Islamophobia Manifesto Clearly Lays Out Plot Against Muslims

by Sheila Musaji

Baron Bodissey (pseudonym of Edward May) of the Gates of Vienna wrote Overselling the Meme which appears to be the clearest statement of the actual intent of the dedicated cadre of Islamophobes who are determined to paint all Muslims as “the other”.  Bodissey, a virulent Islamophobe is respected only by other Islamophobes.  Pamela Geller referred to him as :One of my favorite bloggers and fellow infidel at the Infidel Bloggers Alliance, Baron Bodissey of Gates of Vienna”  He was one of her fellow freedom fighters until they fell out over the EDL.

Here is his practical, step-by-step guide to demonizing an entire religious group (emphasis mine):

My primary job is to be a propagandist: that is, my aim as an activist in the Counterjihad cause is to move the meme. Or, more fully, to move multiple memes.

Only by breaking through the dominant paradigms with subversive memes will we bring down the hegemony of the PC/MC establishment which rules the government, the academy, the media, and the culture at large.

Political correctness currently has an absolute lock on the major media, so propagating memes is extremely difficult. Yes, it helps us to get one of our people on TV as a talking head, but the setup in such situations is almost always rigged to make the interviewee look nutty or dangerous, so the value of such appearances is limited.

For large-scale effectiveness, we must proceed more stealthily, and with more limited goals. Each step is small, and seems inconsequential, but when aggregated our tiny successes have an effect, and will accelerate the change in our direction when things go sideways for the oligarchs.

To do the job, we must insert many, many memelets into common discourse. This must be accomplished at a level well below that of the celebrities and famous pundits, because action on that battlefield invites a massive and well-funded counterattack by CAIR, ISNA, the OIC, etc.

I’ve been paying close attention for the last seven years, and during that time there have been numerous changes in the common discourse at the samizdat level, below what is officially permitted in public discourse. For example, the phrase “Mohammed the pedophile” is now common — almost universal — in popular forums and discussion groups. It even pops up at the higher levels occasionally, and gets people like Susanne Winter and Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff charged and tried. This meme was very rare until well after 9-11.

You might say, “But, strictly speaking, it’s not true — Mohammed’s marriage to a child was a commonly accepted practice in his day, among both Muslims and non-Muslims. It was not considered pedophilia back then. Asserting this is an example of the fallacy of ‘presentism’.”

These counterarguments are reasonable, and they may well be true. But they don’t advance the meme.

It’s the same with “Islam is not a religion.” This concept was all but unheard of just six or seven years ago. But now it is common currency.

To push memes like these into mass circulation, they must be oversold. If we spend all our time fine-tuning them, they won’t emerge into popular consciousness. If we include the historical background, the comparative theology, the philosophical references, and all the subtle nuances of the whole truth, the meme will never spread.

As a propagandist, my task is to spread the meme and not to sweat the nuances. Nuances can be argued about and nailed down by scholars in the centuries after Islam — as a culture, a political ideology, and a religion — is totally destroyed. We don’t have the luxury for such finicky scholasticism right now.

If I wanted to be totally accurate, I might say something like this: “Islam contains religious, political, and cultural ideologies that are fused into a unitary system. Unlike Christianity and Judaism, its political elements have never been separated from its theological ones. Those elements are supremacist, totalitarian, and expansionist.”

Now, that’s fairly accurate, and it’s about as short a statement as you can craft and still include the nuances of the situation. But as a meme, it’s a bust. You can squeeze the trigger on that particular rhetorical gun, and the bullet will just roll out of the barrel and plop into the dust at your feet.

Ordinary people understand the essence of what is intended when someone says, “Islam is not a religion.” They know that it means that Islam is not like modern Christianity. They understand that it refers to the fact that Muslim zealots will lie, steal, cheat, rape, torture, murder, and blow up trains and airplanes to attain political ends. That’s not what they consider a religion.

They know all these things already. Despite the intensive indoctrination they’ve been subjected to for forty years, the truth comes through: they see the dismembered bodies and the burning buildings and the disfigured women, and they understand that “Allahu Akhbar” is involved in virtually every single incident.

So the meme works, because it is true at an essential level.

But we have to oversell it to get it out there on everyone’s lips.

Our propaganda is aimed at changing minds at the margin, at affecting the thinking of those whose opinions are not yet fully formed. If we wait until we get every jot and tittle of our message perfect, the scimitar will be at our throats before we change even a single mind.

This document explains a great deal about the distorted thinking of this group of extremists.  The truth is only an annoyance, if it doesn’t advance the meme.  Currently our goal is to influence those who don’t currently hold an opinion.  The ultimate goal is the destruction of the religion of Islam. 

