Qatar Awareness Campaign – The Stream

qatar_awareness_campaign_logoMs. Malika Bilal and Ms. Femi Oke

Al Jazeera English

PO Box 23127

Doha – Qatar

 

Dear Ms. Bilal and Ms. Femi Oke:

This letter is being sent to you on behalf of the Qatar Awareness Campaign Coalition.  The purpose is to inform you and the public of the activities of Qatar, the country which owns Al Jazeera, the network on which you are co-hosts of the program, The Stream.

We urge to you read the information below, which includes evidence that Qatar is arguably the preeminent sponsor of terror in the world today.  It is a benefactor of the genocidal armies of ISIS, al Qaeda, and Boko Haram; it is involved in Taliban narcotics trafficking through a relationship with the Pakistani National Logistics Cell; and profits from operating a virtual slave state.  Qatar is involved in terror operations from Nigeria to Gaza to Syria to Iraq

So the public understands why this letter is addressed to you both, who are American citizens and co-hosts of an Al Jazeera daily program, here is pertinent background on the Doha-based network.

  • In 1996, then Emir of Qatar, Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani, provided a $137 million loan to start Al Jazeera. Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani was the ruling monarch of Qatar from 1995-2013.
  • Al Jazeera is based out of Doha, the capital of Qatar.
  • In July 2013, 22 employees of Al Jazeera resigned after the station “air[ed] lies and misle[d] viewers” (according to Al Jazeera correspondent) regarding the Egyptian revolution on July 4, which ousted Muslim Brotherhood president Mohamed Morsi.
  • Al Jazeera is home to the Muslim Brotherhood’s spiritual leader (and Morsi-backer) Yusuf al-Qaradawi, who reaches an estimated 80 million viewers each week.

In light of Al Jazeera’s consistent and vocal support for the Muslim Brotherhood and their associated terror campaigns, we ask that you consider the attached sourced report on Qatar’s activities.  The links cited are vetted and credible sources.  We hope you take the time to verify the truth of the statements for yourself.

After doing so, the Coalition of the Qatar Awareness Campaign calls on you to exert due influence on the Qatari government to cease any type of involvement in all forms of Islamic terrorism, slavery, and drug trafficking!

Sincerely,

Lt. Col. Allen B. West (US Army, Ret) – AllenBWest.com

Charles Ortel – Washington Times

Frank Gaffney, Jr. – Center for Security Policy

Pamela Geller –  Atlas Shrugs

Paul E Vallely, US Army (Ret) – Chairman, Stand Up America

Robert Spencer – Jihad Watch

Walid Shoebat – Shoebat.com

**

& the entire Qatar Awareness Campaign Coalition.

Qatar Research Report: http://www.stopqatarnow.com/p/research-report.html
Sign the Petition! Visit www.stopqatarnow.com
Facebook: Stop Qatar Now
Twitter: @stopqatarnow

** Select signatures as of 9/27.  The Qatar Awareness Campaign Coalition is comprised of more than 25 journalists, national security experts, publishers, and independent researchers. To view all Coalition participants, please visit the Campaign’s website.

CC: PR, Media Relations of Al Jazeera

The Media’s Silence to Hamas’ Genocidal Venom

F131115EN04-450x307By Robert Spencer:

The Spanish government on Monday announced that it had “provisionally suspended” sales of weapons to Israel because of its supposed targeting of civilians in Gaza. This came a day after the Obama Administration declared that it was “appalled” by Israel’s “disgraceful” shelling of a UN school in Gaza. UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon called the shelling a “moral outrage” and a “criminal act.” The only problem with all this moral indignation is that it is wrongly placed on the victim rather than the perpetrator, and bears witness to the success of Hamas’s propaganda barrage.

These are just two of the most recent examples of the success of Hamas’s skillful manipulation of the mainstream media, and the eagerness of the media to be manipulated – an eagerness so great that amid the frenzy to demonize Israel in the court of world opinion, Hamas’s oft-reiterated genocidal bloodlust and brazen breaking of ceasefire agreements goes unreported and ignored.

