Header Image (book)


Friday, July 6, 2012

This Week On The Gathering Storm

Our scheduled guest this week is Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch.

The Gathering Storm, co-hosted by WC and yours truly, broadcasts for 30 minutes every Friday beginning at noon Pacific Time.

The call-in number is 646-915-9870. Callers welcome!

We will be discussing Did Muhammad Exist?, Mr. Spencer's latest book.

Listen to the July 6, 2012 edition of The Gathering Storm Radio Show, live or later, by CLICKING HERE.


  1. Think that Obama is not a Marxist?
    How about the facts ? Nothing but the facts!
    Obama's father was a Harvard graduate, a self professed Communist who was perfectly fine with the government confiscating 100% of your income as long as it went to the better good of the people.

    Obama admitted to seeking out communist professors while he was at Harvard. Obama started this whole "Communist sloganed" re-election campaign on May 5th, the birthday of Karl Marx ....

    And, you guys want to believe this was unintentional or coincidental?

    Was "Fast & Furious" unintentional or coincidental? Is that why Eric Holder refuses to testify about it and is now facing contempt charges?

    Everything Obama does it very well thought out and calculated with a motive ..
    Voted for TARP
    *$787 billion stimulus redistribution bill
    *Healthcare bill admittedly about ‘redistributing the wealth’
    *Single Payer Healthcare proponent.
    *President Obama now also President of GM & Chrysler
    *President Obama seizes control of insurance giant AIG
    *President Obama is leading America to single payer healthcare
    *President Obama seized control of Student Loan industry in order to ‘cut out middle man’
    *President Obama seizes control in massive land grabs
    *Repeatedly vilifies ‘the rich’
    *Obama believes race problems can be solved through redistribution of wealth… he said "race is still an enormous factor in our society. But economics can overcome a lot of racial division."
    *Trying to regulate the Internet via FCC
    *Forces mortgage co’s to cover people who aren’t paying mortgage (Link)
    *Extends unemployment benefits to 99 weeks (Link)
    *Told Joe the plumber ‘it’s better when you spread things around.
    And how about his Friends & family..
    Ever hear the term Guilty by Association?
    Family, Friends, Advisors & Administration
    *Wife Michelle Obama said “The truth is, in order to get things like universal health care and a revamped education system, then someone is going to have to give up a piece of their pie so that someone else can have more.”
    *Jim Wallis, Obama’s spiritual advisor & forced redistribution of wealth advocate
    *Van Jones, disgraced Green Jobs Czar & Communist
    *Ron Bloom, Manufacturing Czar & anti-free market
    *John Holdren, pro-redistribution of wealth
    *Andy Stern, SEIU President & redistribution of wealth fan
    *Anita Dunn, fan of Chairman Mao
    *Mark Lloyd, FCC ‘Diversity Czar’
    *Carol Browner, socialist
    *Robert Creamer, socialist
    *Admittedly sought out ‘Marxist’ professors!
    *Admittedly attended ‘socialist conferences!
    *Began attending a Marxist church – led by pastor Jeremiah Wright (attended for 20 years)!!!
    Left Hawaii for Indonesia, Pakistan a very unusual thing to do, don’t you think?
    *Attended a leftist church nicknamed the ‘little red church’ because of its Communist sympathies
    His OWN Mother was a Communist sympathizer!
    Now you non-brain-dead will be able to draw your own conclusions from the facts. As for you BRAIN-DEAD Moonies, I’m not even going to try to change your minds, you are too far gone in the Brain-Washed department for that!

  2. That's awesome! Congrats on landing such a big one for your show!

  3. I'm surprised Spencer is not in hiding and that there is not a new Fatwa out against him as a result of this book.

    Right Truth

  4. Mrs. AOW has interviewed Mr. Spencer several times. The first time, she was crazy nervous. But she isn't now. They worked on a Pheonix show together several times.

    I can't get the show in my iPad. But Mrs. AOW will let me use her laptop to listen to the show live!

  5. Mr. AOW, I used to love to comment while the show was going on, but I did something wrong and now I can't get into it :-(
    I usually work on Fridays but hope to listen today...
    have fun!

  6. I just got off of work and can't wait to catch the podcast!

    Mr. AOW, can you get the podcast from ITunes and sync it to your iPad? That's how I often listen while doing housework.

