By the time I finished reading the 24-page report put out by Smearcasting.com, (about the top 12 Islamophobes in America) I had made so many notes in the margins, I could have easily written a document twice its size in commentary on the ridiculous PR effort to convince readers that those who are trying to educate the public about Islam's relentless encroachment, 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, but 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.
On top of that, they do not acknowledge — and I think this is a significant omission — two significant facts. And the ommission 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. There are intolerant and clearly violent portions in the Qur'an.
These are such glaring and pertinent facts, I don't think any amount of whitewash of Islam or vilification of these pundits could gain any credibility unless they are addressed, or at least acknowledged.
But the article, Smearcasting, actually cheered me up because first of all, they offered nothing that caused any doubt about the work we're doing. And more important for my morale, I discovered the impressive reach of these pundits. It was heartening to know so many people are hearing this message and apparently wanting to hear this message.
Micheal Savage has a radio show that reaches 8.25 million readers per week. According to the article, Savage "sees a monolithic Islamic scheme to take over the U.S." This, as well as many other statements are never refuted in the article, by the way. They must have assumed they were speaking to multicultural journalists who would accept the implication that these claims were preposterous, when almost all the pundits' comments they quoted in the article (in order to ridicule the statements) were accurate, reasonable assertions and statements of fact.
Bill O'Reilly's Radio Factor show reaches 3.5 million listeners. 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.'" This is another statement the article left standing, as if it was self-evident this is ridiculous, when in fact it is an accurate statement.
Anyway, it was a relief to know these antijihad pundits were so popular. Our message doesn't have nearly the reach we need, but this is a good start, and the numbers were bigger than I expected. And it was pleasing to know that in this well-researched onslaught meant to defame and hopefully destroy these twelve kings and queens of Islamophobia, that the best they could come up with was completely toothless.