The U.S. condemnation of the Israeli shelling of the UN school was a particular victory. Jeff Dunetz reported in Truth Revolt Monday that “evidence is emerging that the Israeli strike hit outside of the school and the bodies were moved into the courtyard to make it look like Israel hit the school.” This wouldn’t be remotely close to the first time that Palestinian jihadis have been caught faking Israeli “atrocities” – recently they even billed a still from a horror movie as a fresh Israeli killing of a Palestinian civilian.

Meanwhile, Hamas is cheerfully above-board about how it manipulates the mainstream media. The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) reported in July that “in light of the recent round of fighting in Gaza, the Hamas interior ministry has issued guidelines to Gaza Strip social media users for reporting events and discussing them with outsiders.” These guidelines included this unabashedly Orwellian instruction: “Anyone killed or martyred is to be called a civilian from Gaza or Palestine, before we talk about his status in jihad or his military rank. Don’t forget to always add ‘innocent civilian’ or ‘innocent citizen’ in your description of those killed in Israeli attacks on Gaza.”

But the international media has been almost unanimously indifferent to how it is being played. Nor does it show much interest in the numerous reports of Hamas launching attacks against Israel from civilian areas, so as to provoke retaliatory strikes that can be used for propaganda purposes. The Indian network NDTV reported Tuesday that they had witnessed Hamas constructing a rocket silo “under a tent right next to the hotel where our team was staying. Minutes later, we saw the rocket being fired, just before the 72-hour ceasefire came into effect.” NDTV noted that they were publishing their report “after our team left the Gaza strip – Hamas has not taken very kindly to any reporting of its rockets being fired.” The network, which is no friend of Israel, concluded: “But just as we reported the devastating consequences of Israel’s offensive on Gaza’s civilians, it is equally important to report on how Hamas places those very civilians at risk by firing rockets deep from the heart of civilian zones.”

Read more at Front Page

Forty questions for the international media in Gaza

truthBy David Bernstein:

Reprinted with the permission of the author from the (excellent) British “Harry’s place” blog.

1. Have you or any of your colleagues been intimidated by Hamas?

2. Do you feel restricted in your ability to ‘say what you see’ in Gaza?

3. How do you feel about the Spanish journalist who said Hamas would kill any journalist if they filmed rocket fire?

4. Has Hamas pressured you to delete anything you have published?

5. Has Hamas ever threatened to take your phone, laptop or camera?

6. Has Hamas ever taken the phone, laptop or camera of a colleague in Gaza?

7. Have you seen Hamas fighters in Gaza?

8. If yes, why have you not directly reported Hamas fighting activity when you are eye-witnesses in Gaza, but rather indirectly reported about what the IDF says they Hamas has done?

9. Are you scared to publish photos of Hamas operatives on your Twitter page, or broadcast images of Hamas fighting and aggression on your news channel?

10. Have you published any photos of terrorists launching rockets in Gaza? If so, are these images being turned down by your newspaper or broadcaster?

11. Have you thought of interviewing the traumatised residents of southern Israel?

12. When Israeli authorities say that most of the dead in Gaza are terrorists, and Hamas says most of the dead in Gaza are civilians, how do you differentiate?

13. When Hamas Health Ministry statistics contradict Hamas’ own propaganda and reveal that mostly men of fighting age have died so far in Gaza, does it give you pause for thought?

14. Is an underage armed terrorist still counted as a terrorist or a child when killed? Or both? Do you explain to your readers how this is possible?

nickcaseytweet15. Have you put to Hamas spokespersons that firing rockets from civilian areas in a war situation will draw return fire and lead to the death of civilians?

16. Nick Casey of the Wall Street Journal tweeted: “you have to wonder with the shelling, how patients at Shifa hospital feel as Hamas uses it as a safe place to see media.” Never mind wondering; did you ask any patients how they feel?