  7. I would be embarassed to have any connection to such a hack and con-artist as Robert Spencer.

    Let us look at his credentials.

    1. He is paid to push hate by Horrowitz.
    2. He sells books for profit amongst the small fringe anti-Islam community and thus tells them what they want to here.
    3. He claims to be an academic and specialist on Islam but yet he is not qualified on the subject and academia has rejected him constantly.
    4. He claims to have advised government and in fact he did not, he attended a conference only.
    5. Similarly, he claims to be invited by Universities and "speaks at Colleges" and yet no University or College has ever invited him, it happens that the venues at these institutions are open to student groups to use.
    6. His arguments are based on quoting Islamic texts. Apart from them being simple cut & pastes he bases his arguments that all Muslims must be puritanical.
    7. When his arguments started to falter he changed tactics and now (and very ironically) supports that Salafism and Wahhabism (that faction that most terrorists are from) is the only real Islam and that all the others (ie 90 per cent of Muslims) must be not serious or "bad Muslims".
    8. If you point that out, your post will be deleted from JihadWatch and your IP address blocked so you cannot post again.
    9. Spencer sells to the same group, deals within the same group and is friends alone with the same group. You would expect that if there was value with his argument that somebody in mainstream USA or another country would take him seriously....
    10, lastly, his main finances comes from Horrowitz whom pushes anything anti-Islam to demonize as much as possible so that his main project of sponsoring land-grabbing Settlers looks less evil.

    I think scum would be more appropriate a title for this hate-for-profiteer.

    Damien Charles

  8. Damien Charles,
    I knew that I could count on you to rant in the comments section to this post.

    We've been over this same ground before.

    Your comment will stand -- and let's leave things that way.

    You've stated your views.

    Believe as you choose.

  9. AOW, I will make no more comment as my view is clear. However, as for fairness I will add the following texts that are not my views but clearly point out what is the obvious:

    Former [Richard Nixon] advisor Robert Crane writes that Spencer ignores "centuries of interpretive tradition" and "the wealth of classical Islamic scholarship on both the inner and outer meaning of the Quran and on the hadith that reflect this wisdom. . . Spencer's readers are carefully steered away from all contact with the Islamic interpretative tradition, which equals or exceeds that of any other religion, because any scholarly knowledge about Islam would expose all his extremist interpretations to ridicule."

    Crane says that Spencer is “the principal leader… in the new academic field of Islam bashing."

    Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting (FAIR) ranked Robert Spencer as the second leading Islamophobe in the country, just behind Spencer's boss and financier, neo-conservative David Horowitz (ex-Marxist). The David Horowitz Freedom Center funds Spencer's JihadWatch website, Spencer is a columnist for Horowitz' FrontPage Magazine and Human Events, and Spencer has written several monographs for the Center.

    He consistently forwards conspiracy theories about “Stealth Jihad,” “Eurabia,” genocide in Bosnia never occurring or being exaggerated, eminent “Islamization of America,” and the infiltration of Congress by “Muslim spy interns.”

    Homeland Security has dubbed the “rise in right-wing extremism” since the election of Barack Obama to the presidency. For Robert Spencer this all boils down to a “Crusade against Islam,” a religion that he views as the “chief rival” to Catholicism, that is “incomplete,” “misleading” “downright false,” and a “threat to the peace and well-being of the Western world.” - Robert Steinback, 10 of America's Most Dangerous Hatemongers


    Who are the publishing firms that publish Spencer's works? Who funds them? Who supports his work? Some information on these patrons is given below (the numbers refer to the citations of the organizations marked in bold in the paragraph above). This information is significant because these books are not scholarly, and they do not pass the review of blind refereed evaluation practiced by university presses. They are instead supported by specific political and ideological interests through think-tanks and private foundations. They need to be evaluated differently from scholarly studies, since their agenda does not have to do with the scholarly goals of the humanities and the social sciences. In particular, the lectures given by authors such as Spencer on college campuses may be misunderstood as being equivalent to scholarly research. While it certainly may be acknowledged that scholarship has political implications, independent research needs to be distinguished from hired polemics.

