Saturday, October 25, 2014   

  Home     About     Guest Editorials     Advertise     Blog     Site Map     Links     Contact      Subscribe RSS      Subscribe Email  
Home » Spencer Watch

Proof that Robert Spencer’s JihadWatch.org Relies on Bogus Translations

2 March 2011 Spencer Watch 3 Comments Email This Post Email This Post

Proof that Robert Spencer’s JihadWatch.org Relies on Bogus Translations

Translating-Jihad is one of the newer anti-Muslim blogs to make its debut to the world wide web.  The site’s creator, Al-Mutarjim, fancies himself as a professional Arabic translator and states that his objective is to translate Arabic texts into English in order “to expose [the] darkness [of Islam].”

Robert Spencer, director of JihadWatch.org (arguably the internet’s most popular anti-Muslim website), was absolutely delighted by the emergence of Translating-Jihad.  Spencer gushed about Al-Mutarjim:

You are great. I love your work… Thank you so much for doing what you’re doing.

On January 14th of 2011, Al-Mutarjim posted a supposed translation of an Arabic fatwa on his website; he entitled his translation as follows: Fatwa: “It is Permissible to Have Sexual Intercourse with a Prepubescent Girl”.  Guess who reproduced this “translation” on his website?  None other than Robert Spencer.  See JihadWatch.org: Fatwa: “It is Permissible to Have Sexual Intercourse with a Prepubescent Girl”.  Spencer opined:

Here is evidence that mainstream Muslims…consider child marriage to be completely justified by the Sharia.

This “translation” by Al-Mutarjim’s Translating-Jihad blog was the “evidence” that the fake scholarRobert Spencer gives to justify his claims.

We here at LoonWatch investigated the matter and discovered that Translating-Jihad’s “translation” was utterly bogus.  Read our expose: Translating-Jihad’s Completely Fraudulent Translations.  To summarize, Al-Mutarjim claimed that the fatwa says: “It is permissible to have sexual intercourse with a prepubescent girl”, when in fact the fatwa says the exact opposite. The fatwa forbids sexual intercourse with prepubescent girls, and warns:

It is clear that the marriage of children has health concerns, because their reproductive organs are not ready for sexual intercourse yet, nor are they emotionally prepared for sexual intercourse, especially the female child who will most likely be physically damaged. This is especially if her husband is an old man! Sexual intercourse might cause negative physical and emotional ramifications that would stay with her for the rest of her life and affect her sexual future!

Not only did Al-Mutarjim not translate the above (all tactfully hidden in those ever so strategic ellipses), but he also purposefully omitted to translate the fatwa’s conclusion: “In view of medical grounds, we admonish against marriage before puberty at the very least.

Translating-Jihad’s translation is the epitome of academic dishonesty,  and Al-Mutarjim is a fraud, cheat, and liar.  But, Robert Spencer has no problem with that, so long as Al-Mutarjim is anti-Muslim.  Not only does Al-Mutarjim get high praises from Spencer, but the bogus “sex with prepubescent girls” translation was reproduced on JihadWatch.  It can still be found here.  As of yet, Spencer has not removed it or issued a correction of any sort.

There can be only a few reasons why Robert Spencer reproduced such a bogus translation on his website:

(1)  Robert Spencer is lying when he claims the ability to read and understand Arabic fluently.  In that case, maybe he couldn’t understand the fatwa.  If that is the case, then he is a liar for falsely pretending to read the language.  How can anyone rely on a liar as a credible source?

(2)  If #1 is not the case, then maybe Spencer reproduced the translation without bothering to click the link to the original fatwa.  If that is the case (which is highly unlikely), then what kind of editorial standards and vetting process does JihadWatch.org have!?  What kind of a “scholar” would reproduce something like that without bothering to check the original (which is just a click away)?  How reliable can a site be that just believes anything on the internet?

(3) But the most likely explanation is that Robert Spencer is completely dishonest and has absolutely no problems reproducing bogus translations to further his anti-Muslim agenda.  Would you really rely on such a guy for your knowledge of Islam?

We wouldn’t be surprised, however, if Spencer comes up with one of his classic explanations about how someone else logged into his user name and posted it, without him first taking a look, yadda yadda yadda.  This sort of explanation–which Spencer has used in the past (remember the whole “I got tricked into joining a genocidal facebook group” thing?)–is just about as believable as the teenage kid telling his mom that the marijuana or porn under his bed is really his friends.

Whatever the case, will Robert Spencer have at least the academic honesty to issue a correction?  Will he take back his glowing praise of Al-Mutajim and the Translating-Jihad blog? We sincerely doubt it.

