Thursday, March 26, 2015

PCG's Demonization of Muslims Part 2: Conceiving Hate (2001-3)

December 2001 issue.
(Note the reference to Japan.)

[Update: July 6, 2016: After writing this post I became aware of another article scare mongering against Iran in the period 1998-2001 before 9/11. The post has been amended accordingly.]

So in a previous post looking through PCG's articles from 1998-2001 before 9/11 it was seen that PCG paid surprisingly little attention to the Middle East.

They tended to focus on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict but even with the second intifada erupting it was only mentioned once every few issues, not all the time.

Even more surprisingly PCG was deafeningly silent about Iran. Only one article fear mongered about Iran being the King of the South. [See update.]

If anything they tended to fear monger about Germany and China more than the Arabs and Iranians that PCG's writers have so often railed against.

But now we reach the unfathomably catastrophic crime of 9/11. Did the leaders of PCG change their tune following that most wicked act of mass murder?

Here is a list of articles relevant to this discussion published in The Philadelphia Trumpet between the November 2001 issue and the January 2003 issue.

Looking at it is it quite clear how PCG's writers have latched onto the Middle East in a way they had done before. Events on the Middle East are discussed in just about every issue. Before 9/11 PCG tended to only mention Middle Eastern politics in an issue that would focus on it. Now fear mongering about the Middle East is present in just about every issue.

Also PCG is now much more focused on Iran. Iran was only mentioned in one article between 1998 and 2001 before 9/11. [See update.] Now in this shorter period (November 2001 -- January 2003) there are six articles that fear monger about Iran.

So it is clear that PCG's leaders became decidedly more fixated upon Middle East events after 9/11. And it was only after 9/11 that PCG's leaders began to constantly harp on about Iran within the pages of their recruitment magazine as part of their demonization of Iran.


Here are the articles:



The Battle Lines Broaden by Ron Fraser.

(Here Ron Fraser venomously insinuates that Muslims are scary and prone to violence and hatred.
Americans, in their extreme penchant for even-handedness, have been selling themselves the lie that most Muslims are peaceful folks. If this be the case, why is it that America’s own media continue to throw up perpetual video images of hundreds, even thousands, in Iraq and Pakistan, demonstrating against the U.S. and baying for the blood of American men, women and children?
Fraser then focus his sights particularly on Wahhabism, a strict form of Sunni Islam that is enforced within Saudi Arabia.
It may well be that the majority of Muslims are peace-loving people. But the point is that the most aggressive force within Islam on the political and religious fronts is the Wahhabi movement that has spawned TERRORISM.
He then suddenly brings up Iran, which is Shiite, which is not Wahhabi at all. Wahhabism is a strand of the other kind of Islam, Sunni Islam.
Biding its time as events shape up in the Middle East is the most dominant Muslim nation of all: Iran. The Iranians have a long-term goal in mind which was concisely articulated at the close of the Gulf War: ...
But Fraser seems very confused about Wahhabism. He somehow thinks it dates to the seventh century when in fact it only started in the eighteenth century.
Granted, the terrorists themselves represent the extreme of violent Islamic hatred. Writing for [another publication], [a non-PCG writer] indicates that the militant Islamic sect from which the terrorists hailed is the Wahhabi, dating from the very establishment of Islam in the seventh century. 
Somehow Fraser never bothered to note that this is wildly inaccurate.)

The Head of the Snake by Joel Hilliker.

(Here Hilliker insists the real threat to America within the Middle East is Iran.)

A New Push for Palestine

IRA/Al Qaeda Link?

Volatile Allies


The Power of Religion by Ron Fraser

(Here Fraser venomously portrays Al Qaeda as a creation of the left.
What is intriguing is that many of al-Qaeda’s operatives gained their education on the liberal-socialist campuses of the universities of the West. With middle-class backgrounds, these university-educated converts to militant Islam are the new wave of youthful, bored offspring of a generation which has matured within or under the structure of soft, corrupt elites. Ripe for the plucking, just as the turned-off Western youth of the 1960s and ’70s were to their Marxist-Leninist revolutionary mentors, these young people have been easy meat for brainwashing by fundamentalist mullahs intent on jihad against the West. Nurtured by the widespread Islamic resentment of the power and prosperity of the West, they rationalize the miserable political, social and economic record of Islamic countries by swallowing the neo-Marxist theories that explain Third World poverty as being the result of exploitation by the West.
Fraser insists this is a war of religion thus making all Muslims everywhere worthy of blame in Fraser's eyes.
Many world leaders have gone out of their way to try and sway global opinion to their claim that the terrorist war declared on the U.S. and the West is not a religious war. But if this be the case, why are they trying so hard to convince us? Perhaps there is more to this than meets the electronic eye of TV. It is time we faced the facts... 
What Salman Rushdie says is right: This is a religious war! It has been declared, loud and strong, by one of its principle antagonists as such. In a videotaped message aired over Arabian television stations, Osama bin Laden said, “This war is primarily a religious war.” Appealing to Muslims worldwide, he said, “Rise in support of your religion. Islam is calling you” (Toronto Star, Nov. 4). This is the opposite message to the one President Bush is seeking to put across to those Muslim states he hopes to retain in the coalition against terrorism.
Then why did Al Qaeda kill so many Muslims?

