1. kuhnkat said:

Demonize: to cause somebody or something to appear evil or threatening in the eyes of others

Totally appropriate as we only have to tell the FULL TRUTH about their actual activities.

The real problem is how to undercut the Propaganda that is humanising these animals to most of the world.

2. Bill Narvey said:

Bill,

I agree that those Palestinians who demonize Israel, Israelis and Jews generally ought to be demonized in return and to be outhustled and out muscled in that regard.

Resorting however to yellow journalism and Nazi type propaganda is not the way to go.

Westerners who are given to using the same kind of racially charged invective to describe radical Islam, radical Islamists and Palestinians as they employ in speaking of non-Muslims, Jews and Christians, undermine the credibility of both themselves and their message and do bring upon themselves accusations of racism from both Muslims and fellow Westerners.

Reaching for precedent for appropriate words to describe the radical Islamic enemy, in the words of various political and military leaders of bygone war eras that were then employed to describe enemies, is out of touch with a world that is much different today.

In Western civilization, tolerance and respect for people of different ethnic and religious background and therefore racial sensitivities are now in keeping with the multicultural ethos that has been incorporated into Western politics and culture. Canada has gone the furthest in this regard by legislating Multiculturalism, enshrining it in the Canadian Bill of Rights and ensuring that its laws are in keeping with its legislated multicultural identity.

Though I am against crudeness and racially charged words to counter the racially charged words of the Islamofacists and Palestinians who employ such language against Israel, Israelis and Jews, I do advocate that Western minds would be more greatly influenced by the intelligent use of symbolism and sloganism in the propaganda war against Palestinians and radical Islamist ideology.

Unfortunately, there is little if any attention paid by Western anti-radical Islamist proponents in their discourse to the use of symbolism and sloganism.

3. Bill Levinson said:

Bill, I am the first person to understand just how badly yellow journalism and Nazi-type propaganda (which the Nazis learned from Anglo-French propagandists of the First World War) can be misused.

The Yellow Press went out of its way to provoke a war in which many soldiers were killed on both sides, just so it could sell more papers. It can be argued that the war freed Cubans from oppression but there is no proof or even strong evidence that the Spanish were guilty of sinking the "Maine." The Spanish press shared some guilt because it published inflammatory "Yankee Pig" cartoons instead of arguing that Hearst and Pulitzer were trying to start a war to sell newspapers.

Vicious Anglo-French propaganda was responsible for getting 110,000 Americans killed in England and France's war in 1917-1918. There was right and wrong on both sides of that war, and we didn't have a dog in that fight. Then the Nazis adopted these methods and used them to kill not only 6 million Jews but also 3-4 million Gypsies and Polish Catholics, and to start a war in which 30 million or so other people were killed.

The basic reality is, however, that the enemy is using these methods against us, as shown by the "Crucified Palestine" cartoon (which seems to be copied from the Nazis' "Crucified Germany" cartoon).

As far as your argument, "Westerners who are given to using the same kind of racially charged invective to describe radical Islam, radical Islamists and Palestinians as they employ in speaking of non-Muslims, Jews and Christians, undermine the credibility of both themselves and their message and do bring upon themselves accusations of racism from both Muslims and fellow Westerners" goes, (1) history has shown at least three times (1898, 1917-1918, 1930s-1945) that this kind of thing WORKS even when its user is lying and (2) the Islamofascist enemy obviously thinks it is effective because the enemy is directing it at us (Jews, Christians, and other kafirs).

I do not recognize the legitimacy of any multiculturalist system and I never hesitate to say that Euro-American culture is superior to Third World cultures that sanction domestic violence, femicide, rape, and religious persecution. Multiculturalism seems to be an enemy initiative to cripple our ability to defend ourselves, and I refuse to be so crippled. I am sufficiently confident in both the righteousness of our cause (defense of Civilization, including the rights of women and religious minorities) and my own abilities that I am willing to emulate von Clausewitz's role model, the entity "who knows no law other than his own power."

4. Bill Narvey said:

Bill,

I am posting my comments to your preceding post as it has application here as well. Perhaps there are others who may wish to add their views, either in disagreeing, agreeing or expanding on this dialogue.

I agree with your frustrations, your view that we are in a war that has been declared against Western civilization by radical Islamofacists, regardless of whether it is radicalised Islam or Islam itself as some hold, and your intent to develop a lexicon of words and phrases that Westerners would take hold of to express their anger and disgust with those Islamofacists who attack us and their ideology that in many aspects is the antithesis of our Judeo-Christian culture and society.

The West is quite unlike the Muslim world where a very large majority, while not necessarily terrorists and directly supportive of them, are aligned with radical Islam at least to the extent of hatred of Jews, Israel and America for example.