It is troublesome to think that Robert Spencer is considered an “expert” on Islam, when clearly he is merely a pro-Christian anti-Muslim fanatic–just like Al-Mutarjim of Translating-Jihad is a religious wing nut.  It is frightening to think that Spencer–who has no problems using absolutely bogus translations to further his Islam-bashing ideology–was even used to educate the FBI.  No wonder the FBI is completely misguided in its “war on terror”.  This country is in trouble when it relies on complete frauds and liars to learn about the world’s second largest religion.

Share/Bookmark




3 Comments »

  1. [...] Proof that Robert Spencer’s JihadWatch.org Relies on Bogus Translations | Islamophobia Today eNews…. [...]

  2. [QUOTE]We wouldn’t be surprised, however, if Spencer comes up with one of his classic explanations about how someone else logged into his user name and posted it, without him first taking a look, yadda yadda yadda.”[/QUOTE]

    Nobody is “logging into his user name and posting”. However, slimeballs do post under their own usernames (which they’ve registered as variations of Spencer’s name) pretending to be Spencer… and making absurd comments that Spencer would never make/has never made.

    [QUOTE]Whatever the case, will Robert Spencer have at least the academic honesty to issue a correction?[/QUOTE]

    Seriously? You are going to talk “honesty”? Have you read YOUR hack-job of an “article” here? Or most of the other blatantly dishonest “articles” here?

    [QUOTE]It is troublesome to think that Robert Spencer is considered an “expert” on Islam[/QUOTE]

    Spencer is an expert on Islam. Any other expert on Islam, Muslim and non-Muslim alike, KNOWS this. And any honest Muslim expert-on-Islam will admit this.

    And wrong again: Spencer doesn’t rely on translations from any single person. He has used several translators, including. He has shown translations, taken directly from books written by Muslim Islamic scholars… Muslim Islamic scholars who are highly revered & respected by Muslims world-wide. Books that are used for teachings in mosques & madrassah all over the Western world. Read these frickin’ books and guides, yourself before you go soundin’ off.

    [QUOTE]No wonder the FBI is completely misguided in its “war on terror”.  This country is in trouble when it relies on complete frauds and liars to learn about the world’s second largest religion.[/QUOTE]

    The FBI isn’t misguided. It is stifled by the asdurd politically “correct” environment of, and limited by the politically “correct” control of government, including the higher offices of the FBI. That is what is frightening.

    And no, this country “is in trouble” when politically “correct” idiots succumb to the bullying tactics of the so-called “civil rights” advocates (such as CAIR) of “the world’s second largest religion.

    This country “is in trouble” when law enforcement agencies are holding mandatory “Muslim Sensitivity Training Classes” for their agents:
    So that they can learn how to walk-on-eggshells around this ‘poor, little, misunderstood, mistreated community’ and treat its members with kid gloves.
    So they can learn to jeopardize their own investigations by making special allowances, exceptions, and considerations for Muslim suspects… special allowances that do NOT apply to the rest of us.

    You have been right about one thing… and one thing ONLY… in this entire “article”. And that is: Yes, this country is in trouble, alright.

  3. Spencer is an ignorant nutjob who browses Islamic and anti-Islamic sites, trawling for anything that can be twisted into an attack against Islam. He saw Sunni Muslims accusing shiites/suspected crypto-shiites of ‘Kitman’ (hiding) and is now propagating Kitman as “Islamic Belief of Kitman”. In reality “Kitman al Haqq” (hiding of the truth) is one of the major sins in Islam, condemned in multiple verses of the Quran and numerous ahadith (for example see any major Tafseer for al-Baqarah ayah 174).

    Why should Spencer be believed regarding Islam when:

    – He is a Catholic. The Catholic Church are well known for their lies regarding other faiths, indeed they have been forced to admit their falsehood. For centuries Catholics venerated Simon of Trent, William of Norwich and other children allegedly ritually slaughtered by the Jews at passover. Now that the political tides have turned against them, Catholics have to admit that they lied in the past (and if they did not lie then, then they are lying now, they are liars either way).
    Catholics authorities in the past accused Muslims of believing in a trinity of Gods, there are many other examples of Catholic mendacity.

    – He comes from a family of deceivers. His family is of Greek heritage, but adopted the surname ‘Spencer’ to appear Anglo-Saxon.

    – He is a Neo-Con. It is well established that Neo-Cons believe in lying to further their cause. The Neo-Con godfather Irving Kristol said, “There are different kinds of truths for different kinds of people. There are truths appropriate for children; truths that are appropriate for … adults; and truths that are appropriate for highly educated adults, and the notion that there should be one set of truths available to everyone is a modern democratic fallacy.”

Have your say!

Add your comment below, or trackback from your own site. You can also subscribe to these comments via RSS.

Be nice. Keep it clean. Stay on topic. No spam.

You can use these tags:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>