Voices for the Voiceless

Everyone who labors in the “Islamophobia” business has to contend with the same issue: a lack of effectiveness in the wider world. As has often been pointed out, this website and others like it constitute for the most part an echo chamber. We are addressing an audience that is already familiar with the issues surrounding Islamization and largely agrees with what we say.

There are intramural battles, to be sure — some of them quite fierce. Does the “moderate” Muslim exist? Can the advance of Islam be stopped without first addressing the issue of globalist socialism? Does the welfare state have to collapse before the cultural enrichment of the West can be turned back? The intensity of the arguments over these questions masks the fact that most of the people engaged in the debate already agree with most of what the Counterjihad stands for.

How do we force the same issues into the attention span of the average uninformed low-information voter? This is the essential problem.

My approach is to pursue multiple tracks, mostly Europe-related, since that’s where the center of gravity for this blog may be found. The Brussels Process is one such track. The involvement of the International Civil Liberties Alliance in fighting creeping shariah through the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe is another.

Dr. Bill Warner of the Center for the Study of Political Islam has developed his own ingenious approach to the same problem. He employs the methods of the Left — simplified emotion-based arguments targeting the ill-informed — to shame previously uninvolved people into paying attention to the worldwide persecution of religious minorities by Islam. He uses the same “lefty-speak” as his opponents to occupy the moral high ground in the discussion.

In the following video Dr. Warner provides some specific advice and examples of his approach:

A couple of days ago we mentioned the Religious Communicators Council (RCC) meeting in Nashville later this week. Bill Warner and other activists from Voices for the Voiceless are planning a silent demonstration at the event:

RCC is Training Writers to Deny the Persecution of Christians

We will hold a silent demonstration on Saturday, April 5, 2014 at 11:15 am to protest the Religious Communicators Council (RCC) meeting in Nashville. It will be silent to demonstrate their lack of reporting persecution of Christians. We will invite the media and issue a press release.

The protest will be held rain or shine. Further details about how to park, signs, etc. are posted at voices4voiceless.org

Why We Are Demonstrating

On April 3-5 the RCC will hold a national convention at The Inn at Opryland, 2401 Music Valley Drive, Nashville, TN 37214

There is not ONE RCC speaker who will deal with the persecution of Christians. They support the oppressors, and deny the victims.

Why This is so Important

Those who attend the RCC convention are the major voices in the suppression of the news about the murder of religious minorities. They have no opposition and dominate the media. The RCC shapes the agenda and message that religious communicators use to deny the suffering of the victims, their brothers and sisters.

We need a show of force. The Muslim Brotherhood has stated that they’ve made their greatest gains in the apologist pulpits. Now is the time to resist their dominance.

You Are Not Powerless — What You Can Do

All we ask is that YOU SHOW UP and stand together in silent protest. If you can take part, send us an email to: info@voices4voiceless.org

Spread the word on social media, email, friends. Be sure to contact us at info@voices4voiceless.org and let us know you will attend. We need help with signs and other details.

Additional Info

The general philosophy of this protest can be found here.

Here is the website about this protest.

18 thoughts on “Voices for the Voiceless

  1. One speaks to children in a different way than with adults for some matters.

    I guess Warner’s strategy of consciously resorting to pure pathos – thus relinquishing the more mature critical-thinking-infused outlook – is like that. We are acknowledging that our interlocutors are undeveloped in the faculties for mapping out the matters we both seek the best path through.

    Seems wrong at first. We know better, and we are using their penchant for thoughtless emotional reflex to manipulate them. At the same time, it’s also a bit Aikido-like.

    One slight problem may be that since we know better, we have to steel ourselves, while the lefties et al do it all day with wide-eyed sincerity.

    • So how to steel ourselves? If you understand that these people don’t think but respond to mere emotion, there is no steeling necessary.

      We must talk to them in their tribal baby goo-goo language. They are not familiar with the authentic language of tradition and consideration anyway. Our schools trained them in the baby talk. They know no other language. We must speak intelligently to each other, but when talking or writing to a leftist, in their environment, you must embed your language with their terms. At least one per sentence minimum:

      silenced voices
      , etc.

    • He still mentions facts though: the brochure doesn’t fail to use facts. The approach appears to be using facts and framing them in a way that will trigger the right emotions.

  2. Good, but one problem Christians like Jews have been set-up as fair game in the multikulti mindset they can not be victims, they can only be victims of aggression they invited upon themselves.

  3. At 4Freedoms we realised some years ago, we are in a post-dialogue situation.

    Bill Warner has realised that

    a) the Left/the Anointed do not respond to rational debate (they do respond to violence, as they spineless crumping before islam shows)
    b) the victims of sharia are the only point at which one can connect islam to the understanding of the vast majority of society (4 Freedoms has been concentrating on this angle for some years now, the ICLA has recently started to focus on this too)

    When people do not respond to rational debate there are only 2 ways to “talk” to them: emotion and violence. I don’t see Bill Warner getting violent, so this is the only option he has available to him. His recent comparison of our fight against islam with the fight against the Soviet Union put us only 1/3 of the way into the battle. I think he has realised that if the battle with the islamisation of the west takes as long as the battle with communism did, then we have already lost.

