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

Fox Haters Carrying Water for CAIR

The Council on American-Islamic Relations Announces Educational Initiativeby :

For some progressive writers, it’s more important to bash Fox News than to expose American Islamist groups’ rejection of liberal values. In recent weeks, the Council on American-Islamic Relations has aggressively promoted articles by Fox haters who are more concerned with smearing CAIR opponents as anti-Muslim bigots than addressing facts and evidence.

The U.S. Justice Department says CAIR is a U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entity and labeled it an unindicted co-conspirator in a Hamas-financing trial. Federal prosecutors said in a 2007 court filing that CAIR uses deception to “conceal from the American public their connections to terrorists.” CAIR’s documented record should alienate every progressive.

Part of those efforts is taking advantage of writers with influence in the media. Don’t take my word for it. Look at what CAIR Vice Chair Sarwat Husain said at another terror-tied conference:

“Media in the United States is very gullible, ok? And they will see that if you have something, especially as a Muslim, if you have something to say, they will come running to you—and take advantage of that.”

In a presentation by CAIR Communications Director Ibrahim Hooper, he told supporters how to manipulate reporters. One of the slides was titled “Characteristics of a Journalist” and said, “They will expect you to do their work. Let them.”

CAIR also said to exploit the fact that journalists do “little primary research,” are “under extreme deadline pressure” and “fea[r] charges of inaccuracy.” This is especially true of CAIR’s media allies that choose political ideology over all else.

On February 20, CAIR distributed a Media Matters hit piece by Michelle Leung describing me as “Fox’s Newest Anti-Muslim ‘National Security Analyst,’” even though I am neither anti-Muslim nor “new” on Fox. If she had checked her own website’s archives, she would have seen a hit piece from 2011 about an appearance. The premise of that article is that I am not a credible speaker on Libya because I opposed the Ground Zero Mosque.

My appearance was about the Clarion Project’s disclosure of a jihadist enclave in Texas run by Jamaat ul-Fuqra/Muslims of the Americas. Her article didn’t even mention the topic I was discussing because that might wake readers up as to why this was a story worth covering.

Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX), Vice Chair of the Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security, said the discovery is “appalling.” Despite Leung’s description of Clarion and me as “anti-Muslim,” around a dozen Muslim organizations in the U.S. and Canada endorsed a statement calling on the U.S. government to label Jamaat ul-Fuqra as a Foreign Terrorist Organization.

Read more at Front Page

Tech-savy jihadists up their media campaign

untitled-1 (1)Arabica:

As jihadist militants continue attacks on military and government targets, the recent release of a video by Ansar al-Quds, a militant jihadist organization, points to an increased use by these groups of media to complement their military operations.

