A Well-Funded Public Campaign of Disinformation

By the time I finished reading the 24-page report put out by Smearcasting.com (about the top 12 Islamophobes in America), I'd scrawled so many notes in the margins, I could have easily written a document twice its size in commentary on the PR effort to convince readers that those who are trying to educate the public about Islam's political goals (and the methods of Jihadis) are all "Islamophobes" who are doing nothing more than smearing the good name of Muslims everywhere and stirring up "racial hatred."

The whole 24-page document, entitled Smearcasting, criticizes, insinuates, implies, but doesn't really say anything substantial. Yet it displays a virulently hateful and sarcastic tone about these "Islamophobes." Ironically enough, they seem Islamophobe-phobic and yet in the entire document, they never once refute any of the quoted claims of their hated dirty dozen.

Robert Spencer, one of my favorite writers, is one of the dozen the document tries to discredit. "Spencer serves as an intellectual force in the [Islam-bashing] movement," it says, "specializing in one-sided interpretations of the Qur'an...Yet Islam does in fact have an interpretative tradition..." The note I wrote in the margin was: "Who cares?!" Let me elaborate on exactly why Islam's interpretative tradition doesn't matter to non-Muslims:

1. Simply by reading the Qur'an — which I have done, and which I recommend you do — you will see why Jihadis are doing what they're doing. They are not "interpreting" the Qur'an and they have no need to do so; they are just doing what Allah tells them to do very directly.

2. You can look on TheReligionOfPeace.com and see the tremendous number of Muslims following the Qur'an's directions.

3. It doesn't matter how the peaceful Muslims have "interpreted" Islamic teachings. It doesn't matter what the "true" teachings are. The non-Muslims — the target of Islamic hatred — need to know what the Jihadis believe, not what the "moderate" or apatheistic Muslims believe.

In addition to all the insinuating and criticizing, the writers of Smearcasting do not acknowledge — and I think this is a significant omission — two vital facts. And the omission of this acknowledgment makes the document lose all credibility. The two facts they omit are:

1. Muslims are committing large numbers of violent acts in the name of Islam.

2. The Qur'an violent and intolerant passages — not mere references to violence but clear commands to Muslims to practice intolerance and violence in their lives.These are such glaring and pertinent facts, I don't think any amount of whitewash of Islam or vilification of these 12 pundits could gain any credibility unless the two facts above are addressed, or at least acknowledged.

Despite all this, the Smearcasting article cheered me up because they offered nothing that caused any doubt about the work we're doing (the dirty dozen and all the rest of the writers, bloggers, podcasters, radio personalities and public speakers trying to educate the public). And more important for my morale, the Smearcasting article revealed the impressive reach of these 12 pundits. It was heartening to know so many people are hearing about Islamic supremacism and apparently wanting to hear the message.

Micheal Savage has a radio show that reaches 8.25 million readers per week. That's impressive. According to the article, Savage "sees a monolithic Islamic scheme to take over the U.S." This statement, as well as many other statements quoted in the Smearcasting article, is never refuted in the article. The authors of the article must have assumed they were writing for multiculturalists who would accept the implication that these claims were preposterous. But, in fact, there IS a monolithic Islamic scheme to take over the U.S. Read about it here. And here. Michael Savage isn't "seeing" it, the Muslims themselves have published their goals!

Bill O'Reilly's Radio Factor show reaches 3.5 million listeners. His show, O'Reilly Factor has an audience of two million prime time viewers. Michelle Malkin and Robert Spencer both have bestselling books. Glenn Beck has the third highest-rated national radio talk show among adults ages 24 to 54, and he has "repeatedly associated Islam with Nazism. He drew a parallel between Mein Kampf and 'jihad' because, he said, both mean 'my struggle.'" Here was another statement left standing, as if it was self-evidently ridiculous, when in fact it is an accurate statement.

Anyway, it was a relief to know these counterjihad pundits were so popular. And it was pleasing to know that in this well-researched onslaught, which was meant to defame and hopefully destroy these twelve kings and queens of Islamophobia, that the best they could come up with was completely toothless.

One of the dirty dozen is Steven Emerson, the man who made the film, Terrorists Among Us. According to Smearcasting, Emerson, "specializes in advancing allegations linking Muslim groups in the U.S. to fundamentalist Islamic international terrorism." Allegations? He's caught them on film!

It seems as if the authors of this slick PR effort didn't think anyone reading it would know anything. Emerson doesn't "alledge" these Muslim groups are linked with terrorism, he simply shows you on film leading known terrorists speaking to large Muslim audiences in America, preaching fiery jihad at events sponsored by large, well-established, mainstream, seemingly moderate Muslim groups in the U.S. Read more about how they operate in America.

I'd like to point out one interesting comment in the Smearcasting article. They were criticizing Robert Spencer, accusing him of "selectively ignoring inconvenient Islamic texts." They write, "A similarly selective reading of the Torah might lead one to conclude that Jews favor killing homosexuals, as well as those who wear garments that mix cotton and wool."

This was one of the best arguments they made in this cloying article, and it is so weak as to be pathetic. When is the last time a Jew killed a homosexual or a someone wearing a cotton/wool blend?

On the other hand, when is the last time a Muslim killed a non-Muslim for being a non-Muslim? Probably a few minutes ago.

These particular texts may be obscure for some Muslims (like those who have never read any Islamic texts), but clearly a lot of Muslims take the Qur'an and Sunnah to heart and sacrifice their lives to fulfill the holy passages. The texts Spencer quotes are relevant and significant right now. Those texts present a concrete threat to the free world. In fact, Spencer continually illustrates quotations of those texts with recent acts of Muslims.

The Smearcasting article also quotes Sean Hannity as saying Islamic extremists have the goal of making Islam the religion of America. This statement was said as if it couldn't possibly be true, which is one of the things that make this article seem like taqiyya. Nobody who wrote this article could possibly be unaware of the goals made public by the largest Muslim organization in America, the Muslim Brotherhood, who very much wants to make Islam the religion of America.

If the people who wrote this article knew about this — and I don't see how they could not be aware of it — then this whole article is an effort to smear the dirty dozen. That is, the article must have been written to intentionally mislead the public about the nature of this issue and to discredit these pundits unfairly and innacurately...knowingly and intentionally. In other words, the article itself is smearcasting. The article is jihad.

Here's a bonus Islamophobe: Brigitte Gabriel. She wasn't one of the dirty dozen. I personally think she qualifies. Check it out: CAIR’s Smear Job Against Brigitte Gabriel.