    The publications of Spencer belong to the class of Islamophobic extremism that is promoted and supported by right-wing organizations, who are perpetuating a type of bigotry similar to anti-Semitism and racial prejudice. They are to be viewed with great suspicion by anyone who wishes to find reliable and scholarly information on the subject of Islam. I make these remarks because Spencer was invited to speak at UNC-Chapel Hill in the spring of 2004; I shared these observations with UNC students at the time to indicate that his views have no basis in scholarship (he has no academic training in Islamic studies whatever; his M.A. degree was in the field of early Christianity).
    - "Notes on the Ideological Patrons of an Islamophobe, Robert Spencer"
    by Carl W. Ernst
    William R. Kenan, Jr., Distinguished Professor of Religious Studies
    and Director of the Carolina Center for the Study of the Middle East and Muslim Civilizations
    University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill

  10. Damien,

    Would you care explicate your views on Israel and the Jewish people in general? I imagine your insights and opinions would be fascinating. I'd like to hear them.

    Please, go ahead. I'm all ears.

    ~ FreeThinke

  11. FT,

    look on Sam's post about Iran.

    apart from that, what is your point and why do you raise it?


  12. I frequently visit you AOW- I want to thank you so much for your post on Caesar Rodney -
    and congratulate you on being able to wear your 'little black dress' again!

  13. Brooke,
    I need to find out what you mean by syncing iTunes with the iPad. How does one do that?

    You have my phone number, I think.

  14. CS,

    It's almost time to stop the reducing phase. I consult with my food coach today.

  15. AOW: My work schedule this weekend is crazy-busy. We had a few call-offs, so I picked up hours. Yay for my paycheck. ;)

    I will try to call you Sunday night, or Monday afternoon, if that's OK.

  16. Damien Charles,
    I retrieved your second comment from the spam folder.

  17. Brooke,
    Sunday night is fine.

    Monday I should be home by 3:00 P.M.

    The iPad is an iPad 2, but the OS is not upgraded. Yet.

  18. Although Robert Spencer is often associated with conservatism, he used to write for a Communist publication.

    I can say the same about David Horowitz. Hence, there is another common bond between those two.

    Before Jihad Watch, Robert Spencer wrote reviews for a jazz magazine. He himself was a saxophonist.

    His educational background shows a degree in comparative religions. He is a Melkite Greek Catholic (I hope that I have that term correct).

    BTW, toward the end of yesterday's interview, Mr. Spencer and I discussed the labels that have been hurled at both of us.

  19. Would you care explicate your views on Israel and the Jewish people in general?

    What does that have to do with the pig Spencer?

    Are you so far in the bag, FT, that you accept this stiff's scholarship ?

    You have to pass a Likud loyalty test to criticize this scum?

  20. @This maddening World....wonderful list of useful facts that should be shown during the upcoming November election.

    It's amazing how much we forget about what is truly happening by our politicians.

    You need to read a book out that's a thriller & shows current events cause the times are changing. I've been recommending to everyone.


    With only a 7% approvaling rating by Americans, the congress continues to ignore the very people they are suppose to represent and do as they please. It's just wrong.

  21. I'd accept Spencer's scholarship before I'd accept YOUR " in the bag for Pseudostine" scholarship, duckman.

  22. The problem is Republicans talk conservatism and then at the first negative article or criticism they crumble. Getting them to do anything is like nailing jello to a tree.

    As for them bringing up all the unConstitutional things done by Obama, good luck. They are afraid.

    This election should be a slam dunk in a sane world but with friends like the Republicans on our side we need to pray. pray they grow a spine, pray they grow conviction in their beliefs, pray they arent on the list of Congress folks who took VIP from Countrywide.

    I believe the public is giving a 7% not for what they have done but rather the fact they do nothing....

  23. Awesome! I'll have to check out your show sometime soon. Although I work on Fridays so I probably will have to settle for listening to the recorded version.

  24. IQ al Rassooli

    You may be Iraqi, it matters not as ultimately there are four very simple reasons that your argument is of no value.