The video shows former Major Waleed Badr confessing to the attempted assassination of Interior Minister Mohamed Ibrahim near his home in Nasr City, east of Cairo. The video closes with the large, fiery explosion of the car bomb, which pierces the air and draws strong reactions from cars and passersby.
The increase use of media by jihadists was also evident during the filming of the satellite station bombing south of Cairo a few weeks ago.
What is perhaps surprising about the use of media by these organizations is that its conflicts with our stereotypes of a jihadist, who we often think of as an uneducated country bumpkin, rather than a tech-savy man behind a camera, uploading a video of a terrorist attack to the internet.
Major General Adel Suleiman, president of the Strategic Dialogue Forum, says jihadist groups have powerful media and military arms, for most of their members are engineers and specialists, unlike people think. “They have technical knowledge,” he says. “And they use it before and after military operations.”
IT expert Hani Abdel Aziz says terrorist groups in Egypt use sophisticated techniques to upload videos to mask their true identities and location. “They use unknown programs that security services find difficult to track down,” he says.
“CPROXY is one such program that opens another account every half hour,” he says. “This makes it difficult for the security services to follow.”
Abdel Aziz explained this program is not as common in Egypt as other places, like Saudia Arabia, which is where the idea likely originated for a jihadist application to this program. “Saudis use CPROXY to access prohibited pornographic sites,” he says. “And the Saudi authorities often fail to prevent it because the user goes from Saudi Arabia to China to open these sites.”
Suleiman argues that such technological expertise has been transferred from outside Egypt. “They are learned, having worked abroad,” he adds. “They use the Internet to recruit new members or post their military operations.”
Abdel Ghafour Shemeis, a leading figure of the Jamaa Islamiya group, agrees, adding that most expertise was accumulated in Iraq or Syria and transferred to Cairo when the jihadists came to settle there.
“Maybe they were helped by foreign intelligence services,” he guessed, pointing to former Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi who helped Egypt’s Revolution Organization to attack the Israeli embassy in the early eighties. “They used high technology to film the attack before and after, thanks to Libyan regime support.”
Shemeis also argues that the rate at which new groups are able to get started and running, shows they must be receiving outside help. “Some jihadist groups have been formed as recently as a few months ago,” he says. “Still they have advanced media technologies, which proves they are supported by foreign elements.”
“Jihadist groups learned this technique while serving in Afghanistan or Iraq,” he says. “They use public places to upload their materials.”
Jacqueline Zahir, an expert of Islamic movements affairs, says the sophisticated media capabilities of the Islamist currents became evident after the 25 January revolution, when their websites and social networking pages began to appear. This expansion of media, however, was seen across all sectors of society. “Jihadist groups are no exception,” she says.
Zahir argues that jihadists honed in on their skill when they coordinated wide media campaigns to smear opponents of the former president and his colleagues in the Muslim Brotherhood.
“This was demonstrated in the technological activities of the different brigades targeting opposition figures during the term of deposed President Mohamed Morsy,” she says. “This shows that they are no naive amateurs, but rather well-trained experts that know how to use and abuse the media.”
Jihadist groups all over understand the importance of media, especially Al-Qaeda, argues media expert Yasser Abdel Aziz. He points to a message Ayman al-Zawahiri sent in 2005 to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the Al-Qaeda leader in Iraq, telling him “remember my brother that half of our battle is in the media.”
“This shows how important the media machine is to those terrorist groups next to their military arm,” he says.
Abdel Aziz was quick to make the connection with the Brotherhood. “Hassan al-Banna, the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, talked about the importance of the media in one of his speeches,” he says. “I believe the media strategy accounts for half of their overall strategy.”

 

CAIR’s Guide to Media Manipulation

Nihad & CoreyBY RYAN MAURO:

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), a U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entity and unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation trial, is a master media manipulator. And it is passing on its skills to aspiring activists in ways that should offend and wake up every journalist.

The Investigative Project on Terrorism obtained a CAIR presentation about influencing the media and presented it in an online video (see below). The presentation bears the name of Ibrahim Hooper, CAIR’s communications director.

In 1993, Hooper was working for CAIR’s predecessor when he said, “I wouldn’t want to create the impression that I wouldn’t like the government of the United States to be Islamic sometime in the future. In 2003, he allegedly said on a radio program that sharia law would replace the Constitution if Muslims became the majority.

One of the slides titled, “Characteristics of a Journalist,” displays the condescending attitude that CAIR has towards the media. The characteristics are as follows:

  • “They will expect you to do their work. Let them.”
  • “Does little primary research.”
  • “Under extreme deadline pressure.”
  • “Fears charges of inaccuracy.”

CAIR recognizes that journalists have to turn their stories in on time. They are often juggling multiple stories and are not encouraged to indefinitely pursue stories to their ultimate end, digging up every fact and following every lead. After all, most articles are short and are designed to only give a basic overview.

CAIR has offices around the country and staff members whose job is to develop personal relationships with media sources. Once CAIR convinces the media source that it is the authoritative spokesperson of the Muslim-American community, it becomes the spokesperson.

Through this relationship, CAIR can pitch stories complete with accompanying “facts” and quotes, offering the journalist or radio/TV producer a much-needed shortcut. The result is that CAIR, to a large degree, gets to write the narrative.

