Archive for the ‘Max Blumenthal’ Category

Fetishising Fundamentalists & Resisting Reformers: Maajid Nawaz, Ayaan Hirsi Ali and the SPLC – Conatus News

Fetishising Fundamentalists & Resisting Reformers: Maajid Nawaz, Ayaan Hirsi Ali and the SPLC

Maajid Nawaz, the Muslim co-founder of Quilliam, the UKs first counter-extremism organisation, has been listed with no sense of irony by the SPLC as an anti-muslim bigot. Likewise, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the feminist who endured FGM and fled a forced marriage has been shamed by the SPLC as a key collaborator in anti-muslim bigotry because of her rhetoric on the topic of Islam.

The Southern Poverty Law Centre lists their values and aims on their website: fighting hate, teaching tolerance, seeking justice, memorialising civil rights leaders; alongside quotes from RFK and pictures of MLK, just so you know they are serious about it. And like both RFK and MLK, the SPLC condones a muscular liberalism where pressure groups and social movements urge the mainstream as well as the fringe to give them equal dignity. The SPLC, however, has now decided to radically pivot on all of their core beliefs assuming they ever really believed them. They have come out against condemning homophobes, they are now at least complicit in the forced slavery of women, they offer tacit encouragement to the most retrograde conservative injunctions; and they have done this by smearing the leaders of the most important minority cohort in our politics Islamic Reformers.

One gets the distinct impression that the author of the smears against them has never read, or even listened to anything either of them has ever written or said. For example, the author opens with the adorable attempt at being hard-hitting Maajid Nawaz is a British activist and part of the ex-radical circuit of former Islamists who use that experience to savage Islam. The first question I have, as a reader of Maajid, is not about the fantasy of the ex-radicalcircuit as if there is a revolving door from Pakistan to the Pentagon or the complete void of evidence the author leaves us with; it is more the question of plausibility: how can a Muslim be a bigot against Muslims? The answer is they cant, and even if they could, supporting gay rights, womens rights, and trans rights is not necessarily a bad way to do it in fact the SPLC should surely support those efforts? Nonetheless it is an intriguing lie to further dupe the misinformed.

As for the claims that Maajid is lying about his past, which include fights with neo-Nazi gangs on the streets of Essex and his de-radicalisation in Egypt; the author writes But major elements of his story have been disputed by former friends, members of his family, fellow jihadists and journalists, and the evidence suggests that Nawaz is far more interested in self-promotion and money than in any particular ideological dispute. You may want to take journalism 101, dear author: believe it or not, but when someone leaves an extremist organisation, there is no Live long and be happy leaving do. In fact, Islamists might even lie about an ex-Islamist to delegitimise them, and never mind your next inaccuracy as Maajid was never and has never claimed to have been a jihadist!

The author cites the Alternet hit-piece on Maajid written by Dr Nafeez Ahmed and Max Blumenthal, both of whom lack the integrity of even Maxs lapdog father. It was their original mistake to not check their sources. So when the author reproduces them and then directly lies about Maajids opinion on banning the veil by linking to a piece where Maajid himself says I do not believe in a blanket ban on the niqab one cannot be so surprised. Thus, upon even a mildly close inspection, the author has lied, misrepresented the facts and regurgitates the extremist narrative to undermine progressive voices. From pioneering LGBT rights to the Islamist Pravda, oh how far you have come.

And the way the SPLC, a liberal left leaning think tank demeans a woman is laced with gruesome hypocrisy. They begin their smear against Ayaan with she says she endured female genital mutilation and fled civil wars and an arranged marriage in Africa. ; she says she endured what do you mean,SPLC? Is this just a case of bad writing, or are you really accusing a victim of FGM of being a total liar and fabricator? Where there civil wars really going on in Somalia? Who knows! Your opinion on victim blaming should not be contingent on the political alignment of the victims.

Moreover, when you quote something, SPLC, you must give context. Ayaan has said some provocative things about Islam. You even quoted her correctly, she did indeed say We are at war with Islam and Islam is the new fascism and a destructive, nihilistic cult of death. However, you have left out half of her corpus. Her latest book Heretic: Why Islam Needs a Reformation Now is an ode to her conversations with Maajid Nawaz, among others, who convinced her that Islam needs to be reformed i.e it cannot and should not be destroyed. Thus Ayaan has converted to the belief that the clash is not within civilisations per se, but as Paul Berman has said, it is a clash within Islam itself. And Ayaan and Maajid are on the progressive side of that clash. The SPLC, however, are not merely just on the wrong side, they are active propagandists for it.

The blind hatred toward Islamic Reformers like Ayaan and Maajid from the liberal left is not spawned from the misunderstandings of ignorant Westerners. No, these leftists have been spoon-fed the idea Muslims are somehow different sometimes by Islamists, other times by each-other. This is the idea behind neo-orientalism. Edward Saids classic orientalism says that Westerners will distrust people from the East, and this othering is done openly and malignantly. Neo-Orientalism goes a step further and fetishises even the idea of Muslims, and anyone who tries to change their patriarchal conservative culture will get what is coming to them whether that is the lies and smears of hacks, or the violence of Islamists. Maajid and Ayaan are just the latest victims.

The SPLC has indulged in the neo-orientalist ideology and they match it with an equal hatred for their own culture. And so the Hitchens line This is masochism, and it is being offered to you by sadists should be enough for you to reject these moral cowards.

comments

Visit link:

Fetishising Fundamentalists & Resisting Reformers: Maajid Nawaz, Ayaan Hirsi Ali and the SPLC – Conatus News

Fair Usage Law

February 23, 2017   Posted in: Max Blumenthal  Comments Closed

The White Helmets go to Hollywood – Dissident Voice

The netflix movie The White Helmets may win an Oscar in the short documentary category at the Academy Awards on Sunday February 26. It will not be a surprise, despite the fact that the group is a fraud and the movie is a contrived infomercial.

The White Helmets are a feel good story like a Disney hero movie: 90% myth and fabrication. Most of what is claimed about the Syrian rescue group is untrue. They are not primarily Syrian; the group was initiated by British military contractor James LeMesurier and has been heavily funded (about $100 million) by the USA, UK and other governments. They are not volunteers; they are paid. This is confirmed in the Al Jazeera video which shows some White Helmet volunteers talking about going on strike if they dont get paid soon. Most of the heavy funding goes to the marketing which is run by The Syria Campaign based in New York. The manager is an Irish America woman Anna Nolan who has never been to Syria. As an example of its deception, The Syria Campaign website features video showing children dancing and playing soccer implying they are part of the opposition demand for a free and peaceful Syria . But the video images are taken from a 2010 BBC documentary about education in Syria under the Baath government.

White Helmets and Nusra

When eastern Aleppo was finally freed from the armed militants, it was discovered that the White Helmets headquarters were alongside the headquarters of the Al Qaeda Syrian militant group. Civilians from east Aleppo reported that the White Helmets primarily responded when the militants were attacked. Soon after departing Aleppo in government supplied buses (!) the White Helmets showed up in the mountains above Damascus where they allied with terrorist groups in poisoning then shutting off the water source for five million people in Damascus.

The White Helmets claim to be neutral and independent is another lie. They only work in areas controlled by the rebel groups, primarily Nusra/Al Qaeda. Their leaders actively call for US and NATO intervention in Syria. Video shows White Helmet workers picking up the corpse of a civilian after execution and celebrating Nusra/Al Qaeda terrorist battle wins.

White Helmets and Nusra

The movie is as fraudulent as the group it tries to heroize. The film-makers never set foot in Syria. Their video footage takes place in southern Turkey where they show White Helmet trainees in a hotel and talking on cell phones. Thrilling. There is some footage from inside Syria but it looks contrived. The opening scene depicts a White Helmet volunteer going to work and beseeching his son not to give mommy a hard time. Real or scripted?

The message is simple: here are people we can support; they are under attack by the brutal regime shouldnt we do something to stop it??!

ISIS and One Finger Salute

White Helmets One Finger Salute

Khaled Khatib is said to be the person who filmed the footage from inside Syria. He has reportedly received a US visa and will attend the Oscars. This will likely garner special media attention. Ironically, some of those who have exploited the refugee issue for their own fund-raising campaigns, like Human Rights Watch, are groups which promote the war which created the refugee crisis.

Khatib has tweeted the first video he took showing the White Helmets. It looks remarkably unrealistic, with a girl who was totally buried being removed without injuries or wounds or even much dirt. Is it really possible to rescue people that quickly? In the real world, rescue workers are told to work slowly so as to not damage or exacerbate body injuries. The original video has the logo of Aleppo Media Center (AMC) which was created by the Syrian Expatriates Organization. Their address on K Street in Washington DC suggests this is yet another Western funded media campaign driven by political objectives.

In the past few days, with perfect timing for the upcoming Oscars, there is yet another miracle rescue . another girl totally buried but then removed and whisked away in record breaking time perfect for social media. Is it real or is it contrived?

This raises a question regarding the integrity of the Oscar Academy Awards. Are awards given for actual quality, authenticity, skill and passion? Or are Oscar awards sometimes given under political and financial influence? There is political motivation to promote the White Helmets as part of the effort to prevent the collapse of the Western/Israeli/Gulf campaign to overthrow the Syrian government. These same governments have given boatloads of money to fuel the propaganda campaign. Last week Syria Solidarity Movement reached out to three marketing firms in the LA area to request help challenging the White Helmets nomination. Two of the firms declined and the third said they were already being paid to promote the nomination!

The true source and purpose of the White Helmets was exposed almost two years ago. More recently Vanessa Beeley has documented the fact there is a REAL Syrian Civil Defence which was begun in the 1950s and is a member of the International Civil Defense Organizations. This organization is opposite to the group created in Turkey in 2013. According to on-the-ground interviews in Aleppo, terrorists began by killing real Syrian rescue workers and stealing their equipment. Since then the White Helmets have been supplied, by the West through Turkey, with brand new ambulances and related rescue equipment.

Max Blumenthal has written a two part detailed examination of the shadowy PR firm behind the White Helmets. And Jan Oberg has written an overview survey of the pro and con examinations in his work Just How Gray are the White Helmets.

Yet mainstream media, and some alternative media, continue to uncritically promote the myth of the White Helmets. The promoters of the group absolutely deserve an award for marketing and advertising. This is a field where truth and reality is irrelevant; its all about sales and manipulation. On that basis, the White Helmets has been an incredible success. The group was started as Syria Civil Defense in Turkey in 2013. It was re-branded as the White Helmets in 2014. It was heavily used in 2014 and 2015 by Nicholas Krisof, Avaaz and others to campaign for all out aggression against Syria. In 2016 the group received the Rights Livelihood Award and was seriously considered for a Nobel Peace Prize. These facts show how corrupt and politically and financially influenced the Rights Livelihood Award and Nobel Peace Prize can be.

