in Der Stuermer.

    8. Christianity is peaceful while Islam/Judaism is violent.

    “There is no Muslim version of ‘love your enemies, pray for those who persecute you’ or ‘if anyone strikes you on the right cheek turn to him the other also’.”

    Robert Spencer.

    “The Jew is not being taught, like we are, such texts as, ‘Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself,’ or ‘If you are smitten on the left cheek, offer then your right one.'”

    Julius Streicher.

    9. Muslims/Jews are uniquely violent.

    “(Islam) is the only major world religion with a developed doctrine and tradition of warfare against unbelievers.”

    Robert Spencer.

    “No other people in the world has such prophecies. No other people would dare to say that it was chosen to murder and destroy the other peoples and steal their possessions.”

    Julius Streicher.

    10. Criticising Muslims/Jews is not incitement to violence against Muslims/Jews.

    “There is nothing in anything that I have ever written that could be reasonably construed as an incitement to violence against anyone.”

    Robert Spencer.

    “Allow me to add that it is my conviction that the contents of Der Stuermer as such were not (incitement). During the whole 20 years, I never wrote in this connection, ‘Burn Jewish houses down; beat them to death.’ Never once did such an incitement appear in Der Stuermer.”

    Julius Streicher.

    Julius Streicher wasn’t a member of the Nazi military and he also wasn’t involved in planning the Holocaust. Furthermore, as you can see in point 10 above, Streicher used exactly the same disingenuous argument in his own defence that Robert Spencer has used.

    Nevertheless, during the Nuremburg Trials after WW2, Julius Streicher was found guilty of crimes against humanity for inciting people to actively persecute Jews and for effectively laying the groundwork for the Holocaust as a result of his speeches and articles (“speaking, writing and preaching hatred of the Jews…..week after week, month after month”, as the judgement against Streicher stated). Full details:

    The comments thread on the following Loonwatch article is also worth reading, especially for details on the kind of people Robert Spencer is allied with: . More information on one of SIOA’s co-founders is also available here:

  • aiman

    “BUT when Muslim terror murderers quote Islamic texts in support of their murders…”

    This is actually false. I’ve not heard of any Muslim terrorists quoting “Islamic texts”. These terrorists depend upon thought systems developed by Maududi, Qutb and other such shallow thinkers. The Qur’anic translation of Maududi may well suit their agenda but that is only the tip of the iceberg. These people are tribalists and racists who believe that the answer to imperialism is to dehumanise and kill white civilians. It is very similar to violent Zionism and right-wing Indian nationalism, differing only in circumstance and other variables.

  • Christian-friend
  • Projections are the darnest things.
    They mess you up and make you blind.
    You see yourself and think it’s someone else.

    Robert Spencer is projecting, plain and simple. Hitler hated Judaism. Spencer hates Islam.
    Spencer and Hitler have much in common. They both hated or hate a major world religion.

    What a pity, what a waste, what a LOON!

  • @Emperor

    If Spencer ever does debate Dianos, remind him to bring this up.

    Islamophobia and Antisemitism: Same message, different minority.

    If Spencer wants to continue to claim that Muslims are Nazis, make him explain the similarities between his rhetoric and the Nazis’ rhetoric.

  • relief

    voice of reason – you are splitting hairs. It doesn’t really matter if the word “responsible” was used. All of the following are from posts on this site about the murder of Shaima Alawadi and they ll imply Spencer and Geller’s complicity in the murder. And let’s not forget the title of this article “Terror Inspirer Robert Spencer”.

    I hope Gellar, Spencer, and the other Muslim bashers are proud of themselves.

    Anybody seen Pat Condell?

    The “Human Rights Activist” Geller is probably celebrating, the Murderer probably reads her rants on a daily basis.


    I hope the same for those who would approve of what happened to her, because I know you are out there(Geller, and co.).

  • Christian-friend

    Spencer’s logic makes as much sense as monkeys throwing feces at each other for rotten apple

  • Come on, a little sympathy for Spencer wouldn’t go amiss. How do you think he feels knowing that a Muslim, say again: a Muslim, has done more to combat Islamic terrorism than he ever will.