17. And how do you feel about the fact that Casey subsequently deleted his tweet?

Read more at Washington Post

Also see:

 

 

 

WHY YOU DON’T SEE HAMAS FIRING ROCKETS ON TV

Hamas-RocketsBreitbart, by JAMES DELINGPOLE:

From the Facebook page of Israeli filmmaker Michael Grynszpan:

I met today with a Spanish journalist who just came back from Gaza. We talked about the situation there. He was very friendly. I asked him how comes we never see on television channels reporting from Gaza any Hamas people, no gunmen, no rocket launcher, no policemen.. We only see civilians on these reports, mostly women and children. He answered me frankly : “it’s very simple, we did see Hamas people there launching rockets, they were close to our hotel, but if ever we dare pointing our camera on them they would simply shoot at us and kill us.” Wooh, impressive. Then I asked him “would you mind saying that on camera? I can film you explaining this…” For some reason I cannot really understand he refused and almost ran away. I guess my camera is as dangerous as Hamas threats… So just for you to know, the truth will never appear on the images you see on television.

As the Elderofziyon blog reports, this has long been common practice among Islamist militias.

It is worth reminding people about how reporters in southern Lebanon dealt with Hezbollah intimidation in 2006. CNN’s Nic Robertson dutifully accompanied Hezbollah on a planned tour of a bombed out building, repeating Hezbollah’s talking points about not seeing any military targets there and not telling viewers that it was staged entirely by Hezbollah.

Only when he was safely back in the US, and challenged on TV about his report, did he admit the truth, as reported by Newsbusters:

Hezbollah has “very, very sophisticated and slick media operations,” that the terrorist group “had control of the situation. They designated the places that we went to, and we certainly didn’t have time to go into the houses or lift up the rubble to see what was underneath,” and he even contradicted Hezbollah’s self-serving spin: “There’s no doubt that the [Israeli] bombs there are hitting Hezbollah facilities.”

 

Profs Blame Pro-Israel Bias for Stereotyping Muslims

Pro-Israel-media-biasFront Page, by Andrew Harrod:

Arabs and Muslims have an image problem in media and entertainment as a result of a pro-Israel political agenda. So claimed Edmund Ghareeb and Jack Shaheen, professors at American and New York Universities, respectively, on June 11, 2014, before an audience of forty middle-aged individuals at Washington, D.C. Jerusalem Fund think tank.

Ghareeb and Shaheen’s presentation, “Portraying Arabs: 30 Years Later,” commemorated their respective 1984 publications, Split Vision: The Portrayal of Arabs in the American Media and The TV Arab.  Drawing upon personal experiences, Ghareeb decried a “lack of balance” in Middle East news coverage in Israel’s favor, although groups such as CAMERA and Honest Reporting routinely demonstrate the reverse. According to Ghareeb, this allegedly biased media stereotyping “dehumanizes a people” and “allows for the use of force” against Arabs.

As evidence for this dubious claim, Ghareeb relied upon equally dubious sources such as Senator William Fulbright, who announced on television in 1973 that “Israel controls the United States Senate” and later became a registered lobbyist for Saudi Arabia.  Ghareeb also praised the reporting of  Peter Jennings as an isolated example of balanced Middle East coverage and labeled Orientalism author Edward Said an “important figure” for writing, Covering Islam:  How the Media and the Experts Determine How We See the Rest of the World.  He then cited Muhammad Hassanein Heikal, longtime editor of Egypt’s semiofficial Al Ahram newspaper and government minister under Egyptian dictator Gamal Abdel Nasser, two individuals who inspired little confidence.

Shaheen began his presentation by recounting how, in 1974, his children told him about “bad Arabs on television,” prompting him to study Arabs and Muslims in popular entertainment.  For his interest in this subject, Shaheen claimed he was “tagged the Arab professor” and had his research dismissed as “not academic; it’s propaganda.” A Rockford Files producer, meanwhile, allegedly rejected his interview request with the statement, “I hate Arabs.”

Hollywood prejudice has now “spread its wings” from Arab Muslims to Muslims in general. Shaheen claimed, noting in a subsequent article on the event that “Islamophobia [has] joined Arabophobia.”  He objected to headlines involving “Islamist extremists” in stories where Islam is not a factor, although he neglected to provide any examples. He did concede that, when pertinent, religion “should be part of the story.”

