Robert Spencer has responded to One Law for All's report Enemies not Allies: The Far-Right by saying: 'If Maryam Namazie's One Law For All claims to oppose the jihad while attacking anti-jihadists and supporting the genocidal jihad against Israel, then it is simply a false-flag operation. He links to a press release of the Left Worker-Communist Party of Iraq posted on my blog as proof of ‘anti-Semitism’.
On charges of ‘anti-Semitism’
I find it interesting how Spencer uses the tactics of Islamists. Islamists will often say any criticism of Islam and Islamism is an attack on Muslims and racism in order to silence opposition and in fact bulldoze over the rights of Muslims and others. Spencer labels any criticism of Israeli government policies as anti-Semitism in order to do the same. Needless to say, it is ironic to see the far-Right oppose anti-Semitism – at least tactically for now - when anti-Semitism has always been one of its important cornerstones.
The December 2008 press release of the Left Worker-Communist Party of Iraq that Spencer is referring to opposes the ‘brutal airstrikes of the Israeli government’ and its having ‘dropped more than 100 tons of explosives on Gaza in the deadliest bombing campaigns’.
The press release goes on to say that:
‘Israel's bombing of Gaza is a barbaric act of state terrorism that must be met with outrage and protest. This is part of the on-going conflict between the State of Israel and the barbaric Islamic movement Hamas, which spares no opportunity to fire rockets at Israeli populated neighborhoods. The bombing is a vicious attack on over one million defenseless civilians living in Gaza. While it claims its aim is to eliminate Hamas military targets, the purpose of its vicious air campaign is to create terror in the region with the greatest possible destruction and death toll among Palestinians in order to impose its hegemony and power in defiance of all calls and cries of humanity to stop the massacre and to lift the economic blockade on the innocent people of Gaza. Our Party denounces the brutal bombing by the state of Israel against the people of Gaza and considers it as a crime of state terrorism and calls for its immediate and unconditional stop, and to bring those who ordered it to trial as criminals. The end of the brutal conflict between the forces of terrorism on the regional level and the world will only be achieved through the establishment of a Palestinian state with equal rights to the State of Israel, and therefore, put an end to terrorism, racism and fascism, and the religious Right-wing on both sides of the conflict. This is the task of humanity and the Palestinian Left and also the task of civilized humanity around the world.’
The press release ends with the slogans: ‘Stop the Barbaric Bombing of the civilian population in Gaza Now! Freedom and Security for the Peoples of Palestine and Israel! Yes to the establishment of a Palestinian State with Equal Rights to the State of Israel!’
Claiming to ‘oppose the jihad while attacking anti-jihadists’
Spencer also asserts that opposing him makes us ‘no more anti-jihad than Hassan Nasrallah'. Again, this is based on a false premise. Look, this is a question of politics. One Law for All wants to create a huge movement of people and groups with differing opinions. In fact, many of those involved in the campaign won’t agree with my politics in other areas, e.g. on the Palestinian question and worker-communism as I won’t agree with many of theirs. But that is the point of single issue campaigns and how many movements are strengthened.
Just because the BNP, Stop Islamisation of Europe and America or the EDL are also claiming to be opposed to Islamism, it doesn’t put us in the same camp. We are opposed to Islamism because we want to defend rights, equality, secularism, citizenship rights. They oppose Islamism because it is their competition. Just because Bush invades Iraq to ‘defend women’s rights’ doesn’t make it so. And just because I am a women’s rights campaigner, doesn’t mean I must now support the US’ militarism across the globe.
Marxism
Moreover, Spencer says, ‘Not coincidentally, One Law For All is headed up by Maryam Namazie, a Marxist antisemite who claims to be anti-jihad’. Suffice it to say that I know that anti-communism is a characteristic of the Islamists and far-Right alike, and that the end of the Cold War and a pathetic pro-Islamist Left have made it fashionable to attack the Left and Communism. But people seek out the Left because they demand justice as Mansoor Hekmat had said. Also, worker-communism has never supported the Soviet Union or the Gulags or whatever. If you really want to know what the Worker-communist Party of Iran (WPI) stands for there is ample information on it here.
