Current Affairs

Robert Spencer is angry at Freedom (again)

For over a year, Robert Spencer has been furiously writing and covering the Arab Spring, enraged that his beloved secular dictators were being overthrown one by one, to be replaced by Islamic parties through free and fair elections.

Spencer is at it again, this time complaining about Libya, where reports suggest that after the free and fair elections, it will be the Muslim Brotherhood that will be given the authority to lead the government, in a negotiated political settlement.

Spencer bemoans all of this writing:

Obama has enabled Muslim Brotherhood governments in Egypt, Tunisia and now Libya, as well as soon in Syria. But it’s just a coincidence, doncha know, just the natural workings of democracy, nothing to be concerned about

Yes, Robert, it is the natural workings of democracy, incase you missed it, the governments coming into power in Egypt and Tunis, were voted into power by the people, in free and fair elections, the first and free elections those countries have seen in decades. Notice the hypocrisy of Spencer, he sarcastically writes that this is the natural workings of democracy, his sarcastic tone is obviously meant to show the opposite, and are his attempts at trying to undermine the democracy at play.

Spencer is displaying what many were already aware of with the Neocon-Islamophobe groupings, that they don’t really believe in the concepts of freedom, or democracy, and that they use these words for rhetoric only. When Neocons like Spencer talk about democracy, what they really mean is a democracy they like, and a democracy they want. If it’s a democracy they don’t like, they will not accept it, nor will they acknowledge it is an actual democracy. In other words, Spencer want’s an imposed democracy, which in reality is not a real democracy, but merely fascism cloaked under the name of freedom.

You see the irony is that Robert Spencer and his ilk, are the very same thing they constantly preach against, it is Robert Spencer that believes in a totalitarian ideology, it is him who seeks to impose a democracy that is to his liking, a democracy that will fulfill his agendas.

Spencer also displays his complete totalitarian ideology when he claims that Obama enabled what happened in Egypt and Tunis, excuse me, but how exactly did Obama enable anything in those countries? What Robert is trying to get at, is sentiments that were echoed by Pamela Geller when she wrote the following:

Mubarak has been a US ally for decades. We send three billion dollars a year to Egypt. And Egypt made a peace deal with Israel. But knowing Obama, he will throw another ally under the bus.

Robert and his Islamophobic circle, were very displeased with the actions of the Obama administration, in their eyes, Obama didn’t do enough to help their dictator, Mubarak.

But do notice what Geller has to say about Mubarak, he is an ally, and he should be helped, even though he was a clear dictator. And more to the point, Geller wrote this when Egyptians were protesting on the streets, trying to gain their freedom, and these sentiments are shared by Robert Spencer as well, Spencer fully supported and backed Geller as she was making such statements.

More disturbing to think about is what exactly did Spencer and Geller want from the Obama admin? What would they have liked them to do for Mubarak? Get involved directly? Send more weapons and equipment to put the protests down? The answer is quite obvious, and this is precisely what Robert Spencer would have liked to have seen, in the world of Islamophobes, their hope was to see the dictatorship survive, in place of a people’s revolution for freedom.

In conclusion, Spencer does not support freedom, rather he is the totalitarian threat that he often complains about, and he has displayed this time and time again with the emergence of the Arab Spring. There is light at the end of the tunnel though, a reality is taking place on the ground, a reality in which people are freely voting for governments they want to represent them, and that is the greatest blow to Spencer.

Viva La Freedom!

3 replies »

  1. The problem with Spencer is, he would rather see a Military Dictatorship in Egypt that the Muslim Brotherhood.

  2. America, supporting the revolutionaries of the Arab Spring in their desire to have democratically elected governments. Is this American foreign policy in regards to Muslims and Muslim countries the “logical and political reasoning behind the anger and extremism” of homegrown radicalised Muslims?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s