Maybe Ron Fraser should have bothered to note that over thirty of the victims of 9/11 were Muslims. Many of them Bangladeshis who worked in a restaurant. Maybe Ron Fraser should have asked himself why was Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden willing to murder them as well if there really is "a religious war"?

And Ron Fraser agrees with Osama bin Laden. He trusts Osama bin Laden.
But does this justify the murderous terror tactics of extremist Muslims against the U.S.? Does this justify jihad? It seems so to the fundamentalist Muslims. For theirs is an intolerant religion that labels all unbelievers as infidels and has a history of converting people by force. Islam’s history is a history of war! It is not a pretty picture. Its history is anything but a history of peace!
An who else loves to vilify every other religion as false, even shunning members of related groups that happen to believe many of the same things? Why, PCG of course.)

Negotiating Peace by Jason Hensley

(Although this article talks about the Middle East it is devoted towards fear mongering about Germany. So this article is not really about any Muslims.)



The Beating Heart of Prophecy by Joel Hilliker.

(This issue surveys world events in several regions of the world. This article is the one devoted to the Middle East, specifically talking about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and Iran.
What is happening with Iran today? And with radical Islam?
 No mention of Iraq in this article strangely enough.)


Center of World Terror by Gerald Flurry.

(This article condemns Yasser Arafat and Iran.)


Up for Grabs by Ron Fraser.

(This article fear mongers about Central Asia, states newly independent of what used to be the Soviet Union. It is worth noting that none of them have turned into Islamist states as was insinuated here.)


What is Happening in the Middle East? by Ron Fraser

(Here Fraser talks about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict then in the throes of the second intifada.)


The Two Faces of Iran by Joel Hilliker

(Here Hilliker insists that Iran is still to be feared despite hope that then President Khatami would calm tensions down.)


Revolution in the Air

(About Iran. Here it is insinuated that revolution may soon occur in Iran.
neighboring Iran seethes with internal discontent.  ... The symbolism will not be lost on the large reform-minded population that forms the majority vote in Iran. Over half of this group is under the age of 25. Though endorsing their timid reform-minded president, Mohammed Khatami, their patience could really be stretched as they wait for this non-aggressive leader to instigate the reforms for which they voted him into office.
Yet another false prophecy.)


9/11: One Year Later by Gerald Flurry


What President Bush Doesn't Know by Joel Hilliker

(Here Hilliker moans that Iran should have been the real target. This article is mentioned in a previous post.)


The Solution to Israel's Problems by Gerald Flurry

(About the Israeli-Palestinian conflict again.)



2002: The Real Stories by Ron Fraser

Hebron's History--Key to Peace by Gerald Flurry

(This is largely a reprint of an article by Gerald Flurry in the June 2001 issue of The Philadelphia Trumpet. Here the murder of two Israeli juveniles are exploited to promote PCG's false prophecies.)

(Israel:) Closer with Germany

(Here it is once again fearfully asserted that the State of Israel will be deserted by the United States and forced to ally with the European Union only to be cruelly betrayed.
We continue to point out that Israel will find the European Union, in particular Germany in concert with the Vatican, more than willing to fill the vacuum left by the U.S. Watch for this relationship to continue to grow as the EU, particularly Germany, sends more support to Israel, while at the same time playing a balancing act with the Palestinians as its chief benefactor.
PCG said this in 1996 in Chapter 3 of the original version of Gerald Flurry's booklet, Hosea and God's Adulterous Wife, in Gerald Flurry's 2001 booklet, Jerusalem in Prophecy, and they continue to say this same story to this day.)


And so the January 2003 issue was then followed by the February 2003 issue. But this post ends here.

To be continued...

No comments:

Post a Comment