Human Resources - Social Engineering In The 20th Century

Human Behavior Is Predictable, Therefore Controllable

"Every civilization tends to believe its own propaganda."

"The Real Killers Are Governments"

"It is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth - and listen to the song of that siren, till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those, who having eyes, see not, and having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it might cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it." 

(Patrick Henry - Speech in the Virginia Convention, March 23, 1775)

Why We Hate Them: Arabs In Western Eyes

A New PBS Documentary Reveals How Films and Other Media Have Shaped an Anti-Muslim Narrative.

By PHILIP GIRALDI
Courtesy Of "The American Conservative"

Control of the preferred narrative is essential in today’s instant-news political culture. This has been particularly true since 9/11, as the United States government and the cooperative media have worked together to make sure that a series of enemies are identified and then attacked as a response to what has been shaped as a global terrorist threat. Narrative-shifting also protects against failure, by making it more difficult to advance any actual inquiry either to learn what motivates terrorists or to explore the apparent inability of the federal government to respond effectively. The best known attempt to shift the blame and thereby redirect the narrative was President George W. Bush’s famous assertion that “those evildoers” of 9/11 “hate us because of our freedom.” Other, more plausible motives need not apply.

Later this year PBS will release to its affiliates a documentary film that it co-produced called “Valentino’s Ghost.” I recently watched a preview copy. In its full version it is 95 minutes long, and it lays out a roughly chronological account of how Muslims, particularly Arabs, have been perceived in the West since the 1920s. Written and directed by Michael Singh, it includes interviews with a number of well-known authorities on the Middle East, including Robert Fisk, Niall Ferguson, John Mearsheimer, and the late Anthony Shadid, the New York Times journalist killed in Syria last February. The film explores the political and cultural forces behind the images, contending that the depiction of Arabs as “The Other” roughly parallels the foreign policies of Europe and America vis-à-vis the Middle East region. The title of the film is taken from the first great cinematic “Arab,” Italian Rudolph Valentino, who starred in the 1922 silent film “The Sheik.” When asked regarding the plausibility of the script, in which English aristocrat Lady Diana falls for the “savage” Sheik, Valentino responded “People are not savages because they have dark skins. The Arabian civilization is one of the oldest in the world…the Arabs are dignified and keen brained.”

Valentino’s cinematic triumph was followed by other films extolling Arabian exoticism, including 1924’s “The Thief of Baghdad,” starring Douglas Fairbanks. But the cinematic love affair with Arabia did not last long. The 1920s also witnessed Anglo-French moves to divide up the Arab provinces of the defunct Ottoman Empire and to gain control of Iran’s oil supply.The Arabs, not surprisingly, resisted, which forced a rethink of who they were and what they represented as reflected in Eurocentric movies made in the 1930s, including “Beau Geste,” “The Lost Patrol,” and “Under Two Flags.”

Arabs were increasingly depicted in the cinema as lawless savages who mindlessly opposed the advanced civilizations of Europe, not unlike the American Indians who had stood in the way of manifest destiny. The possible motives for their savagery were strictly off limits, as they were in the American historical narrative. The good Arabs were the ones who were “obedient” and sought accommodation with the French and British. The bad Arabs were the “disobedient” who sought to maintain their traditional ways of life.

The rise of the Zionist movement and the creation of the state of Israel in 1948, with its forced relocation of most Palestinians — which Mearsheimer describes as “ethnic cleansing” — made further shifts in the narrative essential, particularly to demonstrate that Jews had a historic right to the land of Palestine and that the creation of the Jewish state was humanely carried out in a land that did not exist politically and was largely empty and undeveloped. Movies like “Exodus” and “Lawrence of Arabia” appeared, with the former omitting the Zionist terrorism that had led to the creation of Israel while also emphasizing historic Jewish claims to the land. The latter film expressed some sympathy for Arab nationalism but also demonstrated that savage and undisciplined Arabs could only triumph militarily under European leadership. The two films together largely completed the process of defining the Arab in Western popular culture. In “Lawrence of Arabia,” Peter O’Toole, playing Lawrence, described Arabs as “a little people, a silly people. Greedy, barbarous and cruel.” Nothing more need be said.

The Six-Day War further added to the denigration of Arabs in general. Israel’s surprise-attack triumph over its neighbors, in which it was able to exploit superior military resources, was seen as a victory of good over evil in the U.S. media. Walter Cronkite announced on the evening news that “Jerusalem has been liberated.” Footage of long columns of Palestinian refugees appeared briefly on television but then disappeared completely. Mearsheimer describes the post-1967 unwillingness to discuss either the Palestinians’ plight or the nature of the Israeli relationship with Washington as “The Great Silence” fueled by “The Great Silencer,” namely the charge of anti-Semitism or Jewish self-hating inevitably leveled against any critic of Israel. The circle of immunity from scrutiny for Israel also extends to the principal Israel lobby AIPAC, which was last featured on an investigative report on U.S. television in 1977.

The Israeli occupation triggered a wave of terrorism, and the Palestinians sought to have their story told. Limited media attempts to understand the Arab point of view perhaps understandingly vanished completely in 1972 after 11 Israeli athletes were murdered in Munich. When Arabs subsequently sought to use an economic boycott to force the West to stop Israeli expansion on the West Bank, the U.S. media depicted the action as an affront engineered by greedy oil Sheiks.

The increasingly harsh political environment, soon to be framed as a clash of civilizations, corresponded with a rise to prominence of evangelicals in the U.S., together with the popularity of end-times narratives in books and other media, including Hal Lindsey’s The Late Great Planet Earth. Evangelical pastors such as John Hagee conflated the return of the Jews to Israel with the Second Coming of Christ, leading to unlimited political support for Israel and identification of its Arab neighbors as the enemy that would have to be confronted and destroyed at Armageddon.

The Iranian Embassy hostage crisis further hardened views of Islam, with Ayatollah Khomeini lampooned on American television and ABC News featuring a one-hour block each night on “America Held Hostage,” more intensive coverage than the network had given to the Vietnam War. Ronald Reagan referred to the Iranians as “barbarians,” and there was little effort made to learn if there might be some legitimate grievances (there were, dating back to the ouster of Mohamed Mossadeq and the installation of the Shah in 1953).

In 1992 the Disney animated movie “Aladdin” featured a song during the opening credits that referred to Arabia as a land “where they cut off your ear if they don’t like your face, it’s barbaric.” Other major Hollywood movies produced in the 1990s routinely depicting Arabs as terrorists, even if an “obedient” Arab frequently appears among the good guys, included “Rules of Engagement,” “True Lies,” and “The Siege.” 9/11 converted the disturbing or sometimes vaguely amusing Arab into the Arab as attacker, as an existential threat — witness the success of the recent television series “24″ and “Homeland.” The denigration of Arabs in the media has real-world consequences:  it is unlikely that Madeleine Albright would have said the death of 500,000 Iraqi children was worth it or that Rush Limbaugh would have described Abu Ghraib as a “college fraternity prank” if one had been speaking of European or American victims.

Niall Ferguson notes that the justification provided through the hyping of a dark and fearful external threat in support of a burgeoning overseas empire inevitably leads to a suspension of the rule of law back at home. Robert Fisk observes that the shifts in language and metaphor make the entire Middle East unintelligible to most Americans, even to those who claim to be well informed. Colin Powell, while secretary of state, stopped referring to the West Bank as occupied by Israel – he instead referred to the area as “disputed,” a practice that continues to this day in the mainstream media. That went along with Jewish settlements being referred to in the media as “neighborhoods” and the border wall being called a “security fence.” Why would those disgruntled Arabs want to fight over something that is only disputed or object so strongly to a neighborhood or a fence?

One of the more interesting vignettes in the film takes place near the end, with Hillary Clinton saying in March 2011 that many Americans are viewing Qatar-owned television channel al-Jazeera for “real news” because U.S. news programs have become so devoid of content. Would that it were so. Al-Jazeera is only available in New York; Washington, D.C.; Burlington, Vermont; Toledo, Ohio; and Bristol, Rhode Island — and only intermittently in many of those locations, due to political objections over its “Arab” and “anti-American” point of view.

If I have a problem with “Valentino’s Ghost” it is that it tries to do too much. It takes on many issues too superficially given the film’s technical constraints and time limitations. I have been informed that over the objections of the producer the original 95-minute version has been edited down considerably for the version that will be released to PBS affiliates. PBS indicated that it would not use the film without considerable changes. Much of the excising relates to segments critical of Israel and its policies, as well as its U.S. lobby, AIPAC. The affiliates themselves can choose whether or not to air the film, so there will probably be pressure coming from donors and local programming boards not to show it. This would be a shame, as “Valentino’s Ghost” exposes widespread bigotry and the deliberate shaping of a narrative against Arabs while also providing considerable insights into why American foreign policy continues to fail in an important part of the world. One has to wonder what the reaction would be if the film were to be viewed in the White House.

Philip Giraldi, a former CIA officer, is executive director of the Council for the National Interest.

