Robert Spencer is an anti-Muslim far right bigot that has – among other things – collaborated with European neofascists. He’s a New York Times best-selling author; appears regularly on Fox News; and has taken part in counter terrorism training for various government agencies.
What all this means is he says a lot of really stupid shit.
On his JihadWatch blog post, “Pakistan: New bounty offer for Muhammad filmmaker — $200,000“, he made this ridiculous claim:
“Doubling the first offer. Given Obama’s repeated denunciations of the film and the fact that the filmmaker is currently under arrest, maybe he will hand him over to the Pakistanis.”
Was he kidding? Maybe – but given the broad context of making absurd claims about Islam around which he’s based his career, he shouldn’t be too surprised that someone like me would take his alleged “irony” seriously – especially since he’s known not as a satirist or humorist, but as an ignorant anti-Muslim reactionary peddling lies; or what Daniel Pipes calls “a serious scholar.”
So the question is – are his views on Obama as “dhimmi” an indication of a diseased and irrational mindset – or is he merely joking? Consider this post Revolutionary Guards commander: “Iran will not start any war but it could launch a pre-emptive attack” on Israel”:
“World War III. But what side would Obama be on?”
Or this post about the Egyptian government charging seven Egyptian-Americans with blasphemy:
“Will Obama hand them over?”
Then there’s this over-the-top “analysis” of Obama’s biblical invocation during last year’s 10th anniversary of 9/11:
“Obama reads Psalm 46, including verse 8: ‘Come, behold the works of the LORD, how he has wrought desolations in the earth.’
The only people who think that 9/11 was an act of the Supreme Being wreaking desolations on the earth are…Islamic jihadists.
So why did Barack Obama pick this psalm out of 150 psalms, and out of innumerable appropriate Biblical passages, to read at the 9/11 ceremonies? 9/11, after all, was a day when there were indeed wrought desolations on the earth. Did Obama really mean to say that God did it, that it was an act of divine judgment, rather than a monstrous and unmitigated evil?
Or is this just another one of those funny coincidences, of which there are so very, very many when it comes to Barack Obama and his remarkable, unqualified and obvious affinity for Islam?”
Actually, Islamists aren’t the only ones who think this. Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell blamed immorality and secularism for pissing off God, who retaliated with 9/11. Robertson has a consistent pattern of explaining disasters on theological grounds; nor is he alone – all religions feel disasters are God’s wrath.
Added to this maelstrom of brilliance is his close collaboration with Pamela Geller who has made her own irrational claims, like how Obama traveled to Pakistan and became a jihadist as well as being the illegitimate son of Malcolm X. They even co-authored a book about Obama – “The Post-American Presidency – where they made repeated hints suggesting that Obama is a secret Muslim, such as in the section called “Obama The Believer” about the speech he gave in Egypt in 2009 (and remember – in their world, Muslim = Jihadist).
So given this entire context, it’s reasonable to assume that he meant what he said as a serious observation; and I made this the subject of a tweet on my Twitter account. The conversation we had went like this – after making my initial tweet, he responded:
“Clearly you are very, very seriously irony challenged.”
To which I retorted:
“Or you are very, very seriously reality challenged. Either way, you can eat a dick.”
After that, he retweeted my response and I get a tweet from this jackass:
“Can’t tell humor /satire from serious? THATs another reason why we can’t have ‘offensive’ speech banned in the USA.”
Even if Spencer is really satirizing Obama, he’s satirizing a reality that doesn’t exist. This reality is actually a series of projections based on an inverted world of powerful Islamic forces aiming to conquer a vulnerable West led by dhimmis personified in Obama.
Take the first post – that Obama is an appeaser of radical Islam and against free speech. That flies in the face of his speech to the UN where he actually defended the freedom to blaspheme on the same day a report detailed the effects from the massive death toll in Pakistan from the increased use of drone strikes from the previous administration.
Does that sound like a “dhimmi” to you?
Never mind the fact that he killed Bin Laden, renewed the Patriot Act and reneged on his promise to close the Guantanamo Bay concentration camp. But if an African-American Islamist Imam is killed by FBI agents in Detroit in 2009 under Obama’s watch, a joke about the president handing over Nakoula Bassely Nakoula to Pakistan doesn’t really make sense; hence my not seeing the “irony.”
This is the reality of the last four years that Spencer whitewashed to conform with his ideology of racism and dehumanization of Muslims. Just consider this post:
“Barack Obama and General John Allen should be prosecuted for the deaths of every one of the fifty troops murdered by their Afghan ‘allies’ this year. They are all victims of the politically correct unwillingness to accept unpleasant realities about Islam: that it teaches hatred of and warfare against unbelievers, the virtue of deceit in war, and the impermissibility of cooperating with or allying with infidels on a permanent and lasting basis.”
But Bush shouldn’t be prosecuted for invading the country and setting up the occupation that Obama continued?
Aside from that inconvenient little fact, Spencer reveals his indifference to the Afghans, who have experienced far greater suffering and have endured years of American occupation. Apparently, they don’t deserve justice – all because American lives matter more than those Muslims whose religion have attributes that are universal; hatred and warfare against unbelievers is as much of a biblical concept and as for “the virtue of deceit in war,” has he never heard of the Trojan horse or these other non-Islamic examples?
Such rational thinking is irrelevant to Spencer, however, because he’s an eliminationist and his work is dedicated to presenting a picture where eliminationism is the only logical solution in the face of Islamic savagery.
The truth is that Obama is a neocolonial overseer of the American empire, dedicated to the same objectives as all previous administrations – a truth Spencer and people like him have dedicated to convincing others that it doesn’t exist. Spencer’s bigotry does exist, however, both in his serious work and in his “irony.”
So the question, therefore, isn’t whether he was serious or not … it doesn’t matter. What matters more is that Spencer and his agenda must be defeated.