This relationship is best articulated by the words of Sarwat Husain,Vice Chair of CAIR. In 2008, she spoke at the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) South Central Conference in San Antonio, Texas. ISNA is CAIR’s fellow U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entity and, along with CAIR, is an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest terror-funding case in U.S. history which involved the Holyland Foundation.

According to the Investigative Project online video, she said:

“Media in the United States is very gullible, ok? And they will see that if you have something, especially as a Muslim, if you have something to say, they will come running to you—and take advantage of that.”

 

 

Read more at Clarion Project about internal Muslim Brotherhood documents detailing their intent to use media to influence policies and laws with the ultimate goal of “Seizing power to establish their Islamic Nation “

 

Britain: Muslim TV Hate Preachers “Inciting Murder”

by Soeren Kern:

“Disrespectful people should be eliminated.” — Allama Muhammed Farooq Nazimi, presenter on UK’s Noor TV, May 3, 2012

An Islamic television channel has been hit with a hefty fine after a Muslim hate preacher told viewers, live on air, that it was the duty of all Muslims to murder anyone who shows disrespect for the Prophet Mohammed.

Noor TV, a British-based Satellite Television Channel that broadcasts programs about Islam throughout Europe, was fined £85,000 ($115,000) by the British broadcasting regulator known as Ofcom for inciting people to commit murder.

Ofcom said the fine imposed on August 21 was so large due to “the serious nature of the breaches of the Broadcasting Code.” It said young Muslims watching Noor TV could become “radicalized” and take “violent and criminal action as a result of watching videos of Muslims with extreme views.”

The program in question, Paigham-e-Mustafa, a talk show aimed at young British Muslims, was broadcast on May 3, 2012. According to an “enforcement bulletin” published by Ofcom in December 2012, the program featured a presenter named Allama Muhammad Farooq Nazimi, who answered questions about a wide range of issues and personal conduct relating to Islam and Islamic teachings.

 

Allama Muhammad Farooq Nazimi.

The questions were provided by people who called in live from various countries, including the United Kingdom, countries in Western Europe such as Holland and Germany, and Pakistan.

At approximately one hour and 18 minutes into the program, Nazimi answered a question from a caller who asked, “What is the punishment for the individual who shows disrespect for Prophet Mohammed?”

In response to the question, Nazimi delivered an impassioned monologue, saying:

There is no disagreement about this [the punishment]; there is absolutely no doubt about it that the punishment for the person who shows disrespect for the Prophet is death. No one [among the Islamic scholars] disagrees about this. No one disagrees about this. The Koran, hadith [orally transmitted quotes of Mohammed], the actions of the companions of Prophet Mohammed, all testify to this [punishment] and there is no room for doubt in it. Whoever shows disrespect for Prophet Mohammed will be given the death penalty.

We salute those who protect the sanctity of our Lord [Mohammed] and we pray for ourselves too, “O Allah, accept us among those who protect the sanctity of our beloved Mohammed.” There is no privilege in the world greater than this: that the Exalted Allah should select and accept one to [kill to] protect the sanctity of our beloved Lord [Mohammed].

Speaking directly into the camera, Nazimi concluded his remarks this way:

One has to choose one’s own method. … No one can be more fortunate than the one who loses his life, wealth and children for the sake of glorifying our beloved Lord [Mohammed] whom Allah praises and protects. I say the aim of establishing Noor TV, and the slogan of the founder of Noor TV, is the protection of the sanctity of Prophet Mohammed. … In the whole world, there should be slaves of Mustafa [Mohammed] everywhere, and disrespectful people should be eliminated. … The mission of our life is to protect the sanctity of our beloved Lord [Mohammed]. May Allah accept us wherever there is a need [to kill a blasphemer]. We are ready and should be ready at all times [to kill a blasphemer].

According to Ofcom, Nazimi’s comments raised issues under Rule 3.1 of the Broadcasting Code, which states that, “Material likely to encourage or incite the commission of crime or to lead to disorder must not be included in television or radio services.”