    1. Your opinion of Islam is your own and not of the 1.25 billion Muslims.
    2. Your arguments, as are Spencer's is based on the assumptions that:
    a. only the ultra-conservatives, radicals, salafi, wahabi (etc) are the only version of Islam.
    b. that quoting the Quran for your own purposes equates to those followed, aspired or intepreted by the 1.25 billion others.
    c. that cutting & pasting examples somehow represents an entirety.
    3. That somehow you know better and that it somehow represents the total when it only represents, again, your own view - which frankly makes your own standing very questionable simply because you may have experienced a bad life in Iraq or wherever, but it most cerainly has no baring or equates ot reality of people in North Africa, SE Asia and in fact most of the 56 Muslim countries.
    4. and lastly, that you are an ex-Muslim whom posts, profits and attacks Islam puts you immediately out of the argument as you have an invested interest in the matter. In both a legal and moral sense, your arguments cannot be trusted as much as the ex-Christian Muslim converts working for Al Qaeda who also "tell you so".

    I have read your arguments, your a good writer but simply put, your a profiteer that has no relations to the reality on the ground.

    Personally, I do not care if your an ex-Muslim or an ex-scientoligist, it does not bother me. What annoys me is those that deliberately put things out of context and profit from it, avoid the reality and claim to know everything when all you have to do is go and look. IE you count on the ignorance of those that you sell to.

    As a lawyer (barrister in my language) that specialises in social justice now for over 30 years and regularly travel to North Africa, the Lebanon, Turkey and Jordan as well as twice a year to Malaysia - not only in tourist traps but to the homes of my colleagues in those countries - I see how p*ss-poor your arguments are because it does not represent the reality on the ground or the aspiration of the average Muslim.

    As with most matters of faith, the theologics is up to interpretation and you take one line and thousands of "challanges" is a waste of effort. Quoting scriptures is equally so and it comes down to what you - the ex-Muslim who sells his attacks for profit and the 1.25 billion Muslims whom the vast majority simply love God, strive to be good and wish to make a living.

    Your a waste of space.

    Damien Charles

  25. IQ al Rassooli,

    I will also add how foolish is an argument that everything I say about Spencer is a lie because - get this: "I am an Iraqi", as if that is a justification.

    Simply put in my point 4. above, you have a vested interest and thus your arguments are tainted.


  26. Damien Charles to IQ al Rassooli:

    Your [sic] a waste of space.

    Tell you what? IQ is the scheduled guest for Friday, July 13. Why don't you phone in and challenge him?

    646-915-9870 [long distance to the United States]

    The show airs at 3:00 P.M., Eastern Daylight Time (NYC time).

    IQ welcomes challengers!

    He typically is on the show every 2nd and 4th Friday every month.

    Caveat: The show is on the air for only 30 minutes. We cannot add more time as per Blog Talk Radio's parameters.

  27. AOW, if DC actually calls into The Gathering Storm, I'll send you a wonderful can of Cincinnati's own Skyline Chili.

    It'll never happen. But I'll send you the chili anyway, if you'd like. :)

    Also, I find it hilarious that the condescending Mr.-Know-It-All can't figure out the difference between your and you're. I bet he messes up on their, they're, there, and writes alot, as well. Oh, see this and this for a chuckle.

  28. Brooke,
    I want that can of chili! I think that you have my mailing address. If not, let me know.

  29. Brooke,
    Those two sites are hilarious!

    I've bookmarked them.

  30. AOW,

    As I pointed out, the fool is a waste of space. Like Spencer he will argue that his contextually abused comments are somehow stand alone evidence of a whole and thus any argument goes around in circles and become pointless.

    That is the entire point of such absurd claims of being somehow undefeated in debate - by harping on half-facts as independant proof of a total, such as a cut & paste quote of scriptures, interpreting them in the radical way and when questioned respond only by saying "but it is a real quote". Doing so in a legal document is considered falsification and in financial terms fraud and it is both in a moral sense as well.

    Such a debate would go around in circles because the claim that Islam is this and that because of this or that quote or event and I would respond with countless examples of how what is claimed being totally devoid in the average lives of Muslims and of course the response would fall to "prove me wrong" because of the above mentioned fraud. At best it comes down to the view of a few fringe-dwellers whom profiteer from their claims against the overwhelming majority of Muslims whom are nothing like that actual claim.

    Additionally, I would not give a profiteer the respect of my presence, especially when their basis is on a pointless "prove me wrong" basis.

    Be real AOW, look at that original post, .... I am a .... I offered a million dollars to prove me wrong... I must know because I am an Iraqi... .