Meet the White Helmets

The White Helmets movie is a tactic in the ongoing campaign of distortion and deception around Syria. Its a fraud, just like the fake kidnapping of NBC reporter Richard Engel. The Oscars will be a demonstration of the integrity of the Academy Awards. The reporting on the story will be a test of the integrity and accuracy of media outlets. Ironically, the Israeli mainstream TV program I24 presented both sides and titled the segment White Helmets: Heroes or Hoax?. In contrast, the highly popular and widely respected DemocracyNow has only broadcast a puff piece promoting the White Helmet disinformation. The coming days will reveal more about the ongoing information war against Syria. Meanwhile an on online petition continues to gather signatures to NOT give the Oscar to the White Helmets deception.

Rick Sterling is an investigative journalist and member of Syria Solidarity Movement. He can be reached at rsterling1@gmail.com. Read other articles by Rick.

This article was posted on Tuesday, February 21st, 2017 at 4:08pm and is filed under Media, Narrative, Propaganda, Syria, Terrorism (state and retail), Turkey.

Continued here:

The White Helmets go to Hollywood – Dissident Voice

Fair Usage Law

February 21, 2017   Posted in: Max Blumenthal  Comments Closed

Outraged Jewish Students at Oxford Demand Withdrawal of Campus Support for Upcoming Conference Hosting Anti … – Algemeiner

Email a copy of “Outraged Jewish Students at Oxford Demand Withdrawal of Campus Support for Upcoming Conference Hosting Anti-Israel Activists, Alleged Terrorism Sympathizers” to a friend

Keble College Chapel, Oxford University. Photo: Wikipedia.

The Jewish Society at Britains Oxford University (OUJS) is calling for the withdrawal of support for anupcomingconference featuring speakers whohave expressed sympathy for Palestinian terrorists and advocated violence against Israelis,reported Cherwell, the schoolsindependent student newspaper.

According to the report, the OUJS railed against theOxford Radical Forum (ORF) 2017 forplanning to hostMiriyam Aouragh, a Dutch anthropologist and activist, who reportedly describedAhmed Yassin, afounder of Hamas, as anelderly man in a wheelchair living in a refugee camp in Gaza and organized a memorial service for him after he was killed by Israeli forces;Malia Bouattia, the president of the National Union of Students, who called the University of Birmingham a Zionist outpost;andRichard Seymour, whoreportedly wrote of an Israeli journalist,F*** him, they should cut his throat.

The OUJS toldCherwell,We believe that our community should not be inviting speakers who espouse antisemitism and hate speech. They should not be afforded a platform to spread their opinion.

February 20, 2017 6:16 pm

The OUJC demanded thattheOxford University Student Union (OUSU) and a number of Junior Common Rooms (JCRs) which provideservices toa sectorof the student population withdraw theirfunding for theevent,saying, We believe that our students union and JCRsshould not be supporting this.

According toCherwell, the OUSU has said it was not aware of any such concerns, but will take [the allegations]very seriously, while the president of one of the JCRssaidits involvement absolutely does not mean it endorses each and every word the speakers have said in the past nor might say at the ORF.

According to ORF organizers, the conference, scheduled for March 3-5, is a weekend of events designed to critically interrogate current political issues from a range of left-wing perspectives, and has been a fixture of intellectual life at Oxford for almost a decade.

In a statement posted on its Facebook page, ORF defended its choice of speakers, saying, Weconsider [them] to be well qualified to take part in the specific debates to which they have been invited.Organizers added, [We] are united against antisemitism, and all forms of racism, butcriticized those who insistthat past offensive statementsconstitute sufficient basis for which to exclude people from any critical forum.

According toCherwell, ORF has a history of inviting speakers who have expressed antisemitic views and remarks, including journalist Max Blumenthal, the notorious Jewishanti-Zionist.

Oxford has come under scrutiny recently forallegations oframpant antisemitism in its LabourClub, asThe Algemeiner reported, and was criticized whena nearly year-long investigation into the chargesresulted in no disciplinary action.

Excerpt from:

Outraged Jewish Students at Oxford Demand Withdrawal of Campus Support for Upcoming Conference Hosting Anti … – Algemeiner

Fair Usage Law

February 20, 2017   Posted in: Max Blumenthal  Comments Closed

Outraged Jewish Students at Oxford Demand Withdrawal of Campus Support for Upcoming Conference Hosting … – Algemeiner

Email a copy of “Outraged Jewish Students at Oxford Demand Withdrawal of Campus Support for Upcoming Conference Hosting Alleged Zionism-Bashers Sympathetic to Palestinian Terrorists” to a friend

University of Oxford. Photo: Wikipedia.

The Jewish Society at Britains Oxford University (OUJS) is calling for the withdrawal of support for anupcomingconference featuring speakers whohave expressed sympathy for Palestinian terrorists and advocated violence against Israelis,reported Cherwell, the schoolsindependent student newspaper.

According to the report, the OUJS railed against theOxford Radical Forum (ORF) 2017 forplanning to hostMiriyam Aouragh, a Dutch anthropologist and activist, who reportedly describedAhmed Yassin, afounder of Hamas, as anelderly man in a wheelchair living in a refugee camp in Gaza and organized a memorial service for him after he was killed by Israeli forces;Malia Bouattia, the president of the National Union of Students, who called the University of Birmingham a Zionist outpost;andRichard Seymour, whoreportedly wrote of an Israeli journalist,F*** him, they should cut his throat.

The OUJS toldCherwell,We believe that our community should not be inviting speakers who espouse antisemitism and hate speech. They should not be afforded a platform to spread their opinion.

February 19, 2017 9:12 am

The OUJC demanded thattheOxford University Student Union (OUSU) and a number of Junior Common Rooms (JCRs) which provideservices toa sectorof the student population withdraw theirfunding for theevent,saying, We believe that our students union and JCRsshould not be supporting this.

According toCherwell, the OUSU has said it was not aware of any such concerns, but will take [the allegations]very seriously, while the president of one of the JCRssaidits involvement absolutely does not mean it endorses each and every word the speakers have said in the past nor might say at the ORF.

According to ORF organizers, the conference, scheduled for March 3-5, is a weekend of events designed to critically interrogate current political issues from a range of left-wing perspectives, and has been a fixture of intellectual life at Oxford for almost a decade.

In a statement posted on its Facebook page, ORF defended its choice of speakers, saying, Weconsider [them] to be well qualified to take part in the specific debates to which they have been invited.Organizers added, [We] are united against antisemitism, and all forms of racism, butcriticized those who insistthat past offensive statementsconstitute sufficient basis for which to exclude people from any critical forum.

According toCherwell, ORF has a history of inviting speakers who have expressed antisemitic views and remarks, including journalist Max Blumenthal, the notorious Jewishanti-Zionist.

Oxford has come under scrutiny recently forallegations oframpant antisemitism in its LabourClub, asThe Algemeiner reported, and was criticized whena nearly year-long investigation into the chargesresulted in no disciplinary action.

See the original post:

Outraged Jewish Students at Oxford Demand Withdrawal of Campus Support for Upcoming Conference Hosting … – Algemeiner

Fair Usage Law

February 19, 2017   Posted in: Max Blumenthal  Comments Closed

Revealed: Oxford Radical Forum speakers criticised for anti-Semitism ties – Cherwell Online

Speakers at the Oxford Radical Forum (ORF), including controversial NUS President Malia Bouattia, have been variously condemned for allegedly expressed anti-Semitic views, sympathy with Hamas, and for mocking a disfigured British veteran, among other provocative positions.

ORF is described by the organisers as a three day event for the radical left, held in Wadham, although the College has not confirmed that they are hosting the event. There are currently seven speakers announced.

Oxford University Jewish Society (OUJS) said in a statement made to Cherwell: OUJS stands in opposition to the decision of ORF 2017 to host Miriyam Aouragh and Malia Bouattia.

84 per cent of our voting members last year voted that they are unable to reconcile their Jewish identity with Bouattias presidency of the NUS, and 57 Jewish Society presidents across the country condemned her comments. Further, the Home Affairs Select Committee have condemned her outright racism and an NUS investigation decided that her content had been anti-Semitic.

Last term, our own student union called for Bouattia to issue a full and formal apology, and should stand down otherwise. Jewish students are still waiting.

We believe that our community should not be inviting speakers who espouse anti-Semitism and hate speech. They should not be afforded a platform to spread their opinion.

ORFs committee told Cherwell: ORF is a weekend of events designed to critically interrogate current political issues from a range of left-wing perspectives, and has been a fixture of intellectual life at Oxford for almost a decade. We consider the speakers to be well qualified to take part in the specific debates to which they have been invited.

ORF is not committed to a unified political line and as such cannot and does not endorse all the views held by speakers. Its purpose is to enable critical exchange, self-reflection, and mutual questioning, and to contribute to vibrant and nuanced debates about key political issues of the day.

Bouattia was elected NUS President in 2016, but soon came under fire for stating that with mainstream Zionist-led media outlets resistance is resented as an act of terrorism.

The Home Affairs select committee said of her: Referring to Birmingham University as a Zionist outpost (and similar comments) smacks of outright racism, which is unacceptable, and even more so from a public figure such as the president of the NUS.

Another figure due to speak at ORF is Richard Seymour, a far-left blogger who previously spoke at at the forum in 2015.

Seymour responded on Facebook to criticism of Jeremy Corbyn by Simon Weston, a British veteran of the Falklands war who suffered 46 per cent burns to his face after his ship was bombed, by writing Seriously, who gives a shit about what Simon Weston thinks? If he knew anything hed still have his face.

Later that year he wrote of an Israeli journalist reporting on Israel-Palestine Fuck him, they should cut his throat.

He has also appeared multiple times on Press TV, the Iranian state broadcaster that has been accused of Holocaust denial and anti-Semitism, and wrote on his Leninology blog that its sensible for occupied people to attack and kill British troops, and the poppies should be burned not just a few, in a symbolic Islam4UK-style action, but all of them in a mass cremation; and any family members who actually sign up to wear a uniform of the armed forces in Afghanistan or anywhere else should be shunned, not loved.

In a statement Seymour apologised for his comments mocking Simon Western and calling for the murder of an Israeli journalist, referring to them as off-hand, off-colour statements made over a year ago in what I had assumed were private exchanges.

These exchanges involved, as far as I was aware, a small number of friends who would know from the context that they were not intended literally or maliciously

To be absolutely clear. I do not think that Simon Westons injuries deserve ridicule. I emphatically do not think that people who advocate for the West Bank settlers should have their throats cut I am, of course, very sorry to anyone who was hurt.

However, when contacted by Cherwell he made no comment in relation to Press TV or Leninology.

Another speaker on the lineup this year is Miriyam Aouragh, a Dutch anthropologist and activist.

According to Jewish NewsBritains largest Jewish newspaperand JTAa global Jewish news agencyin 2004 Aouragh organised a memorial service in Amsterdam for Ahmed Yassin, a Hamas founder and spiritual leader killed by Israel that year.