Read more at Gatestone Institute

The Arrival of Al Jazeera in America

images (12)

Center for Security Policy, By Christopher Holton:

Thanks to Al Gore selling out his failing Current TV, Al Jazeera TV has come to America with their own cable TV network and news bureaus in several cities across the USA.

Patriotic Americans have reason to be concerned.

Al Jazeera, is an Islamist television network based out of Doha, Qatar (more on Qatar very shortly). It is one of the LEAST independent media outlets in the world. It was started by seed money provided by the emir of Qatar and is to this day owned by the Islamic state of Qatar. That same emir of Qatar at the time later became infamous for massively funding the Muslim Brotherhood around the world and also providing aid to Jihadist “rebels” in Libya and Syria.

Al Jazeera claims to be “independent,” but since when is state-owned media considered “independent?” Any US news network that was owned by the US government would be immediately and justifiably ostracized by the public and the media at large.

Back in January, when Al Gore sold out to the oil-rich Islamists, the Wall Street Journal justifiably slammed the transaction and had this to say in taking the cloak off Osama Bin Laden’s favorite TV channel:

“…the network reflects the interests of the government that runs it—making it akin to Vladimir Putin’s Russia Today and Beijing’s Xinhua. The emir of Qatar, Hamid bin Khalifa Al Thani, appointed his cousin as chairman of Al Jazeera. The emir was last in the news for donating $400 million to Hamas, a terrorist organization.

Al Jazeera continues “to inflame Arab resentments in its promotion of anti-Americanism, Sunni sectarianism and, in recent years, Islamism.”

In 2008, Al Jazeera threw an on-air party for Samir Kuntar when he was released from an Israeli prison. Kuntar led a Palestine Liberation Front terrorist team that kidnapped an Israeli family in 1979. He shot the father and killed the 4-year-old daughter by smashing her head against rocks along the beach. In footage available on YouTube, Al Jazeera’s Beirut bureau chief hands Kuntar a scimitar to cut the celebratory cake and says: “This is the sword of the Arabs, Samir.”

Moreover, it is very important to take into account the kind of state that owns Al Jazeera.

Qatar is an absolute monarchy, a dictatorship if you will. It’s “parliament” is no more than a consultative body, with no authority at all. In fact, its members are all appointed by the emir.

Qatar is also the only Wahhabi Islamic nation other than Saudi Arabia. Perhaps this is why Qatar is the only nation to have allowed the Afghan Taliban to establish a political office in Doha, the capital. Wahhabi Islam is the branch of Islam that gave birth to Al Qaeda.

Qatar is also a Shariah state. The government uses Sunni Shariah law as the basis of its criminal and civil regulations. Shariah is applied to all family law and inheritance issues as well.

But perhaps the most significant aspect of Qatar, the Wahhabi dictatorship that owns Al Jazeera, and now Al Gore’s Current TV, is its role in Jihad.

We know from the Wikileaks documents that US intelligence officials consider Qatar “the worst on counterterrorism.”

According to Wikileaks, Qatari security was “hesitant to act against known terrorists out of concern for appearing to be aligned with the U.S. and provoking reprisals.”

Moreover, Qatari charities, including those associated with the royal family, support Jihadist terrorist organizations:

From The Atlantic:

But U.S. officials may have reason to be suspicious of Qatar. Members of the royal family reportedly hosted Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the 9/11 mastermind, in the late ’90s and may have helped him evade U.S. capture. In 2005, officials discovered another link between Qatar and al Qaeda: Qatar paid al Qaeda (and some speculate it may still be paying) millions of dollars each year so al Qaeda wouldn’t attack it. Qatar struck the deal before the 2003 Iraq invasion and renewed it in March of 2005, when an Egyptian suicide bomber attacked a theater in Doha. Many believed the bomber was part of al Qaeda. “We’re not sure that the attack was carried out by al Qaeda, but we ratified our agreement just to be on the safe side,” a Qatari official said at the time. “We are a soft target and prefer to pay to secure our national and economical interests. We are not the only ones doing so.”