    I have seen used car salesman and snake-oil salesmen pushing the same BS and more successfully. If we based the above joke with seriousness, would not that person be better known than just within the same old Spencer/Fitzherald/Geller/Wilders blog circle that we all know is simply the Horrowitz hate campaigners.

    Just do yourself one favour of self-respect - ask in your radio show "if all these claims actually represents the life of the averge Muslim around the world and are they not also faithful Muslims?"

    By default, that person will have to say yes to backup their claim or say that the bulk of Muslims in the world either are not good Muslims are are not serious about their faith. In otherwords the Spencer excuse.

    Then you respond that so the bulk of the Muslims do not go to Mosques in their countries, do not pray the same and do not read the Quran correctly (unlike you and Spencer).

    Be sure you will get a side-step a squirm and a change of subject. Spencer was caught out five times, once by me and each time the postings somehow vanished.....

    Damien Charles

  31. Brooke

    your contribution to this discussion is typically overwhelming as per usual. Thank you for all your wonderul add ins, arguments and debate.

    Sheeeesh, another armchair clown.

    I do not have explain myself and my eyesight issues to another waste-of-effort gassbag whom considers the bloggosphere to be representative of life itself.

    Go out and get some fresh air.

    Damien Charles

  32. AOW, allow me to provide the crib-notes of what Damien Charles wrote (above). He cannot defend his point of view; don’t hold your breath waiting for him to call in.

    This causes one to wonder about the sort of legal professional who fears debate. The notion is rhetorical: the kind of legal professional who knows he’s incompetent and cannot win. We can expect this sort of person to evolve into a blog lurker, or a radical Imam, perhaps.

  33. Sam,

    do not waste your time on attempting to put logic into an argument. Remember, you are the one that believes in conspiracy theories, crop circles and that somehow with an entire world's intelligence/legal/political services that somehow your president is an Islamic spy.

    I have made my point clear enough. Arguing to somebody that provides an argument based on cut & paste, innuendo, butchered context and personal hatred (especially when they profit from it) is a total waste of time.

    Additionally, which trashes your argument on the legal side, I would love to argue such a case in a legal environment simply because your friend would avoid it like the plague. A judge, for start, would throw out arguments that are based on heresay and opinion and look to three facits only:

    1. Facts based on context.
    2. Independance of evidence - ie, not based on or gathered by those with a bais, and lastly and most importantly
    3. A bases of argument.

    All three would fail instantly as there will be no facts nor context. The person is a profiteer who uses their "ex-Muslim" status and thus cannot be considered credible. Lastly, the basis behind the argument is not only contrary to logic but fails in every element of social justice and in most countries would be considered itself either a hate-crime, racism or bigotry.

    The power of blogs and citizen radio is that you can hide from justice and truth.

    Damien Charles

  34. DC: Oooh. LOL!

    I still contend you won't call in. You won't dare take on IQ, and you know why not; you'll be nuked from orbit!

    Oh, and AOW, I will pick up a can on my next trip to the market and get it out to you. I do have your addy.

    In order to have proper Cinci chili, you have to make spaghetti until it is a bit soft and put it in a bowl or deep plate, dollop the chili over the pasta and then top generously with mild shredded cheddar cheese.

    That's called a three-way around here, and I think this is the only city in which you can request one and not get a shocked look. ;)

    If you'd like a four or five way, you can add onions or beans or both... But I'd recommend the 3. :) We also get oyster crackers and soak up the chili remnants.

  35. Brooke,

    Mr. AOW loves all kinds of pasta. I'll give that recipe a try!

  36. Damien Charles,
    Such a debate would go around in circles...

    Additionally, I would not give a profiteer the respect of my presence....

    Well, suit yourself.

    For an attorney, you certainly are reticent to engage in a debate, albeit a short one because of BTR's imposed time restraints. I find your reticence interesting in and of itself -- particularly as you have claimed to have "shown up" Robert Spencer at least once.

  37. Sam,
    I saw Damien Charles's response yesterday evening -- and your crib notes as well. Your pithy crib notes are spot on, and I really have no need to reply to DC.

    Of course, being a woman, I did reply today. **wink**


We welcome civil dialogue at Always on Watch. Comments that include any of the following are subject to deletion:
1. Any use of profanity or abusive language
2. Off topic comments and spam
3. Use of personal invective

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.