In their statement to Cherwell OUJS described Hamas as a terrorist organisation whose charter issued in 1988 is overtly anti-Semitic, stating the need to kill Jews and referring to The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

Aouragh told Cherwell: Like many I was very angry about Israels murderous targeted killings campaign between 2000-2004, which saw hundreds of political activists and leaders assassinated when the popular uprising in 2000 broke out.

These war crimes were condemned across the political spectrum, especially the collateral damage caused by extrajudicial killings using F16s, such as collapsing buildings with families in them and the killing of bystanders when cars were blown up.

One case was that of Ahmed Yassin of Hamas, an elderly man in a wheelchair living in a refugee camp in Gaza . I was part of a protest against the incredible violence of that period, many were making this argument, including the UN, the EU, as well as a large numbers of MPs in this country.

Oxford University Student Union (OUSU) Council, Somerville JCR, and Magdalen JCR have each voted to donate hundreds of pounds to support the event sparking further controversy.

OUSU and Somerville JCR both pledged 150 and Magdalen 200 to cover the costs of bringing the speakers to Oxford.

OUJC condemned OUSUs funding of the forum: We believe that our students union and JCRs should not be supporting this event and therefore demand that their funding for the Oxford Radical Forum 2017 be withdrawn.

OUSU Communications Manager, Jo Gregory-Brough told Cherwell: OUSU werent aware of any such allegations against the motion but take them very seriously. With this in mind, the OUSU Sabbatical team are looking into the allegations as a matter of urgency and from which a conclusion will be drawn regarding the funding.

Somerville JCR President Alex Crichton-Miller said: ORF puts on panels for all sorts of currently relevant issues, and this absolutely does not mean it endorses each and every word the speakers have said in the past nor might say at the ORF.

Magdalen JCR President Hannah McNicol did not respond to a request for comment.

This is not the first time that ORF has invited speakers with alleged ties to anti-Semitism. Max Blumenthal, who spoke in 2016, has been criticised for his 2013 book Goliath, Life and Loathing in Greater Israel, in which he compared Israel to Nazi Germany, advocated that the majority of Jews currently living in Israel be removed to make way for a Palestinian state, and referred to Israeli soldiers as Judeo-Nazis.

The Simon Wiesenthal Center, named after the famed Nazi Hunter, included the book in its 2013 list of the worst anti-Semitic and anti-Israel quotes.

The book was praised by former KKK leader David Duke, but denounced by a writer in The Nation who said it could have been published by the Hamas Book-of-the-Month Club.

Malia Bouattia and Max Blumenthal have not replied to Cherwells request for comment.

Read the original:

Revealed: Oxford Radical Forum speakers criticised for anti-Semitism ties – Cherwell Online

Fair Usage Law

February 17, 2017   Posted in: Max Blumenthal  Comments Closed

Trump’s Nominee for Ambassador to Israel Is More Right-Wing Than Netanyahu – AlterNet


AlterNet
Trump's Nominee for Ambassador to Israel Is More Right-Wing Than Netanyahu
AlterNet
Before a crowd of far-right Israeli-Americans, he launched into a bizarre diatribe against Max Blumenthal, an editor of this website, accusing him of being one of the world's leading anti-Semites and a secret adviser to Hillary Clinton, then claimed

and more »

Original post:

Trump’s Nominee for Ambassador to Israel Is More Right-Wing Than Netanyahu – AlterNet

Fair Usage Law

February 14, 2017   Posted in: Max Blumenthal  Comments Closed

No Holds Barred: Hillarys Clintons troubling …

Who is Max Blumenthal, why is he a Hillary Clinton Israel Svengali and does he pose as big a headache for Hillary as Jeremiah Wright did for President Barack Obama? The well-known proverb declares you can tell a lot about a person by the company they keep.

Last summer, in the wake of the impending Iran deal, which she herself helped to create and vocally supported, Hillary reached out to calm the jitters of her wealthiest Democratic Jewish supporters in an attempt to convince them that she would always support Israel. She also emphasized that she utterly condemns the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement that Israel is currently facing.

But she has been a harsh critic of the Jewish state, often relishing her role.

During a speech in 2012 she spoke of Israels lack of generosity and lack of empathy toward the Palestinians. She admitted that during her time as secretary of state she oftentimes was the designated yeller at Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. She once yelled at him for 45 minutes when Israel granted permits to build houses in the eastern neighborhoods of its capital Jerusalem during Vice President Joe Bidens visit to Israel.

But with the recent dumps of emails from Hillarys private Internet server the public has received an in-depth look at the very important role that Sidney Blumenthal played for Hillary during her time in the Obama administration.

Blumenthal is one of Hillarys closest advisers and a longtime family friend. He was a senior adviser during Bill Clintons presidency and served again as senior adviser for Hillarys failed 2008 run for the White House.

Blumenthal was clearly a man whose advice Hillary trusted and she was willing to pay him $10,000 a month for his services. However the information coming to light paints a troubled picture.

What they show is a slew of anti-Israel writings and opinions, many of which originated from articles written by Blumenthals own son, Max Blumenthal.

Max is a writer and self-declared anti-Zionist, known for his active support of the BDS movement and his calls for the dismantling of the State of Israel. He trolls pro-Israel writers, as I can personally attest. Maxs widely panned 2013 book Goliath, Life and Loathing in Greater Israel is full of anti-Israel rants, omissions and outright lies. In it, he repeatedly compares the Jewish state to Nazi Germany, and advocates that the majority of Jews currently living in Israel must be removed from the land to make way for a Palestinian state. Mimicking the Islamic States acronym ISIL, Max created the hashtag #JSIL Jewish State in the Levant. To Max, the democratic State of Israel and Islamic State are morally equivalent entities.

His opinions are seen as radical leftist claptrap even by Left-leaning detractors of the Jewish state. The Nation columnist Eric Alterman himself a critic of Israels presence in the West bank described how the book could have been published by the Hamas Book-of-the-Month Club. J. J. Goldberg of The Forward described Goliath as an unpleasant book. By contrast, David Duke, the racist former Klu Klux Klan leader, praised Blumenthals book.

What is truly concerning is that Sidney Blumenthal has not only failed to ever condemn his sons anti-Israel writings, but has actively advocated for and defended the warped, outrageous ideas conveyed therein. In fact, after learning of Altermans critique of Maxs book, Blumenthal began sending out emails attacking Alterman and supporting his sons shoddy and repugnant anti-Israel scholarship. One such email included an article from the radical anti-Zionist website Mondoweiss (which loved the book and for which Max has written for in the past) attacking Altermans review.

But even more concerning than all of this is that Hillary Clinton, the nations chief diplomat, valued Max Blumenthals disturbed anti-Israel rants so much that she forked out $120,000 a year to his dad to keep the flow of information coming.

Among the emails Sidney Blumenthal sent to Hillary is a link to a November 2010 blog post written by his son. In it, Max attempts to equate the views and policies of far Right Dutch politician Geert Wilders with those of Israel. Max goes so far as to claim that Wilders learned from, and formulated his views as a result of his living in Israel. Max writes: Israels mainstream leadership echoes Wilders crudest talking points on a regular basis. Max describes how the extreme right [in Europe] is also attracted to Israel because the country represents its highest ideals. While some critics see Israel as a racist apartheid state, people like Wilders see Israel as a racist apartheid state and they like it.

He continues, They richly enjoy when Israel mows down Arab Muslims by the dozens and tells the world to go to hell; they admire Israels settler culture.

Max also writes, Most of all, they yearn to live in a land like Israel that privileges its ethnic majority above all others to the point that it systematically humiliates and dispossesses the swarthy racial outclass. He adds, The endgame of the far-right is to make Europe less tolerant and more Israeli.

What was Hillarys response to this racist, anti-Israel tirade? She writes back to Blumenthal, A very smart piece as usual.

Before her speech to AIPAC in March of 2010, Blumenthal sent Hillary a column written by Uri Avnery claiming Israel was pursuing goals contrary to the United States interests while starting a rebellion against the US.

Hillarys response to Blumenthal was, I have to speak to AIPAC tomorrow.

How and should I use this? Blumenthal responds that with regard to the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, Hillary should, Hold Bibis [Netanyahus] feet to the fire.

Blumenthal also recommended to Hillary to try and mention in a positive light the George Soros-funded organization J Street, which is fiercely critical of the Jewish state.

Blumenthal tells Hillary to remind [AIPAC] in as subtle but also direct a way as you can that it does not have a monopoly over American Jewish opinion. Bibi is stage managing US Jewish organizations (and neocons, and the religious right, and whomever else he can muster) against the administration.

AIPAC itself has become an organ of the Israeli right, specifically Likud.

Holding Netanyahus feet to the fire, advocating for J Street and courting AIPACs favor while simultaneously viewing it as a conspiracy organization being wielded against the interests of the United States? These are the musings of Hillary Clinton as she considers American policy toward Israel.

Blumenthal also offered some truly bizarre analysis in an email to Hillary in the aftermath of the 2010 Gaza flotilla raid. During that operation Israeli soldiers boarded a Turkish vessel approaching the Gaza Strip, where they were brutally attacked, stabbed and thrown off ledges by the ships passengers, resulting in a shootout and casualties, as video evidence of the event makes clear. However, back in May of that year, before any of the facts had been properly clarified, Blumenthal provided Hillary with an armchair psychoanalysis of the events in which he states, Bibi desperately seeks his fathers approbation and can never equal his dead brother. Blumenthal explains that this must be what led Netanyahu to order the operation, adding, The raid on the ship to Gaza resembles the raid on Entebbe [in which Netanyahus brother was killed] except that there are no hostages, no guns (on the Turkish ship), its not in Africa, and its a fiasco; otherwise, its Entebbe.

Throughout all of this, there is no email showing Hillary objecting to any of these anti-Israel articles and opinions that Blumenthal continually sent her. To this day, even in light of all these damning exchanges being made public, Hillary has yet to apologize or publicly distance herself from Sidney or Max Blumenthal. Will Hillary disassociate herself from the crackpot anti-Israel theories of Max Blumenthal? Were all waiting to see.

The author, Americas rabbi, whom The Washington Post calls the most famous rabbi in America, is founder of The World Values Network and is the international best-selling author of 30 books, including Wrestling with the Divine and The Fed-Up Man of Faith, both of which deal with the problem of human suffering. Follow him on Twitter @RabbiShmuley.

Relevant to your professional network? Please share on Linkedin

Read more:

No Holds Barred: Hillarys Clintons troubling …

Fair Usage Law

January 19, 2017   Posted in: Max Blumenthal  Comments Closed

Elie Wiesel’s Perfect Tribute: Hate Tweet from Clinton …

SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER

Which is precisely why terror sympathizers and antisemites like Max Blumenthal son of Hillary Clintons close associate, Sid Blumenthal, and a Jew who hates both Israel and the Jewish people into which he was born celebrated Wiesels death.

SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER

The elder Blumenthal, who earns $200,000 per year as a partof Clintons inner circle, frequently sent the Secretary of State his sons hateful work. That oeuvre includesGoliath, an anti-Israel screed casting the Jewish state in the role of the Nazis.

Blumenthals bileis a perfect tribute to Wiesel, who was the living retort to such nonsense. He earned his enemies by being a witness who not only refused to die, but alsoto shut up.

It was Wiesel who elevated the phrase speaking truth to power, as he took on presidents from both parties, challenging Ronald Reagans visit to Bitburgand Barack Obamas surrenderto Iran.

His most widely-read work,Night, is a riveting memoir ofhis survival at Auschwitz, after the Jews in his remote Hungarian village were rounded up, stuffed into cattle cars, and sent to die horrific deaths. (I first readNight in the eighth grade;its terror has stayed with me since.)

But Wiesel won the Nobel Prize in 1986 for peace, not for literature. It was Wiesel who shaped memory into a potent political force: whenever a new genocide loomed, he was the voice of conscience, urging the world to act.

In hisefforts to save others, he drew no distinctions of race, religion, or ethnicity. He was as passionate in his pleas for Muslims in danger of extermination as he was in defendingthe State of Israels right to defend its citizens against Palestinianterrorism.

Re-read Max Blumenthals tweet accusing Wiesel of defending apartheid and then read what Wiesel said on accepting the Nobel Prize:

It would be unnatural for me not to make Jewish priorities my own: Israel, Soviet Jewry, Jews in Arab lands But there are others as important to me. Apartheid is, in my view, as abhorrent as anti-Semitism.

In that same speech, he recognized the plight of the Palestinians, but added that he deplore[d] their terrorist methods. Let Israel be given a chance, let hatred and danger be removed from her horizons, and there will be peace in and around the Holy Land, he said.

That is a solution Max Blumenthal, and his Clinton-advising father, reject.

Notably, Hillary Clinton has not shunned the Blumenthals. These are the sorts of people whom even Barack Obama, with his long history of associations with Jeremiah Wright and Rashid Khalidi and the like, knew to keep at bay.

With the passing of Wiesel and his generation, fabulists like Max Blumenthal who invert history to cast Israel as the fascists will feel emboldened.

Thatis precisely why each of us must keep Wiesels work, and his moral vision, alive.

Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News. His new book,See No Evil: 19 Hard Truths the Left Cant Handle, will be published by Regnery on July 25 and is available for pre-order through Amazon. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.

Read the original here:

Elie Wiesel’s Perfect Tribute: Hate Tweet from Clinton …

Fair Usage Law

December 17, 2016   Posted in: Max Blumenthal  Comments Closed

Sidney Blumenthal – Wikipedia

Sidney Stone Blumenthal (; born November 6, 1948) is an American journalist, activist, writer, and former political aide. He is a former aide to President Bill Clinton; a long-time confidant[1] to Hillary Clinton, formerly employed by the Clinton Foundation;[2] and a journalist, especially on American politics and foreign policy. He was editor of several departments and wrote for several publications including The Washington Post, Vanity Fair, The New Yorker, and was Washington, D.C. bureau chief for Salon.com, for which he has written over 1800 pieces online. He is a regular contributor to openDemocracy.net, and was a regular columnist for The Guardian.[3] After 2000, he published several essays critical of the administration of President George W. Bush.[4][5][6][7]

Blumenthal has written for several publications including The Washington Post, The New Republic, The Guardian and The New Yorker, and was briefly Washington, D.C. bureau chief for Salon.

Blumenthal was born in Chicago, to Jewish parents Claire (ne Stone) and Hyman V. Blumenthal.[8] He earned a BA in sociology from Brandeis University in 1969, and started his career in Boston as a journalist who wrote for The Boston Phoenix and The Real Paper, two weekly-issued publications.[9]

Blumenthal popularized the phrase “permanent campaign”, in a book of the same name, in 1980. The term describes officials campaigning for re-election throughout the electoral cycle, leaving no time when they can focus exclusively on governing.[10]

In 1983, Blumenthal became a national political correspondent for “The New Republic”, covering the 1984 campaign.[9] Soon after, Blumenthal began working for “The Washington Post” before returning to “The New Republic”.[11]

In 1993, Blumenthal became a Washington correspondent for “The New Yorker” before joining the Bill Clinton Presidential administration in the summer of 1997.[9]

Sidney Blumenthal served as assistant and senior adviser to Bill Clinton from August 1997 until January 2001. His roles included advising the President on communications and public policy as well as researching information in the general media about the White House. He became a major figure in the grand jury investigation that ended in the impeachment of President Clinton. While working for Clinton, Blumenthal was known for this loyalty to the Clintons, and for attacks on their adversaries, which is one reason Rahm Emanuel, original chief of staff for President Obama, barred Blumenthal from holding a position in Hillary Clinton’s State Department.[9]

During the investigations by independent counsel Kenneth Starr, Blumenthal was called to the grand jury to testify on matters related to what Clinton had told both Blumenthal and his senior staff in regard to Monica Lewinsky. It was on this occasion that Blumenthal was accused by the independent counsel of seeking to discredit the office of the counsel by passing stories to the media about Starr and his aides. The leadership of the Republican majority in the House of Representatives felt enough evidence existed in regard to the Paula Jones case and Lewinsky for impeachment proceedings to begin in December 1998.

After the House Judiciary Committee and the United States House of Representatives impeached Clinton on December 19, the matter then passed to the United States Senate. Blumenthal was one of four witnesses called to testify before the Senate. No live witnesses were called; the four were interviewed on videotape. His testimony addressed the key “lie”: that Clinton was allegedly pressuring Betty Currie and Blumenthal himself to attest that it was Lewinsky who initially pursued Clinton, not vice versa. Lewinsky stated she was the one who instigated the relationship. The Senate acquitted Clinton of perjury and impeachment proceedings ended.

In 1997, Blumenthal filed a $30 million libel lawsuit against Internet blogger Matt Drudge (and AOL, who had hired Drudge) stemming from a false claim Drudge had made of spousal abuse attributed to “top GOP sources”. Drudge retracted the story later, saying he had been given bad information. In Blumenthal v. Drudge, 992 F. Supp. 44 (D.D.C. 1998), the court refused to dismiss Blumenthal’s case for lack of personal jurisdiction. Drudge later publicly apologized to the Blumenthals. Blumenthal dropped his lawsuit and eventually reached a settlement involving a payment to Drudge over having missed a deposition. In his book, The Clinton Wars, Blumenthal claimed he was forced to settle because he could no longer financially afford the suit.[12][13]

After the Clinton presidency, Blumenthal wrote The Clinton Wars, which was published in 2003. Janet Maslin wrote in a review of the book in the New York Times: “Beyond his intention to set the record straight on controversies that plagued the Clinton presidency, Mr. Blumenthal has a more personal agenda. Barely mentioning others close to the Clintons, and illustrating this memoir with smiling, convivial photographs of himself in their company … Blumenthal sends a clear message to his administration colleagues: Mom liked me best.”[14]

Reviewing the book in the New York Review of Books, Joseph Lelyveld, the former executive editor of the New York Times, wrote that Blumenthal came across as more like “courtier” than “the bright campaign reporter he once was … When it comes to the Clintons, there is not a single line of comparable acuity or detachment in the whole of The Clinton Wars. What you get instead are passages that would have been regarded as above par but hardly fresh if they had appeared in a news magazine cover story ten years ago.”[15]

Andrew Sullivan has characterized Blumenthal as “the most pro-Clinton writer on the planet.”[16]

In addition to The Clinton Wars (2003), Blumenthal’s books include The Permanent Campaign (1980), The Rise of the Counter-Establishment (1986), Pledging Allegiance: The Last Campaign of the Cold War (1990), and How Bush Rules: Chronicles of a Radical Regime (2006).

During the 2004 election, Blumenthal was Washington, D.C. bureau chief for Salon.[9] He also was a regular columnist for “The Guardian” from August 2003 until November 2007.[17]

British-American journalist and author Christopher Hitchens upon subpoena submitted an affidavit to the trial managers of the Republican Party during the impeachment of Bill Clinton. In the affidavit, Hitchens swore that then-friend Blumenthal had described Monica Lewinsky as a stalker. This allegation contradicted Blumenthal’s own sworn deposition in the trial,[18] which resulted in a hostile exchange of words between the two. Following the publication of The Clinton Wars, Hitchens wrote several pieces in which he accused Blumenthal of manipulating facts.[18][19]

Blumenthal was a political consultant for the Emmy-award winning HBO series Tanner ’88, written by Garry Trudeau and directed by Robert Altman; he appears as himself in one episode. More notably, he was the executive producer of the documentary Taxi to the Dark Side, directed by Alex Gibney, which won an Academy Award for Best Documentary of 2007. He was an associate producer of the 2002 film Max.[20]

Blumenthal joined the 2008 Hillary Clinton presidential campaign as a “senior advisor” in November 2007.[21] While on a trip to advise Clinton on her presidential campaign, Blumenthal was arrested for driving while intoxicated in Nashua, New Hampshire, on January 7, 2008. He pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor DWI charge.[22]

After her January 2009 appointment as Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton wanted to hire Blumenthal. However, Obama’s chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, blocked his selection due to lingering anger among President Barack Obama’s aides over Blumenthal’s role in promoting negative stories about Obama during the Democratic primary.[23] According to a report in the New York Times, “Emanuel talked with Mrs. Clinton … and explained that bringing Mr. Blumenthal on board was a no-go. The bad blood among his colleagues was too deep, and the last thing the administration needed, he concluded, was dissension and drama in the ranks. In short, Mr. Blumenthal was out.”[23]

Blumenthal was a full-time employee Clinton Foundation from 2009 until 2013 and served as a consultant for the foundation from 2013 until 2015, earning about $10,000 per month.[24][25] Right-wing critics charge that Blumenthal’s work at the foundation was inappropriately politically motivated and that during his time at the foundation, he blurred the lines between the foundation and Secretary Clinton’s role as Secretary of State.[26][27]

During the 2011 uprising in Libya against Muammar Gaddafi, Blumenthal prepared, from public and other sources, about 25 memos which he sent as emails to Clinton in 2011 and 2012, which she shared through her aide, Jake Sullivan, with senior State Department personnel. In the form of intelligence briefings, the memos sometimes touted his business associates and, at times contained inaccurate information.[28][29]

The United States House Select Committee on Benghazi, headed by Representative Trey Gowdy, Republican of South Carolina, subpoenaed Blumenthal in May 2015.[30][31] Blumenthal gave testimony in a closed-door session the following month.[32]

Blumenthal’s name came up during the October 22, 2015 full committee public questioning of Hillary Clinton regarding the Benghazi incident, as one of the alleged sources of Hillary Clinton’s intelligence. During this hearing Democratic members asked that Blumenthal’s deposition transcript be made public so that comments regarding his involvement could be placed in context. The motion was defeated by a party-line vote.[33]