How Anti-Muslim Bigotry Was Brought Into The American Mainstream

By Alex Kane,
Courtesy Of "Global Research"

Ahmed Sharif was a 44-year-old Muslim Bangladeshi taxi driver in New York City. It was August 24, 2010, a time that marked the height of vitriolic protests against a planned Islamic center to be located in lower Manhattan, a few blocks away from the site of Ground Zero. Sharif picked up 21-year-old Michael Enright for an early evening ride. Everything was going smoothly until Enright, three blocks away from his stop, yelled at Sharif, “this is a checkpoint, motherfucker, and I have to bring you down.”

Enright, a filmmaker who kept a diary filled with strong anti-Muslim sentiment, pulled out a knife and slashed Sharif across the throat, face and arms. Enright tried to escape, but was arrested by the New York Police Department. Sharif survived, but he packed up and moved to Buffalo, in upstate New York. It was a crime that seemed to fit in with the general climate of hysteria over Muslims that developed that summer.

This is how Nathan Lean begins telling the story of how a small group of bigots seized upon the frustrations and fears of post-9/11 America and exploited those feelings to create a circular industry of hate. Lean’s new book, The Islamophobia Industry: How the Right Manufactures Fear of Muslims, is a compact and punchy look at this industry stretching across continents that has sowed hatred of Muslims into the fabric of Western society.

The book, written by the editor-in-chief ofAslan Media, comes at an opportune time. Released in September 2012, the book landed just one month after American Muslims witnessed a stark increase in hate attacks during the holy month of Ramadan. A report by the Council on American Islamic Relations documented that the Ramadan of 2012 “saw one of the worst spikes of anti-Muslim incidents in over a decade.”

From the beginning of 2012 to July 20, which is when Ramadan began, there were 10 incidents in which Muslim places of worship were targeted. During Ramadan–specifically over 13 days in August–”Muslim places of worship were targeted eight times.” These incidents include the destruction of a mosque in Missouri by fire; the leaving of pig legs at a planned mosque site in California; and the firing of air rifles outside a mosque in Illinois.

How, exactly, did we get here? By the time Ramadan of 2012 rolled around, it had been almost 11 years since the September 11, 2001 attacks were carried out by a group of Islamic fundamentalists part of Al Qaeda. You would expect anti-Muslim bigotry to decrease after the wounds of 9/11 healed, after it became clear that the vast majority of American Muslims have no inclination to attack their own country. You would be wrong.

Jumping from the U.S. to Israel to Europe, Lean traces the arc of the Islamophobic sentiment that has exploded in the West. The foreword from scholar on Islam John Esposito lays out the importance of Lean’s work: “It exposes the multi-million dollar cottage industry of fear mongers and the network of funders and organizations that support and perpetuate bigotry, xenophobia, and racism, and produce a climate of fear that sustains a threatening social cancer.”

Lean properly places anti-Muslim bigotry in the context of American hysteria over religions and ideologies that refused to conform to mainstream standards. Before jumping into the contemporary context, he reminds readers that Catholics were once the target of acceptable religious bigotry. The conspiracy theories spun out of thin air about Catholics would ring a familiar bell to those consumingFrank Gaffney’s utterly insane theory that the Muslim Brotherhood has infiltrated the U.S. government and is subverting it from within.

But by far the most important contribution Lean makes is his unmasking of the bigots who have infused American politics with virulent anti-Muslim sentiment. Lean zeroes in on a number of high-profile episodes and figures to make his points, from the pro-settler Clarion Fund’s distribution of an anti-Muslim film to the 2010 Values Voter summit to Anders Behring Breivik’s killing spree in Norway. Lean points to an “industry” of hate mongers that have gone to “great lengths to sell its message to the public.” The difference, though, between this industry and others is that “in many cases the very networks that spread their products are themselves participants in the ruse to whip up public fear of Muslims….It is a relationship of mutual benefit, where ideologies and political proclivities converge to advance the same agenda.”

The most important nodes in this industry are the online peddlers of hate. The author particularly focuses on Pamela Geller, the blogger at the front of the network of Islamophobes in the U.S. You can see Geller’s fingerprints in many of the public battles over Islam in this country, most prominently the ginned-up hysteria over the Park 51 Islamic center. Currently, Geller is in the spotlight for a series of anti-Muslim ads she has put up in New York, San Francisco and Washington, D.C.–with more on the way. She has used her celebrity, boosted by Fox News (a principal player in the Islamophobia industry), to create cross-continental activist networks against Islam. Robert Spencer, Geller’s partner in crime, is also a focus of Lean’s. “People such as Robert Spencer, Daniel Pipes, or Martin Kramer, all online Islamophobes, spread each others’ postings and write-ups to their own audience,” writes Lean. “With each new click of the mouse, the story grows.”

But the Islamophobia industry does not just exist in the fever swamps of the online world. There’s real on the ground work being done. And there are disparate players in this industry. They come, principally, from right-wing Zionism and evangelical Christianity, uniting to form a Judeo-Christian front in their battle against Islam. Their funders, too, come from these worlds–though the right-wing Zionist world has fueled the majority of anti-Muslim activists.

Right-wing Christian ideology places Muslims beyond the pale. “The idea that Muslims may also be in possession of God’s revelation and truth, is not only unacceptable, it is an offense so blasphemous that it must be stopped,” Lean notes. Evangelical Christians, as a core part of the Republican base, have actively pushed their ideas about Islam into the mainstream of American politics. They have been aided by figures such as Newt Gingrich, who while reinventing himself as an ardent Christian conservative has also spread panic about Sharia law taking over the United States. Many Christian conservatives are also, of course, Christian Zionists who see Israel as the fulfillment of biblical prophecy that will continue until the Messiah comes down again.

It is this Christian Zionism that closely binds right-wing evangelicals with strong supporters of the Jewish state. The Zionists who spread anti-Muslim bigotry can be placed in three camps, according to Lean: religious (Jewish) Zionism, Christian Zionism and political Zionism. “For Religious Zionists, prophecy is the main driver of their Islamophobic fervor. For them, Palestinians are not just unbidden inhabitants; they are not just Arabs in Jewish lands. They are not just Muslims, even. They are non-Jews–outsiders cut from a different cloth–and God’s commandments regarding them are quite clear,” he writes. And there is the political Zionism that sheds religious language but is still hostile towards Muslims. As Max Blumenthal wrote, these figures, some of whom are neoconservatives, believe that “the Jewish state [is] a Middle Eastern Fort Apache on the front lines of the Global War on Terror.”

Lean’s spot-on analysis about how Zionism is connected to Islamophobia is a refreshing departure from other works and institutions that shy away from examining the connection. The most prominent investigative reporting on Islamophobia and its sources of funding has come from the Obama-linked Center for American Progress (CAP). But the Zionist motivations of many of the funders CAP highlights are not interrogated. You have to turn to this piece by activists Donna Nevel and Elly Bulkin on those connections to get the full picture.

Lean also pinpoints how anti-Muslim bigtory has spread from the Internet world to the very heart of some government policies on terrorism. From the New York Police Department’s surveillance program to Peter King’s hearings on “Muslim radicalization,” anti-Muslim bigotry has become institutionalized in some quarters of government.

But Lean’s discussion of how parts of the U.S. government have become infused with Islamophobia does not tell the full story–and this is the main critique I have of an otherwise excellent book. Lean correctly focuses on how the right has manufactured fear and hatred of Muslims. But it would be wrong to leave out the other side of the equation: how liberals in this country who are part of the Democratic Party have also helped anti-Muslim sentiment to spread.

This is not to say that Democrats spew Islamophobia in their election campaigns. No, the Democratic Party does not go that far. But they are largely silent when ugly anti-Muslim bigotry comes into play, which allows the right to step into the vacuum in a debate over Islam in the U.S. When the Democrats run away from the issue, there is no one left in the mainstream to challenge the right’s Islamophobia.

As Deepa Kumar, author of her own book on Islamophobia, pointed out in The Nation, Islamophobia is a “bipartisan project.” Liberal Islamophobia, Kumar writes, “may be rhetorically gentler but it reserves the right of the US to wage war against ‘Islamic terrorism’ around the world, with no respect for the right of self-determination by people in the countries it targets.” You can see this liberal Islamophobia in action when you look at the fact that “Obama has continued Bush’s policies of torture, extraordinary rendition and pre-emptive prosecution. American Muslims continue to be harassed and persecuted by the state.” And then there was Obama counter-terrorism adviser John Brennan pronouncing that the NYPD’s targeting of Muslim in their surveillance program was legitimate. “My conversations with Commissioner [Ray] Kelly indicate he’s done everything according to the law,” Brennan told reporters.

While the White House walked back his comments, Brennan’s continued presence in the administration tells you all you need to know. Liberal Islamophobia’s march continues ahead–and ignoring how the Obama administration has failed to combat anti-Muslim bigotry is setting people up for failure. The way to combat Islamophobia is through activism and coalition-building, but if you ignore its manifestations no matter where they emanate from, you won’t get very far.

Besides that oversight, though, Lean’s The Islamophobia Industry is a vital contribution to the still-growing body of literature on anti-Muslim sentiment in the U.S. If you want to understand the genesis of the right’s toxic Islamophobia and how it has spread, pick up Lean’s book. You won’t regret it.

