King Henry V said that modest stillness and humility were suitable peacetime behaviors but war requires us to behave like tigers and "disguise fair nature with hard-favour'd rage." Like actors stepping into a distasteful but necessary role on the world's stage, we must don the ugly and terrifying mask of war. This concept (which Patton also described) predates the Star of England by more than a thousand years. Pallas Athena, the namesake of Athens, was a favorite Greek deity who personified the highest aspects of Civilization. During peacetime she was the patron goddes of wisdom, the sciences, and crafts such as weaving but, when the polis or city-state went to war, she turned into a ruthless, terrifying, and cold-blooded killer.
By the enemy's choice and not ours, we must accordingly cry "Havoc!" and let slip the dogs of war: an indiscriminate propaganda campaign that uses the most inflammatory language possible, in effective and synergistic combination with pictures and facts, to evoke worldwide hatred of militant "Islam."
Adolf Hitler and Joseph Goebbels were among the worst people who ever lived but we must remember that their methods worked. (The two Nazis, incidentally, may have learned their craft from Anglo-French propagandists, who may in turn have learned from the American Yellow Press of 1898.) If Hitler and Goebbels could persuade an entire nation to hate productive and law-abiding Jewish citizens, Euro-American Civilization should be able to evoke worldwide loathing, hatred, and contempt for Islamofascist cultures that condone and sanction femicide, rape, domestic violence, wife battering, terrorism, slavery and religious persecution. Hitler's and Goebbels' methods can, like a German Mauser rifle that was captured by an Allied soldier or Resistance fighter, be turned against Nazis-- including the sand variety.
Basic Principles
"All propaganda has to be popular and has to adapt its spiritual level to the perception of the least intelligent of those towards whom it intends to direct itself."
-Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf ("My Struggle"), Vol. I
Part of Germany's problems during the First World War was the fact that its public relations statements came in the form of long-winded academic statements from university Professor-Doctors (often without translation into English) while Anglo-French propagandists drew pictures of fanged apes in spiked helmets, "adapting their propaganda to the least intelligent of those toward whom it intends to direct itself." (As Boss Tweed once pointed out regarding Thomas Nast's political cartoons, even his illiterate constituents could savvy pictures.) Atrocity stories, some of which were doubtlessly imaginary, were circulated as news (thus anticipating Hitler's Big Lie theory by decades).
As an example, Anglo-French propagandists accused German soldiers of raping nuns and added that, to prevent venereal diseases in the German Army, any man who had VD was to cut off one of the nun's breasts so uninfected soldiers would not rape her. Other cartoonists depicted Germans sticking babies on their bayonets or tying a woman to an artillery carriage's wheel and then lighting a fire to burn one of her hands off. After a steady diet of such material, the American people were soon willing to march off (and be slaughtered in droves on the Western Front) to "make the world safe for democracy."
To Hitler's advice, Joseph Goebbels added,
Arguments must therefore be crude, clear and forcible, and appeal to emotions and instincts, not the intellect. Truth was unimportant and entirely subordinate to tactics and psychology... Hatred and contempt must be directed at particular individuals."
Our propaganda must use the same principles even though I do not advocate lying, as Goebbels did. The point of the above discussion is that, if Hitler and Goebbels could sell outright lies with the techniques they describe, we ought to be able to sell the truth.
Choosing the Right Words
When describing the conduct of the Islamofascists, we must use deliberately inflammatory words like "femicide," "rape," "wife battering," "child molesting," "child rape," and even "Islamofascist Christ Killers." Such words evoke powerful emotions and even rage in Euro-American audiences and we must use them as frequently as possible.
Meanwhile, the enemy is not an "insurgent" and he is certainly not, to use Michael Moore's words, a "Minuteman." He, or rather it, is a terrorist, jihad monkey, sand ape, or sand Nazi. Remember that Patton did not exhort his men to kill Germans, he told them to kill "lousy Hun bastards." An Axis soldier ceased to be a human being and became instead a Jap, Kraut, or Hun. A Korean War or Vietnam War enemy was not an "Asian," he was a gook, Chicom (Chinese Communist), or Charlie (Victor Charlie, a Viet Cong). This language was not, incidentally, racist; a good guy was a ROK (Republic of Korea) or ARVN (Army of Vietnam).