Blumenthal currently serves as a consultant to the left-leaning watchdog group Media Matters for America, the pro-Democratic Super PAC American Bridge 21st Century and the pro-Clinton Super PAC Correct the Record.[34]

He currently lives in Washington, D.C. with his wife. The couple has two sons, one of whom is author, journalist and pro-Palestinian activist Max Blumenthal.[35]

View original post here:

Sidney Blumenthal – Wikipedia

Fair Usage Law

December 2, 2016   Posted in: Max Blumenthal  Comments Closed

Fetishising Fundamentalists & Resisting Reformers: Maajid Nawaz, Ayaan Hirsi Ali and the SPLC – Conatus News

Fetishising Fundamentalists & Resisting Reformers: Maajid Nawaz, Ayaan Hirsi Ali and the SPLC Maajid Nawaz, the Muslim co-founder of Quilliam, the UKs first counter-extremism organisation, has been listed with no sense of irony by the SPLC as an anti-muslim bigot. Likewise, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the feminist who endured FGM and fled a forced marriage has been shamed by the SPLC as a key collaborator in anti-muslim bigotry because of her rhetoric on the topic of Islam. The Southern Poverty Law Centre lists their values and aims on their website: fighting hate, teaching tolerance, seeking justice, memorialising civil rights leaders; alongside quotes from RFK and pictures of MLK, just so you know they are serious about it. And like both RFK and MLK, the SPLC condones a muscular liberalism where pressure groups and social movements urge the mainstream as well as the fringe to give them equal dignity. The SPLC, however, has now decided to radically pivot on all of their core beliefs assuming they ever really believed them. They have come out against condemning homophobes, they are now at least complicit in the forced slavery of women, they offer tacit encouragement to the most retrograde conservative injunctions; and they have done this by smearing the leaders of the most important minority cohort in our politics Islamic Reformers. One gets the distinct impression that the author of the smears against them has never read, or even listened to anything either of them has ever written or said. For example, the author opens with the adorable attempt at being hard-hitting Maajid Nawaz is a British activist and part of the ex-radical circuit of former Islamists who use that experience to savage Islam. The first question I have, as a reader of Maajid, is not about the fantasy of the ex-radicalcircuit as if there is a revolving door from Pakistan to the Pentagon or the complete void of evidence the author leaves us with; it is more the question of plausibility: how can a Muslim be a bigot against Muslims? The answer is they cant, and even if they could, supporting gay rights, womens rights, and trans rights is not necessarily a bad way to do it in fact the SPLC should surely support those efforts? Nonetheless it is an intriguing lie to further dupe the misinformed. As for the claims that Maajid is lying about his past, which include fights with neo-Nazi gangs on the streets of Essex and his de-radicalisation in Egypt; the author writes But major elements of his story have been disputed by former friends, members of his family, fellow jihadists and journalists, and the evidence suggests that Nawaz is far more interested in self-promotion and money than in any particular ideological dispute. You may want to take journalism 101, dear author: believe it or not, but when someone leaves an extremist organisation, there is no Live long and be happy leaving do. In fact, Islamists might even lie about an ex-Islamist to delegitimise them, and never mind your next inaccuracy as Maajid was never and has never claimed to have been a jihadist! The author cites the Alternet hit-piece on Maajid written by Dr Nafeez Ahmed and Max Blumenthal, both of whom lack the integrity of even Maxs lapdog father. It was their original mistake to not check their sources. So when the author reproduces them and then directly lies about Maajids opinion on banning the veil by linking to a piece where Maajid himself says I do not believe in a blanket ban on the niqab one cannot be so surprised. Thus, upon even a mildly close inspection, the author has lied, misrepresented the facts and regurgitates the extremist narrative to undermine progressive voices. From pioneering LGBT rights to the Islamist Pravda, oh how far you have come. And the way the SPLC, a liberal left leaning think tank demeans a woman is laced with gruesome hypocrisy. They begin their smear against Ayaan with she says she endured female genital mutilation and fled civil wars and an arranged marriage in Africa. ; she says she endured what do you mean,SPLC? Is this just a case of bad writing, or are you really accusing a victim of FGM of being a total liar and fabricator? Where there civil wars really going on in Somalia? Who knows! Your opinion on victim blaming should not be contingent on the political alignment of the victims. Moreover, when you quote something, SPLC, you must give context. Ayaan has said some provocative things about Islam. You even quoted her correctly, she did indeed say We are at war with Islam and Islam is the new fascism and a destructive, nihilistic cult of death. However, you have left out half of her corpus. Her latest book Heretic: Why Islam Needs a Reformation Now is an ode to her conversations with Maajid Nawaz, among others, who convinced her that Islam needs to be reformed i.e it cannot and should not be destroyed. Thus Ayaan has converted to the belief that the clash is not within civilisations per se, but as Paul Berman has said, it is a clash within Islam itself. And Ayaan and Maajid are on the progressive side of that clash. The SPLC, however, are not merely just on the wrong side, they are active propagandists for it. The blind hatred toward Islamic Reformers like Ayaan and Maajid from the liberal left is not spawned from the misunderstandings of ignorant Westerners. No, these leftists have been spoon-fed the idea Muslims are somehow different sometimes by Islamists, other times by each-other. This is the idea behind neo-orientalism. Edward Saids classic orientalism says that Westerners will distrust people from the East, and this othering is done openly and malignantly. Neo-Orientalism goes a step further and fetishises even the idea of Muslims, and anyone who tries to change their patriarchal conservative culture will get what is coming to them whether that is the lies and smears of hacks, or the violence of Islamists. Maajid and Ayaan are just the latest victims. The SPLC has indulged in the neo-orientalist ideology and they match it with an equal hatred for their own culture. And so the Hitchens line This is masochism, and it is being offered to you by sadists should be enough for you to reject these moral cowards. comments

Fair Usage Law

February 23, 2017   Posted in: Max Blumenthal  Comments Closed

The White Helmets go to Hollywood – Dissident Voice

The netflix movie The White Helmets may win an Oscar in the short documentary category at the Academy Awards on Sunday February 26. It will not be a surprise, despite the fact that the group is a fraud and the movie is a contrived infomercial. The White Helmets are a feel good story like a Disney hero movie: 90% myth and fabrication. Most of what is claimed about the Syrian rescue group is untrue. They are not primarily Syrian; the group was initiated by British military contractor James LeMesurier and has been heavily funded (about $100 million) by the USA, UK and other governments. They are not volunteers; they are paid. This is confirmed in the Al Jazeera video which shows some White Helmet volunteers talking about going on strike if they dont get paid soon. Most of the heavy funding goes to the marketing which is run by The Syria Campaign based in New York. The manager is an Irish America woman Anna Nolan who has never been to Syria. As an example of its deception, The Syria Campaign website features video showing children dancing and playing soccer implying they are part of the opposition demand for a free and peaceful Syria . But the video images are taken from a 2010 BBC documentary about education in Syria under the Baath government. White Helmets and Nusra When eastern Aleppo was finally freed from the armed militants, it was discovered that the White Helmets headquarters were alongside the headquarters of the Al Qaeda Syrian militant group. Civilians from east Aleppo reported that the White Helmets primarily responded when the militants were attacked. Soon after departing Aleppo in government supplied buses (!) the White Helmets showed up in the mountains above Damascus where they allied with terrorist groups in poisoning then shutting off the water source for five million people in Damascus. The White Helmets claim to be neutral and independent is another lie. They only work in areas controlled by the rebel groups, primarily Nusra/Al Qaeda. Their leaders actively call for US and NATO intervention in Syria. Video shows White Helmet workers picking up the corpse of a civilian after execution and celebrating Nusra/Al Qaeda terrorist battle wins. White Helmets and Nusra The movie is as fraudulent as the group it tries to heroize. The film-makers never set foot in Syria. Their video footage takes place in southern Turkey where they show White Helmet trainees in a hotel and talking on cell phones. Thrilling. There is some footage from inside Syria but it looks contrived. The opening scene depicts a White Helmet volunteer going to work and beseeching his son not to give mommy a hard time. Real or scripted? The message is simple: here are people we can support; they are under attack by the brutal regime shouldnt we do something to stop it??! ISIS and One Finger Salute White Helmets One Finger Salute Khaled Khatib is said to be the person who filmed the footage from inside Syria. He has reportedly received a US visa and will attend the Oscars. This will likely garner special media attention. Ironically, some of those who have exploited the refugee issue for their own fund-raising campaigns, like Human Rights Watch, are groups which promote the war which created the refugee crisis. Khatib has tweeted the first video he took showing the White Helmets. It looks remarkably unrealistic, with a girl who was totally buried being removed without injuries or wounds or even much dirt. Is it really possible to rescue people that quickly? In the real world, rescue workers are told to work slowly so as to not damage or exacerbate body injuries. The original video has the logo of Aleppo Media Center (AMC) which was created by the Syrian Expatriates Organization. Their address on K Street in Washington DC suggests this is yet another Western funded media campaign driven by political objectives. In the past few days, with perfect timing for the upcoming Oscars, there is yet another miracle rescue . another girl totally buried but then removed and whisked away in record breaking time perfect for social media. Is it real or is it contrived? This raises a question regarding the integrity of the Oscar Academy Awards. Are awards given for actual quality, authenticity, skill and passion? Or are Oscar awards sometimes given under political and financial influence? There is political motivation to promote the White Helmets as part of the effort to prevent the collapse of the Western/Israeli/Gulf campaign to overthrow the Syrian government. These same governments have given boatloads of money to fuel the propaganda campaign. Last week Syria Solidarity Movement reached out to three marketing firms in the LA area to request help challenging the White Helmets nomination. Two of the firms declined and the third said they were already being paid to promote the nomination! The true source and purpose of the White Helmets was exposed almost two years ago. More recently Vanessa Beeley has documented the fact there is a REAL Syrian Civil Defence which was begun in the 1950s and is a member of the International Civil Defense Organizations. This organization is opposite to the group created in Turkey in 2013. According to on-the-ground interviews in Aleppo, terrorists began by killing real Syrian rescue workers and stealing their equipment. Since then the White Helmets have been supplied, by the West through Turkey, with brand new ambulances and related rescue equipment. Max Blumenthal has written a two part detailed examination of the shadowy PR firm behind the White Helmets. And Jan Oberg has written an overview survey of the pro and con examinations in his work Just How Gray are the White Helmets. Yet mainstream media, and some alternative media, continue to uncritically promote the myth of the White Helmets. The promoters of the group absolutely deserve an award for marketing and advertising. This is a field where truth and reality is irrelevant; its all about sales and manipulation. On that basis, the White Helmets has been an incredible success. The group was started as Syria Civil Defense in Turkey in 2013. It was re-branded as the White Helmets in 2014. It was heavily used in 2014 and 2015 by Nicholas Krisof, Avaaz and others to campaign for all out aggression against Syria. In 2016 the group received the Rights Livelihood Award and was seriously considered for a Nobel Peace Prize. These facts show how corrupt and politically and financially influenced the Rights Livelihood Award and Nobel Peace Prize can be. Meet the White Helmets The White Helmets movie is a tactic in the ongoing campaign of distortion and deception around Syria. Its a fraud, just like the fake kidnapping of NBC reporter Richard Engel. The Oscars will be a demonstration of the integrity of the Academy Awards. The reporting on the story will be a test of the integrity and accuracy of media outlets. Ironically, the Israeli mainstream TV program I24 presented both sides and titled the segment White Helmets: Heroes or Hoax?. In contrast, the highly popular and widely respected DemocracyNow has only broadcast a puff piece promoting the White Helmet disinformation. The coming days will reveal more about the ongoing information war against Syria. Meanwhile an on online petition continues to gather signatures to NOT give the Oscar to the White Helmets deception. Rick Sterling is an investigative journalist and member of Syria Solidarity Movement. He can be reached at rsterling1@gmail.com. Read other articles by Rick. This article was posted on Tuesday, February 21st, 2017 at 4:08pm and is filed under Media, Narrative, Propaganda, Syria, Terrorism (state and retail), Turkey.