Shaheen alleged that “people who have a political agenda” play a significant role in creating such stereotypes, while entertainment involving an “Israeli connection” is “pervasive.” Eight seasons of the television crime show NCIS, he noted, featured American intelligence cooperation with an Israeli Mossad agent, not with a Palestinian or Yemeni agent. Yet despite CIA cooperation with Palestinian and Yemeni agents, American ties with Israel are clearly much stronger and mention of them in a TV show involving spies simply reflects reality. Vaguely referenced “friends of Israel” in the media are “much more influential, powerful,” than their opponents, Ghareeb added conspiratorially.

After the event, this reporter asked whether there was an analogy with consistently negative portrayals of Germans, given their authoritarian and aggressive past.  Shaheen called this a “totally different issue.”  He then reiterated his 2002 Nightline comments that Americans “were at war with a country” in the World Wars and not with Islam’s supposedly “lunatic fringe, al-Qaeda.”  Yet decades-long conflict with various Islamic terrorist organizations and dictatorial regimes is hardly a “fringe” phenomenon.

Undeniably, Hollywood’s dream factory and the media can stand more realism, but Shaheen and Ghareeb’s often cartoonish views condemning a supposed pro-Israel political agenda offer little benefit.   Substantial evidence of anti-Israel media bias, however, does exist, and despite Ghareeb and Shaheen’s dubious sources and wishful thinking, art does, in fact, imitate life when it depicts violence among Arabs and other Muslims. Ignoring these facts in deference to the professors’ fantasies would be the real fiction.

Andrew E. Harrod is a freelance researcher and writer who holds a PhD from the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy and a JD from George Washington University Law School. He is a fellow with the Lawfare Project; follow him on twitter at @AEHarrod. He wrote this essay for Campus Watch, a project of theMiddle East Forum.

The Newburgh Deception: HBO Documentary Whitewashes American Jihad Plot

 

By Andrew E. Harrod:

The Newburgh Sting will air Monday, July 21 on HBO.  This documentary concerns a 2009 FBI undercover operation against terrorist attacks upon New York area targets.  Viewers beware, though; this film ignores copious evidence of jihadist motivation in a tale of deprived individuals entrapped by zealous officials that discredits effective tactics against terror.

The documentary analyzes how four American Muslims undertook what they thought would be attacks against two Bronx synagogues and American military transport planes in a May 20, 2009 FBI sting.  The operation begins with FBI informant Shahed Hussain visiting Newburgh, New York’s Masjid Al-Ikhlas mosque undercover, where the apparently wealthy Hussain raised suspicions with persistent inquiries into jihad.  “Everybody here is straight,” however, so Al-Ikhlas imam Salahuddin Muhammad remained unconcerned.

Yet the film recounts how Hussain encountered in Al-Ikhlas’s parking lot, on June 13, 2008, James Cromitie, as described by court records, where his Muslim name, Abdul Rehman, also appears.  In the film, Cromitie falls prey not to talk of jihad, but rather to Hussain’s offer of $250,000, according to former FBI agent and ACLU policy analyst Mike German.  “They’re doing it for the money,” Cromitie likewise says on a surveillance tape in the film about the three plotters he recruits.  David Williams (“AKA DAOUD” in official documents), for example, liked “weed and women,” according to his aunt.  He merely became a “jailhouse Muslim” in order to avoid prison gangs and wanted money for his mother’s liver transplant operation.

These four plotters “certainly were not terrorists,” German judges, but ran afoul of FBI entrapment.  The “rules don’t apply anymore” at an FBI that after September 11, 2001, views the “entire Muslim community as suspect,” German criticizes.  “Some bad actors in every community” can appear, concurs Representative Keith Ellison, when authorities “channel a vast amount of law enforcement resources.”  Muslims are now merely the “new thing” after Communists in the 1950s and gang members in the 1990s.