The same technique should be used in describing Islamofascist violence against Arabs and Muslims. As an example, a Palestinian woman murdered her daughter for being raped by her brothers. In describing this incident, one refers to the victim as "she" and "her," the mother as a "sow" and "it," and the rapist brothers as "bucks" or "studs" i.e. terms normally reserved for animals. Only the victim is given a human face and description as a human being; the perpetrators are described as less than human.
Choosing the Right Pictures
"The insurrection in Cuba that had been simmering for several years, provided [William Randolph] Hearst and [Joseph] Pulitzer with the excuse for a rip-roaring circulating-building crusade. Playing on the American people's sympathy for the insurrectos, Hearst artists drew fake atrocity pictures of Spaniards stripping American women on the high seas, while Pulitzer correspondents in Cuba cabled reports of 'Blood on the roadsides, blood in the fields, blood on the doorsteps, blood, blood, blood'" (Hess and Kaplan, The Ungentlemanly Art, 1968, 122).
That was before we had color pictures and the Internet. Today, pictures of beheaded victims, nail bomb victims, and rape victims can be circulated all over the world within hours. This site has an excellent video of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, including pictures of people jumping out of the burning World Trade centers along with exhausted firefighters. Omdurman.org, meanwhile, offers free cartoons that anyone can use on his or her blog or Web site.
If black-and-white newspaper pictures and cartoons could evoke enough hatred of Spaniards and then Germans to get the United States into two wars, we can blame only ourselves if we cannot evoke worldwide hatred of Islamofascists. Since hatred stems from fear (no one hates something he doesn't think is a threat), the enemy's most barbaric conduct should be illustrated graphically at every opportunity.
Backing them with Facts
Although one might sometimes get away with depicting the enemy as a barbaric subhuman ape, it is best to back such images with fact to prevent them from being written off as mere hate propaganda. My preference is to supply a very inflammatory image along with references to reputable news sources to prove that the event the image described really happened.
Here are some examples:
"Crucified Between Two Thieves" shows a picture of Sudanese "Muslims" crucifying a man for being a Christian, while referring to the Islamofascists as "Christ Killers." The inflammatory picture and words are backed up with an invitation to do a Google search on "Sudan" and "crucified" so the viewer can verify for himself that I am not just making this up.
"Hanging a Kafir" shows Iran hanging a young woman for being a Bahai. This is again backed up with facts.
Sometimes, however, the five-second sound bite or equivalent is enough by itself. "Iran + The Bomb = Nuclear Islamocaust."
This one shows a Saudi whipping a man's back into bloody ribbons, and backs up the picture with a news reference. In all cases, the Islamofascist villains are given bestial and subhuman features, as suggested by Grant Hamilton's "The Spanish Brute."
In all cases, inflammatory pictures and words-- and they should be made inflammatory by intention-- must be backed up with facts.
Hijacking the Enemy's Words
Words are weapons but the enemy's own words can and should be hijacked whenever possible. "Allahu akbar!" should always be used in the context of Islamofascists cutting off heads or committing other atrocities. Although it means "God is great" the context should always suggest, "Let's chop off heads!" or "Let's stone a woman to death!" Robert Heinlein did this in a nonfiction story in which the context of Pravda (truth) always suggested that Pravda meant "bull excrement."
In "Hitler in a Headscarf", the context of "Allahu akbar!" makes it mean "Sieg Heil!"
The enemy has also dug out the old "Jews as Christ Killers" blood libel. This was a very bad place for them to go because we can and should reply with the phrase "Islamofascist Christ Killers" whenever possible. The facts are with us and totally against them because Islamofascists and not Jews are persecuting and killing Christians in droves all over the world.
Circulating the Propaganda
"To be effective, leaflets must scatter. Bundles of paper which fall intact make little impact on the enemy [or prospective audience, the general public in this case] unless they hit him on the head." (Linebarger, Psychological Warfare)
Royalty-free leaflets and cartoons that anyone is free to copy are one way of distributing our propaganda. The ideal result should be a chain reaction; e.g. if three people copy a royalty-free cartoon (which contains a statement giving permission to copy it as long as no changes are made) and post it to their own Web sites or blogs, and three visitors to each of their Web sites copy the cartoon, it will soon be all over the Internet. With regard to leaflets, we all remember imaginative amateur cartoons that circulated from one office to another even before there was an Internet; people who liked them photocopied them and gave copies to their friends.