Fair Usage Law

February 21, 2017   Posted in: Max Blumenthal  Comments Closed

Outraged Jewish Students at Oxford Demand Withdrawal of Campus Support for Upcoming Conference Hosting Anti … – Algemeiner

Email a copy of “Outraged Jewish Students at Oxford Demand Withdrawal of Campus Support for Upcoming Conference Hosting Anti-Israel Activists, Alleged Terrorism Sympathizers” to a friend Keble College Chapel, Oxford University. Photo: Wikipedia. The Jewish Society at Britains Oxford University (OUJS) is calling for the withdrawal of support for anupcomingconference featuring speakers whohave expressed sympathy for Palestinian terrorists and advocated violence against Israelis,reported Cherwell, the schoolsindependent student newspaper. According to the report, the OUJS railed against theOxford Radical Forum (ORF) 2017 forplanning to hostMiriyam Aouragh, a Dutch anthropologist and activist, who reportedly describedAhmed Yassin, afounder of Hamas, as anelderly man in a wheelchair living in a refugee camp in Gaza and organized a memorial service for him after he was killed by Israeli forces;Malia Bouattia, the president of the National Union of Students, who called the University of Birmingham a Zionist outpost;andRichard Seymour, whoreportedly wrote of an Israeli journalist,F*** him, they should cut his throat. The OUJS toldCherwell,We believe that our community should not be inviting speakers who espouse antisemitism and hate speech. They should not be afforded a platform to spread their opinion. February 20, 2017 6:16 pm The OUJC demanded thattheOxford University Student Union (OUSU) and a number of Junior Common Rooms (JCRs) which provideservices toa sectorof the student population withdraw theirfunding for theevent,saying, We believe that our students union and JCRsshould not be supporting this. According toCherwell, the OUSU has said it was not aware of any such concerns, but will take [the allegations]very seriously, while the president of one of the JCRssaidits involvement absolutely does not mean it endorses each and every word the speakers have said in the past nor might say at the ORF. According to ORF organizers, the conference, scheduled for March 3-5, is a weekend of events designed to critically interrogate current political issues from a range of left-wing perspectives, and has been a fixture of intellectual life at Oxford for almost a decade. In a statement posted on its Facebook page, ORF defended its choice of speakers, saying, Weconsider [them] to be well qualified to take part in the specific debates to which they have been invited.Organizers added, [We] are united against antisemitism, and all forms of racism, butcriticized those who insistthat past offensive statementsconstitute sufficient basis for which to exclude people from any critical forum. According toCherwell, ORF has a history of inviting speakers who have expressed antisemitic views and remarks, including journalist Max Blumenthal, the notorious Jewishanti-Zionist. Oxford has come under scrutiny recently forallegations oframpant antisemitism in its LabourClub, asThe Algemeiner reported, and was criticized whena nearly year-long investigation into the chargesresulted in no disciplinary action.

Fair Usage Law

February 20, 2017   Posted in: Max Blumenthal  Comments Closed

Outraged Jewish Students at Oxford Demand Withdrawal of Campus Support for Upcoming Conference Hosting … – Algemeiner

Email a copy of “Outraged Jewish Students at Oxford Demand Withdrawal of Campus Support for Upcoming Conference Hosting Alleged Zionism-Bashers Sympathetic to Palestinian Terrorists” to a friend University of Oxford. Photo: Wikipedia. The Jewish Society at Britains Oxford University (OUJS) is calling for the withdrawal of support for anupcomingconference featuring speakers whohave expressed sympathy for Palestinian terrorists and advocated violence against Israelis,reported Cherwell, the schoolsindependent student newspaper. According to the report, the OUJS railed against theOxford Radical Forum (ORF) 2017 forplanning to hostMiriyam Aouragh, a Dutch anthropologist and activist, who reportedly describedAhmed Yassin, afounder of Hamas, as anelderly man in a wheelchair living in a refugee camp in Gaza and organized a memorial service for him after he was killed by Israeli forces;Malia Bouattia, the president of the National Union of Students, who called the University of Birmingham a Zionist outpost;andRichard Seymour, whoreportedly wrote of an Israeli journalist,F*** him, they should cut his throat. The OUJS toldCherwell,We believe that our community should not be inviting speakers who espouse antisemitism and hate speech. They should not be afforded a platform to spread their opinion. February 19, 2017 9:12 am The OUJC demanded thattheOxford University Student Union (OUSU) and a number of Junior Common Rooms (JCRs) which provideservices toa sectorof the student population withdraw theirfunding for theevent,saying, We believe that our students union and JCRsshould not be supporting this. According toCherwell, the OUSU has said it was not aware of any such concerns, but will take [the allegations]very seriously, while the president of one of the JCRssaidits involvement absolutely does not mean it endorses each and every word the speakers have said in the past nor might say at the ORF. According to ORF organizers, the conference, scheduled for March 3-5, is a weekend of events designed to critically interrogate current political issues from a range of left-wing perspectives, and has been a fixture of intellectual life at Oxford for almost a decade. In a statement posted on its Facebook page, ORF defended its choice of speakers, saying, Weconsider [them] to be well qualified to take part in the specific debates to which they have been invited.Organizers added, [We] are united against antisemitism, and all forms of racism, butcriticized those who insistthat past offensive statementsconstitute sufficient basis for which to exclude people from any critical forum. According toCherwell, ORF has a history of inviting speakers who have expressed antisemitic views and remarks, including journalist Max Blumenthal, the notorious Jewishanti-Zionist. Oxford has come under scrutiny recently forallegations oframpant antisemitism in its LabourClub, asThe Algemeiner reported, and was criticized whena nearly year-long investigation into the chargesresulted in no disciplinary action.

Fair Usage Law

February 19, 2017   Posted in: Max Blumenthal  Comments Closed

Revealed: Oxford Radical Forum speakers criticised for anti-Semitism ties – Cherwell Online

Speakers at the Oxford Radical Forum (ORF), including controversial NUS President Malia Bouattia, have been variously condemned for allegedly expressed anti-Semitic views, sympathy with Hamas, and for mocking a disfigured British veteran, among other provocative positions. ORF is described by the organisers as a three day event for the radical left, held in Wadham, although the College has not confirmed that they are hosting the event. There are currently seven speakers announced. Oxford University Jewish Society (OUJS) said in a statement made to Cherwell: OUJS stands in opposition to the decision of ORF 2017 to host Miriyam Aouragh and Malia Bouattia. 84 per cent of our voting members last year voted that they are unable to reconcile their Jewish identity with Bouattias presidency of the NUS, and 57 Jewish Society presidents across the country condemned her comments. Further, the Home Affairs Select Committee have condemned her outright racism and an NUS investigation decided that her content had been anti-Semitic. Last term, our own student union called for Bouattia to issue a full and formal apology, and should stand down otherwise. Jewish students are still waiting. We believe that our community should not be inviting speakers who espouse anti-Semitism and hate speech. They should not be afforded a platform to spread their opinion. ORFs committee told Cherwell: ORF is a weekend of events designed to critically interrogate current political issues from a range of left-wing perspectives, and has been a fixture of intellectual life at Oxford for almost a decade. We consider the speakers to be well qualified to take part in the specific debates to which they have been invited. ORF is not committed to a unified political line and as such cannot and does not endorse all the views held by speakers. Its purpose is to enable critical exchange, self-reflection, and mutual questioning, and to contribute to vibrant and nuanced debates about key political issues of the day. Bouattia was elected NUS President in 2016, but soon came under fire for stating that with mainstream Zionist-led media outlets resistance is resented as an act of terrorism. The Home Affairs select committee said of her: Referring to Birmingham University as a Zionist outpost (and similar comments) smacks of outright racism, which is unacceptable, and even more so from a public figure such as the president of the NUS. Another figure due to speak at ORF is Richard Seymour, a far-left blogger who previously spoke at at the forum in 2015. Seymour responded on Facebook to criticism of Jeremy Corbyn by Simon Weston, a British veteran of the Falklands war who suffered 46 per cent burns to his face after his ship was bombed, by writing Seriously, who gives a shit about what Simon Weston thinks? If he knew anything hed still have his face. Later that year he wrote of an Israeli journalist reporting on Israel-Palestine Fuck him, they should cut his throat. He has also appeared multiple times on Press TV, the Iranian state broadcaster that has been accused of Holocaust denial and anti-Semitism, and wrote on his Leninology blog that its sensible for occupied people to attack and kill British troops, and the poppies should be burned not just a few, in a symbolic Islam4UK-style action, but all of them in a mass cremation; and any family members who actually sign up to wear a uniform of the armed forces in Afghanistan or anywhere else should be shunned, not loved. In a statement Seymour apologised for his comments mocking Simon Western and calling for the murder of an Israeli journalist, referring to them as off-hand, off-colour statements made over a year ago in what I had assumed were private exchanges. These exchanges involved, as far as I was aware, a small number of friends who would know from the context that they were not intended literally or maliciously To be absolutely clear. I do not think that Simon Westons injuries deserve ridicule. I emphatically do not think that people who advocate for the West Bank settlers should have their throats cut I am, of course, very sorry to anyone who was hurt. However, when contacted by Cherwell he made no comment in relation to Press TV or Leninology. Another speaker on the lineup this year is Miriyam Aouragh, a Dutch anthropologist and activist. According to Jewish NewsBritains largest Jewish newspaperand JTAa global Jewish news agencyin 2004 Aouragh organised a memorial service in Amsterdam for Ahmed Yassin, a Hamas founder and spiritual leader killed by Israel that year. In their statement to Cherwell OUJS described Hamas as a terrorist organisation whose charter issued in 1988 is overtly anti-Semitic, stating the need to kill Jews and referring to The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Aouragh told Cherwell: Like many I was very angry about Israels murderous targeted killings campaign between 2000-2004, which saw hundreds of political activists and leaders assassinated when the popular uprising in 2000 broke out. These war crimes were condemned across the political spectrum, especially the collateral damage caused by extrajudicial killings using F16s, such as collapsing buildings with families in them and the killing of bystanders when cars were blown up. One case was that of Ahmed Yassin of Hamas, an elderly man in a wheelchair living in a refugee camp in Gaza . I was part of a protest against the incredible violence of that period, many were making this argument, including the UN, the EU, as well as a large numbers of MPs in this country. Oxford University Student Union (OUSU) Council, Somerville JCR, and Magdalen JCR have each voted to donate hundreds of pounds to support the event sparking further controversy. OUSU and Somerville JCR both pledged 150 and Magdalen 200 to cover the costs of bringing the speakers to Oxford. OUJC condemned OUSUs funding of the forum: We believe that our students union and JCRs should not be supporting this event and therefore demand that their funding for the Oxford Radical Forum 2017 be withdrawn. OUSU Communications Manager, Jo Gregory-Brough told Cherwell: OUSU werent aware of any such allegations against the motion but take them very seriously. With this in mind, the OUSU Sabbatical team are looking into the allegations as a matter of urgency and from which a conclusion will be drawn regarding the funding. Somerville JCR President Alex Crichton-Miller said: ORF puts on panels for all sorts of currently relevant issues, and this absolutely does not mean it endorses each and every word the speakers have said in the past nor might say at the ORF. Magdalen JCR President Hannah McNicol did not respond to a request for comment. This is not the first time that ORF has invited speakers with alleged ties to anti-Semitism. Max Blumenthal, who spoke in 2016, has been criticised for his 2013 book Goliath, Life and Loathing in Greater Israel, in which he compared Israel to Nazi Germany, advocated that the majority of Jews currently living in Israel be removed to make way for a Palestinian state, and referred to Israeli soldiers as Judeo-Nazis. The Simon Wiesenthal Center, named after the famed Nazi Hunter, included the book in its 2013 list of the worst anti-Semitic and anti-Israel quotes. The book was praised by former KKK leader David Duke, but denounced by a writer in The Nation who said it could have been published by the Hamas Book-of-the-Month Club. Malia Bouattia and Max Blumenthal have not replied to Cherwells request for comment.