It’s true: Qatar is one of many nations that have allegedly funded Islamic movements to save their own citizens, and that funding was another topic of discussion slated for last January’s meeting. “Officials should make known USG concerns about the financial support to Hamas by Qatari charitable organizations and our concerns about the moral support Hamas receives from Yousef Al-Qaradawi,” the December, 2009 cable said.

In other words, Qatar sends money to Al Qaeda, Qatar supports HAMAS and Qatari charities fund Jihad. Oh, I can’t allow that Qaradawi reference to get by…People who have followed events in Egypt are probably familiar with Yousef al Qaradawi. He is the world’s foremost Sunni Shariah scholar with extensive, longstanding ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. He was banished from his native Egypt by President Mubarak, and was given refuge by Qatar.

While in Qatar, Qaradawi managed to get banned from travel to both the US and the UK and he also headed up the Union of Good, an umbrella group of some 56 Islamic charities. The US Treasury Department designated the Union of Good as a terrorist entity a few years back.

Qaradawi has also, for years, been one of the most popular on-air personalities on Al Jazeera TV as the host of “Shariah and Life,” with an audience of 60 million viewers. This is particularly disturbing since, as recently as July, Qaradawi used Al Jazeera to call on members of the Muslim Brotherhood to murder those who “do not obey” Morsi.

Folks, this isn’t “independent” media, it’s pure propaganda for our Jihadist enemies. Now, you won’t see the worst of this drivel on Al Jazeera America; its propaganda will be much more subtle and sophisticated to appeal to an American audience, but you should know that Al Jazeera has been supporting worldwide Jihad for years.

Read more 

Christopher Holton is Vice President for Outreach at the Center for Security Policy. Mr. Holton came to the Center after serving as president and marketing director of Blanchard & Co. and editor-in-chief of the Blanchard Economic Research Unit from 1990 to 2003. As chief of the Blanchard Economic Research Unit in 2000, he conceived and commissioned the Center for Security Policy special report “Clinton’s Legacy: The Dangerous Decade.” Holton is a member of the Board of Advisers of WorldTribune.com

Video: Mordechai Kedar on Al Jazeera

aljaz

 

 

Mordechai Kedar is an Israeli scholar of Arabic literature and a lecturer at Bar-Ilan University. He holds the Ph.D. from Bar-Ilan University. Kedar is an academic expert on the Israeli Arab population. Listen to him debate on Al Jazeera the issue of Israeli settlements and the so called “occupied” territories:

 

Still Time to Stop Al Jazeera America

aljazeera_1371203cCliff Kincaid – July 9, 2013

Al Jazeera is under scrutiny for subversion in Egypt, and facing a mutiny from its own reporters over supporting the Muslim Brotherhood there. But The Washington Post assures us in a story that the channel’s official launch in the United States is on August 20, and its coverage, will be different.

Philip Seib, author of The Al Jazeera Effect, is quoted as saying, “I don’t think you’ll see al-Jazeera America touting the Muslim Brotherhood. It will be more like CNN.”

But the foreign owners in Qatar will remain the same, and that is part of the problem. Former Attorney General Michael Mukasey has said that Al Jazeera’s purchase of Al Gore’s Current TV should be the subject of a congressional inquiry because of the channel’s foreign sponsorship.

Dr. Judea Pearl, father of slain journalist Daniel Pearl, has informed us, in regard to this controversy, “I support your call to investigate the impact of this transaction.” His statement reads as follows:

“A decade of watching over its programs has left me no doubt: Al Jazeera is the main propaganda machine of the Muslim Brotherhood. Posing as a benign alternative communication medium, Al Jazeera choreographs a world stage in which the West is a perennial villain, Hamas is the ultimate role model, and entire societies are dehumanized to a lower form of life, stripped of any mark of dignity or empathy. While refraining from explicit incitement to violence, Al Jazeera weaves the ideological structure and combustible angers from which Jihadi recruits eventually emerge.”