Omdurman.org has a Web page on the science and history of propaganda for further reading.
Hate propaganda? Cry "Havoc" and let slip the dogs of war!
by Bill Levinson
The distasteful measures that I am about to describe are unfortunately a reasonable and necessary response to Islamofascist propaganda and fifth column activities that are pervading Judeo-Christian organizations such as the Presbyterian Church USA, Unitarian Universalist Church, Union for Reform Judiasm (formerly the Union of American Hebrew Congregations), and so on along with women on the political Left. The enemy has thus succeeded in enlisting the very people whose death or enslavement (dhimmitude) the enemy's ideology requires.
King Henry V said that modest stillness and humility were suitable peacetime behaviors but war requires us to behave like tigers and "disguise fair nature with hard-favour'd rage." Like actors stepping into a distasteful but necessary role on the world's stage, we must don the ugly and terrifying mask of war. This concept (which Patton also described) predates the Star of England by more than a thousand years. Pallas Athena, the namesake of Athens, was a favorite Greek deity who personified the highest aspects of Civilization. During peacetime she was the patron goddes of wisdom, the sciences, and crafts such as weaving but, when the polis or city-state went to war, she turned into a ruthless, terrifying, and cold-blooded killer.
By the enemy's choice and not ours, we must accordingly cry "Havoc!" and let slip the dogs of war: an indiscriminate propaganda campaign that uses the most inflammatory language possible, in effective and synergistic combination with pictures and facts, to evoke worldwide hatred of militant "Islam."
Adolf Hitler and Joseph Goebbels were among the worst people who ever lived but we must remember that their methods worked. (The two Nazis, incidentally, may have learned their craft from Anglo-French propagandists, who may in turn have learned from the American Yellow Press of 1898.) If Hitler and Goebbels could persuade an entire nation to hate productive and law-abiding Jewish citizens, Euro-American Civilization should be able to evoke worldwide loathing, hatred, and contempt for Islamofascist cultures that condone and sanction femicide, rape, domestic violence, wife battering, terrorism, slavery and religious persecution. Hitler's and Goebbels' methods can, like a German Mauser rifle that was captured by an Allied soldier or Resistance fighter, be turned against Nazis-- including the sand variety.
Basic Principles
Part of Germany's problems during the First World War was the fact that its public relations statements came in the form of long-winded academic statements from university Professor-Doctors (often without translation into English) while Anglo-French propagandists drew pictures of fanged apes in spiked helmets, "adapting their propaganda to the least intelligent of those toward whom it intends to direct itself." (As Boss Tweed once pointed out regarding Thomas Nast's political cartoons, even his illiterate constituents could savvy pictures.) Atrocity stories, some of which were doubtlessly imaginary, were circulated as news (thus anticipating Hitler's Big Lie theory by decades).
As an example, Anglo-French propagandists accused German soldiers of raping nuns and added that, to prevent venereal diseases in the German Army, any man who had VD was to cut off one of the nun's breasts so uninfected soldiers would not rape her. Other cartoonists depicted Germans sticking babies on their bayonets or tying a woman to an artillery carriage's wheel and then lighting a fire to burn one of her hands off. After a steady diet of such material, the American people were soon willing to march off (and be slaughtered in droves on the Western Front) to "make the world safe for democracy."
To Hitler's advice, Joseph Goebbels added,
Our propaganda must use the same principles even though I do not advocate lying, as Goebbels did. The point of the above discussion is that, if Hitler and Goebbels could sell outright lies with the techniques they describe, we ought to be able to sell the truth.
Choosing the Right Words
When describing the conduct of the Islamofascists, we must use deliberately inflammatory words like "femicide," "rape," "wife battering," "child molesting," "child rape," and even "Islamofascist Christ Killers." Such words evoke powerful emotions and even rage in Euro-American audiences and we must use them as frequently as possible.