Yet “Islam literally means peace,” Al-Ikhlas assistant imam Hamin Rashada says.  The “most beautiful thing that has ever come off the tongue” is the Koran, he adds, breaking into tears, to which terrorists are “only giving lip service.”  Zero American mosques have had terrorism links, Nihad Awad, from the unindicted terrorism financing co-conspirator Council on American-Islamic Relations, also assures.

Treating Muslims as “partners or as suspects” in law enforcement is the choice Salam al-Marayati from the equally radical Muslim Public Affairs Council outlines for authorities.  Marayati wanted “to push out surveillance as a law enforcement tactic…with effective partnership programs” at a June 2014 presentation of The Newburgh Sting.

Brief references to jihadist ideology appear in the documentary.  The Bronx synagogues are “good…excellent” targets for Cromitie because “I hate those…f—ing Jewish bastards.”  “This is jihad,” Hussain in turn stresses to Cromitie, and not just a matter of money.

Court records, however, give a far fuller account of why the four plotters’ entrapment defense failed both at trial and on appeal.  Cromitie wanted “to do something to America…to die like a shahid, a martyr” and “go to paradise,” he declared to Hussain after initiating contact with him on June 13, 2008.  “In all his prior encounters as an informant,” Hussain “had never heard anything like that before,” the prosecutor’s brief to the appeals court observed.

Read more at American Thinker

Also see:

‘Muslim Mafia’ author: Muslims working with Facebook to silence critics of Islam

135d74c68d744c0a8ba9abf757e3a456The Examiner, By Joe Newby:

On Wednesday, Dave Gaubatz, a former Air Force investigator and author of “Muslim Mafia,” told Examiner.com that he “infiltrated” a Muslim conference held in Detroit earlier this month. While at the conference, he reportedly spoke to a representative of a group known as Muslim Advocates, who said the organization is working “closely” with social media sites like Facebook and Twitter to close down accounts of users critical of Islam.

“They are asking these groups to close the accounts of anyone who is critical of Islam,” he said. “This is considered serious hate speech and should not be allowed on the Internet.”

According to Gaubatz, the representative also said that “anyone critical of Islam and sharia law are haters.” Ditto for those who oppose either the construction or expansion of a mosque in the United States.

“We are experts with deep experience in the courtroom and powerful connections in Congress and the White House,” Gaubatz recalled being told by the Muslim Advocates representative.

“This should be of no surprise to anyone,” Gaubatz said.

Gaubatz also said the conference, which was attended by representatives and leaders from several groups, should have been named the “U.S. Constitution and the 1st Amendment are for MB terrorists and not for American Patriots.” For four days, he said, he stayed at the same hotel as leaders from over a dozen groups that support the Muslim Brotherhood.

He reportedly met and spoke with executives from the Islamic Society of North America and the North American Islamic Trust.

“I was informed that NAIT owned several hundred million dollars of property in America, and has the funding from 400 plus Islamic Centers in America,” he added.

But Gaubatz’ report of collusion between these groups and social media sites like Facebook and Twitter present a clear danger to the fundamental right of free speech and Americans’ ability to freely express themselves online. As we have reported multiple times, Muslim activists have called for global blasphemy bans and an end to free speech in the United States, despite the clear language of the First Amendment.

Last Wednesday, we reported that one page critical of Islam — “Islam Exposed” — was yanked by Facebook after administrators received death threats. Facebook later restored the page, saying it was yanked in error.

On Wednesday, a post at the page advising visitors to avoid hateful speech was removed by Facebook for allegedly violating the site’s community standards. Facebook did not explain why the post was pulled and one administrator received a 30-day ban.

But as we have reported, Facebook routinely turns a blind eye to threats from users with Muslim-sounding names. Last August, for example, Facebook told a conservative female they could not confirm direct threats she received violated their community standards. One threat reported to Facebook was quite specific: “We will kill you.”

Ironically, Facebook has said it supports free speech and reviews all complaints equally.

We contacted both Facebook and Muslim Advocates to verify Gaubatz’ claim and received no reply as of this writing.