Reminder For Journalist Responsible For Middle East Coverage

• Never forget that it is always the Arabs who attack, Israel is only defending itself and always acts in retaliation.

• When the Israeli army kill Arab civilians, it is always in self-defence. When Israeli civilians are killed, it’s called terrorism.

• The Israelis do not kidnapped Palestinian civilians, they capture them. Always mention security needs to explain these catches.

• Conversely, Palestinians and Lebanese are not authorized to capture Israeli military! If they do, the term to use is kidnapping.

• It is not appropriate to mention the number of Palestinian prisoners (11,000, including 300 children) currently captured. If, however, you need to state, call them terrorists or suspected terrorists.

• Use as little as possible the term Palestinian and prefer Arab, the Israeli government official term to describe non-Jewish inhabitants of both territories.

• When you mention the “Hezbollah”, always add the expression “supported by Syria and Iran”. But when you talk about Israel, it is superfluous to add supported by the U.S. and Europe. One might think that this is a unbalanced conflict.

• Do not use the term “occupied territories” but disputed territories. In this regard, it is better to say Judea and Samaria rather than West Bank.

• Never remind the various UN resolutions or Geneva Conventions that are unfavourable to Israel. Ditto for convictions by the Court of Justice in The Hague … This may disturb the reader, viewer or listener.

• It is best not to say Israeli army, but to use the nicer term Tsahal.

• It is good form to suggest that the “Hamas” is a terrorist group that does not recognize the State of Israel (The comment those Islamists who do not want Peace is welcome). Above all, make no mention of the acknowledgment made in 2002.

• It is not appropriate to mention Israel has always refused to set its boundaries and does not recognize Palestine.

• The word colonies must be rejected in your text, talk instead ofsettlements.

• To affirm the symmetry of the conflict, never bring Israeli expansionism but always talk about two people fighting over a territory.

• In case you need to discuss projects of nuclear development of Iran, it is not necessary to insist on the Israeli military nuclear arsenal … Neither to mention that it is the sixth world power in this field.

• When you need to report the Palestinian refusal to accept Israeli conditions for the cessation of hostilities, always add that “Israel considers that it has no partner for peace process” … If possible in a tone of regret.

• If you are asked to cite the “separation wall”, never mention it was established on annexed Palestinian lands, but always mention that this wallwas built to stop terrorist attacks … And especially avoid quoting the sentence of the “International Court of Justice” demanding its dismantling.

• For opponents of Israel, never use the words resistants or militants … Always talk about activists. Even if they demonstrate only for peace, they must be qualified of pro-Palestinians.

• In case you’d want to talk about “Cast Lead”, always take the Israeli thesis: it was Hamas who broke the truce (add “unilaterally” for a better understanding), and that Israel had warned Palestinians before the bombing (no need to quote phosphorus bombs).

• In case of a new operation aiming to break the blockade of Gaza, use expressions such as “this flotilla supposedly pacifist” or ” act of defiance” … and especially avoid comments like “illegal blockade of Israel, condemned by the UN.”

• If you have the opportunity, say that Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East. Do not, of course, add that this quality concerns only the white and  Jewish population of the country.

• Do not criticize the current government’s desire to transform the term Israel in Jewish state, thus excluding de facto the 20% Muslim population. Always avoid the religious reference in this regard.

• Israelis speaking better French than the Arabs, often give them the floor. They can better explain the above rules and you and your will therefore assert your journalistic neutrality.

Via: "Off The Freakin' Track"

Looking At Anti-Iran Propaganda

By JEFF NYGAARD
Courtesy Of "CounterPunch"

USA Today cautioned recently that “War with Iran won’t be a quick affair.”  A Pittsburgh newspaper plaintively wonders whether “War with Iran” is a  “Necessity or Folly.”  Talk of war is in the air.  What many in this country don’t realize is that the U.S. is already engaged in a war with Iran.  We just don’t hear about it.  The name of the war that is already underway is “sanctions.”

Economic sanctions have been called “a war against public health,” and a “weapon of mass destruction” that “may have contributed to more deaths during the post-Cold War era than all weapons of mass destruction throughout history.”  Since the 1979 revolution in Iran, the United States has “employed a policy of sanctions, demonization, containment, and deterrence against Iran, which has impeded Iran’s right to development and brought great suffering to its people,” according to the American Iranian Council.

Both the United States and the European Union have intensified their sanctions against Iran in recent months.  To the great shame of the U.S. media, the suffering that has resulted remains almost completely unknown, and thus largely uncontroversial, in this country, other than on tactical grounds (“Necessity or Folly?”).  Still, if one looks hard enough and widely enough, there are hints to be found of the human consequences of the U.S./European sanctions regime.

The Human Cost Of Iran Sanctions

Writing in al Jazeera on July 11th, Tehran-based political analyst Mohammad Ali Shabani wrote about traveling around Tehran with the wife of a man with cancer, looking for chemotherapy drugs that were unavailable through normal channels.  He reported that “Repeatedly, we were told that there was a shortage of many foreign drugs because of the sanctions, even though the West’s punitive measures don’t directly target supplies such as medicines.”

Near the end of a major front-page story in the New York Times of February 7th 2012 appeared the following words:

“The crisis [brought on by the sanctions] has taken a toll on medical care, affecting the middle class as well as the poor. Because of the ever-tighter pressure on any kind of trade with Iran, the black market price of Herceptin, a breast cancer drug, has nearly doubled in the past year, said Lian, a young nurse who works in the cancer ward of one of Tehran’s major hospitals (the government regulates the mainstream supply of such drugs, but supplies are very limited).

“The sanctions have also affected medical technology, because radiology machines fall under the ‘dual use’ provisions of laws aimed at keeping nuclear technology out of Iran. At Shohada Hospital, one of the country’s premier institutions, about 1,200 cancer patients a year go without radiological treatment, because the radiology equipment is no longer working and replacement parts cannot be brought into Iran, said Pejman Razavi, a doctor at the hospital.”

On October 17th, the Guardian of London published an article headlined, “Iran Sanctions ‘Putting Millions of Lives at Risk.’” The opening paragraph read,

“Millions of lives are at risk in Iran because western economic sanctions are hitting the importing of medicines and hospital equipment, the country’s top medical charity has warned.  Fatemeh Hashemi, head of the Charity Foundation for Special Diseases, a non-government organisation supporting six million patients in Iran, has complained about a serious shortage of medicines for a number of diseases such as haemophilia, multiple sclerosis and cancer.”

Outside of the corporate press we learn that “With the plunging Iranian currency and staggering inflation, many Iranians have had to cut back on what they purchase and eat. Many Iranians live on monthly government subsidies of $40 – $50 that are no longer sufficient to meet their food and shelter needs.”  (Public Affairs Alliance of Iranian Americans, August 2012)

Meanwhile, the U.S. Senate voted unanimously on November 29th to tighten the sanctions against Iran yet again, a vote that was largely ignored by the U.S. media.

Noticing Suffering, Re-assigning Blame



One particular article on the impact of sanctions that appeared recently serves as an example of news coverage that just seems weird… until we recognize that what we’re seeing is the deployment of Propaganda against an O.D.E., or Officially Designated Enemy, of the United States.

The article in question appeared in the Washington Post on the day after Thanksgiving, Friday  November 23rd.  Headlined “In Iran, Frustrations Building over Health Care,” the lead paragraph reads like this:

“Iran is facing a possible crisis in its health-care system as a result of economic sanctions and alleged government mismanagement of diminishing state funds, according to officials here.”

And thus the tone was set: There’s a crisis in health care in Iran, with the responsibility split between sanctions, on the one hand, and on the other hand an Iranian leadership that can’t—or won’t—manage its money properly.

It’s remarkable how closely the Post hews to the more-or-less official government line, best summarized in a comment made to the London Guardian in October by an official in the British Foreign Office: “Whilst it is true that sanctions are having an impact on the Iranian population, this is compounded by the Iranian government’s economic mismanagement. Iran’s leaders are responsible for any impact on their people. . .” [Emphasis added]

The rest of this Washington Post article works very hard to assure that whatever blame is due for the suffering of the Iranian people goes in the right direction.

Criticism From “Officials”?

Despite the opening reference to “officials” alleging “government mismanagement,” if one reads the entire Post article one notices that there is only one “official” cited who makes such allegations.  This is the head of parliament’s health committee, who is quoted as saying that “the government is playing with our people’s health and is not assigning the approved finances.”  He’s not the only official quoted in the article, but all the others speak about mismanagement, but rather about the sanctions, and about the difficult conditions under which the Iranian government has struggled in recent months.

About halfway through the article we read, “With oil exports down and Iran’s ability to conduct international financial deals severely hamstrung [by sanctions], the bulk of [public] funds have not been delivered by the central bank this year. As a result, the health ministry has received only a fraction of its budget, and care has suffered.”

While the one official cited above sees this as the government “playing with people’s health,” the Post article itself, after giving some hints of the severity of the drug shortages in Iran, tells us that the explanation for the shortages is “complicated”:

“The scarcity derives from a complicated set of circumstances that includes both a heavy dose of Western sanctions, which are aimed at forcing Iran’s leaders to halt their uranium-enrichment program, as well as what critics here say are missteps by the government. While some of the anger over the shortages has been directed at the United States and other global powers, there has also been an internal backlash.”