Those Westerners who are advocating a united offensive against radical Islamic ideology and the terrorism it spawns, are being hamstrung in having their efforts come to fruition by the very freedoms we stand on our soap boxes to proclaim we so arduously value and cherish.

The West and Western liberal left wing ideologues especially, seem oblivious to the fact that those very freedoms we cherish are being taken advantage of by radical Muslims for their own benefit. Further these same Westerners perversely find common cause with radical Islamic ideology in casting Israel and America in the role of evil oppressors of the lives and liberty of the underdogs in society.

Democratic freedoms are for the benefit of democracies' citizens who deserve those freedoms by exercising those freedoms within the law and for a lawful purpose. Those that do not are quarantined from deomocratic society in our prisons.

Strange that Western democracies do not see that radical Islamists who take advantage of our freedoms to carry out their anti-West/democratic objectives, deserve no better fate than our own citizens who breach our society's trust and the rights of other law abiding citizens.

Stranger and stranger that the liberal left wing does not recognize that in joining radical Islam's voice against Israel and America, that radical Islam does not distinguish between right wing, left wing or centrist Westerner and have declared all enemies of Islam.

Perhaps it is the West's arrogantly smug, but questionable confidence that Western civilization will without having to lift much of a finger, survive intact, whatever the onslaught by radical Islam.

There are a number of reasons and causes for Western dysfunction in failing to recognize that it is Western civilization that is being targeted for death by radical Islam and accordingly it is Western dysfunction that keeps the West from mounting a united offensive to destroy the threat of radical Islam.

Those Westerners who do see the threat of radical Islam, must tirelessly continue to sound the alarm to warn of the imminent danger to Western civilization that radical Islam poses and to keep trying to open their co-Westerners' eyes to the face of Islam that radical Muslims have painted.

If Western eyes can begin to open, Western minds will be more receptive to accepting explanations that do not offend political correctness and multicultural sensibilities, that the ideologies, nature and purpose of radical Islamists are an anathema to all Westerners believe in.

Once that begins to happen, Westerners will be more open to accepting certain pejorative symbolic words and phrases that become codewords for the various aspects of radical Islam and its adherents that are seeking to destroy the West and codewords to motivate Western forces to engage in and carry on the united battle that necessarily will come, hopefully sooner than later.

5. Bill Levinson said:

Bill Narvey wrote, "The West is quite unlike the Muslim world where a very large majority, while not necessarily terrorists and directly supportive of them, are aligned with radical Islam at least to the extent of hatred of Jews, Israel and America for example."

This is definitely true, and I would not even be averse to attempting to win over white supremacist organizations-- some of which support the Islamofascists because the Islamofascists hate Jews! One such individual (who uses a swastika as his avatar) posted to a forum I found through a Google search,

Do you LOOK WHITE?

Do you ACT WHITE?

Do you FIGHT WHITE?

If the answer to all three of the above questions is yes, than you are White enough for me.

Someone else posted to Stormfront.org, "If someone looks White, acts White, fights White, then until their actions prove otherwise, they are our Folk. On the other hand, regardless of pedigree or appearance, those who oppose, criticize, hinder or fail to support our cause are no friends of ours." - David Lane

Now if I place this individual as the Propaganda Man, i.e. the person to whom I wish to address my propaganda, I would point out that Jews "look White, act White, and fight White," noting that Israelis defeated something like five or ten times their number of Third World adversaries in 1948, and those adversaries were better armed. The image of a blonde warrior labeled "Israel" with a Star of David defeating a dark-skinned horde of grunting Arabs could obviously be superimposed on the propaganda that the white supremacists themselves favor.

Furthermore, if the Islamofascists get their way, it is not a Jew who is going to rape their blonde-haired and blue-eyed sister, daughter, or mother, and/or stone her and/or sell her into slavery. (You can see where this kind of propaganda might lead.)

Of course, I would go even further by pointing out that some of my country's best people, like Condi Rice, General Colin Powell, columnist Thomas Sowell, and Roy Innis don't look white but they sure act and fight "whiter" (Euro-American) than most light-skinned people, so perhaps the Stormfront folks should stop hating them just because their skins are a little darker than ours. Convincing at least some of the white supremacists that it is CULTURE (i.e. beliefs, values, and behavior) that count as opposed to RACE (genetic origin) would have two benefits: getting them to stop hating Jews and Black people just for being Jewish or Black, and also turning them against the real enemy.

I have also started a comic strip called "The CrUSAders" (http://www.omdurman.org/comic/) that has a multi-ethnic cast of superheroes who fight militant "Islam." One is, in fact, a Muslim Palestinian woman who fled her country to avoid being killed by her own family (femicide or honor killing). This character's purpose is to remind the audience that the enemy is not Islam but Islamofascism, whose victims include Muslims as well as Jews and Christians.