One Law for All and I are not one and the same
Most importantly, though, my Marxism and worker-communism’s press release on the Palestinian question are not relevant to One Law for All since the campaign does not promote Marxism, nor does it issues press releases on the Israeli government’s occupation of Palestine. But again this is an attempt to muddy the waters in order to evade the questions raised about him and his movement in our report.
Spencer has asked for an apology for labelling him far-Right. He should not wait for one as none will be forthcoming. I have suggested, however, that he be more honest with himself and others and own up to his regressive and inhuman politics. It would be much more respectable.
Look, if Spencer wants to challenge the One Law for All report, he will have to refute the evidence in the report, which is the result of a January 2011 seminar on the issue and months of research and not grab at straws.
By the way, this is the last time I will address Spencer’s comments. I have better things to do with my time. The goal, after all, behind writing the report was not to make Spencer have a 'change of heart' but to persuade a majority that is against Islamism and Sharia law to also be vigilant against ‘their own far-Right’.
You can read Adam Barnett's response to Robert Spencer here. He co-wrote the Enemies not Allies report and did most of the research for it.
14 comments:
Well said, Maryam!
Oh, how cute.
You know, I attended that "One Law for All" rally. If this threat of Islamic fascism is ever to be met, it will require a little more than a collection of self-righteous fools reading crap poetry and snivelling that they are here to "defend human rights" not "Western Civlization". Where, exactly, did those rights come from if not there?
A confessed supporter of the only system in human history that can go toe to toe with Islam for body count should think twice before casting aspersions.
"Needless to say, it is ironic to see the far-Right oppose anti-Semitism – at least tactically for now - when anti-Semitism has always been one of its important cornerstones."
I found this sentence to be absolutely astounding. Do you actually believe that Robert Spencer, supposedly being of the "Far-Right", is really secretly anti-semitic himself and only purpotes to support Israel as a short term, tactical ploy?
I couldn't really take anything else you say seriously after reading this. You live in a fantasy world.
I agree here.
Im no fan of Israels occupation, either, altough I also detest Hamas and Hizbollah.
That beeing said, I hold no contempt against the country or its people, just that the gov. makes the most stupid decisions.
I used to post comments on Robert Spencers blog (and even included him in my blogroll!), but found that a majority of his following are racist, xenophobic thugs. Many of the remarks left in the comments section had nothing to do with Islam, but were attacks on Arabs and Arab culture, etc. When I mentioned this, I was attacked with a viciousness I have not experienced online before. Spencer does nothing to moderate or counter hate speech on his blog. In fact, it appears he encourages it. Between that and his own extremist agenda, I can only assume that he is in paid service to a foreign entity with a strategic interest in seeing right-wing Christian fundamentalists take over the U.S. There's only one country in the world that would benefit from such a takeover. Do the math.
A very fine and polished example of the Stalinist technique of amalgamation.
You know, if you are going to lump in Mr. Spencer with the BNP, you don't get to bitch and moan when you get lumped in with HAMAS and Hezbollah.
The Godless Monster wrote:
"I used to post comments on Robert Spencers blog (and even included him in my blogroll!), but found that a majority of his following are racist, xenophobic thugs."
People have been trying to discredit Spencer with the "guilt-by-association" tactic for years. Aside from the fact that only a few dozen people regularly comment on his blog, out of a readership of many thousands and that you therefore can't possibly know what the majority of his "followers" are like, please quote Spencer giving support for any racist, xenophobic or thugish opinion or having expressed one himself. If you can't, then stop flogging a dead horse.
The Godless Monster wrote:
"Between that and his own extremist agenda, I can only assume that he is in paid service to a foreign entity with a strategic interest in seeing right-wing Christian fundamentalists take over the U.S. There's only one country in the world that would benefit from such a takeover. Do the math."
Such conspiracy paranoia makes me think you are an Iranian working at the "Counter-Zionist-Squirrels" department.
"Anonymous" spewed,
"People have been trying to discredit Spencer with the "guilt-by-association" tactic for years."
I guess you'd know, now wouldn't you?
Who or what you are is rather transparent, despite the fact that you hide behind "Anonymous".
Not impressed and certainly not convinced.
