Rearranging deck chairs on the H.M.S. Titanic...
HesperadoYes there is dire need for such a manual. However the grandees of the movement don't seem to want effective soldiers in the fight. They all seem to want to hog what little attention there is to be had for themselves. And when they aren't exposing Muslims they are purging posters from their blogs for all sorts of supposed violations/slights. One has to be very careful posting anything other than anti-Islamic rants. Veer into foreign policy and say the wrong thing and you're gone. The grandees certainly aren't big tent people nor what I would call populists.IMO with the current crop at the helm, the anti-Islam movement will continue to stay small and offer little resistance to Muslim encroachment.
Anonymous,I was going to mention in my essay the impression one gets about Robert Spencer, but I decided against it. Perhaps another day. The impression I refer to is the ostensible fact that he effectively benefits from the current situation where he's the (or one major among a very small select group) font of anti-Islam knowledge. As far as I can tell, his career is based on this; and if there were an AIM (Anti-Islam Manual) produced and widely disseminated, his role would diminish greatly. He'd still be a great debater, and his Jihad Watch would still be a great source, newsreel-wise, but frankly he's not a good book-writer (his prose is exceedingly boring and unnecessarily complicated), and the money he makes apparently derives largely from that (and perhaps also from speaking and consulting fees). (Latterly, I've noticed that in the past year, Jihad Watch has become a "cookie monster" and by now he must be making a tidy sum from sheer advertising and cookies that invade every computer user who visits the site.Meanwhile, I'm quite poor and nobody pays me for what I contribute.
I corresponded with Pamela Geller via email for a while a couple of years ago when she first started getting asked to be on TV.My impression based on my personal experience is that Pamela Geller wants to be the Queen Bee of the anti-jihad movement, and she is downright vicious if she feels that someone has crossed her - whether that person intended to harm her or not.For example, Pamela Geller had apparently paid for Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff to speak at an anti-jihad conference in the USA.As I understand events, after Austria later charged ESW with a hate crime, ESW gave her first interview to Gates of Vienna (I think).Well, as I remember it, Pamela Geller was incensed that ESW was so 'disloyal' as to fail to give Pamela Geller her first interview after Pamela Geller had paid her way to the USA in the past - with part of her personal money, natch.In my opinion, it seemed that Pamela Geller 'interpreted' the entire event to be about herself and her very emotional response - rather than either ESW and ESW's problems or the ultimate goals of the anti-jihad movement. It was remarkable - in a very bad way!As I recall, in a bizarre and surreal tit-for-tat spate of 'revenge' for an imagined harm, Pamela Geller omitted to blog about ESW's hate crime charge or trials on her website. That's when I began to stop reading her blog because I thought that Pamela Geller was extremely immature to omit to cover a very important anti-jihad news story with far-reaching implications.Then, Pamela Geller's erstwhile business 'partner', Robert Spencer was first supposed to testify as an expert witness for GSW; then, Spencer backed out seemingly because Pamela Geller was allegedly furious at GSW; then, Spencer publicly volunteered to testify for GSW again after he was roundly criticized for failing to help. In the end, ESW declined Spencer's help - probably because ESW thought Spencer was completely mean and unreliable which is how is seemed to me at the time.I have a few more other personal stories that prove my point, but my conclusion is that, first and foremost, Pamela Geller wants to be a celebrity.With that said, Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer still add to the base of anti-jihad information - although I never read Geller's blog anymore.Also, Pamela Geller is very brave to bear the horrible death threats that she receives from Muslims on a regular basis. I presume that Robert Spencer receives the same type of death threats, too, from Muslims who are biding their time until they can make good on the death threats.My sense is that neither Geller nor Spencer will ever lead an organized movement of people.Geller wanted to create an action type organization, but she quickly became afraid of the liability to her if someone became violent to Muslims. I completely understand her fear because I believe that Western governments would LOVE to infiltrate anti-jihad groups just to commit crimes that discredit name-brand leaders and prevent them from gaining more anti-jihad partners.Egghead
Yes, I recall that whole ESW saga; and it seems Spencer and Geller have quite a history doing similar things, burning bridges with various colleagues -- you might have seen my essays about the "Gentlemen's Club" in which I go into details about, for example, Andrew Bostom, Diana West, Debbie Schlussel. Also, there was an exchange I had here on my blog in the comments section with Baron Bodissey where he went on quite at length about Spencer in this regard; though he also, at the same time, basically said he could not go into too much concrete detail -- because, he strongly implied, he was actually afraid of what Spencer might do to him! (not physically, of course, but some other way that would "ruin" him; not sure exactly how, as he had to keep it vague). Weird, to say the least. If you never saw those comments and are interested, I'll try to find them for you.
Yes, Hesp, that thread would be interesting to read if you can find the link to it easily. :)Egghead
Post a Comment