This is a cross-post by Homo Economicus
Robert Spencer has invited me to arrange a debate with him. I would agree that Twitter limits proper detailed exchanges, but it does reveal the nature of how someone debates. Blogs also provide an ability to discuss things and time to respond. So first let us talk about Srebrenica Genocide and then come to what Rob was saying to me on Twitter after yesterday’s post of our earlier exchange on there.
Spencer hides behind saying only repeating reports on what a minority have said on genocide denial. In repeating the deniers claims he had this to say for himself before quoting them:
[TITLE, which is a quote from article Robert will eventually link to hence quotation marks*] “After 14 years of investigating events that took place in Srebrenica in 1995 I can attest there was no genocide over Muslims in that enclave”
[Now Robert Spencer’s written introduction before he further quotes Caleb Posner’s article follows]
The strange thing about this case is that self-proclaimed anti-jihadists who have no trouble recognizing Palestinian “Paliwood” War-Is-Deceit propaganda designed to advance the jihad cause by manufacturing Israeli atrocities, and who even recognize fauxtography generated by the Palestinians, Iran, and others for the same purpose, refuse even to consider the possibility that Muslims could have carried out any deceptive atrocity-manufacturing in the Balkans. Indeed, some even charge that anyone who thinks that Balkan Islamic jihadists carried out any deception at all must be secretly a sympathizer of this genocide-that-never-was. [Jihad Watch] [Emphasis added]
Robert in your own words you said “this genocide-that-never-was”. You have said it, as a matter of public record. It is not wrong to say you side with genocide deniers; more accurate you identify yourself as one. This is beyond linking to other articles. Recently you have said about Srebrenica denial:
“Perhaps some challenge can be made to these claims, but it is a legitimate discussion that needs to be had.”
The “legitimate debate” defence is reminiscent of intelligent design, that there is a another point of view which has as much credibility. For Robert note he is saying the challenge is for those saying there was a genocide. I am always fascinated by how we know things, and a historian must go by evidence, just as a scientist does.
Here is a link to the full post – well worth reading in full.
Sarah adds (15.10.13): Here is a link to a post in which Robert Spencer responds to various criticisms with regard to this topic and others. It has been added at this late date because it has only just been brought to my attention and because I offered to post any response back in July.