Fair Usage Law

February 17, 2017   Posted in: Max Blumenthal  Comments Closed

Trump’s Nominee for Ambassador to Israel Is More Right-Wing Than Netanyahu – AlterNet

AlterNet Trump's Nominee for Ambassador to Israel Is More Right-Wing Than Netanyahu AlterNet Before a crowd of far-right Israeli-Americans, he launched into a bizarre diatribe against Max Blumenthal , an editor of this website, accusing him of being one of the world's leading anti-Semites and a secret adviser to Hillary Clinton, then claimed … and more »

Fair Usage Law

February 14, 2017   Posted in: Max Blumenthal  Comments Closed

No Holds Barred: Hillarys Clintons troubling …

Who is Max Blumenthal, why is he a Hillary Clinton Israel Svengali and does he pose as big a headache for Hillary as Jeremiah Wright did for President Barack Obama? The well-known proverb declares you can tell a lot about a person by the company they keep. Last summer, in the wake of the impending Iran deal, which she herself helped to create and vocally supported, Hillary reached out to calm the jitters of her wealthiest Democratic Jewish supporters in an attempt to convince them that she would always support Israel. She also emphasized that she utterly condemns the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement that Israel is currently facing. But she has been a harsh critic of the Jewish state, often relishing her role. During a speech in 2012 she spoke of Israels lack of generosity and lack of empathy toward the Palestinians. She admitted that during her time as secretary of state she oftentimes was the designated yeller at Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. She once yelled at him for 45 minutes when Israel granted permits to build houses in the eastern neighborhoods of its capital Jerusalem during Vice President Joe Bidens visit to Israel. But with the recent dumps of emails from Hillarys private Internet server the public has received an in-depth look at the very important role that Sidney Blumenthal played for Hillary during her time in the Obama administration. Blumenthal is one of Hillarys closest advisers and a longtime family friend. He was a senior adviser during Bill Clintons presidency and served again as senior adviser for Hillarys failed 2008 run for the White House. Blumenthal was clearly a man whose advice Hillary trusted and she was willing to pay him $10,000 a month for his services. However the information coming to light paints a troubled picture. What they show is a slew of anti-Israel writings and opinions, many of which originated from articles written by Blumenthals own son, Max Blumenthal. Max is a writer and self-declared anti-Zionist, known for his active support of the BDS movement and his calls for the dismantling of the State of Israel. He trolls pro-Israel writers, as I can personally attest. Maxs widely panned 2013 book Goliath, Life and Loathing in Greater Israel is full of anti-Israel rants, omissions and outright lies. In it, he repeatedly compares the Jewish state to Nazi Germany, and advocates that the majority of Jews currently living in Israel must be removed from the land to make way for a Palestinian state. Mimicking the Islamic States acronym ISIL, Max created the hashtag #JSIL Jewish State in the Levant. To Max, the democratic State of Israel and Islamic State are morally equivalent entities. His opinions are seen as radical leftist claptrap even by Left-leaning detractors of the Jewish state. The Nation columnist Eric Alterman himself a critic of Israels presence in the West bank described how the book could have been published by the Hamas Book-of-the-Month Club. J. J. Goldberg of The Forward described Goliath as an unpleasant book. By contrast, David Duke, the racist former Klu Klux Klan leader, praised Blumenthals book. What is truly concerning is that Sidney Blumenthal has not only failed to ever condemn his sons anti-Israel writings, but has actively advocated for and defended the warped, outrageous ideas conveyed therein. In fact, after learning of Altermans critique of Maxs book, Blumenthal began sending out emails attacking Alterman and supporting his sons shoddy and repugnant anti-Israel scholarship. One such email included an article from the radical anti-Zionist website Mondoweiss (which loved the book and for which Max has written for in the past) attacking Altermans review. But even more concerning than all of this is that Hillary Clinton, the nations chief diplomat, valued Max Blumenthals disturbed anti-Israel rants so much that she forked out $120,000 a year to his dad to keep the flow of information coming. Among the emails Sidney Blumenthal sent to Hillary is a link to a November 2010 blog post written by his son. In it, Max attempts to equate the views and policies of far Right Dutch politician Geert Wilders with those of Israel. Max goes so far as to claim that Wilders learned from, and formulated his views as a result of his living in Israel. Max writes: Israels mainstream leadership echoes Wilders crudest talking points on a regular basis. Max describes how the extreme right [in Europe] is also attracted to Israel because the country represents its highest ideals. While some critics see Israel as a racist apartheid state, people like Wilders see Israel as a racist apartheid state and they like it. He continues, They richly enjoy when Israel mows down Arab Muslims by the dozens and tells the world to go to hell; they admire Israels settler culture. Max also writes, Most of all, they yearn to live in a land like Israel that privileges its ethnic majority above all others to the point that it systematically humiliates and dispossesses the swarthy racial outclass. He adds, The endgame of the far-right is to make Europe less tolerant and more Israeli. What was Hillarys response to this racist, anti-Israel tirade? She writes back to Blumenthal, A very smart piece as usual. Before her speech to AIPAC in March of 2010, Blumenthal sent Hillary a column written by Uri Avnery claiming Israel was pursuing goals contrary to the United States interests while starting a rebellion against the US. Hillarys response to Blumenthal was, I have to speak to AIPAC tomorrow. How and should I use this? Blumenthal responds that with regard to the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, Hillary should, Hold Bibis [Netanyahus] feet to the fire. Blumenthal also recommended to Hillary to try and mention in a positive light the George Soros-funded organization J Street, which is fiercely critical of the Jewish state. Blumenthal tells Hillary to remind [AIPAC] in as subtle but also direct a way as you can that it does not have a monopoly over American Jewish opinion. Bibi is stage managing US Jewish organizations (and neocons, and the religious right, and whomever else he can muster) against the administration. AIPAC itself has become an organ of the Israeli right, specifically Likud. Holding Netanyahus feet to the fire, advocating for J Street and courting AIPACs favor while simultaneously viewing it as a conspiracy organization being wielded against the interests of the United States? These are the musings of Hillary Clinton as she considers American policy toward Israel. Blumenthal also offered some truly bizarre analysis in an email to Hillary in the aftermath of the 2010 Gaza flotilla raid. During that operation Israeli soldiers boarded a Turkish vessel approaching the Gaza Strip, where they were brutally attacked, stabbed and thrown off ledges by the ships passengers, resulting in a shootout and casualties, as video evidence of the event makes clear. However, back in May of that year, before any of the facts had been properly clarified, Blumenthal provided Hillary with an armchair psychoanalysis of the events in which he states, Bibi desperately seeks his fathers approbation and can never equal his dead brother. Blumenthal explains that this must be what led Netanyahu to order the operation, adding, The raid on the ship to Gaza resembles the raid on Entebbe [in which Netanyahus brother was killed] except that there are no hostages, no guns (on the Turkish ship), its not in Africa, and its a fiasco; otherwise, its Entebbe. Throughout all of this, there is no email showing Hillary objecting to any of these anti-Israel articles and opinions that Blumenthal continually sent her. To this day, even in light of all these damning exchanges being made public, Hillary has yet to apologize or publicly distance herself from Sidney or Max Blumenthal. Will Hillary disassociate herself from the crackpot anti-Israel theories of Max Blumenthal? Were all waiting to see. The author, Americas rabbi, whom The Washington Post calls the most famous rabbi in America, is founder of The World Values Network and is the international best-selling author of 30 books, including Wrestling with the Divine and The Fed-Up Man of Faith, both of which deal with the problem of human suffering. Follow him on Twitter @RabbiShmuley. Relevant to your professional network? Please share on Linkedin

Fair Usage Law

January 19, 2017   Posted in: Max Blumenthal  Comments Closed

Elie Wiesel’s Perfect Tribute: Hate Tweet from Clinton …

SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER Which is precisely why terror sympathizers and antisemites like Max Blumenthal son of Hillary Clintons close associate, Sid Blumenthal, and a Jew who hates both Israel and the Jewish people into which he was born celebrated Wiesels death. SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER The elder Blumenthal, who earns $200,000 per year as a partof Clintons inner circle, frequently sent the Secretary of State his sons hateful work. That oeuvre includesGoliath, an anti-Israel screed casting the Jewish state in the role of the Nazis. Blumenthals bileis a perfect tribute to Wiesel, who was the living retort to such nonsense. He earned his enemies by being a witness who not only refused to die, but alsoto shut up. It was Wiesel who elevated the phrase speaking truth to power, as he took on presidents from both parties, challenging Ronald Reagans visit to Bitburgand Barack Obamas surrenderto Iran. His most widely-read work,Night, is a riveting memoir ofhis survival at Auschwitz, after the Jews in his remote Hungarian village were rounded up, stuffed into cattle cars, and sent to die horrific deaths. (I first readNight in the eighth grade;its terror has stayed with me since.) But Wiesel won the Nobel Prize in 1986 for peace, not for literature. It was Wiesel who shaped memory into a potent political force: whenever a new genocide loomed, he was the voice of conscience, urging the world to act. In hisefforts to save others, he drew no distinctions of race, religion, or ethnicity. He was as passionate in his pleas for Muslims in danger of extermination as he was in defendingthe State of Israels right to defend its citizens against Palestinianterrorism. Re-read Max Blumenthals tweet accusing Wiesel of defending apartheid and then read what Wiesel said on accepting the Nobel Prize: It would be unnatural for me not to make Jewish priorities my own: Israel, Soviet Jewry, Jews in Arab lands But there are others as important to me. Apartheid is, in my view, as abhorrent as anti-Semitism. In that same speech, he recognized the plight of the Palestinians, but added that he deplore[d] their terrorist methods. Let Israel be given a chance, let hatred and danger be removed from her horizons, and there will be peace in and around the Holy Land, he said. That is a solution Max Blumenthal, and his Clinton-advising father, reject. Notably, Hillary Clinton has not shunned the Blumenthals. These are the sorts of people whom even Barack Obama, with his long history of associations with Jeremiah Wright and Rashid Khalidi and the like, knew to keep at bay. With the passing of Wiesel and his generation, fabulists like Max Blumenthal who invert history to cast Israel as the fascists will feel emboldened. Thatis precisely why each of us must keep Wiesels work, and his moral vision, alive. Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News. His new book,See No Evil: 19 Hard Truths the Left Cant Handle, will be published by Regnery on July 25 and is available for pre-order through Amazon. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.

Fair Usage Law

December 17, 2016   Posted in: Max Blumenthal  Comments Closed

Sidney Blumenthal – Wikipedia

Sidney Stone Blumenthal (; born November 6, 1948) is an American journalist, activist, writer, and former political aide. He is a former aide to President Bill Clinton; a long-time confidant[1] to Hillary Clinton, formerly employed by the Clinton Foundation;[2] and a journalist, especially on American politics and foreign policy. He was editor of several departments and wrote for several publications including The Washington Post, Vanity Fair, The New Yorker, and was Washington, D.C. bureau chief for Salon.com, for which he has written over 1800 pieces online. He is a regular contributor to openDemocracy.net, and was a regular columnist for The Guardian.[3] After 2000, he published several essays critical of the administration of President George W. Bush.[4][5][6][7] Blumenthal has written for several publications including The Washington Post, The New Republic, The Guardian and The New Yorker, and was briefly Washington, D.C. bureau chief for Salon. Blumenthal was born in Chicago, to Jewish parents Claire (ne Stone) and Hyman V. Blumenthal.[8] He earned a BA in sociology from Brandeis University in 1969, and started his career in Boston as a journalist who wrote for The Boston Phoenix and The Real Paper, two weekly-issued publications.[9] Blumenthal popularized the phrase “permanent campaign”, in a book of the same name, in 1980. The term describes officials campaigning for re-election throughout the electoral cycle, leaving no time when they can focus exclusively on governing.[10] In 1983, Blumenthal became a national political correspondent for “The New Republic”, covering the 1984 campaign.[9] Soon after, Blumenthal began working for “The Washington Post” before returning to “The New Republic”.[11] In 1993, Blumenthal became a Washington correspondent for “The New Yorker” before joining the Bill Clinton Presidential administration in the summer of 1997.[9] Sidney Blumenthal served as assistant and senior adviser to Bill Clinton from August 1997 until January 2001. His roles included advising the President on communications and public policy as well as researching information in the general media about the White House. He became a major figure in the grand jury investigation that ended in the impeachment of President Clinton. While working for Clinton, Blumenthal was known for this loyalty to the Clintons, and for attacks on their adversaries, which is one reason Rahm Emanuel, original chief of staff for President Obama, barred Blumenthal from holding a position in Hillary Clinton’s State Department.[9] During the investigations by independent counsel Kenneth Starr, Blumenthal was called to the grand jury to testify on matters related to what Clinton had told both Blumenthal and his senior staff in regard to Monica Lewinsky. It was on this occasion that Blumenthal was accused by the independent counsel of seeking to discredit the office of the counsel by passing stories to the media about Starr and his aides. The leadership of the Republican majority in the House of Representatives felt enough evidence existed in regard to the Paula Jones case and Lewinsky for impeachment proceedings to begin in December 1998. After the House Judiciary Committee and the United States House of Representatives impeached Clinton on December 19, the matter then passed to the United States Senate. Blumenthal was one of four witnesses called to testify before the Senate. No live witnesses were called; the four were interviewed on videotape. His testimony addressed the key “lie”: that Clinton was allegedly pressuring Betty Currie and Blumenthal himself to attest that it was Lewinsky who initially pursued Clinton, not vice versa. Lewinsky stated she was the one who instigated the relationship. The Senate acquitted Clinton of perjury and impeachment proceedings ended. In 1997, Blumenthal filed a $30 million libel lawsuit against Internet blogger Matt Drudge (and AOL, who had hired Drudge) stemming from a false claim Drudge had made of spousal abuse attributed to “top GOP sources”. Drudge retracted the story later, saying he had been given bad information. In Blumenthal v. Drudge, 992 F. Supp. 44 (D.D.C. 1998), the court refused to dismiss Blumenthal’s case for lack of personal jurisdiction. Drudge later publicly apologized to the Blumenthals. Blumenthal dropped his lawsuit and eventually reached a settlement involving a payment to Drudge over having missed a deposition. In his book, The Clinton Wars, Blumenthal claimed he was forced to settle because he could no longer financially afford the suit.[12][13] After the Clinton presidency, Blumenthal wrote The Clinton Wars, which was published in 2003. Janet Maslin wrote in a review of the book in the New York Times: “Beyond his intention to set the record straight on controversies that plagued the Clinton presidency, Mr. Blumenthal has a more personal agenda. Barely mentioning others close to the Clintons, and illustrating this memoir with smiling, convivial photographs of himself in their company … Blumenthal sends a clear message to his administration colleagues: Mom liked me best.”[14] Reviewing the book in the New York Review of Books, Joseph Lelyveld, the former executive editor of the New York Times, wrote that Blumenthal came across as more like “courtier” than “the bright campaign reporter he once was … When it comes to the Clintons, there is not a single line of comparable acuity or detachment in the whole of The Clinton Wars. What you get instead are passages that would have been regarded as above par but hardly fresh if they had appeared in a news magazine cover story ten years ago.”[15] Andrew Sullivan has characterized Blumenthal as “the most pro-Clinton writer on the planet.”[16] In addition to The Clinton Wars (2003), Blumenthal’s books include The Permanent Campaign (1980), The Rise of the Counter-Establishment (1986), Pledging Allegiance: The Last Campaign of the Cold War (1990), and How Bush Rules: Chronicles of a Radical Regime (2006). During the 2004 election, Blumenthal was Washington, D.C. bureau chief for Salon.[9] He also was a regular columnist for “The Guardian” from August 2003 until November 2007.[17] British-American journalist and author Christopher Hitchens upon subpoena submitted an affidavit to the trial managers of the Republican Party during the impeachment of Bill Clinton. In the affidavit, Hitchens swore that then-friend Blumenthal had described Monica Lewinsky as a stalker. This allegation contradicted Blumenthal’s own sworn deposition in the trial,[18] which resulted in a hostile exchange of words between the two. Following the publication of The Clinton Wars, Hitchens wrote several pieces in which he accused Blumenthal of manipulating facts.[18][19] Blumenthal was a political consultant for the Emmy-award winning HBO series Tanner ’88, written by Garry Trudeau and directed by Robert Altman; he appears as himself in one episode. More notably, he was the executive producer of the documentary Taxi to the Dark Side, directed by Alex Gibney, which won an Academy Award for Best Documentary of 2007. He was an associate producer of the 2002 film Max.[20] Blumenthal joined the 2008 Hillary Clinton presidential campaign as a “senior advisor” in November 2007.[21] While on a trip to advise Clinton on her presidential campaign, Blumenthal was arrested for driving while intoxicated in Nashua, New Hampshire, on January 7, 2008. He pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor DWI charge.[22] After her January 2009 appointment as Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton wanted to hire Blumenthal. However, Obama’s chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, blocked his selection due to lingering anger among President Barack Obama’s aides over Blumenthal’s role in promoting negative stories about Obama during the Democratic primary.[23] According to a report in the New York Times, “Emanuel talked with Mrs. Clinton … and explained that bringing Mr. Blumenthal on board was a no-go. The bad blood among his colleagues was too deep, and the last thing the administration needed, he concluded, was dissension and drama in the ranks. In short, Mr. Blumenthal was out.”[23] Blumenthal was a full-time employee Clinton Foundation from 2009 until 2013 and served as a consultant for the foundation from 2013 until 2015, earning about $10,000 per month.[24][25] Right-wing critics charge that Blumenthal’s work at the foundation was inappropriately politically motivated and that during his time at the foundation, he blurred the lines between the foundation and Secretary Clinton’s role as Secretary of State.[26][27] During the 2011 uprising in Libya against Muammar Gaddafi, Blumenthal prepared, from public and other sources, about 25 memos which he sent as emails to Clinton in 2011 and 2012, which she shared through her aide, Jake Sullivan, with senior State Department personnel. In the form of intelligence briefings, the memos sometimes touted his business associates and, at times contained inaccurate information.[28][29] The United States House Select Committee on Benghazi, headed by Representative Trey Gowdy, Republican of South Carolina, subpoenaed Blumenthal in May 2015.[30][31] Blumenthal gave testimony in a closed-door session the following month.[32] Blumenthal’s name came up during the October 22, 2015 full committee public questioning of Hillary Clinton regarding the Benghazi incident, as one of the alleged sources of Hillary Clinton’s intelligence. During this hearing Democratic members asked that Blumenthal’s deposition transcript be made public so that comments regarding his involvement could be placed in context. The motion was defeated by a party-line vote.[33] Blumenthal currently serves as a consultant to the left-leaning watchdog group Media Matters for America, the pro-Democratic Super PAC American Bridge 21st Century and the pro-Clinton Super PAC Correct the Record.[34] He currently lives in Washington, D.C. with his wife. The couple has two sons, one of whom is author, journalist and pro-Palestinian activist Max Blumenthal.[35]

Fair Usage Law

December 2, 2016   Posted in: Max Blumenthal  Comments Closed


Fair Use Disclaimer

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

Under the 'fair use' rule of copyright law, an author may make limited use of another author's work without asking permission. Fair use is based on the belief that the public is entitled to freely use portions of copyrighted materials for purposes of commentary and criticism. The fair use privilege is perhaps the most significant limitation on a copyright owner's exclusive rights.

Fair use as described at 17 U.S.C. Section 107:

"Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phono-records or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright.

In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include:

  • (1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for or nonprofit educational purposes,
  • (2) the nature of the copyrighted work,
  • (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole, and
  • (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work."