Indeed, says the Post, “Ordinary citizens have expressed frustration with their government.”

[It must be noted that the Post’s claim about the “aims” of Western sanctions are disputed.  The Raha Iranian Feminist Collective suggested in a recent article “that sanctions against Iran . . . are meant to, first of all, appease calls for sabre-rattling at home and by Israel; second, assert economic control over Iranian oil, while curbing Iran’s increasing influence in the region; and third, lay the groundwork for a diplomatic due-diligence claim in order to justify any potential military strike.”  That’s a different set of “aims.”]

Criticizing The Government?  Or Pleading For Help?



The Post tells us that “critics” are “frustrated” with “missteps by the government,” which indicates an “internal backlash.”  The article does make it appear that Iranians are frustrated, and are criticizing. . . something.  But is it the government?

The Post cites the case of “Zohreh, a 60-year-old housewife,” who “said the price for her daughter’s epilepsy drug has doubled in the past three months. ‘When I ask why they have raised the price, they say we have a shortage of the medicine,’ she said. ‘The government must help poor people like us.’”

So, is this a “critic” of the government?  Or is this a citizen asking for, or perhaps expecting, help from her government?  Almost at the end of the article we get a hint:

“One of the tenets of the Islamic republic since its inception in 1979 has been universal health care. Any working Iranian is entitled by law to insurance coverage from their employer. Even privatized health care is greatly subsidized and had been relatively affordable until the past several months.”  Indeed, a 2001 report prepared by officials at the World Bank noted that, at that time, “The Government’s focus on primary care has resulted in access to primary care services for almost the entire population and health outcomes that are among the best in the region.”

In other words, for 33 years the Iranian government has been “helping poor people like us” get access to health care.  What has changed in “the past several months”?  What has changed is that the U.S./European sanctions have been strengthened and—in the words of many commentators in this country—have “begun to bite.”

While all of this may seem rather weird, perhaps the weirdest comment appears in the second-to-the-last paragraph:  “While sanctions have forced many Iranians to adjust their consumption habits, accepting less from the health-care system is a sacrifice few seem willing to make.”

As we saw above, this polite phrase—“adjust their consumption habits”—refers to Iranians not having enough money to pay for food and shelter, an “adjustment” which it’s unlikely that anyone, in Iran or anywhere, is “willing” to make.

The Post had made a similar point earlier in the article, saying that “Iranians have demonstrated a resilience to the impact of sanctions in many sectors of the economy.  But,” said the Post, “Iranians have grown accustomed to receiving highly subsidized medical treatment from the government, and they hold authorities responsible for rising prices or unavailable medicines.”

Could it be that, rather than an indication of an “internal backlash,” what this Washington Post article is really telling us is that the Iranian people expect and demand that their government find a way to help them in the face of the collective punishment knows as sanctions?  Could Zohreh’s plea—that “The government must help poor people like us”—reflect a belief among the Iranian people, or at least some of them, that they have some sort of a right to health care?  Such an interpretation may seem foreign to people in the United States, who are constantly told that our “poor people,” too, must accept a lack of access to needed health care.  In this country the cause of “rising prices or unavailable medicines” is not sanctions, but simply “market forces.”  Yet the frustration is the same, whether or not the corporate media reports it.

There is much to criticize about the Iranian government, and there are many Iranians, inside and outside of the country, who struggle daily for greater democracy and justice in Iran.  The U.S. and European sanctions, in addition to causing enormous suffering, make the struggle for peace and justice in Iran more difficult.  The sanctions must be lifted.

Gaza and The US Media Narrative

It is a familiar story: Israel bombards the densely populated Gaza Strip, and a US president defends its right to do so due to the rocket fire from the Occupied Territory.

As the number of Palestinian casualties grow, both US politicians and media express sympathy, but point out that the 'militants' brought it on themselves with their constant aggression. 

"The problem [is that these stories] are covered as cycles, they are covered as Breaking News rather than the larger context with a larger history .... [The issues] are complicated and they are contextual and therefore, unfortunately, they get chased out of a lot of American journalism which is looking for a simple story line." - Frank Sesno, former CNN Washington Bureau Chief

As far as television coverage is concerned, the watchword is balance. 

No description of Palestinian suffering can be aired without a reminder of the suffering in Israel.

But what has made this year's bombardment interesting is the number of US journalists deployed to Gaza. 

Unlike previous years, Israel did not shut the territory down. The question is whether, as a result, the story being told by the US networks has deepend in its comprehension.

Another development is the recent success of a self-defined progressive TV network, MSNBC, that may be tempted to question the official narrative.

In addition, there is the flowering of online opinion, and newly energised outlets of dissent like the Occupy movement. 

A statement on the OccupyWallStreet.org website - which was later removed - appears to draw a moral equivalence between Hamas and the Israeli government.    

"There are at least two framing narratives that were utterly unchanged. The first one is of Israeli innocence, that Israel is somehow not responsible for what occurs, that it is simply reacting to issues .... There is no sense that Israel is occupying Gaza, occupying the Palestinian lands. There is no sense that when you occupy a people they will resist." - Vijay Prashad, Trinity College

That statement said:

"Since the latest round of violence erupted in Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories, many of us in OWS have felt saddened and torn. We completely condemn the Hamas rocket attacks on civilians, but we also know that retaliation will only beget further violence.

"We hold diverse opinions on the ongoing situation there, but from the bottom of our hearts, we feel the utmost solidarity and compassion for those - on all sides of the conflict - who are suffering from terror and wish peace to prevail. It is possible to support those in Israel without supporting the injustices perpetuated by the Israeli state; we stand united against anti-semitism and Islamophobia alike, and we condemn violence from all sides."

Could these recent developments suggest that, this time around, there may be the potential for a crack in the time-honoured US media narrative around the Israeli-Palestinian conflict?

And how has the US media been covering the conflict in Gaza?

The Jewish War On Islam

By Khalid Amayreh,
Courtesy Of "The People's Voice"

There is an undeclared but ferocious Jewish war against Islam going on these days. One would have to be blind and deaf to deny this brazen fact.

In occupied East Jerusalem, government-backed Messianic Jews have been attacking and desecrating Islamic and, to a lesser extent, Christian holy places.

In the last few days, millenarian Jews, protected by para-military Israel police, have been attacking and beating peaceful Muslim worshipers at the Aqsa Mosque esplanade. The Aqsa Mosque is the third holiest Islamic site in the world.

According to observers of Israeli behavior in Occupied Jerusalem, the audacity and frequency of Israeli provocations at the Islamic sanctuary increased dramatically in recent weeks.

Sheikh Ikrema Sabri, the former head of the Supreme Muslim Council, warned that Messianic Jewish groups were "hell bent on provoking bloodshed on a wide scale in Jerusalem."

"These religious maniacs believe that by inciting violence and causing bloodshed, they would expedite the appearance of a mythical Messiah who would create a world-wide Jewish empire ruled from Jerusalem."

The extremists, who are backed by powerful religious and manifestly fascist parties in the Israeli Knesset or Parliament, don't deny these accusations.

Moshe Feiglin, a Nazi-like Israeli politician who believes non-Jews should be stripped of their national and political rights, including the right to vote, this week led dozens of extremists to the Aqsa Mosque esplanade where he called for the demolition of Islamic Holy places.

Feiglin, also a prominent figure in the ruling Likud party, was arrested for a few minutes and then released to make further provocative statements against Islamic shrines.

The brief arrest had nothing to do with his incitement, according to an Israeli police spokesman.

Meanwhile, Jewish religious leaders continue to make statements and religious sermons offending Islam and Christianity. Some of the rabbis have even ruled that the status of non-Jews in general is not higher than that of animals such as donkeys.

Interestingly, such brashly racist statements don't raise many eyebrows in Israel, neither among intellectuals nor politicians and religious leaders.

Those who dare criticize the so-called "rabbinic sages" for indulging in this Talmudic hallucination don't do so out of rejection of Halakha or Jewish religious law, which views goyem or non-Jews, as animals walking on two feet, but rather because what is being said is politically wrong as could generate hostility for Jews among Gentiles.

Jewish incitement against Islam and Muslims is by no means confined to the Palestinian arena. This week, Jewish circles posted anti-Islam posters in four subway stations in Washington D.C.

The provocative add read:

“In any war between the civilized man and the savage, support the civilized man,” the ad reads. “Support Israel/Defeat Jihad.”

The very same add was posted in a New York subway station two weeks ago, generating disgust and anger among Muslims.

Well, Jews are urged to thoroughly and honestly read and examine their Talmud and Old Testament in order to find for themselves who is Civilized and who is savage.

Anyone, Jew or gentile, can easily quote pornographically barbaric texts from both scriptures, underscoring the utter savagery and wickedness of religious Jewish thinking.

Jews should examine their ancient and recent history before hurling epithets of savagery and terrorism at Muslims.

Indeed, any honest comparison between Islam and Judaism would put Islam on a decidedly higher moral ground.

