Sunday, August 09, 2009
I guess the house isn’t on fire yet.
Yesterday, Robert Spencer posted an article with this arresting title:
Demographic time bomb: millions of Muslim immigrants will change Europe beyond recognition, and almost no policymakers are talking about it
And here was Spencer’s editorial remark:
“And those who are talking about it are smeared and vilified as racists and bigots. When a nuclear-powered Islamic Republic of France threatens the U.S., however, some Americans may come to regret the ease with which they swallowed and even propagated defamation and lies about anti-jihad European politicians such as Geert Wilders.”
Now here is what Spencer has had to say about nine months ago in a Jihad Watch comments field about another valiant political party in Europe, Vlaams Belang (VB), fighting against jihad in Europe:
I should also add, by way of summation, that I am not going to endorse the VB either, whatever I find out about them and whatever they do or don’t do. I am not going to endorse the VB any more than I would endorse the Republican Party, or Democratic Party, or any other party. I am not interested in endorsing parties, I am interested in resisting Islamic supremacism.
Well, Mr. Spencer, one good way to resist Islamic supremacism is to endorse VB. And one doesn’t have to “endorse” it in the sophistical way you are implying, by becoming a card-carrying member of it and volunteering at the campaign office on Saturdays. One endorses VB by standing up and supporting them in their valiant fight against jihad; something, apparently, which Spencer cannot bear to do, out of fear of being called a “racist” or a “fascist” perhaps.
At any rate, Spencer already indicated in that same comments thread that he knows how to differentiate between the red herring of “endorsing” a “political party” and simply supporting Vlaams Belang for their valiant efforts to fight jihad in Europe—when a commenter “UsorThem” asked him point-blank:
It would be nice to see a reasoned debate about whether VB merits our support and should be avoided. Where's the beef?
And Spencer replied:
I answered your question here [then provided a link to another previous comment]. My answer was this: “I am still looking into the matter, and find it appalling to be demonized and vilified by Charles for this.” There are some things I want to find out on my own. I’m not going to apologize for wanting to do this, or snap to anyone’s ideological lockstep in the meantime.
Well, it’s nine months later. Has enough time gone by for Spencer to “look into the matter”? To date, I have seen nary a peep on him regarding this most urgent matter. What I did see, yesterday, was an urgent article about the Islamicization of Europe and Spencer’s editorial remark about the possibility of Muslims in the not-too-distant future gaining sufficient control of, say, France, with its nuclear capabilities. Rightfully, Spencer adduced the vilification of Geert Wilders by the mainstream as one unconscionable display of wrong priorities in this most urgent situation in which our house, the “House of War” (the Dar-al-Harb, as Islam sees all lands that have not yet succumbed to Islamic domination) finds itself. Now what about Vlaams Belang?
I guess for Spencer the house isn’t quite on fire yet. When will it be? And when he and others like him finally deem it to be on fire, will it be too late?
We’re all racists—except when we’re not