Meanwhile, the enemy is not an "insurgent" and he is certainly not, to use Michael Moore's words, a "Minuteman." He, or rather it, is a terrorist, jihad monkey, sand ape, or sand Nazi. Remember that Patton did not exhort his men to kill Germans, he told them to kill "lousy Hun bastards." An Axis soldier ceased to be a human being and became instead a Jap, Kraut, or Hun. A Korean War or Vietnam War enemy was not an "Asian," he was a gook, Chicom (Chinese Communist), or Charlie (Victor Charlie, a Viet Cong). This language was not, incidentally, racist; a good guy was a ROK (Republic of Korea) or ARVN (Army of Vietnam).
The same technique should be used in describing Islamofascist violence against Arabs and Muslims. As an example, a Palestinian woman murdered her daughter for being raped by her brothers. In describing this incident, one refers to the victim as "she" and "her," the mother as a "sow" and "it," and the rapist brothers as "bucks" or "studs" i.e. terms normally reserved for animals. Only the victim is given a human face and description as a human being; the perpetrators are described as less than human.
Choosing the Right Pictures
That was before we had color pictures and the Internet. Today, pictures of beheaded victims, nail bomb victims, and rape victims can be circulated all over the world within hours. This site has an excellent video of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, including pictures of people jumping out of the burning World Trade centers along with exhausted firefighters. Omdurman.org, meanwhile, offers free cartoons that anyone can use on his or her blog or Web site.
If black-and-white newspaper pictures and cartoons could evoke enough hatred of Spaniards and then Germans to get the United States into two wars, we can blame only ourselves if we cannot evoke worldwide hatred of Islamofascists. Since hatred stems from fear (no one hates something he doesn't think is a threat), the enemy's most barbaric conduct should be illustrated graphically at every opportunity.
Backing them with Facts
Although one might sometimes get away with depicting the enemy as a barbaric subhuman ape, it is best to back such images with fact to prevent them from being written off as mere hate propaganda. My preference is to supply a very inflammatory image along with references to reputable news sources to prove that the event the image described really happened.
Here are some examples:
"Crucified Between Two Thieves" shows a picture of Sudanese "Muslims" crucifying a man for being a Christian, while referring to the Islamofascists as "Christ Killers." The inflammatory picture and words are backed up with an invitation to do a Google search on "Sudan" and "crucified" so the viewer can verify for himself that I am not just making this up.
"Hanging a Kafir" shows Iran hanging a young woman for being a Bahai. This is again backed up with facts.
Sometimes, however, the five-second sound bite or equivalent is enough by itself. "Iran + The Bomb = Nuclear Islamocaust."
This one shows a Saudi whipping a man's back into bloody ribbons, and backs up the picture with a news reference. In all cases, the Islamofascist villains are given bestial and subhuman features, as suggested by Grant Hamilton's "The Spanish Brute."
In all cases, inflammatory pictures and words-- and they should be made inflammatory by intention-- must be backed up with facts.
Hijacking the Enemy's Words
Words are weapons but the enemy's own words can and should be hijacked whenever possible. "Allahu akbar!" should always be used in the context of Islamofascists cutting off heads or committing other atrocities. Although it means "God is great" the context should always suggest, "Let's chop off heads!" or "Let's stone a woman to death!" Robert Heinlein did this in a nonfiction story in which the context of Pravda (truth) always suggested that Pravda meant "bull excrement."
In "Hitler in a Headscarf", the context of "Allahu akbar!" makes it mean "Sieg Heil!"
The enemy has also dug out the old "Jews as Christ Killers" blood libel. This was a very bad place for them to go because we can and should reply with the phrase "Islamofascist Christ Killers" whenever possible. The facts are with us and totally against them because Islamofascists and not Jews are persecuting and killing Christians in droves all over the world.
Circulating the Propaganda
Royalty-free leaflets and cartoons that anyone is free to copy are one way of distributing our propaganda. The ideal result should be a chain reaction; e.g. if three people copy a royalty-free cartoon (which contains a statement giving permission to copy it as long as no changes are made) and post it to their own Web sites or blogs, and three visitors to each of their Web sites copy the cartoon, it will soon be all over the Internet. With regard to leaflets, we all remember imaginative amateur cartoons that circulated from one office to another even before there was an Internet; people who liked them photocopied them and gave copies to their friends.
Omdurman.org has a Web page on the science and history of propaganda for further reading.
Posted by Bill Levinson at December 18, 2005 01:43 PM