As Accuracy in Media has been reporting for over six years, the anti-American channel works hand-in-glove with the Muslim Brotherhood and its associated terrorist groups, including al Qaeda and Hamas. Nothing has changed. In fact, Al Jazeera has become more open about its work as a foreign policy instrument of Qatar, including the promotion of al Qaeda-linked terrorist groups in Syria.

It is apparent that the Egyptian military and its supporters in the pro-democracy movement didn’t want Egypt to become another Syria.

The Muslim Brotherhood website still carries a story referring to Al Jazeera as “the greatest Arab media organization.” The channel originally made a name for itself by airing al-Qaeda videos, and one of its correspondents was convicted of being an agent of the terrorist group that carried out the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

The hit movie “Zero Dark Thirty,” based on the killing of bin Laden, notes that the al-Qaeda leader was tracked down in part by locating a nearby Al Jazeera office that received and aired terrorist videos.

In response to the jailing of Al Jazeera journalists in Cairo after the overthrow of Mohamed Morsi, the channel proclaimed, “Regardless of political views, the Egyptian people expect media freedoms to be respected and upheld.”

Broadcaster Jerry Kenney, a leading critic of the Qatar-funded propaganda network, said, “This is hilarious. Media freedoms? Why don’t they allow it in Qatar?” Qatar, which sponsors and funds Al Jazeera, is a dictatorship which jails independent journalists and even poets critical of the regime.

But that doesn’t seem to bother Soledad O’Brien or the other Americans who are going to work for Al Jazeera America. “If you look at what they’re doing at Al Jazeera English: High quality journalism,” she says, oblivious to the fact that while its slant has been watered down somewhat, the channel still has a bias in favor of global jihad.

992779_192846420875709_552416354_n-e1373393363447

Read more: Still Time to Stop Al Jazeera America

***************

Florida Family Association has more:

Democracy and First Amendment champion Newseum to permanently host Al Jazeera America flagship show. Click here to send email to Newseum officials.


NewseumThe Weekly Standard reports that when Al Jazeera America “goes live later this year, its flagship primetime show, America Tonight, will be broadcast from a studio in Washington’s Newseum…”   Unlike many other news organizations that rented temporary studio space at the Newseum, “Al Jazeera will be the only news organization that has a more permanent contract.”

The Newseum is a “250,000-square-foot facility that offers visitors an experience that blends five centuries of news history with up-to-the-second technology and hands-on exhibits.”  The Newseum mission is to “educate the public about the value of a free press.”

The Freedom Forum is the main funder of the Newseum.  The heading of the Freedomforum.org web site boasts that it “is a non-partisan foundation that champions the First Amendment as a cornerstone of democracy.”

The Weekly Standard reports “What Al Jazeera most seems to need is credibility.”  Al Jazeera is clearly seeking to garner credibility by hosting their flagship show at the Newseum where democracy and the First Amendment are championed.

It is incomprehensible that an organization which boasts a “mission of championing democracy and the First Amendment” would provide credibility to Al Jazeera.  Al Jazeera is a news company that is owned by a non-democratic, monarch styled emirate who does not afford citizens freedom of the press, espouses Islamic Sharia law and backs the leader of Hamas.

The Wall Street Journal reports:  More due diligence might have included a review of the close journalistic coverage over the years of the Al Jazeera Arabic and English broadcasts, which discloses the unsurprising fact that the network reflects the interests of the government that runs it—making it akin to the Vladimir Putin Russia Today and the Beijing Xinhua. The emir of Qatar, Hamid bin Khalifa Al Thani, appointed his cousin as chairman of Al Jazeera. The emir was last in the news for donating $400 million to Hamas.