    What next? Jewish opposition to Zionism? Catholic opposition to child abuse?

    The world has gone mad!

  • the_voice_of_reason

    “But you are absolutely convinced that they (Spencer and Geller) are responsible for those and other murders.”

    I cannot recall anyone here ever saying that Spencer and/or Geller were “responsible” for murders. What was stated was that hate speech, defining a group as subhuman by reason of their beliefs, can result in people using these comments as justification for their own deranged worldview. Based upon that analysis (which equally applies to anyone using the Qu’ran as justification for their deranged worldview), I fail to see any “double standard”.

  • Relief

    Spencer believes what Spencer believes. But what I notice is an apparent bit of hypocrisy from Loonwatch and many of its readers. You describe him as a terrorist inspirer in the headline. And I know many of you blame him and Geller for the Norway murders, for example. It does not seem to matter to you that none of you can produce one authentic quote from them advocating killing anyone or that the Norway killer also quoted Churchill and Jefferson among many others. But you are absolutely convinced that they (Spencer and Geller) are responsible for those and other murders.

    BUT when Muslim terror murderers quote Islamic texts in support of their murders, you say it is racist to point that out and that it tars all Muslims with the same brush and that Muslims have to live in fear all the time.

    So: Norway murderer quotes Spencer (who does not advocate killing and speaks out against it) and a host of other people dead and alive on both sides of the aisle and then goes out and kills people, therefore Spencer is responsbile for the deaths.

    Muslim terror murderer quotes Islamic text advising murder (strike at their necks, kill the infidels wherever you find them, etc.) but the murders have nothing to do with Islam.

    Can someone explain this double standard?

  • Reynardine

    Dammit, it used to be Communists, who included Truman, Eisenhower, and the Girl Scouts of America.

  • Fred

    Spencer is no scholar of Islam. Anyone who feeds into his continuous drivel will lose the brain they have been blessed with.

    Kudos to this site for showing us this.

    Behind the manly facial hair, the glasses, and the extra large suit, there is nothing, just a mind wanting to spread hate and fear amongst the public.

  • badboo

    Oh, forget about Spencer. This is his line of logic and soon he will be shooting himself in the leg:

    1. Islam is a false and demonic religion , we have the proof.

    2. Moselms are two categories: Bad Moslems who follow Islam, and good Moslems who do not follow Islam.

    3. But Good Moslems didn’t get what we proved to them alright. Otherwise they would have denounced Islam as we did and convert. So they must be practicing Takkiyya (refer to 1 to know what it is).

    4. So there is no good Moslem. All of them are bad.

    5. But there are people who are associated with Moslems. They are either fools, or are stealth Moslems themselves, practicing Takiyya. They cannot be fools, since we proved outright that all Moslems are bad Moslems in points 1-4. After all, since Moslems are allowed to hide their faith to deceive us, how are we sure that anybody (Obama, Rick Perry,…, General Petraeus, Santorum, Gingritch, etc.) is not a Moslem?

    6. Therefore, everybody is proven to be Moslem
    unless he abuses and defames Islam and Its
    Prophet publicly. Even then we are not sure, since perhaps some Moslems would do that to practice Takiyya and to deceive the unbelievers to push their agenda. For example, Mr. Spencer himself, might be a Moslem trying to spread Islam. Isn’t he a scholar?
    Isn’t Islam poison? He has been poisoned, and he’s
    spreading the true teachings of Islam under the cover of fighting it. After all, these teachings of Islam proved extremely attractive to billions of People
    over 14 centuries, and it is enough for people to
    become aware that such things exist, to begin to read Koran for themselves, for a new wave of conversion to Islam begins.

    7. So finally, I, Robert Spencer, proved that everybody is a covert Moslem by default, including myself. I can only trust myself from now on, if I truly am what I claim to be and am not doing Takkiya. You can go to hell all of you 7 billions minus one , Sharia supporters. Armaggedon now.

  • mindy1

    Who’s acting like the Nazi now??? 😉

Powered by Loon Watchers