"The West and Western liberal left wing ideologues especially, seem oblivious to the fact that those very freedoms we cherish are being taken advantage of by radical Muslims for their own benefit. Further these same Westerners perversely find common cause with radical Islamic ideology in casting Israel and America in the role of evil oppressors of the lives and liberty of the underdogs in society."

It's amazing how many liberal women (e.g. Rachel Corrie) take the side of the Islamofascists, whose cultures sanction domestic violence, rape, femicide, and female genital mutilation. These themes must be directed continuously to the "Propaganda Woman" whom we want to convince. Some of Phyllis Chesler's material is excellent for this purpose and it can be built upon.

6. test said:

test

7. leonard said:

Bill - You say you would not be adverse to trying to win over white supremacists.Well they remain no less the enemy than the Islamo-fascists that you seek to combat who have been lapping up their propaganda and hatred towards the Jews.They share the same ideology -and use eachothers platforms - this should be apparent from any website, just look at the proclamations by KKK Duke to the Syrians through MEMRI TV, and the adoption by the Iranian President of Holocaust denial that is spewed through Far Right Websites. I would sugest that if you really profess such views then you should not be using a pro- Israel Advocacy sight to promote them since such views will appal both Christian and Jewish friends of Israel, and you should not be using this forum to promote them.

8. Bill Levinson said:

Leonard wrote, "You say you would not be adverse to trying to win over white supremacists. Well they remain no less the enemy than the Islamo-fascists that you seek to combat who have been lapping up their propaganda and hatred towards the Jews." If we win them over, then they are no longer white supremacists and they are no longer the enemy.

It is a basic tenet of psychological warfare that one can drive a wedge between the leaders and the followers with the right propaganda. If we win the white supremacists over to our viewpoint-- that the conflict is between Euro-American and non-Euro-American cultures as opposed to between whites and nonwhites-- then they are no longer white supremacists [b]and we have won.[/b] Getting them to hate Islamofascists more than they hate Jews and Blacks, and to regard Islamofascists as what they call "mud races," would at least be a partial success. At least then they would not be helping the enemy.

PsyWar requires one to address one's arguments to the Propaganda Man, the hypothetical listener whom you want to convince. In this case, the Propaganda Man is a white supremacist who has been indoctrinated to hate Jews and Black people. What arguments can we make that might cause him to rethink his hatred, or at least redirect it in the proper direction? Even though I agree with the facts that you stated about white supremacists, the Propaganda Man will simply write them off as "Jewish propaganda."

Let's return to David Duke. In directing our arguments to the Propaganda Man as opposed to ourselves, we do not condemn him for meeting with the Jew-haters in Syria. The Propaganda Man has no problem with Jew-haters and he is likely to praise Duke for doing this. On the other hand, our Propaganda Man claims to be a "patriotic white Christian American." We must therefore point out that Syria is an enemy of the United States that is sponsoring terrorism against "white Christian American soldiers" in Iraq. This, according to white supremacist standards, makes David Duke a "race traitor." (I recall arguing somewhere that the best way to deal with a witch-hunt is not to argue that witches don't exist but rather to find, or even manufacture, evidence that the Witch-Finder General is a witch or a sorcerer.) (While terms like "race traitor" are obviously distasteful to us, successful PsyWar requires us to talk the Propaganda Man's language and not our own.)

Another technique might be to use "gray propaganda," which comes from an anonymous source. It obviously does no good to start by defending Jews and Blacks to white supremacists but it might be useful to point out that Syrians are the same "race" (Semites) as Jews, and that they are furthermore the enemies of the "white Christian" world. This might not get the white supremacists to stop hating Jews but it could get them to hate Syria instead of supporting it, which would be a partial success. It also opens a door through which other arguments can be driven later.

Note also that I have taken the anti-Semitic slur "Christ Killers" and turned it against the enemy. Islamofascists and not Jews are slaughtering Christians wholesale so the shoe definitely fits. The enemy is obviously counting on Jews to cringe every time they hear the phrase, and being counterattacked with it is the last thing the enemy expected. It is furthermore absolutely devastating because the facts prove that the enemy deserves this hate-filled label. The kind of decisive shock that wins battles comes from hitting the enemy from an unexpected direction with an attack against which he cannot possibly defend himself, and I am sure the enemy never expected a frontal counterattack with the hate words he himself is so fond of using.

9. Joeboy said:

Bill

You are not going to get white supremacists to stop hating Jews. If they gave up their Jewish conspiracy theories they'd have pretty much no ideology left.

I don't really think this matters to you though. You're just interested in stirring up hatred wherever you can. Good luck with your new neo-Nazi friends, I think you'll find you have lots in common. Try not to get lynched though.

Joe