In the final analysis, those living in glass houses, don't throw stones.

But the anti-Islam Jewish circles, who unfortunately seem to represent a majority among Jews, have little concern for truth and honesty. Their ultimate goal is to spread lies, hatred, vindictiveness and malice.

In fact, Jews, especially those supporting Zionism or Jewish Nazism, are probably the last people on earth who are qualified to lecture humanity on civility and savagery.

The Jews were probably the first people on earth to carry out an organized genocide against another people for religious reasons. The Old Testament contains detailed records of this genocide.

Some Jewish apologists might argue that is grossly unfair to blame contemporary Jews for controversial religious scriptures written more than 3000 years ago.

Well, such a defensive reflex would probably be listened to were it not for the fact that for hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of Jews around the world, this genocidal mindset is still relevant today as it was 3000 ago.

Don't we see and hear numerous rabbis out there who teach, even openly, that the life of a Goy (non-Jew) has no sanctity and that a Jew might murder a gentile in order to harvest his or her organ if the Jew needed one!


Don't you think I am speaking about some rare cases of crazy rabbis hallucinating about ancient religious texts inside their parochial circles... These criminal rabbis are prominent and respected in their communities and have numerous followers, many with high college degrees from prestigious universities.

Today, Jews incite against Islam and Muslims on five continents. Their tacit message is "hate, hate, and hate."

When you call people "savages" and "terrorists" and other names just because they are fighting for their freedom and human rights, you are effectively inciting to murder. Vilification and demonizing always precede murder.

Murder, including mass murder, is the ultimate fruit of mass hatred and incitement.

Jews ought to remember in case they have forgotten that before Auschwitz and Treblinka and Bergen Belsen, and even Kristalnacht, there was a Mein Kampf, the Nuremberg laws and the anti-Jewish mass hysteria.

In light, one might ask: Is this anti-Islam mass hysteria what Jews are trying to generate and produce? Are Jews trying to affect a holocaust for Muslims in Europe, North America and Australia in order to allow Israel to build more colonies for fanatical Jews in the West Bank ?

Jews reject both Islam and Christianity. The main reason for this illogical rejection is the timeless Jewish desire to retain and maintain the dubious prerogative of the "chosen people"

But Jews can't be more deserving of heavenly salvation than other people just because some ancient Israelites worshiped God whereas other peoples and nations were pagans and worshipped idols. The Almighty doesn't calculate matters this way. God deals with men on an individual basis. There are "chosen" individuals, not chosen people, and it doesn't matter what ethnicity one belongs to.

Today many Jews worship power, money and sex, while others, and they are too many, worship the new Golem of Zionism, or Israel.

In the past, Jews tried and failed to poison and murder the Prophet of Islam. They also tried to decapitate and destroy the fledgling Muslim community in Madina by joining forces with the pagans of Arabia. Today's Jews are doing the same thing by joining ranks with hysterical Christian Zionists seeking world domination. This coalition of evil, too, will fail and Islam will triumph.

But when Islam ultimately prevailed and Muslims built a huge Muslim state based on justice and tolerance, Jews enjoyed religious, political and economic freedoms.

Jews didn't survive all these centuries because of their power. They survived because Islam catered for them and protected them from danger, near and distant. It is sad that Jews are now expressing their gratitude to Muslims by urging and instigating Westerners in America and Europe and elsewhere to hate and kill them.

Follow The Money: From Islamophobia To Israel Right or Wrong

The people Bankrolling Illegal Israeli Expansionism In The Occupied West Bank Are The Same People Fomenting Anti-Muslim Sentiment In The U.S.

By Elly Bulkin and Donna Nevel
Courtesy Of "Alter-Net"

You don’t have to get more than a minute into Obsession: Radical Islam’s War Against the West (2007) to begin to see how inextricably it ties Islamophobia to hardline Israeli policies [1]. Despite its initial disclaimer, the film demonizes all Muslims, and through explicit statements and rapid-fire images, makes clear the filmmaker's view that there is a direct connection between Nazis and both Palestinians and Muslims. 

Obsession played a brief but high-profile role during the 2008 presidential election campaign when theClarion Funddistributed 28 million DVDs as a newspaper insert in swing states [2]. A few years later, Clarion’s The Third Jihad: Radical Islam’s Vision for America (2008)—about an Islamic enemy that, purportedly, “the government is too afraid to name”—made its own headlineswith reports that the New York City Police Department had showed the film to nearly 1,500 police officers [3]. And in 2011, Clarion got still more attention when it issued its third big film, Iranium [4]. The filmpushes the Israeli and neoconservative narrative about Iran's nuclear program and the need for military action against Iran, using a “clash of civilizations” framework that attributes “unavoidable” conflict to fundamental cultural differences between Islamic and Western civilizations [5].

Obsession and The Third Jihad ignited a firestorm of criticism from Muslim, civil rights and other groups. The Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) condemnedObsession for spreading “scurrilous accusations against Islam and Muslims,” while the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) denounced The Third Jihad as “blatantly anti-Muslim” [6]. Activists, researchers, and journalists have commented on Obsession’s mistranslations and The Third Jihad’s use of a “discredited conspiracy theory” [7]. They have also noted the films’ countless distortions and manipulations: benign images of Muslims at prayer made sinisterby “scary music” and “repeated images of an Islamic flag flying over the White House”—“cherry picking . . . inflammatory images and splicing them together to create fear” [8].

But others, particularly supporters of Israel’s right-wing policies, found these films’ virulently anti-Muslim message to their liking. All three films have been effectively mainstreamed in the Jewish community, with local showings sponsored by such groups as Hillel and the Jewish Federation of Greater Philadelphia, and the DallasAnti-Defamation League (ADL) and B’nai B’rith chapters [9]. Obsession has become a staple of David Horowitz’s “Islamo-Fascism Awareness” weeks on college campuses. Sheldon Adelson, the billionaire supporter of Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney—and a critic of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) from the right—has distributed copies of Obsession to young people on Birthright-sponsored tours to Israel, a project he funds [10].

The Clarion filmmakers and their funders were using Islamophobia in the service of their vision of Israeli expansionism. Commenting on Iranium, journalists Eli Clifton and Ali Gharib analyze it within the context of The Third Jihad, Clarion’s previous movie. Each, they write, “portrays a clash of civilizations, suggests that Muslims value death over life, and portrays irrational hatred toward Israel and anti-Semitism as key to comprehending the anger and frustration voiced by Muslim countries against the United States. . . . [T]he formula for the Clarion Fund's anti-Muslim propaganda is becoming more apparent with each new iteration” [11]. And particularly relevant to this article, the films reflect the worldview of almost all of the anti-Muslim ideologues, the funders of a nationwide Islamophobia network, and the right-wing pro-Israel groups that we discuss below.

Some of the activists and journalists critiquing the content of these films also followed the money to the Clarion Fund, especially for Obsession. Ferreting out its funders proved no easy task. While journalists were able to explain fairly easily that Clarion was behind the film and that an $18 million grant from Donors Capital made possible the election-year distribution of the Obsession DVDs, things got messy beyond that. The journalists’ difficulties arose primarily because Clarion has resisted even the most basic level of transparency. An offshoot of the Israel and U.S.-based Aish HaTorah, which supports militant Israeli settlers,Clarion has a “virtual,” rather than a physical, office in the United States and is not forthcoming about its connection with Aish, including having directors with ties to both groups [12]. Sometimes even the most diligent journalist had to just be lucky. An accountant’s error, for example, led Justin Elliott of Salon to learn the identity of the individual source of the huge Donors Capital grant forObsession—a discovery that, despite IRS forms to the contrary, spokespeople for both the possible donor, Barre Seid, and for Donors Capital claimed to be untrue [13].

While some individuals who have followed the money behind Obsession and The Third Jihad made the obvious connections between the country’s leading Islamophobes (and their funders) and support for Israel’s occupation and right-wing policies, analyses and resources in liberal and mainstream publications only rarely mention these links [14]. This was the case, for instance, with the Center for American Progress' Fear, Inc.: The Roots of the Islamophobia Network in America, which has gotten considerable attention from the mainstream media and is a valuable work of investigative journalism on Islamophobia. CAP has hardly been alone in failing to make a connection between Islamophobia and Israel.

Our approach draws on the work of CAP in identifying the Islamophobes and their largest funders, as well as the work of those journalists who, on the trail of anti-Islam money, did not stop short when Israel was the logical next step. First, we look briefly at the connection between some of the leading anti-Muslim ideologues and right-wing pro-Israel politics. Then we provide an overview of the seven biggest funders of the “Islamophobia network,” as identified in Fear, Inc., and explore the links between these funders and groups in Israel and the United States with hardline Israel politics.