    People need to understand, the islamo-nazis and the fascist Left robbed muslim victims of islam of the only word that existed to describe their (justified) fears of islam: islamophobia. Anyone who uses the word “islamophobia” to criticise those who fear islam, is party to robbing the victims of the only word they have. This word MUST be returned to its original meaning from 100 years ago. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamophobia#History_of_the_term

    • That way of arguing is a futile and self-defeating move into the moderate islam arena, an attempt to reform islam in its own image.

      Good luck with that one you will need it!

      • Can you explain why that argument is self-defeating? In what ways is that so?

        We will need good luck no matter how it goes.

        • @Dymphna,

          Only several comments into the thread and already the Christian victims of islam have been forgotten and displaced for the “robbed muslim victims”.

          In someway it is the trap of saying only muslims can practice “islamophobia” and any outside critic is an illegitimate interlocker supporting what is a muslim heretic – islam then becomes the victim of the illegitimate interlocker and the muslim heretic.

      • “That way of arguing is a futile and self-defeating move into the moderate islam arena, an attempt to reform islam in its own image.”

        I don’t believe there’s any moderate islam. And you seem to have a very crude concept of what tactics can be deployed.

        • I agree with you Joe, crude and unsettling but that is the configuration, nothing to stop both tactics being deployed.

  4. Ah, the ‘voiceless’. Reeks of those crazy neoReactionaries.

    As with the tree in the forest:
    ‘when a protest is silent, does it make a point?’


  5. Bill, You are to be commended for all you do and have done. I understand your new approach, expanding the class or classes of victims. What we run up against immediately is the ingrained/indoctrinated mantra that whites and/or Christians can never be victims. Those people are forever, in the thinking of the left, oppressors and as such can never be victims.

    This is cut from the same cloth as affirmative action. Only blacks are victims; white are always oppressors.

    Any thoughts on blunting that?

    • Play the Left/Anointed at their own game of victimology. Here’s the victim categories from 4F (divided into “seculary” & “religious” groupings):

      Animal Victims
      Apartheid & Segregation
      Child Victims
      Crime Victims
      Free Speech & Civil Society
      Gay Victims
      Imperialism Victims
      Infiltration & Parasitism
      Military Victims
      Slavery Victims
      Terrorism Victims
      Women Victims

      Buddhist Victims
      Christian Victims
      Jewish Victims
      Muslim Reformist/Apostate Victims
      Sikh Victims

      The Left/Anointed are totally open to being attacked for their support of islamo-nazism’s attacks on the child victims, the slavery victims, apartheid victims, women victims, gay victims, hindu victims, jewish victims, muslim reformists, apostates, etc.

      It’s not about black vs. white. It’s about islam vs. all the different victim categories. These victim categories supply each of you with one (or more) of 17 different fronts on which islamo-nazism (or more particularly, their fascist Left enablers) are vulnerable.

      If the enablers don’t care about christians, then kick them in an area where there is another victim group whom they care about. Do not let up on the enablers. Make them face up to their own hypocrisy. As Alinsky says “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.”

      Expose them. Even if they don’t change, they can shorn of their support by demonstrating their hypocrisy to an audience.

      • Oh, Lord. This reminds me of the first time I ran across an academic offering at the nearby state university: “Victimology” as an official ‘subject’ for which one could earn credits toward a humanities degree.

        That was a frightening moment – i.e., realizing that a grass-roots, local endeavor to help families in crisis by keeping the women safe while the drama played out was about to be co-opted & corrupted & falsified by academia.

  6. Brilliant. Dr. Warner has “cut to the quick” on how to deal with these people. He deserves our full support.
    I know you will keep us informed on how this goes and offer any refinements to the method.

  7. Those of us who see ourselves as liberals, supporting equal rights for men and women and pro-gay rights, have been taking this approach from the start. I find that in private my friends (gay and straight) are very supportive of islam criticism. But there is nothing specific we can do. They’re not going to start supporting parties they see as right wing, let along anti-gay ones. The mid-left is waking up, but has nowhere to go…

  8. Ha ha ha you censored my comment.

    I’m glad I spent 45 minutes writing out EXACTLY why the Counter-Jihad is doomed. So let me summarize it:

    The CJ is the exclusive domain of white conservative Christians. We (liberals) don’t trust you (conservatives), and we don’t like you. When you tell the truth about something, like islam, it just makes most of us believe the lie of ‘peaceful’ islam even more.

    YOU (and your conservative cohorts) are the greatest obstacle to the Counter-Jihad. Most liberals don’t realize that a conservative (like a broken clock) can be right (by accident) at least 2 minutes a day.

    Perhaps if you hadn’t CENSORED my original comment you wouldn’t be living in an echo chamber of JUST you and other people who think EXACTLY like you? I was looking forward to getting yelled at people who strongly disagree with me. Obviously you can’t take a dissenting opinion.

    How very ‘muslim’ of you. 😛 (At least you didn’t threaten to cut off my head, or go Ted Nugent on me).

Comments are closed.