How the Right abandoned the resistance to jihad

NEW UPDATE July 31: Big Fur Hat responds brilliantly to a commenter over at iOwntheWorld:

Katherine,This is not a flame war. And I fully expect commenters from WZ to come here and defend your site.

You offer opinion ie: Geller is nuts.
(Dagwaker offers idiocy ie: Spencer is Jewish (as if that would matter, anyway.))

This article offers nothing but facts, and they are not presented to damage WZ’s finances, traffic, or say they suck, or anything of the sort.

Here are the facts:
Zip called Spencer and said “Do not link to my site anymore.”
Spancer asked why.
Zip said because if he did, Pamela might link to that story, and his name would appear on Atlas Shrugs and he wants nothing to do with Atlas.
The discussion ended with Zip saying that Spencer was responsible for the Norway massacre.

When a story was suggested on Twitchy by a contributor, the contributor was told by Jessie Malkin that, “we won’t do anything with Atlas Shrugs.”

Hot Air asked Robert Spencer to produce a series called “blogging the Quran.”
The series was popular and then abruptly pulled by Malkin. Morrissey offered this as a reason – the Obama/McCain election is heating up and we don’t have time for this.
Does anyone believe that excuse?

I think it is important to have these top blogs say publicly what their problem is.

What I am hearing from you (and dagawker) are two simultaneous contradictory arguments –

Weasel Zippers doesn’t back down from blogging about Islam, he does war porn and calls them barbarians and in the comments we call them goatf*ckers, and we piss on them yada yada yada –
but Geller is too toxic.

Do you think that makes any sense to you whatsover, particularly when Geller doesn’t come close to doing, in terms of decorum, what you’re boasting WZ’s does?

Ask yourself this, as well. Spencer and Geller are a team, why does Zip have a problem with Geller and not Spencer? Makes no sense unless it is personal.

Listen, talking about goatf*cking is nice, and dutifully putting up fapping videos of war is great.

With all due respect, the real work is being done in the courts by “that nut” Pamela Geller. What you don’t know, and what Zip doesn’t know, could fill a reservoir. Frankly, you’re way out of your league.
Now, having said that, you’re not just a wee bit curious as to the exact reason the top tier blogs are cutting Pamela out of their incestuous dutch rudder linkage club? Or are you merely content with the marginalizing of one of our top warriors and content that Jihad will be challenged by Zip and the Zip commenting community?

Remove Geller from the landscape and what are you left with?
Stay at home bloggers trying to “make a living” who conspire to damage a woman who has her ass on the line defending the first amendment, for you and I, with her own money.
Tell us all again how Geller is nuts, it was charming.




UPDATE: Big Fur Hat over at iOwntheWorld has figured it out: the blogger being discussed below is Weasel Zippers. Zip and I had once been friendly and actually had been planning to meet again for lunch when he wrote me and asked me to stop linking his posts at Jihad Watch, because then when Pamela Geller would link my posts, a link to his site would show up at Atlas Shrugs, and he didn’t want to have anything to do with her because of her exposure of Rick Perry’s Islam curriculum. When I responded incredulously, he grew progressively more abusive, finally ending up by repeating the Leftist/Islamic supremacist smear that I was responsible for the Norway murders. He still does cover jihad issues at Weasel Zippers, but not in a way that would trouble anyone who buys the propaganda line, purveyed by both Leftists and Fox, that Islam is a Religion of Peace that has been Hijacked by a Tiny Minority of Extremists.


Ah, now it all makes sense — not just about Malkin, but I also had been quite friendly with the blogger discussed in the email below, until he suddenly and inexplicably began sending me abusive emails demanding that I stop linking to him. It’s ironic that a central part of the Leftist/Islamic supremacist myth about freedom fighters is that there is some lucrative “Islamophobia industry” and that people are in this for money and fame, when actually the path to money and fame today is to dissemble and downplay the reality of jihad and Islamic supremacism, and their root causes within Islam itself.