The Anti-Muslim Ideologues

As Fear, Inc. reports, one stream of funding, totaling more than $42.5 million, flows from several funders to a very influential circle of Islamophobia misinformation “experts” and their organizations [15]. What it doesn’t report, however, are the ways in which these individuals, funders, and organizations support hawkish groups and politics around Israel, often including the settler movement:

• Frank Gaffney, a former U.S. Assistant Secretary of Defense who sees mosques as part of attempts to impose “Sharia law” in the United States, is a “contributing expert” to the Ariel Center for Applied Research, an Israeli research institute that reflects the hardline Likud position on Israeli security [16].
• Daniel Pipes, who focuses on the “threat” of “lawful Islam” in the West, promotes student monitoring of professors on their campus for theirviews on “the Arab-Israeli conflict” and other topics [17] to ensure that they are not critical of Israel.
• Robert Spencer, who co-founded Stop the Islamization of America, identified by the Southern Poverty Law Center as a hate group,and whosewriting has been recommended by the FBI for training recruits, helped organize a 2010 “pro-Israel” rally that defined Israel as including all of “Judea and Samaria” [18].
• Steven Emerson, who has opposed efforts to build mosques in Murfreesboro (Tennessee), Boston, and lower Manhattan and provides terrorism-related training to both private security professionals andmilitary/government personnel, gave Israeli officials a “sneak preview” of his 1994 PBS film, Jihad in America, helping them “press their case with the [Clinton] administration—that Islam is our common enemy” [19].
• The Clarion Fund, which we discuss above, has Gaffney and Pipes on itsadvisory board, while Emerson, Brigitte Gabriel, and Pipes were among the talking heads in Obsession. Gaffney appeared in Iranium [20].
• David Horowitz, who publishes anti-Muslim, anti-Arab pieces on his FrontPage magazine Web site, has maintained that “middle eastern Muslims are ‘Islamic Nazis’ who ‘want to kill Jews, that’s their agenda’” [21].
• Brigitte Gabriel, whose Act! for America lobbies for state laws against the alleged threat of “Sharia law,” has defined "the difference . . . between Israel and the Arab world . . . [as] the difference between civilization and barbarism” [22].

These groups and individuals are important not just because they provide misinformation to Fox News and other media outlets, but because of the relationship many have with the U.S. government and the potential impact they have on U.S. domestic and foreign policy. This relationship is mutually beneficial. The ideologues provide government officials with “facts” that support domestic spying, profiling of Muslims, and foreign sanctions and interventions [23]. And the anti-Muslim ideologues increase their influence, credibility, and ability to rake in funding from the government and private funders by being able to publicize the “invaluable” service they provide to congressional committees and homeland security personnel. They also help provide a conceptual framework—Islamophobic and Israel-right-or-wrong—for neoconservatives and others within and outside government who are unequivocal supporters of U.S. intervention in majority-Muslim countries and of hardline Israeli policies. As Deepa Kumar hasargued in Islamophobia and the Politics of Empire, “the right-wing Islamophobes are not a fringe minority but rather part and parcel of the structures of mainstream American society” [24].

The Funders

Likewise, the primary funders of these anti-Muslim ideologues almost all sustain right-wing or militant groups in Israel (through U.S.-based conduits) or groups in the United States that promote ultra-Zionist policies and actively target those who critique, protest or even just dialogue or teach about those policies. Recent reviews of public documents have begun to reveal a great deal about the financial lifeblood of anti-Muslim organizations. Journalists have followed the money trailfrom Aubrey Chernick’s Fairbrook Foundation to a West Bank settlement and to U.S. groups bent on fomenting Islamophobia [25]. Writing about the Fairbrook Foundation in 2010, Max Blumenthal describes the financial connection between an Islamophobic crusade in the United States and “conservative elements from within the pro-Israel lobby” and “an aggressively pro-Israel sensibility. Central figures within this lobby “venerat[e] “the Jewish state as a Middle Eastern Fort Apache on the front lines of the Global War on Terror and urg[e] the U.S. and various European powers to emulate its heavy-handed methods” [26].

Fear, Inc. has identified the seven largest funders of eight of the most prominent groups in this country’s Islamophobia network between 2001 and 2009. Focusing on these seven funders, we reviewed their annual Internal Revenue Service 990Forms from 2001 to 2010 and other summaries of data from those federal forms, which list grant recipients and amounts [27]. And we found substantial data indicating the financial links between these funders and U.S. (and, in some cases, Israeli) groups that have both an Islamophobic worldview and take an "Israel right or wrong position," including support for the Israeli government's expansionist settlement policy.

FUNDING TO EIGHT ORGANIZATIONS IN “THE ISLAMOPHOBIA NETWORK”* FROM: Bradley—$5,370,000 Scaife—$7,875,000 Donors Capital—$20,768,600 *Data from Fear, Inc., Center for American Progress

Of the seven biggest funders of the Islamophobic groups identified by Fear, Inc., the three largest—the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, Richard Mellon Scaife foundations, and Donors Capital Fund—provided the overwhelming majority (82%) of this support, a total of more than $42.5 million.

• Started by a cofounder of the far-right John Birch Society, the Bradley Foundation has beendescribed as “a $460 million conservative honey pot dedicated to crushing the labor movement” in Wisconsin. According to theMilwaukee Journal Sentinel, between 2001 and 2009, it doled out “nearly as much money as all seven” foundations run by the Scaife family and the billionaire Koch brothers [28].

• Another supporter of what political historian Alan J. Lichtman has called a “white Protestant nation” [29]. Scaife money comes primarily from the Mellon family’s oil and bank holdings. Like Bradley and Donors Capital, it funds groups that have long been the engine of the neo-conservative movement in the United States, such as the American Enterprise Institute, the Federalist Society, and the Heritage Foundation. Among the multiple think tanks that Scaife helps fund is the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, whose right-wing pro-Likud and anti-Iran advocacy attracts support from funders who are less neo-conservative and more Israel-focused than Scaife [30]. The Scaife Foundations’ only foray into funding Jewish political groups involved grants ($300,000) to the American Jewish Committee for “publication support” of Commentary, the Jewish neoconservative magazine.

• While Donors Capital, the mega-funder of the Obsession DVD, makes grants that reflect a commitment to “limited government, personal responsibility, and free enterprise,” its role as a donor-advised fund, under no legal obligation to reveal to the public the names of individual or corporate donors, contributes to its reputation as “secretive” [31].

FUNDING TO EIGHT ORGANIZATIONS IN “THE ISLAMOPHOBIA NETWORK”* FROM: Becker—$1,136,000 Anchorage/Rosenwald— $2,818,229 Fairbrook—$1,498,450 Berrie—$3,109,016 *Data from Fear, Inc., Center for American Progress

All four of the other funders of Islamophobia identified by Fear, Inc. have ties with the organized Jewish community. Different from the trio of Bradley, Donors Capital, and Scaife, these four funders mention Jewish life or Israel in their mission statements, have principals affiliated with Jewish organizations, and/or fund Jewish religious, educational, political, and communal groups. The principals of three of these foundations are or have been affiliated with groups with militant Israeli politics [32].

• When CPA-test prep and alternative energy maven Newton Becker of the Newton D. and Rochelle F. Becker Foundation/Becker Family Foundation/Becker Charitable Trust, died early in 2012, the Israeli settlers’ publication Arutz Sheva published a glowing obituary. The news outlet quoted two of the right-wing pro-Israel groups that we discuss below, lauding Becker as “a mensch” and “a giant in pro-Israel philanthropy” [33]. He has, we found, given more than $650,000 between 2006 and 2010 to the San Francisco Jewish Community Federation, a pillar of the Jewish establishment; according to the Center for American Progress, the federation gave the Clarion Fund, purveyor of vehemently anti-Muslim, pro-Israel propaganda, $75,000 between 2008 and 2009 [34].

• The Anchorage Charitable Fund/William Rosenwald Family Fund was started by liberal philanthropist Julius Rosenwald, the founder of Sears. Carried on by a son who helped found the United Jewish Appeal in 1939, it has since passed into the hands of a third generation. This includes Elizabeth Varet and her sister Nina Rosenwald—a former member of the AIPAC board, whom Max Blumenthal describes as “the sugar mama of anti-Muslim hate” [35]. (Fear, Inc. reports that Anchorage/Rosenfeld took a hit from the Bernie Madoff Ponzi scandal, resulting in a significant drop in charitable contributions [36].)

• The Fairbrook Foundation is run by Aubrey and Joyce Chernick. Aubrey, a former trustee of the hawkish, neoconservative Washington Institute for Near East Policy (an AIPAC-affiliated think tank where the Islamophobia network’s Daniel Pipes is an adjunct scholar) who helped start the staunchly pro-Israel Pajamas Media blog, which was part of the vocal anti-Muslim opposition to Park51 (the lower Manhattan cultural center and mosque) [37]. Our review of Fairbrook’s 990 forms indicated that it gave more than $5.5 million to the Jewish Federation Council of Greater Los Angeles between 2005 and 2010.

• The Russell Berrie Foundation is different from the other three Jewish funders: Angelica Berrie, widow of its founder, is board chair not of AIPAC or another hawkish pro-Israel group, but of the Shalom Hartman Institute-North America, which supports religious pluralism in Israel [38]. However, according to its 990 Forms from 2010 (a year not covered by Fear, Inc.), Berrie gave more than $820,000 to the Investigative Project on Terrorism, the project of the Islamophobia network’s Steven Emerson.

