Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Osama bin Laden. Anwar al-Awlaki. Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi— and Robert Spencer?
JIHAD WATCH ^ | 2020-04-06 14:06:34 | ROBERT SPENCER

Posted on 04/07/2020 3:24:56 PM PDT by robowombat

Osama bin Laden. Anwar al-Awlaki. Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi— and Robert Spencer? BY ROBERT SPENCER 2020-04-06T14:06:34

If we all agree to ignore the passages in the Qur’an that enjoin believers to be violent toward non-Muslims, they’ll go away, right? If we deny that such passages even exist, jihadis will cease acting upon them, won’t they? That appears to be the view of Nathan Spannaus, a hustling young academic (or academic hustler, if you prefer) who identifies himself on Twitter as a “Middle East and Islamic Studies Ph.D” and author of a book called Preserving Islamic Tradition. Writing in the NYU Law School publication Just Security Wednesday, the far-seeing Spannaus has some big news: Mohiusunnath Chowdhury, a Muslim who attacked police with a sword outside Buckingham Palace, was apparently inspired to do so by…me. Spannaus claimed that Chowdhury’s reading of my work, along with that of Tommy Robinson and Christian scholar David Wood, “to reinforce in his mind the religious necessity of jihad.”

The day this article appeared was indeed April Fool’s Day, but it looks as if Spannaus was serious. As ridiculous as his claim was, however, he was generous enough to note that “Spencer has pushed back on the characterization that his writings helped inspire Chowdhury, arguing that a Muslim doesn’t need non-Muslim voices to justify jihadism. Fair enough — and questions of inspiration can be complicated. But evidence shows how seriously Chowdhury took these figures’ views. He saved numerous articles from Jihad Watch, including a list of Quranic passages extolling violence, and he shared Woods’ videos on jihadist attacks with the undercover agents, describing them as potential options....”

There is no doubt that, at least by his own account, Mohiusunnath Chowdhury did read my website Jihad Watch, along with material by Robinson and Wood. But would Nathan Spannaus actually have us believe that Chowdhury would not have had access to the Qur’an if not for Jihad Watch? Does Spannaus actually believe that Islamic jihadis don’t read the Qur'an themselves, and that if “Islamophobes” would just shut up about what’s in it, no Muslims would know its contents, and there would be no jihad terrorism?

Spannaus does mention that Chowdhury had been reading jihad manuals and material from al-Awlaki and other jihad preachers, but he still joins the relentlessly biased Lizzie Dearden of the Independent, whose article on Chowdhury a few weeks ago is the source of his claim, in charging that Tommy, David Wood and I are really the ones who set the poor, peaceful lad on the path to perdition.

If that were so, why were no Muslim clerics, with whom Chowdhury was manifestly in contact, unable to convince him of the true, peaceful Islam? Why was there jihad violence for 1,400 years before Tommy, David, or I wrote or said anything? If we validated the jihadist interpretation of Islam, where did it come from, and why did it have so much resonance among Muslims before we came along?

Spannaus does seem to be unaware of that 1,400-year history, and thinks it’s all our fault. “That Islam requires violent jihad and that mainstream Muslims are deluded about their faith is a common refrain in anti-Islam circles,” Spannaus writes, as if “anti-Islam circles” made up the idea that Islam requires violent jihad. Apparently Nathan Spannaus, his head full of things he thinks are true but aren’t, which is what happens to you when you get a Ph.D. in Islamic studies these days, assumes that if we all pretend that Islam is a religion of peace and never speak about its teachings calling for warfare against unbelievers and their subjugation under the rule of Islamic law, jihad activity will go away.

The problem for Spannaus and Dearden, and for their hapless readers, is that the Qur'an says what it says whether Tommy and David and I quote it or not. And Muslims read it whether we quote it or not. And some Muslims act upon its violent passages, whether or not we mention their existence.