“The Right’s dirty little secret,” by Pamela Geller over at Atlas Shrugs today:

Actually, it’s a big dirty secret.I could not help but notice, over the past few years, the right wing blogosphere’s silence on jihad and Islam. When I started blogging back in 2004-2005, there were literally scores of counter-jihad blogs in an already crowded field. Seven years later, it is a paltry few,  save for Jihadwatch, The Religion of Peace, Creeping Sharia, and political bloggers like Logan’s Warning, IOTW, American Power blog, Zilla,  ….. [UPDATE: and The Right Planet].

The first jolt and obvious disconnect was back in 2008, when Michelle Malkin and Hot Air suddenly and without explanation stopped running Robert Spencer’s “Blogging the Quran” series and his Jihad Watch v-logs. They were fantastic, informational and needed. Around the time she dropped Spencer, Malkin had a short-lived show on Fox and was trying to get more exposure there, and she also stopped writing as much as she had about Islam and jihad. I was surprised and disheartened at the time, but was unaware that these were just some early signs of a decision by the most influential people on the Right to sanction the jihad and sharia with their silence. Silence is sanction. Malkin still posts on big jihad stories every now and then (as do other right-of-center bloggers), and acts as if nothing has changed and she is still in the fight, but it has gone to the periphery of her concerns.

But this is not about just Michelle Malkin — not by a long shot. I wrote about her because the evidence in her case is fairly clear. But it is also about all of them: Drudge, Rush, Kathryn Lopez of National Review, Mark Levin, Michael Savage, etc. The email below makes the Right’s actions intelligible. It is unlikely — in fact, inconceivable — that the blogger described in it, who saw his path to money and traffic in abandoning the fight against jihad and Islamic supremacism, was the only one. Obviously, many others have gone down this road as well. The big blogs on the right never link counter-jihad blogs. They have all but surrendered.

It irked me that the party of constitutional rights and individual rights would adhere to the blasphemy laws under the sharia (do not criticize or offend Islam).

Which is worse: the left’s vocal support of the sharia or the right’s silence? The silence is more insidious. At least you know where you stand with the left. The following email came from a new blogger who was communicating with me on an unrelated issue. He used to blog at a very well known, well-trafficked right wing blog, one of the biggest. When I made a passing remark about the blogger’s negative behavior toward me, the new blogger responded [names redacted]:

Wow. I didn’t know you were aware of XXXX’s attitude towards you. He is nasty. He hides it well but if you displease him he’ll lash out at you.  He got pissed at me when I posted an article that made Rick Perry look bad. He changed my headline and comment.

I posted a link to one of your blog posts in early 2011. Another blogger on the site pulled the link to you and sent me an email saying stay away from posting links to Atlas. He said XXXX [the owner of the blog] would get mad.

I think it also had to do with the fact that XXXX  changed the blog’s policy towards Islamic issues. I used to post uncensored stuff about Islam. Pictures with insults to Allah, swastikas on muslim terrorists, cartoons I made saying “Heil Allah!”

In December 2010, XXXX decided to tone down XXXX and make it more like a Hot Air style site. He told me to stop insulting Islam because he wanted to attract advertising and make a living from doing XXXX. I complied with his wishes and toned down not only Islam stuff but other subjects as well. I gradually became disenchanted with posting at XXXX. My daily output became less and less.

Read it all.

Posted by Robert

Inside France’s Future Muslim-Majority City

by /When foreigners think of the French city of Marseille they think of the national anthem, of Renoir sketching the old port in slashes of yellow and blue, and of castles and cafes overlooking the water. But the old port will now be overshadowed by a Grand Mosque.

The Grand Mosque project has cast a shadow over Marseille since 1989; its location on the site of a former slaughterhouse where pigs were once butchered and the Saudi money going into the project has only given the whole affair a more ominous air. The prolonged legal battle over its construction has gone on through the years even as Islamic terrorism in Marseille has grown to dangerous proportions.