Any discussion of funding from Becker and Fairbrook is limited by their failure to always include basic information about their grantees—like their names—on their federal forms. Becker sometimes lists non-U.S. grantees only as being in the “Middle East/North Africa,” and the far-right Fairbrook Foundation reports some grants to U.S.-based recipients by state and amount, but not by name or other identifier. Their apparently intentional lack of transparency makes it impossible to know the extent of their backing for Israeli settlements and for groups in the United States that support the Israeli government’s hardline positions. (Because the Berrie Foundation’s 2008 federal 990 Form did not include a list of grantees, we can provide only incomplete information about its funding.)

Funding Israeli Settlements

Of the seven funders of the Islamophobia network, three of the four Jewish funders also provided financial support for Israeli settlements in the West Bank through grants to U.S.-based organizations, while one of these three backed former settlers in Gaza. These three—Becker, Anchorage/Rosenwald, and Fairbrook—clearly view supporting the Israeli settler movement as compatible with their organizational missions. Settlements are in violation of international law, specifically of the Fourth Geneva Convention, which prohibits an occupying country from moving its citizens into the occupied area as residents. Support for the settlements by U.S.-based funders, even when relatively modest, supplements the very substantial financial support, direct or indirect, of the Israeli government [39].

FUNDING TO THE CENTRAL FUND OF ISRAEL FROM: Anchorage/Rosenwald— $36,000 Becker—$201,000 Fairbrook—$180,000

The settlement movement—and apparently the three Jewish funders who back them—consider Palestinians merely as an obstacle to achieving Jewish sovereignty over all of what they call “Judea and Samaria.” These funders have funneled large amounts of money through the New York-based Central Fund of Israel, which funds, among others, the West Bank Yitzharsettlement, whose rabbi has “said it is permissible to kill gentile babies because of ‘the future danger that will arise if they are allowed to grow into evil people like their parents’” [40]. Its senior rabbis have encouraged students to “engage in illegal, subversive, and violent activities against Arabs and the Israeli security force” [41].

GRANTS TO ISRAELI SETTLERS FROM FAIRBROOK: Aish Hatorah—$49,000 American Friends of Kedumim--$30,000 American Friends of Ateret Cohanim—$30,000 Friends of Gush Katif—$50,000

In addition, the Fairbrook Foundation has funded--through Aish Hatorah and American Friends of Kedumim—armed northern West Bank settlements near Yitzhar with members of the ultra-rightGush Emunim settlement movement [42]. Fairbrook also supports, among others, Ateret Cohanim, whose “Jerusalem Reclamation project” involves purchasing property in the Palestinian part of East Jerusalem, renovating buildings, and moving in yeshiva families; and the residents of the former Gaza settlement of Gush Katif, now living in Israel, whose homes the Israeli army emptied and demolished in 2005 [43].

GRANTS TO THE ARIEL SETTLEMENT FROM: Becker—$10,000 Fairbrook—$15,00

Perhaps no West Bank settlement is as clearly a “fact on the ground” as Ariel. Routinelydescribed by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and others as the “‘capital of Samaria’ and an ‘indisputable’ part of Israel” [44]. Ariel is deep in the West Bank. Its 19,000 residents have access to a performing arts center, the Ariel University Center, and plenty of clean water, while Ariel wastewater, according to the Israeli human rights group B’Tselem, periodically pollutes the water supply and land of local Palestinians [45]. The American Friends of Ariel has received grants from the Becker family and the Fairbrook Foundation, which, though nominal for such foundations, demonstrates support for this mega-settlement.

While Fairbrook is clearly the most hardline of the four Jewish funders, three of them also back the Central Fund of Israel, and Becker, not just Fairbrook, supports the Ariel settlement. This illustrates, as Philip Weiss has written about Becker and other donors to the Central Fund, “how deeply enmeshed in mainstream [Jewish] American organizational life the settlement program is” [46].

Funding Hasbara Groups, Hawks and Christian Zionists

We found that six of the seven funders of Islamophobia network organizations (all except Scaife) have also funded multiple organizations that back, and oppose any criticism of hawkish Israeli policies. These groups are engaged in propaganda (“hasbara”) initiatives designed to justify Israeli government policies and actions, including continued expansionism, and to defend Israel by improving its image around the world. For these groups and their constituents, Islamophobia complements hardline Israel politics. As Middle East policy analyst Matthew Duss wrote a year before the publication of the Fear, Inc. Islamophobia report that he co-authored, “As long as Jews are encouraged to believe that scary Muslims are hiding under every American bed, the idea is perpetuated that support for the Jewish state is a zero-sum contest between favoring Israel and favoring Arabs and Muslims. For too many American Jews, smearing Islam is seen as a legitimate expression of Zionism” [47].

Many of the right-wing Zionist groups, their projects, and their funders smear Islam and are part of the organized Jewish community. CAMERA and the Zionist Organization of America, for example, are part of local Jewish Community Relations Councils. The David Project, as Max Blumenthal has noted, emerged from a meeting in the early 2000s “of such mainstream Jewish groups as the ADL, American Jewish Committee, and AIPAC, to address what they perceived as an increase in pro-Palestinian campus activism” [48]. The David Project is apartner agency of Hillel, which serves “Jewish Campus Life” at over 500 colleges and universities [49]. The Zionist Organization of America lobbied hard from within to push the Jewish Council on Public Affairs (JCPA), organized Jewry’s main domestic-focused umbrella group, to adopt a resolution supporting the use of civil rights legislation against campus critics of Israeli policies [50]. The Israel Campus Beat is a project of both the Israel Coalition on Campus (a Berrie grantee) and the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations [51].

Six of the seven funders of the Islamophobia network support hardline Zionist, Jewish neoconservative and Christian Zionist groups. We look briefly here at a few of these.

GRANTS TO THE ZIONIST ORGANIZATION OF AMERICA (ZOA) FROM: Becker—$345,000 Berrie—$6,000 Fairbrook—$619,000

The oldest of these groups is the 115-year-old Zionist Organization of America (ZOA), which billsitself as “the oldest pro-Israel organization in the United States” [52]. Its president, Morton Klein, sides with the ideologically anti-Muslim and pro-settler coterie. ZOA leaders see Palestinians as having a “shocking difference in values from ours in America and the West” [53]. ZOA has co-sponsored “pro-Israel” rallies with and sponsored a talk by Pamela Geller, co-founder of the anti-Muslim hate group Stop the Islamization of America [54]., who has recently run ads on public buses and subways that characterizethe Israel-Palestine conflict as a “war between the civilized man and the savage” [55]. ZOA’s Klein is on the “International Board of Governors of the College of Judea and Samaria in Ariel, Israel” (which is actually on the West Bank, in the occupied territories) [56].

GRANTS TO THE DAVID PROJECT FROM: Anchorage/Rosenwald— $15,000 Becker—$25,000 Fairbrook—$202,000

The David Project was a product of the mainstream Jewish community, although founder Charles Jacobs has since taken to attacking that community for its alleged lack of vigilance in fighting what he sees as the “Islamic anti-Semitism and Islamist penetration of American Society” [57]. “One of the many outfits bankrolled” by the Fairbrook Foundation, the David Project helped foment an eventually unsuccessful, multi-year Islamophobic smear campaign to prevent the construction of the Islamic Society of Boston Cultural Center and Mosque [58].

GRANTS TO CAMERA FROM: Anchorage/Rosenwald --$374,000 Becker—$105,000 Donors Capital—$500,000 Fairbrook—$125,000

Jacobs also co-founded CAMERA, the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America, which monitors what it views as anti-Israel bias in the media and consistently works to shut down any criticism of Israel and to attack its critics. David Steinmann, president of the Rosenwald Family Fund, is a former executive board member for CAMERA.

The Israel Project (TIP) has supplied resources advancing a right-wing pro-Israel, anti-Palestinian narrative to journalists, policymakers, and others. Islamophobia network member Frank Gaffney is included in its long list of speakers. In July 2009, TIP posted a manual online that urged pro-settlement advocates to accuse their opponents ofsupporting “a kind of ethnic cleansing to move all Jews” from the West Bank [59].

GRANTS TO THE ISRAEL PROJECT FROM: Becker—$492,000 Anchorage/Rosenwald— $11,000

A month later,  under criticism, they withdrew that wording [60]. Shortly after Newt Gingrich and Michelle Bachmann talked about the “Palestinian culture of hate” during the 2012 Republican presidential primaries (and Gingrich described Palestinians as an “invented” people), TIP issued a “fact” sheet to support such views [61]. TIP’s focus until now has been on public relations and information that promote Israeli government policies. This may change with the August 2012 appointment of a new CEO, Josh Block, a former AIPAC spokesperson with a reputation as a “pro-Israel bulldog” [62]. Nathan Guttman of the Jewish Daily Forward has described Block as “eager to take on [Israel's] detractors — especially those within the Democratic Party, the foreign policy community and even Jewish circles — who veer off the unofficial though well-defined mainstream pro-Israel road” [63] Until his 2012 death, Newton Becker of the Becker Family Foundation was on the TIP Board of Directors. Its Board of Advisors currently includes 16 senators and 22 congressional representatives [64].