Sharia law is the main source of Qatari legislation.  It is applied to aspects of family law, inheritance, and certain criminal acts.  Sharia courts were abolished in 2003 but Sharia principles are still applied in matters related to personal status (such as marriage, divorce and child custody). In some cases a woman’s testimony is worth half a man’s and in some cases a female witness is not accepted at all.  As of 2005, certain provisions of the Qatari Criminal law permitted  punishments such as flogging and stoning to be imposed as criminal sanctions. The UN found that these practices constituted a breach of the obligations imposed by UN Convention.   Many provisions of Sharia law are antithetical to the rights afforded under the United States Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

Aljazeera.com reports that Qatar supported the April 1, 2013 re-election of Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal.  Khaled Mashaal said that the“Zionists are enemies of Allah and the prophets, and called for preparing to liberate Jerusalem and restore the homeland once more through jihad, the rifle, and self-sacrifice” during a speech in Cairo on October 3, 2012.   Khaled Meshaal lives in Qatar.

Please urge Newseum officials not to denigrate the United States Bill of Rights and American democracy by providing space to Al Jazeera at the Newseum. Florida Family Association has prepared an email for you to send to Newseum officials.

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 change the subject or message text if you wish.  Please Note if you have a problem with the prepared email:  Internet Explorer 10 is not compatible at this time with our Action Message.  If you are using IE 10 please click the link where prompted to “if you have trouble viewing the message text ..” in order to send your email.

Please click here to send your email to the Newseum officials.

Media Jihad and The Grand Deception

Snapz-Pro-XScreenSnapz2426by IPT News:

American journalists have been “subdued” when it comes to reporting on Islamic radicalization, “largely by intimidation and the fear of accusations of Islamophobia –[which] is the Islamists’ greatest coup,” Muslim physician and writer Qanta Ahmed argues in a new column.

She points to Investigative Project on Terrorism Executive Director Steven Emerson’s new documentary, “Jihad in America: The Grand Deception,” for examples about radical connections and ideals espoused by national Islamist groups that are ignored by the media.

“‘The Grand Deception’ exposes radical Islamists in their own words,” Ahmed writes, something “shattering to any Muslim in America – and is exactly why our communities invite unwanted scrutiny. In their own voices, American Islamists demand violent jihad against the United States.”

The documentary has impressed other viewers, with Orange County Register editorial writer Rory Cohen calling it a “must see” for showing “how far the Muslim Brotherhood has reached within our own political fabric in less than three decades.”

But media coverage fails to show the diversity of ideas and beliefs held by Muslims in America, Ahmed writes, noting adherents to 70 sects and people with roots in nearly as many countries. There’s a “battle for America’s Muslim narrative” that the media fails to recognize and cover.

“If only the media paid the same scrutiny to such data as to that gathered by the IPT in The Grand Deception … we would greatly advance the public debate. It’s time to emerge from our torpor. Refusing to debate these issues, however uncomfortable or intimidating, is a grand deception indeed, one which we accomplish at our own hand and our own peril.”

Read her whole column here. Learn more about the film “The Grand Deception” here.

The Media’s Character Assassination of Lars Hedegaard

pic_giant_030613_SM_hedegaard-450x328By :

It’s starting to look like the Book of Job. For years, he’s been demonized in his nation’s media for criticizing Islam. In 2011 and 2012, he was put on trial – not one, twice, but three times – for violating a Danish law that makes it a crime to insult or denigrate a religion. Last month, a guy came to his door dressed as a mailman and tried to kill him; his survival seems nothing short of a miracle.

You might think that in the wake of this assassination attempt, Lars Hedegaard would get some respect – or at least solidarity – from the Danish media. But you could only think that if you were unaware of the aftermath of the murders of Pim Fortuyn and Theo van Gogh, whose bodies weren’t even cold when Dutch journalists set about smearing them even more enthusiastically than they had before, essentially blaming them for their own deaths. Many of Lars’s fellow Danes, to be sure, did rally round him after his close call. But in large part, the Danish media’s reaction was depressingly predictable. As I noted just last week, a couple of morally challenged employees of the newspaper Ekstra Bladet actually tried to follow a moving van to Lars’s new home, apparently so they could print the address; fortunately, the police foiled their effort.