Update: A few hours after this article was published, Facebook falsely flagged the link as “unsafe” in what appears to be a bid to keep it from being circulated. We have reached out to Facebook, but have not received a response.

Update #2: Muslim Advocates spokesperson Fatima Khan responded with an email claiming we misquoted their representative, even though we did not. The statement relayed to us was Gaubatz’s recollection, not a direct quote from MA or any of their representatives. We specifically asked Khan about the quote, and about allegations the group is working to shut down social media accounts of those critical of Islam. Khan never responded. The article was flagged by Facebook after our contact with Khan. More on the incident can be seen here.

Also see:

Guardian Copy Editor Brags About Joining Islamist Censorship Campaign

MTV partners with CAIR to shape television programming for 500 million households despite the group’s Islamist Agenda

CAIR-MTV-HPFlorida Family Association:

Click here to send your email of concern to MTV and Viacom (parent) officials.

The Clarion Project reports in part:

MTV is including the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), a U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entity with a history of radicalism, in its “world-class coalition of expert partners” for a campaign to combat discrimination and inequality. CAIR has a history of tarring its opponents by calling them “anti-Muslim” or “Islamophobes.”

The multi-year “Look Different” campaign will use celebrity activism, television shows and social media to influence the over 500 million households that MTV is available in. While well-intentioned, MTV unfortunately chose to include CAIR, an organization with an extremist history that tars every opponent as an anti-Muslim bigot.

The Justice Department designated CAIR an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest terrorism-financing trial in U.S. history. The government listed CAIR as an entity of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood, specifically its secret Palestine Committee; a body set up to covertly support the Hamas terrorist group.

CAIR’s efforts to use MTV’s campaign for political advantage will be endorsed by the Southern Poverty Law Center, another organization included in MTV’s coalition.

This means that the Southern Poverty Law Center, which has officially labled Florida Family Association a hate group, will be a rallying voice for CAIR’s agenda on the MTV advisory group.  The SPLC.org web site classifies Florida Family Association as engaging in “general hate.”

If anyone thinks that America will never accept Sharia law then they need to read the Clarion Projects report titled Popular Muslim Imam: Working Towards Sharia for America  and Jihadwatch.org article titled Austria to introduce law that respects Islamic Sharia and invites imams to preach at public institutions.

The CAIR that MTV wants expert advice from regarding congenial treatment toward others is the same CAIR (Council on American Islamic Relations) that:

How is it possible that MTV would ever consider CAIR as an expert advisor on congenial and humane treatment of other people (Women, non-Muslims, Apostate Muslims) given an agenda by this group which:

  • Censors and harasses anyone who dares to speak the truth about the Islamist agenda?
  • Pushes for the disarmament of law enforcements’ use of constitutionally valid methods of surveillance to defend the United States against Jihad?
  • Opposes women who dare speak out against “honor violence” against women?
  • Defends adaptation of Sharia law in America?

Additionally, CAIR officials have made some extraordinary public statements:

  • Omar Ahmad, Chairman and founder of Council on American Islamic Relations:  Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faiths, but to become dominant. The Koran, the Muslim book of scripture, should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth.”  Omar Ahmad told a crowded audience of Muslims in 1998 according to a San Ramon Valley Herald news report by Lisa Gardiner.  
  • Omar Ahmad, Chairman and founder of Council on American Islamic Relations:  At the Islamic Association of Palestine’s third annual convention in Chicago in November 1999, Omar Ahmad gave a speech at a youth session praising suicide bombers who “kill themselves for Islam.” “Fighting for freedom, fighting for Islam — that is not suicide. They kill themselves for Islam,” he said.   
  • Nihad Awad, CAIR, Executive Director:  Awad publicly declared “I am in support of the Hamas movement,” during a March 1994 symposium at Barry University.    Before helping to launch CAIR, NihadAwad worked as public relations director for the Islamic Association for Palestine (IAP) in 1993 and 1994. A 2001 Immigration and Naturalization Service memo documented IAP’s support for Hamas and found that the “facts strongly suggest” that IAP was “part of Hamas’ propaganda apparatus.”
  • Mustafa Carroll, executive director of the Dallas-Fort Worth CAIR branch: Muslims living in America should not be bound by U.S. law, according to an official of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, who delivered the controversial message to a Muslim crowd in Austin, Texas.  “If we are practicing Muslims, we are above the law of the land.”   

