Spencer, criticizing Johnson, submits to Johnson

(Note: See the long follow-up to this entry in which I attempt to get at the truth of what happened with Spencer and the Pro-Koln conference.)

Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller, both of whom, according to the German anti-Islamization group Pro-Cologne, had earlier accepted an invitation to attend Pro-Cologne’s meeting in Germany in May to protest the construction of a giant mosque in Cologne, have withdrawn from the conference.

The German anti-Islamization website, Politically Incorrect (see English translation below), says that the withdrawals were motivated by Charles Johnson’s attacks on Pro-Cologne as a fascist organization (discussed by me here). Indeed, what other reason could Spencer and Geller have had?

The upshot is that despite Spencer’s forceful criticisms of Johnson for posting faked photographs showing Filip Dewinter of Vlaams Belang and Markus Beisicht of Pro-Cologne standing in front of hooded fascist-looking figures (who were actually members of a leftist anti-Fascist group), Spencer gave into Johnson’s intimidation. How perfectly Spencer-ish.

Even after having been denounced as a fascist and expelled by Charles Johnson, Spencer still follows his former (web)master’s line. So prounounced is Spencer’s doublethink that in the very entry in which he contradicts Johnson, he announces quietly that he’s not attending the Pro-Cologne meeting, thus showing his obedience to Johnson.

I guess Spencer never took in Solzhenitsyn’s remark that after they take everything away from you, you’re free.

Meanwhile, over at Pamela Geller’s Atlas Shrugs website, we find out that there was another anti-jihad conference over the weekend with Geert Wilders, this one a gala affair in Florida at which, judging by Geller’s own coverage of the event, the main attraction was Pamela Geller’s breasts. When a movement starts to celebrate itself (an instructive example is National Review’s celebrity-centered cruises), that’s an indication that it is, or is danger of becoming, unserious.

The Danish writer Lars Hedegaard, the head of the International Free Press Society, has also withdrawn from the Pro-Cologne conference.

Politically Incorrect, according to the English-language German site, Fact-Fiction, is the most popular German blog and “strongly pro-American and pro-Israel.” Here is Babel Fish’s rough English translation of the article at Politically Incorrect:

The congress of anti-islamizing of pro Cologne of 8.—10. May will take place without the American Islam critic and operator of Jihadwatch, Robert Spencer (photo). The participation likewise called the New Yorker Publizistin off Pamella Geller and the Danish author Lars Hedegaard. Reason for the refusals is a substantial campaign of the US blog Little Green of football (LGF), in which it called among other things Pamela Geller “Postergirl of the euro fascists”.

Charles Johnson, the operator of LGF, put on itself in the last months with many old way companions and within the anti-Islam scene a perfectly unnecessary controversy began. We all meet for the most different reasons, in order to proceed against the threat of our freedoms by the Islam. This consciousness should be us all connecting, smallest common denominators. Among our readers conservative Christians rank exactly the same as progressive Muslims or tolerant gays. One does not have to agree with each article and already not at all with each comment, in order to read pi. The straight variety is it, which we want to defend.

We are now of Charles Johnson as “per facist German website” designated. White Charles Johnson actually still which it writes?

Its verbal attacks against renowned Islam critics such as Pamella Geller, Robert Spencer and Lars Hedegaard have these meanwhile induced to call their participation off to Cologne congress. Too largely, too heavily the fascist moral club weighs also among us Islam critics.

It is sad that one could not agree within the Islam-critical scene on the smallest common denominator. Charles Johnson must be able to be reproached that he abgeblockt any attempts in addition and prevented with his influence. The meetings from 8 to 10 May will take place. It is now at us to defend variety. The smallest common denominator. In addition, it is worth to defend itself these.

” Facts & fictions: Little Green of football forges photo and of writes arrogantly read!

- end of initial entry -

Paul K. writes:

It’s important that a person have enough objectivity to understand how he or she is coming off to other people. While posting her photos, I imagine Pamela Geller was thinking, “God, I look amazing,” rather than, “I am the most inappropriately dressed woman at this event.”

I wonder if she modeled for the nude female Atlas on her masthead?

LA replies:

That’s very insightful.

Michael S. writes:

You write:

“Meanwhile, over at Pamela Geller’s Atlas Shrugs website, we find out that there was another anti-jihad conference over the weekend with Geert Wilders, this one a gala affair in Florida at which, judging by Geller’s own coverage of the event, the main attraction was Pamela Geller’s breasts.”

Not quite sure how you arrive at that conclusion. But her sartorial choice would be imprudent under any circumstances.

LA replies:

I could understand your disagreeing with that conclusion, but not your saying that you’re not quite sure how I arrive at that conclusion.

Michael S. replies:

I understand how you arrived at your conclusion, but I think your inference was unfair.

LA replies:

Imagine if Pamela Geller, photography, and the Web had existed in 1776. Imagine Pamela blogging from Philadelphia during the Second Continental Congress. Imagine the same photograph at the top of her blog, with her wearing the same dress, except that she’s standing next to Thomas Jefferson instead of Geert Wilders. What would the visual, sensory message be about what mattered in Philadelphia?

LA writes:

Is it a fair inference that Spencer withdrew from the conference because of Johnson’s attack?

Spencer said in an earlier reply to Johnson that he, Spencer, had not yet decided to go. Then he said in a later entry that he was not going. But Pro-Koln said that he had definitely accepted the invitation. (I think I read somewhere that they said they had a written acceptance from him, but I don’t have a link to that.) Further Spencer, as far as I’ve seen from checking his site, gives no reason why he decided not to go.

So it could be that Spencer, just as he said, had initially not decided one way or the other, and then decided not to go, perhaps because of Johnson, perhaps for some other reason. But since he earlier said that he had not ruled out going, that means that he regarded Pro-Koln as not off the chart. Therefore some new factor had to have entered the situation to make him decide against going.

Or it could that Spencer had told Pro-Cologne he was going, but then, after Johnson’s attack began, changed his mind, perhaps because of Johnson’s’ attack, perhaps for some other reason.

I would have to search around for different comments to nail this down further, but at present, given Pro-Koln’s statement that Spencer was going, and given Spencer’s own failure to state his reason for not going, the evidence supports the view that Spencer told Pro-Koln he was going, and then changed his mind because of Johnson’s attack. If he had another reason for not going, other than Johnson’s attack, wouldn’t he have given it, so as to avoid leaving the impression that he was being cowed by Johnson? After all, he has not exactly been shy in the past about denouncing or refusing to associate with groups he regards as racial or too right-wing.

Again, I could be wrong, but based on the information I have, plus logical deduction, that’s the way it looks to me right now.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at April 27, 2009 12:48 PM | Send