In 1994, Marseille was where the Christmas Hijacking of Air France Flight 8969 came to its bloody end. Muslim terrorists from the Armed Islamic Group had hijacked the plane on Christmas Eve shouting “Allah Akbar” and informing the passengers that this particular deity had chosen them to wage war in his name. The terrorists forced the stewardesses to veil themselves with cabin blankets, recited verses from the Koran and murdered a number of passengers.

But the Armed Islamic Group had bigger plans than a few burkas and a few murders. Their plan was to ram Air France Flight 8969 directly into the Eiffel Tower. Marseille was supposed to be a refueling stopover before a final fatal flight to Paris, but with no sign of the extra fuel that would allow them to inflict maximum damage, the terrorists tried to kill a member of the crew who had told them he was an atheist. Instead French authorities took down the terrorists and prevented an earlier French version of September 11.

Islamic terror however wasn’t done with Marseille or the Eiffel Tower. More recently French authorities broke up another terrorist ring which had targeted the Eiffel Tower and Notre Dame. The Grand Mosque of Marseille is a more indirect form of architectural attack. Rather than blow up Marseille‘s Notre-Dame de la Garde church, considered by Catholics to be the guardian and protectress of the city, it will overshadow it instead.

Between a quarter and a third of Marseille’s residents are Muslim and demographics suggest that the city may be on its way to becoming the first majority Muslim city in Europe. Marseille’s coat of arms may still bear the azure cross, but not for long. There are already 60 mosques in the city, but many of them are underground. When it is completed, the Grand Mosque will act as a claim of ownership to the city.

Muslims had attacked the port city in the 9th century capturing it and enslaving its native inhabitants. That which Muslims once took, their theologians insist is theirs in perpetuity. The Muslim return to Marseille is seen as a reconquista, a return to the land that was once theirs. Building a mega mosque is a way of sealing the deal and making it clear to any infidels that the religion of peace is back with a vengeance.

Last week, a woman in Marseille wearing a niqab, a Muslim garment that covers the entire face except for the eyes, was asked for her identification by the police. “I don’t obey the laws of the French Republic,” was her reply. Some of the Muslims near the mosque attacked the police, who defended themselves and are now facing an administrative inquiry for doing so. Their Muslim attackers however were released, according to the prosecutor, as a “gesture of appeasement during Ramadan.”

Last year in Marseille, a Muslim man had been sentenced to six months in jail for punching a female nurse who had tried to remove his wife’s burka during childbirth. On sentencing him the judge had said, “Your religious values are not superior to the laws of the republic.” But whether or not the laws of the republic are indeed superior to the laws of the caliphate still remains to be seen as the struggle over the Islamization of France continues. And that struggle is felt keenly in Marseille.

Nearly half of all immigrants to France are Muslim. In Marseille 41.8 percent of those under 18 were of foreign descent. And so it was in Marseille that Sarkozy chose to deliver an election speech in which he warned, “These are foreigners more and more sure of their rights, who arrive each year to impose their way of life. Marseille knows about this. The customs and way of life are openly displayed, or imposed on the French, in a way which seems to be more and more a form of provocation or arrogance.”

The French right has traditionally done well in Marseille because the city’s French working class along with some Eastern European immigrants have seen it reflecting their daily sense of outrage at what their city is becoming. But the rising number of Muslims has slowly tilted the political balance helping Hollande eke out a marginal victory over Sarkozy in the second round of the presidential election.

Despite pandering to working-class native voters with an immigration cap during the election, Hollande has shown that he knows exactly where the credit for his victory lies. Foreigners living in France will shortly be able to vote in local elections and the new Interior Minister Manuel Valls, formerly mayor of Evry, home of the Grand Mosque of Evry, which has crime rates that are some of the highest in France, has begun a pandering tour, praising the Grand Mosque and Islam.

The French police will no longer be able to arrest illegal aliens and Muslim immigrants no longer need to bother learning anything about the country. Valls has announced that he intends to scrap a test of French history and culture, which had asked such challenging questions as, “Whom do you associate with the Arc de Triomphe? a) Napoleon b) General de Gaulle c) Julius Caesar?”