The advice that CAIR provides MTV, given their above described history, may likely work to promote television impressions that censor and/or minimize pro-Sharia Islamist activities of Muslims and Imams in the United States.  Additionally, CAIR may be inclined to advise MTV to demonize and mock anyone who voices concern about the Islamist agenda in America.  Such censorship and demonization will only work to riskily hide the Islamist agenda’s clear and present danger to American liberties and traditional values.

Florida Family Association has prepared an email for you to send that encourages MTV and Viacom officials to drop CAIR as an expert for their “Look Different” campaign or face the loss of advertisers for programming where CAIR’s involvement is evident.

To send your email, please click the following link, enter your name and email address then click the “Send Your Message” button. You may also edit the subject or message text if you wish.

Please click here to send your email that encourages MTV and Viacom officials to drop CAIR as an expert for their “Look Different” campaign or face the loss of advertisers for programming where CAIR’s involvement is evident.

Go HERE for MTV contact info

Steven Emerson: The effort to censor our NYT ad by pro-Islamist forces makes our point for us

The New York Times: Making the world safe for terrorism

Scurrilous NYT Informant Story Ignores Successes

 

Chicago ABC Station, Financial Institutions Co-Sponsor CAIR Banquet

Hamas Plans New Satellite Channel

Religion News Service, Washington Post bemoan fact that foes of jihad terror “still popular in law enforcement training”

Omar-Sacirbey_avatar-300x300By :

Omar Sacirbey, the fiercely smiling author of this RNS editorial masquerading as a news story that the Washington Post picked up, has all the journalistic standards of Josef Goebbels. Recently he published assertions about me that were obviously and flagrantly false, whereupon I wrote him asking for a retraction and an apology. He wrote back saying that his “editor” had sided with him (big surprise) and thus the lies stayed up.

In this piece he is no less magnificently unimpressed with the truth, as he assembles an impressive tissue of smears, half-truths, innuendos and lies about various foes of jihad terror, and wraps them up nicely into a “news story” that the WaPo, eager as ever to run defamation in the service of Islamic supremacists and jihadists, then presents to its hapless readers. Sacirbey is smarting because a Hamas-linked CAIR smear campaign failed to get former FBI agent John Guandolo’s training course for law enforcement officers canceled in Culpeper County, Virginia. Sacirbey wrote up this hit piece to try to ensure that this failure would not be repeated.

“Anti-Muslim speakers still popular in law enforcement training,” by Omar Sacirbey for the Religion News Service, March 12:

Law enforcement officers in Virginia will no longer receive credit for a counterterrorism course taught by a former FBI agent and anti-Muslim activist after the academy where the course was taught canceled its accreditation the day it was scheduled to begin.

Sacirbey uses “anti-Muslim” throughout this piece for foes of jihad terror, which — as I have said before when pseudo-journalistic ideologues like Sacirbey have used this term in the past — is like calling foes of Nazism “anti-German.” It shows Sacirbey’s bias and sympathy for jihadists, and should never be acceptable practice in what are supposedly respectable journalistic outlets like RNS and the WaPo. But standards go out the window when it comes to journalists covering for jihad terrorism; they do it so unanimously, zealously and unflinchingly that they must either be true believers or paid off, or both.

Nevertheless, the three-day course with John Guandolo, which Culpeper County Sheriff Scott Jenkins vigorously defended, proceeded at nearby Germanna Community College late last month.

Some 50 people, many from out of state, reportedly enrolled in the seminar, “Understanding and Investigating Jihadi Networks in America,” advertised as $225 per trainee.