In regards to this idiotic gem, "please quote Spencer giving support for any racist, xenophobic or thugish opinion or having expressed one himself.", that's equivalent to asking me to quote Hitler saying something anti-Semitic. Give me a break. Nobody except the extreme right takes Spencer seriously. He's a bigoted religious extremist at best, a paid Zionist toady at worst.
Neat, GM. You Godwin yourself and you cannot even quote it, and then decide to make it that he is in the pay of - who else? - those evil, sinister Jews. Sorry "Zionists".
I think we're seeing the true colours of Namazie's racket. She's against Islamic barbarism - when she and her movement are the target. The rest of us can go hang.
Anony-mouse,
You know, I wouldn't have an issue with you and your fellow Spencerites if it wasn't for the fact that you have an either-or false dichotomy set up. You see, in your mind, it's not enough for one to be anti-Islam, one must ALSO be pro-Israel or it isn't legit. I call bullshit on that idiotic position.
It is indeed possible to see the Zionist agenda as evil and Islam (not just Islamic fundamentalists but ISLAM period) as evil.
If you check my blog, you'll see that I've given Muslims no quarter and much of my family is Muslim. In fact, I've been sharply criticized by the left for coming down so hard on Islam.
By the way...how much money did YOU donate to Geert Wilder's defense last year? I donated $100 out of my own pocket. I've since changed my stance on both him and Spencer, but you cannot say that I dismissed either of them out of hand. By making allegiance to Israel a necessary part of your anti-Islamic fundamentalist agenda, you detract from your overall argument and destroy your credibility with anyone in possession of more than three firing neural synapses upstairs.
Also, don't even try to paint me as being anti-Jewish. I've got issues with Zionism, Zionists and the extreme right political machine within the state of Israel. I also have issues with other extremist, racist and nasty ideologies elsewhere. Zionist bigots don't get a special pass just because they're Jews.
Right, you're not anti-Jewish, just against those Jews who run sinister conspiracies and bribe people to support their agenda. Fine, good.
Yes, I'm sure you're telling the truth and it is only complete oversight that your silly blog contains zero hits for "Geert Wilders" and zero hits for "Ayaan Hirsi Ali" and zero hits for "Ibn Warraq" and so on and so on.
Nice for pretending. Go back home to your imaginary girlfriend/boyfriend.
There's more than one anonymous on this thread. Well, my response is as follows:
If you are aware of the extent and nature of the Islamic menace, how can you seriously claim to be against the Jihad while rubbishing one of its fiercest opponents? Similarly, how can you seriously claim to be surprised at being accused of anti-Semitism when you start spreading dark nonsense about people being paid agents of the Zionist entity? Do you really have no idea what you sound like?
Now, I checked out your comments history on JihadWatch. Yes, you've hung around for two months and are now throwing a tantrum because they were mean to you. Booh-hoo. What you have not seen is the endless filth that's been thrown at Spencer for the last seven years, minimum, the back-stabbing and vilification, not to mention the threat of murder. That has, understandably, lead him to harden his views somewhat.
@Anonymous (the adult one),
"If you are aware of the extent and nature of the Islamic menace, how can you seriously claim to be against the Jihad while rubbishing one of its fiercest opponents?"
As I stated before, it's possible to find both parties equally reprehensible. For example, being a rabid anti-communist, one might dislike both China and Vietnam, even when China launched attacks against Vietnam over territorial disputes. What about the Nazi invasion of Russia in WW2? Just because I'm a staunch anti-communist does not mean that I would suddenly become enamored of the Nazis because they sought to destroy the Soviet Union! I happen to not subscribe to the old "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" bullshit. It's overly simplistic and does not involve any serious thought or consideration to the complexity of these situations. Like it or not, there are no easy answers to life's problems. Grabbing at simple answers to complex problems merely exacerbates them.
Okay, that has some way to rise before it reaches the level of the trivial. If one takes this at face value, it means that Robert Spencer, who has never harmed a fly, is on a part with the women-enslaving, Jew hating, racist, fundamentalist, genocidal nutcases he's against.
Then there's the converse case. Maryam Namazie is a confessed supporter of Communism, and we know what that means in practice. So no matter which way you look at it, your point's do not come out oka.
Post a Comment