La Marseillaise, France’s National Anthem, got its name when volunteer revolutionaries from Marseille sang the song. Now Marseille is at the center of a new revolution. The Islamic Revolution. Muslim volunteers from France have been identified training with the Taliban and after Mohammed Merah’s massacre at a Jewish school, a group of Jews in Marseille were attacked by Muslim men shouting, “Vive Mohamed Merah, F— the Jews, Palestine will win.”

As in 1994, Allah Akbar has become the new Marseillaise, replacing the song of the Army of the Republic, with the guttural cry of the Caliphate eager to be born.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

Report of possible Gaza independence stirs debate

By Mounir Ateeq

Recent reports that the Hamas Islamist movement was considering to declare the independence of the Gaza Strip with the help of Egypt, which has an Islamist president, has stirred controversy among Palestinians and in both Egypt and Israel.

The London-based al-Hayat had reported that the subject would be on the discussion table between Gaza Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh and Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood President Mohammed Mursi last week.

But top Hamas officials like Mahmoud Zaharand Osama Hamdan denied the report, but the controversy and speculation continued nonetheless.

Khaled Mesmar, head of the Political Committee at the Palestinian National Council, said although Hamas dismissed the idea of independence, its members were still working on establishing an Islamic emirate in Gaza even if they do not admit so publicly.

“That is why Hamas still insists on retaining control over Gaza and imposing its own independent laws on its people,” Mesmar told Al Arabiya.

Mesmar added that Hamas was also independently engaged in “secret talks” with several international parties over the independence of Gaza.

“Hamas is trying to garner as much support as possible for the idea of secession especially among several Arab regimes.”

For Mesmar, those steps are extremely dangerous not only because they are bound to deepen the inter-Palestinian division, but also because they will offer Israel an easy way out.

“Hamas is now implementing Israel’s plan and which basically revolves around throwing Gaza’s responsibility on Egypt. The problem is that Egypt will not accept the idea of the independence of Gaza.”

Mesmar pointed out that late Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat had rejected Israel’s proposal known as “Gaza First” and insisted on the “Gaza and Jericho first” principle.

Former Palestinian ambassador to the UAE and Turkey Ribhi Halloum said he does not perceive any danger in Gaza’s declaration of independence.

“I don’t see anything wrong with Gaza declaring its independence and severing all ties with Israel while establishing stronger ones with Egypt.”

For Halloum, Gaza is an integral part of the Palestinian land so declaring its independence is a step towards the liberation of Palestine and not the other way round.

“When Gaza is liberated, border crossings with Egypt will be opened and residents of the strip will be allowed to secure their needs of food, medicine, and fuel. This will definitely help in struggling against Israel because it will break the blockade it has been imposing on Gazans.”

As for the separation between Gaza and the West Bank, Halloumi said it exists anyway because of the Israeli occupation and will not be caused by the independence of Gaza.

“Failure to unite both is not Hamas’s fault. Fatah is the faction that failed miserably at reaching at resolving the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and through its lack of resistance to Israeli policy undermined the influence of the Palestinian Authority.”

Labib Qamhawi, professor of political science, said Egypt’s stance will determine whether the independence of Gaza is a viable option.

“If Egypt does not support Hamas in its plan for independence, the whole issue will be nothing but ink on paper,” he told Al Arabiya.

Regardless of the independence, Qamhawi pointed out, strengthening ties with Egypt is in Gaza’s best interest.

“This does mean that, as some people think, that Gaza will be annexed to Egypt. It only means that Gaza will replace Israel with Egypt as far as economic ties are concerned.”

Saeid Thiab, secretary general of the Jordanian Popular Unity Party, said, “Gaza is becoming a nuisance for Israel,” which would be happy to see Egypt taking over the strip.

Thiab added that the independence of Gaza will not solve the Palestinian problem.

“The only solution to the problem is ending the division between Palestinian factions in order to be able to form a united front that faces Israel after the failure of negotiations.”