Note the emphasis on the fee. Leftist allies of Islamic supremacism such as the Center for American Progress and the Southern Poverty Law Center have millions upon millions of dollars — far more than any counter-jihad organization of individual has ever had. But it is a staple of these smear pieces that the so-called “Islamophobia industry” is a well-heeled machine in which people are just in it for the money, as if getting regular death threats and constant vilification is worth any amount of money. Anyway, $225 is a perfectly reasonable charge for a seminar like this one — indeed, far lower than what other organizations charge for programs of similar duration. But Sacirbey is following his marching orders: Imply that it’s all about the money.

The Culpeper controversy is the latest law-enforcement training course to draw harsh criticism from Muslim groups who say agencies hire purported experts in Islam or counterterrorism who in fact have other agendas.

While Muslim-American activists and media reports have raised awareness about anti-Muslim trainers, occasionally resulting in curriculum reviews and canceled classes, many say the problem persists because there are too few police administrators to properly vet courses and instructors.

What Sacirbey means is: “The problem persists because there are too few Leftists and Islamic supremacists putting pressure on police administrators so that they don’t dare host a course that tells the truth about Islam and jihad.”

The consequences, critics add, go beyond political incorrectness and include undermining public safety and obscuring real dangers as police officers chase bad leads based on profiling.

What’s behind this absolutely baseless charge (for which Sacirbey offers no evidence, because there is none) is the ongoing effort by Hamas-linked CAIR and other groups like it to end all surveillance of Muslim communities, including the NYPD’s program which just withstood a Leftist/Islamic supremacist challenge in court.

After 9/11, several anti-Muslim activists emerged, speaking about Islam to audiences at churches, synagogues, political organizations and universities. With the nation focused on homeland security, many anti-Muslim speakers began offering their courses to local, state, and federal law enforcement agencies, which paid for them with taxpayer-funded government grants.

Nearly 13 years later, these speakers continue to win lucrative fees to train law enforcement officers despite a history of rhetoric that seems to undermine their credibility.

Note again the emphasis on the money. I would have told Omar Sacirbey if he had asked me, but of course he didn’t, because he didn’t want the truth: when I was flying around the country in order to help give training seminars for the FBI, CIA, JTTF, and military groups, I didn’t get paid. Not a penny. Not even for expenses. I paid my own way, bought my own hotel rooms, etc. On a few occasions a Colonel who had me speak several times on military bases told me about a form I could fill out for reimbursement of my travel expenses. I never filled out the form. I did the training out of a sense of duty to my country, not for personal gain. If Omar Sacirbey were a journalist rather than a smear merchant, he might have asked me and some others what we were paid, whether we were paid, etc. But quite obviously he is not a journalist.

For example, Guandolo, who taught the Culpeper class, is seen saying in a YouTube video with anti-Muslim blogger Robert Spencer that CIA Director John Brennan converted to Islam. In another recording, he claims that Brennan is “unfit for duty,” because he has brought in leaders of Hamas to advise the government.

Note again the identifier intended to demean: “anti-Muslim blogger.” Not, say, “bestselling author and former FBI trainer.” Daniel Martin Varisco, another “Islamophobia” smear merchant, has a blog and wasrecently whining about how it was less popular than this one. But you can be sure that Sacirbey would never, ever refer to Varisco as a “blogger.”

Anyway, Sacirbey presents Guandolo’s charge that Brennan is a Muslim as if it were self-evidently false. On what basis? Has Brennan ever denied this? No. Is it widely known that there is a top intelligence official in the Obama Administration’s CIA who has converted to Islam? Yes. It was reported in none other than the Washington Post in 2012. Why couldn’t it be Brennan? Did Sacirbey speak to Brennan? If he did, he doesn’t mention it in the article. What is much more likely is that Sacirbey didn’t speak to Brennan, and has no idea whether or not he is a Muslim, but since Brennan hasn’t said anything one way or the other about the charge, he uses it to portray Guandolo as crazy. (You can see the video of my interview with Guandolo here.)

Read the rest of this excellent rebuttal at Jihad Watch