In this morning’s live-blogging report on Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff’s “hate speech” trial in Austria, we mentioned that Robert Spencer was one of the potential expert witnesses who might be called when the trial resumes in January. Elisabeth herself also mentioned Mr. Spencer’s offer of help during her interview last week in the New English Review, excerpts from which were reposted here.That appears to have changed: Elisabeth says Mr. Spencer has withdrawn his offer of assistance as an expert witness. While this news is dismaying, it is fortunate that Prof. Hans Jansen and Wafa Sultan are both still willing to appear on her behalf. Professor Jansen is Dutch, and assisted Geert Wilders at the latter’s recent trial. Prof. Jansen is one of the foremost Arabists in the world. Wafa Sultan, originally from Syria but now living in America, is a Muslim apostate. She is a psychiatrist specializing in the tyranny of the theological and political ramifications of Islam.
In other words, Elisabeth has excellent, expert witnesses who can stand by her during the coming ordeal of her trial. Nonetheless, the absence of Mr. Spencer is a keenly felt setback. No one can take Mr. Spencer’s place when it comes to speaking eloquently about the danger of Islam.
I have been privileged to hear Mr. Spencer speak twice, both times in October 2007. The first occasion was in Antwerp, where he gave a talk to a gathering of Vlaams Belang members. His presentation impressed everyone. He spoke again two days later at the Counterjihad Brussels conference. Both lectures were lucid and inspiring.
Mr. Spencer’s work, his wisdom, and his ability to respond to those who promote Islam as a “Religion of Peace” have earned him a unique place as a leader in the Counterjihad. Come January, his knowledge and eloquence will be sorely missed in Vienna.
14 comments:
I wonder who will be left to speak for Spencer when they come for him?
I wonder why he changed his mind? This doesn't sound like him.
Thrasymachus: I wonder who will be left to speak for Spencer when they come for him?
Touché! Spencer and others of the counter-jihad's aristocracy had best begin to reconsider their disdain for getting down into the trenches with poor blighters like Elisabeth. Far too much is at stake to be overly selective about one's photo ops and other such PR drivel.
We have all had our call to arms and those who even occasionally turn a deaf ear do none of us any favors.
Richard, I was wondering the same thing.
Spencer's aligned himself with Pamela Geller. When Ms. Geller heard of the original article by Jerry Gordon, which said that Sabaditsch-Woff had asked for help from Spencer but had received none, Geller opined, 'How horrible. Robert and I brought her to America to speak. Paid for everything and he (we) recently posted about her. We introduced het [sic] to America- what an ingrate. Never again.'
Now Spencer has withdrawn his offer to help Sabaditsch-Wolff. Makes you wonder who he's been speaking to, doesn't it? And what they've been saying to him.
Meanwhile, the top post of Geller's blog is a video of the 'Annie Taylor Award Presentation to Pamela Geller'. Beneath the video she writes 'Last Friday night, I received the Annie Taylor award. It was the culmination of years of work that defines me - defense of freedom.'
Geller now signs her emails: 'Yours in liberty, Pamela Geller
Editor, Publisher Atlas Shrugs
Executive Director, FDI/SIOA
Author The Post-American Presidency, the Obama Administration's War on America'
One can't help wondering what Ms. Geller's priorities are nowadays.
Spencer in thrall to Pamela Geller's! Who'd a thunk it?
Maybe Frau Geller is jealous of Frau Sabaditsch-Wolff...
Ms. Geller certainly seems to have something of an ego. We all do to some extent of course, but the question is always whether it's getting in the way of doing the right thing.
It does seem strange that Ms. Geller seemed more interested in her having paid for Ms. Sabaditsch-Wolff to visit America than Ms. Sabaditsch-Wolff being prosecuted for speaking her mind.
Especially when Ms. Geller claims in her blog that the fight for freedom is what defines her.
I commented on Pamela Geller's blog noting that the owner was happy to have posts on there about her receiving an award for fighting for freedom, which apparently defines her.
Yet she and Robert Spencer were refusing to help Ms. Sabaditch-Wolff; Spencer won't help her at her trial, and there are no posts on 'Atlas Shrugs' about Ms. Sabaditch-Wolff's trial.
I wondered why Ms. Geller's idea of 'fighting for freedom' doesn't include helping Ms. Sabaditch-Wolff? Perhaps it's because Ms. Sabaditch-Wolff doesn't bow down at the altar of Geller and tell everybody she meets how wonderful and courageous Ms. Geller is.
The comment was deleted. What a surprise. Ms. Geller's ego appears to have gotten the better of her. How sad.
Unfortunately, we are forced to speculate why Spencer does this, that and the other thing; since he seems to think he owes no explanations about his anti-Islam behavior. Thus, "al" above could be correct, or my hypothesis -- that Spencer has learned some tidbits of rumors that Sabadistch-Wolff might have said or done things in the past that would render her an untouchable "fascist" or "racist" and thus -- even though such rumors would be unconscionably scurrilous, Spencer decides it's in the best interest of the Spencer-Geller Corporation to distance himself from Sabaditsch-Wolff.
http://hesperado.blogspot.com/
Hesperado: Thus, "al" above could be correct, or my hypothesis -- that Spencer has learned some tidbits of rumors that Sabadistch-Wolff might have said or done things in the past that would render her an untouchable "fascist" or "racist" and thus -- even though such rumors would be unconscionably scurrilous, Spencer decides it's in the best interest of the Spencer-Geller Corporation to distance himself from Sabaditsch-Wolff.
I have met Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff personally and, besides being fiercely protective of her delightful young daughter with regard to that child ever living under shari'a law, she did not exhibit one iota of unreasonable opposition to Islam. There was no hint of racism or bigotry, just a dread and growing alarm over the Islamization of Austria not to mention Europe in general.
Regrettable as it may be, it appears as though Spencer and Geller are picking their particular appearances with an eye more towards personal prestige than efficacy in combating Islam. I hesitate to go further with accusations of influence mongering but the entire kerrufle with Vlad's Allen West video going viral along with subsequent evasiveness and lack of clarity about its removal from YouTube was confusing, to say the least. That said, having been privy to some of the backchannel exchanges about the incident, much of what I witnessed transmited a distinctly mixed message with respect to the unwavering unity required in our struggle against Islam.
Spencer's own comments at Gates of Vienna about this incident were not conducive to the sort of open discussion and conciliation that is so badly needed within the counter-jihad community. His withdrawal from testifying upon Elisibeth's behalf only serves to cement this impression.
Yes it does seem rather off, for Ms. Geller to be more concerned about the fact that she had paid for Ms. Sabaditch-Wolff to visit the States than Ms. Sabaditch-Wolff being prosecuted for speaking about Islam. According to Ms. Geller the fact that Ms. Sabaditch-Wolff, when discussing her 'expert witnesses' during an interview, said that Robert Spencer had not offered to help her makes Ms. Sabaditch-Woff an 'ingrate'. I fear this says more about Ms. Geller than anyone else.
Post a Comment