Does Nathan Spannaus, “Middle East and Islamic Studies Ph.D,” really not know this? Or is his article in Just Security all simply part of the Left-fascists’ ongoing attempt to shut down all dissent from their agenda?

Certainly when Lizzie Dearden’s article came out, there were numerous calls for this site to be shut down and my books withdrawn from circulation, because they supposedly inspired Mohiusunnath Chowdhury. That would be like saying that an anti-Nazi writer in the 1930s, who quoted Mein Kampf and explained Nazi motives and goals, had to be shut down because he was inspiring Nazism. It’s insane, and that’s the world we live in today, where the likes of Lizzie Dearden are respected “journalists” and Nathan Spannaus is an accredited academic.


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Philosophy; United Kingdom
KEYWORDS:

1 posted on 04/07/2020 3:24:56 PM PDT by robowombat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: robowombat

So what if Chowdhury’s reading of his work, along with that of Tommy Robinson and Christian scholar David Wood, “to reinforce in his mind the religious necessity of jihad.”?

That doesn’t make Tommy Robinson into a high ranking Muslim.


2 posted on 04/07/2020 3:29:45 PM PDT by BenLurkin (The above is not a statement of fact. It is either opinion or satire. Or both.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: robowombat

Stephen Coughlin has wisely pointed out that we do not need to concern ourselves with the muddied waters of which is the real Islam but only with the actual texts that are on sale in Muslim Bookstores / Mosques all across the land, books to teach Muslims how to be good Muslims and which usually come with the very highest *bling* of scholarly authority.

These point Muslims to jihad. Plain and simple.


3 posted on 04/07/2020 3:36:09 PM PDT by Rurudyne (Standup Philosopher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: robowombat

Partner, we have been saying that the Mooselimb religion is a gutter religion.

Their growth comes from their men practicing polygamy!

They converted folks with a sword to their necks.

I would never nor will I ever submit to this gutter religion.

4 posted on 04/07/2020 3:49:04 PM PDT by TheConservativeTejano (God Bless Texas...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

Muslims believe that The Qur’an is co-extensive with Allah from Eternity. Its existence pre-dates the beginning of time.


5 posted on 04/07/2020 3:50:36 PM PDT by CharlesOConnell (CharlesOConnell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: robowombat

‘Does Nathan Spannous Middle east and Islamic Studies PhD., really not know this?

Of course he does, He’s GOOD with it.


6 posted on 04/07/2020 3:59:31 PM PDT by A strike (" Was that wrong? Should I not have done this? " - Costanza)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: robowombat; Robert Spencer; All

“Or is his article in Just Security all simply part of the Left-fascists’ ongoing attempt to shut down all dissent from their agenda?”

Asymmetric war. We are in it. EVERY DAY.

HOORAY Robert Spencer. Thank you, sir.

“The universalism of Islam, in its all-embracing creed, is imposed on the believers as a continuous process of warfare, psychological and political, if not strictly military. . . . The Jihad, accordingly, may be stated as a doctrine of a permanent state of war, not continuous fighting.”- Majid Khadduri

https://securitypolicylaw.syr.edu/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/MyersJoseph.Quranic-Concept-of-War.pdf

Fitna in the republic.


7 posted on 04/07/2020 4:23:43 PM PDT by PGalt (Past Peak Civilization?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: robowombat

Anwar al-Awlaki
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The only American citizen of the listed jihadists.
He had a Yemeni wife and his kids are natural born citizens eligible to be President according to some here.
If Ted Cruz is, they are.

The ENTIRE reason for the natural born citizen requirement was to exclude the children of foreigners.


8 posted on 04/07/2020 5:56:40 PM PDT by Lurkinanloomin (Natural Born Citizens Are Born Here of Citizen Parents_Know Islam, No Peace-No Islam, Know Peace)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: robowombat

bkmk


9 posted on 04/07/2020 7:37:16 PM PDT by sauropod (Pelosi Galore: We know she's lying when we see her dentures flying.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson