Author: Eli Clifton

Last week I wrote about GIYUS — the “online public diplomacy platform of Israel” as the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Word document) describes it—and the powerful role it can play in shaping the results of online polls and changing the direction of message board discussions.

Yesterday GIYUS sent out an alert about a forum on The Christian Science Monitor’s website. GIYUS appears to have driven a lot of traffic to the discussion–which is titled “Israeli blockade of Gaza: What would you change?“–and has inundated the forum with pro-blockade comments.

Comments in favor of the blockade are consistently receiving “thumbs up” votes and those in opposition to the blockade, and the IDF’s lethal attack on the flotilla, are getting voted down.

As an example, here is the comment which is currently the most highly ranked.

“Johnny Gee” wrote:

I would stress the strongest support as possible for the beleaguered Israelis, who are threatened from every direction and by every mode, including missles [sic], suicide murderers, and of course arms from the sea. Remember, the Israelis are the canary in the coalmine – the real target of the Islamic fundamentalist murderers is the US, Europe, and the world.

“Sam from Oregon” didn’t have the same appeal to GIYUS users and has found his comment voted to the bottom of the thread.

Sam wrote:

I would eliminate all US financial and military support to Israel. Israel is not “too big to fail”, and if they can’t figure out a way to make nice with their neighbors, then they deserve to fail. The US habit of unconditional support for everything Israeli is the primary cause of middle east unrest. It’s time for US military adventures to come to an end. Bring home the troops, and use all the money for improving US infrastructure, education, and health care.

One day out from Obama’s long-awaited announcement on troop deployments to Afghanistan the White House is getting plenty of criticism from both sides of the aisle.

Democrats, including Rep. David Obey (D-WI), the influential chair of the House Appropriations Committee, have expressed concerns about both the cost of the war and the difficulty of achieving victory in defeating the Taliban in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Republicans, such as John McCain (R-AZ), have hammered Obama for setting a timeline for troop withdrawals beginning in 18 months.

Despite the widespread lack of enthusiasm, however, the White House has made striking progress in turning around Weekly Standard editor and outspoken Obama critic (and Sarah Palin booster) Bill Kristol.

On November 23rd, Kristol wrote in the Weekly Standard:

”Just what is Barack Obama as president making of our American destiny? The answer, increasingly obvious, is … a hash. It’s worse than most of us expected. His dithering on Afghanistan is deplorable, his appeasing of Iran disgraceful, his trying to heap new burdens on a struggling economy destructive,’’

But in today’s Washington Post Kristol was hailing the new “War President”.

“By mid-2010, Obama will have more than doubled the number of American troops in Afghanistan since he became president; he will have empowered his general, Stanley McChrystal, to fight the war pretty much as he thinks necessary to in order to win; and he will have retroactively, as it were, acknowledged that he and his party were wrong about the Iraq surge in 2007 — after all, the rationale for this surge is identical to Bush’s, and the hope is for a similar success. He will also have embraced the use of military force as a key instrument of national power.’’

The extent to which Kristol’s reassessment reflects his political agility, or Obama’s, remains unclear.

Insights into who funded the mysterious Clarion Fund remain few and far between, but new information about two funders surfaced this week giving a better outline of the network of donors who supported Clarion’s activities.

The obituary for ‘’retail magnate’’ Sy Syms’ ran in The Forward on Tuesday and mentioned, ‘’Through the Sy Syms Foundation, Syms supported various Jewish and non-Jewish causes, including the UJA-Federation of New York, The Clarion Fund and the Inner-City Scholarship Fund.’’

I looked into the Sy Syms Foundation most recent tax returns and found a $25,000 contribution to the Clarion Fund in 2007/2008.

Sy Syms’ $25,000 contribution was a very small piece of the funding required to stage the massive DVD mailing campaign of Obsession: Radical Islam’s War Against the West before the November presidential election. Until now the only other known contributors were the Mamiye brothers who, like Syms, contributed $25,000 and are in the clothing business. Among other brands, the Mamiye brothers distribute Hello Kitty-branded kids clothing in the US.

Sy Syms started the Syms discount clothing stores—which now owns Filene’s Basement—in 1959 and was famous for coining his company’s slogan, ‘’An educated customer is our best customer’’.

A generous philanthropist, Syms’ contributions in 2007/2008 included a number of right-wing groups including: The Simon Wiesenthal Center—which has garnered controversy for screening The Third Jihad and building a new museum on a Muslim cemetery in Jerusalem—and Friends of the IDF, but the majority of his philanthropy went to mainstream Jewish organizations and progressive social causes.

These included: Yeshiva University, the United Nations Association, Meals on Wheels, Amnesty International, SEEDS of Peace—a group which runs summer camps in Maine to bring together Egyptian, Palestinian and Israeli young people—and the American Civil Liberties Union.

The other new donor—giving just $10,000—discovered today was the Wagner Family Foundation.

The foundation is run by Leon and Marsha Wagner. Leon Wagner appears to be the son of Rubin Wagner—a major property developer in Long Island—and Sima Wagner.

Read the rest of the post

A newly created group dedicated to fighting the “Islamization of America” will be walking the streets of Washington DC on September 25th engaging passers-by in a “dialogue” about Islam in America.

The group, Stop Islamization of America (SIOA), stands out for its extensive ties to far-right bloggers in the US and Frank Gaffney’s Center for Security Policy. It also has links to the European Far Right and Nazi apologists.

The choice of September 25 as the launch date is designed to coincide with “Jumah Prayer on Capitol Hill: A Day of Islamic Unity,” a gathering of Muslims on the National Mall. Its organizers say:

“The objective of this gathering is to invite the Muslim Communities and friends of Islam to express and illustrate the wonderful diversity of Islam. We intend to manifest Islam’s majestic spiritual principals [sic] as revealed by Allah to our beloved prophet Muhammad (PEACE BE UPON HIM) of Arabia. Likewise; we intend to inspire a new generation of Muslim to work for the greater good of all people. We shall serve all people, regardless of race, religion or national origin.”

SIOA, however, takes a dim view of what it calls “the doctrine of Islam, jihad, and Sharia (Islamic law),” especially in the United States.

“Islamic law and jihad are brutal, misogynist, and fundamentally contrary to our Constitution and to our concepts of human rights and freedom. Tolerance for ideologies that are opposed to our principles of individual freedoms and our Constitution is indefensible,” reads SIOA’s website.

The new group’s September 25 launch will include a number of high-profile guests, including Robert Spencer, Pamela Geller and Christine Brim.

Both Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller were present at the 2007 CounterJihad Europa Conference in Brussels which was co-sponsored by the Belgian far-right Vlaams Belang (VB) party whose platform, among other things, calls for pardoning Belgians convicted of collaborating with the Nazis. Spencer, Geller and Brim have also been strong supporters of far-right Dutch MP Geert Wilders and helped facilitate his fund-raising trips to the US. (Ali Gharib, Daniel Luban and I have written about Wilders and his American hosts here, here and here) Wilders has gone so far as to suggest that the Koran should be banned, along with Mein Kampf, as examples of hate speech.

Spencer, Geller and other attendees at the Brussels conference have denied that they’re allied with Nazi apologists, insisting that their European contacts in VB and Wilders’ Party for Freedom are totally unrelated to the fascists of the 1930s. By loudly claiming their affection and support for Israel, the new European Far Right has tried to distance itself from that era and, in so doing, has succeeded in gaining the support of some neoconservatives.

SpinWatch recently published an excellent article that details the development of the European far-right’s relationship with U.S. neoconservatives.

In 2007 Christine Brim, whose group Center for Vigilant Freedom helped organize the Brussels conference (along with VB) and who is listed as a speaker at the SIOA kickoff next week, elaborated on the neoconservative relationship with the European far-right in 2007.

“If such parties specifically state pro-Israel positions, and take real actions opposing anti-Semitism and disavowing previous positions – and reach out to Jewish constituents and encourage Jewish participation in party positions – these are real actions to observe, and to approve.”

Brim also serves as a senior vice president at Frank Gaffney’s Center for Security Policy.

Encouraging far-right political parties in Western Europe to reject anti-Semitism–formerly a tenet of their often fascistic views towards immigrants and non-Christians–is a positive step. But the willingness of U.S. neoconservatives such as Brim, Gaffney or far-right US bloggers, such as Geller and Spencer, to embrace politicians who have substituted Muslims as targets for their xenophobia and hate they once (and probably still, at some level) directed at Jews seems like a devil’s bargain. (Of course, this is not entirely new: prominent neo-conservatives, including Midge Decter and the late Irving Kristol, staunchly defended the murderous military junta in Argentina from the late 1970s until the 1982 Falklands/Malvinas War against charges by Jacobo Timmerman and human-rights activists that it had a special affinity for Hitler and Nazi paraphernalia.)

Arutz Sheva called attention to SIOA’s “brainstorming” blog posts that suggested that donkeys, dogs and women should be brought to the group’s launch in order to interfere with the Jumah Prayer event on the Mall.

SIOA president D.L. Adams responded to accusations that such provocations were “extreme”.

“Because the Arutz Sheva article picked up on some of SIOA’s creative brainstorming posts to use humor and a bit of theatrics involving the things that are thought to disrupt prayer for Muslims – dogs, donkeys and women – some are already calling this loving group of people “extreme.”

I take the opposite viewpoint and contend that drawing attention to the Muslim belief that ”dogs, donkeys, women” (and don’t forget breaking wind) are the things that interfere with their prayers being received, rather than spiritual matters like insincerity of heart, highlights the essential materialism of this so-called religion.

Neither our Founding Fathers, nor Lao Tse, Confucius, Gautama Siddartha, Saint Paul, Jesus, Isaiah, Moses, nor Abraham would recognize Islam as a bona fide religion, but would instantly understand it as the massive intellectual fraud that it is. Our cowardly leaders, in both Church and State, who claim it doesn’t matter what people believe, are fools. It matters that Muslims believe non-Muslims are inferior human beings. It matters that Muslims believe women are inferior to men. It matters that Muslims believe obedience and worship are the same thing and that conformity is the same as morality. It matters that Islam requires territorial sovereignty. It matters that Muslims believe that leaving Islam is equivalent to high treason. It matters what Muslims believe just as it matters what communists believe and what neo-Nazis believe.”

SIOA’s kickoff will be followed by a “saunter” to “engage in conversations with our fellow citizens who might happen to be there on the same day on matters of moment.”

Eli D Greenberg – the former attorney and listed contact for the Clarion Fund – has resurfaced as the head of an independent committee tasked with policing and encouraging greater transparency in the nonprofit foundations within the Sephardic communities in New Jersey and New York according to an article last week in Jewish Week. Non-profits operating in Syrian, Egyptian, Moroccan and Israeli Sephardic communities in the US have been on the receiving end of increasing criticism for their secretive operating structures since the arrest last month of three Syrian rabbis for an alleged money-laundering scheme.

For those who don’t remember, the mysterious Clarion Fund produced the anti-Muslim documentaries The Third Jihad and Obsession: Radical Islam’s War Against the West and funded a massive distribution of 28-million DVD inserts of Obsession in swing state newspapers shortly before the 2008 presidential election.

Greenberg is an interesting choice for an attorney to help promote transparency and good governance since the Clarion Fund was widely seen as serving to hide the identity of wealthy donors who wished to influence the presidential election and spread unsubstantiated fears about Muslims in America.

The Federal Election Commission (FEC) investigated accusations that Clarion may have violated its non-profit 501c3 status by explicitly endorsing John McCain in a statement on one of its websites, Radicalislam.org.

The statement, which was later removed, read:

“McCain’s policies seek to confront radical Islamic extremism and terrorism and roll it back while [Barack] Obama’s, although intending to do the same, could in fact make the situation facing the West even worse.”

Further muddying the waters was the appearance that Clarion was not only trying to influence the presidential election but that the funding – or at least the organizing – for the effort was coming from Aish HaTorah, a Jewish Orthodox Ashkenazi organization based in Israel.

Clarion has denied any organizational links but its four listed directors all have had close relationships with Aish. Clarion’s assertions that Aish and Clarion are completely independent entities are undermined by the facts that: Rabbi Raphael Shore, Clarion’s founder was employed as Aish HaTorah International’s executive director; Gregory Ross, Clarion’s spokesman and communications director was a fundraiser for Aish HaTorah International and the Clarion Fund shares a mailing office with Aish’s office in Manhattan.

All of the above doesn’t mean that Clarion necessarily did anything illegal but it does suggest that Clarion isn’t the poster-child for transparency and that its counsel didn’t impose the stringent ethical and good governance guidelines that presumably he will impose on the Sephardic charities in New York and New Jersey.

Greenberg seems to have a specialty in nonprofit foundations within the Syrian and Sephardic communities.

Four Mamiye brothers – Charles M., Charles D., Hyman and Abraham – gave $25,000 to the Clarion Fund in 2007 through their nonprofit foundation. Their nonprofit—Mamiye Foundation—gives primarily to the Sephardic Syrian communities in New Jersey and New York.

Greenberg serves as an attorney for a Mamiye held company.