I would like to ask Baron Bodissey, Pamela Geller, Robert Spencer, Frank Gaffney, David Yerushalmi, and all of the rest of their Islamophobic network exactly how do they think they will destroy the religion of Islam without destroying Muslims?

The tragic terrorist attack in Norway carried out by an individual who had absorbed these anti-Muslim memes and saw no solution except violence as a solution to what he saw as an imminent danger, is another sad reminder of how vulnerable we all are to attacks by radicalized “true believers” in whatever distorted political or religious ideology they may falsely believe they are promoting through violence and terrorism. 

It would seem that the Gates of Vienna is not the only site to have expressed such an ideology in the form of a manifesto.  A site called Crombouke blogspot displays a disgustingly hateful image on the page titled “How to destroy Islam - non-violently”.  They open with If we don’t destroy Islam as an ideology it will exterminate us culturally and physically, then repeat anti-Muslim propaganda and say “There can be no violent solution” and layout out what their “non-violent” program should be:  The only option for defeating Islam is to undermine it in the same way we undermined communism - by a slow process of ideological warfare.

What is their brilliant plan?  The Muslims themselves have shown us their most vulnerable spot, which is the questionable (though unquestioned) character of the ‘Prophet’ himself. We need to satirise and ridicule baby-bonking Mo until the Muslims fly into uncontrollable tantrums, then ridicule them even more for their tantrums, and repeat the process until they froth at the mouth and steam comes out of their ears.

And then Secondly, Muslims should not merely be treated the same as everybody else, but should be made to pay the price of their totally negative antisocial and damaging presence in our countries.
- Muslim immigration must be stopped.
- Islam’s status as a religion should be rescinded.
- Muslims must be regarded as enemy aliens and banned from sensitive occupations where they may be a security risk.

It goes on with all of these ideas at great and disgusting length. 

Just in case you are tempted to think, well, these are fringe groups and don’t really represent any “respectable” thought, remember that last year, Justin Elliott published an article Mystery of who funded right-wing “radical Islam” campaign deepens which included internal memos and emails which seemed to suggest that the Clarion Fund (producers of the film Obsession, etc.) were engaged in a well thought out plan to   Here is a summary of what was discovered from Alternet ThinkProgress has obtained new documents, left open to the public by the Clarion Fund’s webmaster, that offer an insight into the ideas behind the organization’s websites and films. An e-mail from Clarion Fund communications director Gregory Ross to the webmaster, outlines the campaign to promote Obsession during the 2008 presidential election (view a copy here). Ross explains how he would like to brand Clarion’s anti-Muslim campaign with “something pleasing to the eye, edgy, hip and fun!” To bring Obsession’s anti-Muslim themes into the mainstream, Ross wanted to make a symbol or slogan with wide appeal, like “google, banana republic or even coca-cola”

And, if you read quotes from David Yerushalmi (author of the anti-Sharia bills sweeping the country) and from his organization SANE the language used by Yerushalmi and SANE is more than similar to the language of Bodissey and Crombouke.  Our TAM report on Yerushalmi and SANE is here.

—————-

RESOURCES

A Who’s Who of the Anti-Muslim/Anti-Arab/Islamophobia Industry

The American Muslim (TAM) has collected information about these individuals in this easy to use format.  Just click on the links provided to go to in-depth articles and backgrounders on these individuals.  There are a number of other individuals who should be included here, and they will be added, and this will be updated as time permits.

There would appear to be an Islamophobia industry engaged in what Max Blumenthal calls a Great Islamophobic Crusade.  In regard to the production of “Relentless”,  “Obsession: Radical Islam’s War on the West” and “The Third Jihad” TAM has published this article and Richard Silverstein has discussed the anti-Muslim propaganda during the last election cycle here, and the money trail between these groups here  and here

Ayaan Hirsi Ali - see TAM Responses collection

Zachariah Anani *

Glenn Beck (media) - see TAM Responses collection

Rev. Flip Benham and Operation Save America *

Ergun Mehmet Caner *

Aubrey & Joyce Chernick and the Fairbrook Foundation (financier)  *****

Phyllis Chessler *

Ann Coulter (media) - see TAM Responses collection

Nonie Darwish and Former Muslims United *

Alan Dershowitz - see TAM Responses collection

Steven Emerson and the Investigative Project **

Bryan Fischer and The American Family Association **

Hugh Fitzgerald of Jihad Watch *

Brigitte Gabriel and ACT for America ***

Dave Gaubatz *

Frank Gaffney and the Center for Security Policy (anti-Sharia) **** and ****

Pamela Geller of Atlas Shrugs and SIOA ***

John Guandolo *

Sean Hannity (media) - see TAM Responses collection

David Horowitz and the Freedom Center *****

Raymond Ibrahim and the Middle East Forum (MEF) **

Charles Jacobs and Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America CAMERA and David Project **