Alas, that wasn’t the end of it. On Sunday, Deadline, a program on the state-owned TV channel DR2, aired a half-hour taped interview with Lars by reporter Martin Krasnik. Krasnik’s introduction, tacked onto the beginning of the show later, was not promising. In a manifest attempt to paint Lars as an extremist, Krasnik mentioned Lars’s hosting of Geert Wilders at the Free Press Society and Anders Behring Breivik’s citation of Lars in his “manifesto.”

Read more at Front Page

See also:

In Defence of Lars Hedegaard (counterjihadreport.com)

New York Times Encourages Attacks Against Jews

RETRO-ISRAEL-INTIFADA-PALESTINIANSBy :

The New York Times has crossed the line this weekend by encouraging Palestinian Arabs to embark upon a “third intifada” against Israel with an article by Ben Ehrenreich titled “If There is a Third Intifada, We Want to be the Ones who Started It.” This article is tantamount to calling upon the Arabs to kill Jews.  Against the backdrop of Thursday’s rock attack where a two-year-old Israeli was severely injured with brain injuries when the car she was in veered off the road as a direct results of Arab youth throwing rocks, one wonders where is the decency of the NYT? Rock attacks have caused deaths and serious injuries on Israel’s roads for decades.

The New York Times Magazine celebrated the people who consider their rock attacks “non-violent,” defining them as “peaceful protestors.” Rock-throwers aren’t “peaceful” – anywhere in the world. To even allow Ehrenreich to write an article, rather than an op-ed shows the inherent bias of this outlet.

Read more at Front Page

 

UN Confirms Hamas Rocket Kills BBC Reporter’s Son

WaPo-Cover-540x377by IPT News  •  Mar 8, 2013 at 5:09 pm

Competition Needed for Al Jazeera

mic

A voice for change? Or a voice for the Muslim Brotherhood?

By JanSuzanne Krasner

Vice President Al Gore’s sellout of Current TV to Qatar’s Al Jazeera is going to bring this Middle Eastern news giant into American homes, but it will be information ‘nuanced’ for the American public’s consumption. This state owned network was the media of choice for Osama Bin Laden, and continues to be the resources for Hamas and Hezbollah.

It seems that this single Middle Eastern offering for 40 million American cable subscribers needs some competition that will show Americans what Muslims in the Middle East (and maybe in a local mosque) are listening towithout the ‘nuances.’ One suggestion is the MEMRI TV Project One, an organization that monitors over 100 Arabic and Farsi TV channels round the clock.

Watch a recent 1:41 minute  video picked up by MEMRI that is truly an “eye-opener.” It is embedded below. The speaker is the Egyptian Cleric Abu Islam as he appeared on February 13, 2013 on Egypt’s Al-Omma TV in a “Swear to God the Almighty, I am not lying” speech on the emergence of Christianity from penis worship.

Cleric Abu Islam tells the viewers “that the Church worship originated in worship of the penis. This is documented in dozens of pictures. Let me tell you something…it’s indecent, but true. Take a look at a picture of Jesus and you’ll see a penis, right there (he strokes his right side)…Or is it on this side? (He points to his left side and back to the right side) Oh, it’s the right side…A penis, right here. There are many pictures like this. They worship it.”

The Cleric continues with claims about Christian women: “(Christian women) raise cats and dogs as a substitute for husbands. They train their dogs to play the husband. I swear to God, I am not lying. They buy dogs for this purpose. They train dogs to play the husband of them. Christian women do that.”

Watch this short video to see how followers of Islam are propagandized against Christians, not only Jews.

 

If people made these claims about Islam while in a European country with a large Muslim population (Denmark, France, Spain, Sweden and the UK come to mind), they would be arrested for a hate-crime against Muslims and Islam; and if in a Muslim country, they would be arrested for blasphemy and likely be beheaded. Islam is a one way street.

These religious and political leaders speak to their billions of followers just like this and the followers believe.

We must not allow our families to be indoctrinated with false pictures and “reality shows” of Muslim life that appear to be like American daily life without exposing the truth, at least in the name of fair and balanced news.

Source: American Thinker