Zuhdi Jasser and the American Islamic Forum for Democracy ***
Note:  Jasser is a Muslim, and defines himself as a devout Muslim, nevertheless his actions and statements separate him from the mainstream American Muslim community, and at the very least play into the hands of the Islamophobes

Rev. Terry Jones of Dove World Outreach Christian Center *

Joe Kaufman - see TAM Responses collection

Sam Kharoba (fake counter-terrorism trainer) *

Alan Keyes and the Oak Initiative *

Charles Krauthammer (media)  - see TAM Responses collection

Michelle Malkin (media) - see TAM Responses collection

Andrew McCarthy (media) see TAM Responses collection

Kamal Nawash and Free Muslims Against Terrorism * (Nawash is a Muslim, but his words and actions separate him from the mainstream and play into the hands of the Islamophobes.)

Chuck Norris *

Bill O’Reilly (media) - see TAM Responses collection

Marty Peretz (media) - see TAM Responses collection

Daniel Pipes and the Middle East Forum (MEF)  ****

Dennis Prager (media) *

Guy Rodgers and ACT for America **

Kamal Saleem *

Michael Savage (media) - see TAM Responses collection

Debbie Schlussel - see TAM Responses collection

Stephen Schwartz and Center for Islamic Pluralism **
Note:  Schwartz is a Muslim, and defines himself as a devout Muslim, nevertheless his actions and statements separate him from the mainstream American Muslim community, and at the very least play into the hands of the Islamophobes

Phyllis Schlafly and the Eagle Forum *

Roland Shirk of Jihad Watch *

Walid Shoebat **

Anis Shorrosh *

Ali Sina and Faith Freedom International *

Robert Spencer and Jihad Watch ***

Mark Steyn (media) - see TAM Responses collection

Wafa Sultan *

Tom Trento and the Florida Security Council/United West Organizations *

Ibn Warraq - see TAM Responses collection

Bat Y’eor **

David Yerushalmi and SANE ****

Those in bold are key figures

SEE ALSO:

—  Islamophobia no longer questioned - even by our elected representatives for a lengthy list of anti-Muslim, Islamobophic quotes by elected representatives and government representatives. 

—  Christian brotherly love is difficult for some to obtain for anti-Muslim quotes by Christians including Christian clergypeople.  Members of this group include: Rev. Jerry Falwell, Bryan Fisher (American Family Association), Rev. Franklin Graham, Rev. John Hagee, Rev. Rod Parsley,  Rev. Pat Robertson (Christian Coalition, 700 Club), etc.

— Islamophobia Can Be A Useful Term, Sheila Musaji http://www.theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/features/articles/islamophobia_can_be_a_useful_term/0018676

—  Jewish “Ahavah shel achvah” Brotherly Love is Difficult for Some to Attain for anti-Muslim quotes by Jews including Rabbis.

DEFINITION OF ISLAMOPHOBIA

The Islamophobia Research and Documentation Project at the Center for Race and Gender has the best working definition I have seen:

The term “Islamophobia” was first introduced as a concept in a 1991 Runnymede Trust Report and defined as “unfounded hostility towards Muslims, and therefore fear or dislike of all or most Muslims.” The term was coined in the context of Muslims in the UK in particular and Europe in general, and formulated based on the more common “xenophobia” framework.

The report pointed to prevailing attitudes that incorporate the following beliefs:

•Islam is monolithic and cannot adapt to new realities
•Islam does not share common values with other major faiths
•Islam as a religion is inferior to the West.  It is archaic, barbaric, and irrational.
•Islam is a religion of violence and supports terrorism.
•Islam is a violent political ideology.
For the purposes of anchoring the current research and documentation project, we provide the following working definition:

Islamophobia is a contrived fear or prejudice fomented by the existing Eurocentric and Orientalist global power structure.  It is directed at a perceived or real Muslim threat through the maintenance and extension of existing disparities in economic, political, social and cultural relations, while rationalizing the necessity to deploy violence as a tool to achieve “civilizational rehab” of the target communities (Muslim or otherwise).  Islamophobia reintroduces and reaffirms a global racial structure through which resource distribution disparities are maintained and extended.