GRANTS TO THE INSTITUTE FOR JEWISH AND COMMUNITY RESEARCH FROM: Anchorage/Rosenwald— $80,000 Bradley—$50,00

Along with monitoring and trying to shape media coverage of Israel, some of these groups have been using legal challenges as a strategy to silence critics of Israeli policies. The Institute for Jewish and Community Research (IJCR), for example, which documents what it calls “anti-Israelism,” has pushed for a (still pending) U.S. Education Department Office of Civil Rightsinvestigation into whether, by ignoring “campus speech critical of Israel or Zionism,” University of California Santa Cruz administrators were “creating a hostile climate for Jewish people on the campus” [65].

The ramifications of this case reached deep into the mainstream Jewish community. The IJCR, Zionist Organization of America, and other adamantly pro-Israel Jewish groups urged the Jewish Council for Public Affairs (JCPA) to support a resolution that supports the use of federal civil rights law to protect Jewish students from criticism of Israel, which they equated with anti-Semitism. It took eight months of controversy within the JCPA for this multi-constituent umbrella group to reach a decision. Ultimately it endorsed the use of “federal law to counter anti-Semitism on American college campuses,” “while recognizing “‘the importance of the First Amendment’” and stating that federal law “should not be invoked ‘when it could lead to an environment in which legitimate debate about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is squelched and academic freedom is undermined’” [66].

GRANTS TO StandWithUs FROM: Becker—$787,000 Fairbrook—$192,000

StandWithUs/Israel Emergency Alliance illustrates as well as any of these groups, the lack of daylight between it and the Israeli government. StandWithUs pursued its legal strategy incollaboration with the Israeli Consul General for the Pacific Northwest when it targeted a food coop whose members had voted to protest Israeli policies by opting not to carry Israeli products [67]. A judge has dismissed the lawsuit as violating “protectedfree speech involving an issue of public concern” and held StandWithUs “liable for the costs and fees of the suit and $160,000 in statutory damages” [68]. The group’s general attitude toward Palestinians is reflected in its comic book, which features “Captain Israel” and depicts Palestinians as vermin [69].The StandWithUs speakers' bureau includes the Islamophobia network’s Brigitte Gabriel [70]. Newton Becker of the Becker Family Foundation was a StandWithUs founder.

GRANTS TO THE JEWISH POLICY CENTER FROM: Anchorage/Rosenwald— $10,000 Becker—$60,000 Bradley—$20,000

Jewish neoconservatives have a home in two Jewish think tanks that are popular with several of the Islamophobia network funders and that bring their hardline Israel views to Republican national politics. The Jewish Policy Center brings together Jewish Republicans, anti-Muslim ideologues, and a veritable who’s who of Jewish neocons [71]. It shares a director, as well as some key board members, with the Republican Jewish Coalition, which, with pro-settler billionaire Sheldon Adelson, a Romney supporter, has been trolling for votes among Jews in the U.S. and Israel [72].

Like other right-wing think tanks, the Jewish Policy Center supports “a strong American defense capability . . . missile defense, . . . small government [and] low taxes” [73]. But its focus—most prominent during the 2012 election cycle—has been its commitment to “U.S. Israel security cooperation” and support for Israel’s “quest for legitimacy and security” [74]. Its speakers’ bureau includes the Islamophobia industry’s Steven Emerson, David Horowitz and Daniel Pipes, while the last two are also on the group’s board.

GRANTS TO THE JEWISH INSTITUTE FOR NATIONAL SECURITY AFFAIRS (JINSA) FROM: Anchorage/Rosenwald— $587,000 Becker—$76,000

A second think tank, the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA), brings U.S. cadets, midshipmen, retired generals, and admirals to Israel, so they can become “well briefedin the security concerns of Israel” and learn about Middle East issues “that will be of continuing concern to American military planners for the foreseeable future” [75]. JINSA’s Law Enforcement Exchange Program provides trips to Israel for U.S. “law enforcement leaders” so that Israel’s national security agencies can “support and strengthen American law enforcement counter terrorism practices” [76]. These participants are bound to be exposed to JINSA’s “clash of civilizations”argument—that “the West” must back Israel, because of “fear of large Muslim minorities–unassimilated and unassimilable . . . ” [77]. The recipient of major support from Anchorage/Rosenwald, JINSA has on its board David Steinmann, who is former JINSA president and CEO, and current board co-chair and Rosenwald Family Fund president, as well as Nina Rosenwald, JINSA and Rosenwald vice president [78].

Illustrating how unquestioning support for Israel can trump all other considerations, several of the funders provide support to Christian Zionist groups even though many of them seem to primarily value Jews—and Israel—in terms of the end-time battle in Israel that will lead to Jesus’ return (the Second Coming) [79]. Usually combining the political and theological, Christian Zionists are often drawn from the ranks of fundamentalist and evangelical Protestants and have, for decades, supported Israel by lobbying Congress, fundraising, and sponsoring Christian educational tours [80].

GRANTS TO CHRISTIAN ZIONISTS FROM: Becker—$110,000 to the International Christian Embassy in Jerusalem; $25,000 to Israel Christian Nexus; $31,000 to Christians for Fair Witness on the Middle East; $42,000 to National Christian Leadership Council for Israel; $50,000 to Global Evangelism, Inc. Fairbrook—$300,000 to Israel Christian Nexus Donors Capital—$442,000 to Christians United for Israel (CUFI)

The Reverend John Hagee of Global Evangelism, Inc. and Christians United for Israel (CUFI) blame the Holocaust on therefusal of the Jews to immigrate to Israel as Theodor Herzl had urged [81]. CUFI used its postal permitto support a mailing ofObsession: Radical Islam’s War Against the West to Reform rabbis and other Jewish leaders [82]. It typically caps its "Nights to Honor Israel" with “a big donation to the local [Jewish] federation and sometimes to an Israeli settlement project as well.” [83]

GRANTS FROM BERRIE TO: New Israel Fund—$145,000 Seeds of Peace—$232,500 Israel Coalition on Campus— $100,000 Taglit-Birthright Israel— $400,000 Nefesh B’Nefesh—$3,477,500 American Friends of Reut Institute—$225,000

The Russell Berrie Foundation merits its own discussion, because it provides only the most minimal funding ($6,000 to the ZOA) to the groups described above. An outlier in some ways, it is the only one of the four Jewish foundations to give more than $2,000 (Anchorage/Rosenwald) to the New Israel Fund, as well as significant support for Seeds of Peace, an international conflict resolution/leadership program that grew out of a camp for Egyptian, Israeli and Palestinian teens.

But that is only part of Berrie’s funding story. It has given significant support to two pro-Israeli government, youth-focused groups. One is the Israel Coalition on Campus—previously part of Hillel [84]—a coalition of 33 groups that includes among its “most active” organizations CAMERA, Hasbara, Hillel, StandWithUs, the David Project, and the Zionist Organization of America [85]. The second is Taglit-Birthright Israel, which provides free trips to Israel for Jewish youth as part of what one investigative journalist has called “the fight for the political loyalties of young Jews”[86]. Birthright was set in 2011 to start receiving $100 million from the Israeli government and has received more than $100 million since 2007 from Sheldon Adelson [87].

In addition, the Berrie Foundation has committed nearly $3.5 million for a $10 million project with Nefesh B’Nefesh. This group, backed by the Israeli government (and receiving funding from John Hagee Ministries), encourages North American and British Jewish settlement of northern Israel as part of a governmentcampaign to “populate the Galilee” with Jews, while including West Bank settlements among other options [88]. Berrie has also given substantial funding to American Friends of Reut Institute, the Israeli government’s leading national security think tank. Reut has helped frame a narrative that defines nearly all criticism of Israeli policies as part of a “delegitimization” campaign, thereby providing U.S. and Israeli groups with further impetus to suppress dissent [89].

*****

Following the money between these seven funders and some of their grantees translates two overlapping ideologies into dollar figures. One is vehemently anti-Muslim and anti-Arab, and the other is in the “Israel right or wrong” camp.

Our research makes clear that the nexus between hardline Israeli politics and Islamophobia is as strong as the “Islamophobia network in America” discussed in the Center for American Progress’ (CAP’s) Fear, Inc. report. The funders and the individuals and groups that they back overlap in various ways—as board members, on speakers’ bureaus, and as the leaders of Islamophobic and anti-Palestinian smear campaigns.

This money-Islamophobia-Israel network matters, in part, because of its impact on—and strong relationship with—state policies and institutions. In addition to furthering a rabidly anti-Muslim climate, its members help bolster the state-sponsored Islamophobic and anti-Palestinian policies adopted and promoted by the U.S. government. If we fail to examine the Islamophobia network in all its dimensions, we bring an incomplete analysis to the essential work of challenging Islamophobia.

Elly Bulkin is a writer and editor. Donna Nevel is a community psychologist and educator. Both were founding members of Jews Against Islamophobia and steering committee members of Communities in Support of the Khalil Gibran International Academy. They can be reached at challengingislamophobia@gmail.com

Research by Elly Bulkin. Read the authors' previous article, "How the Jewish Establishment's Litmus Test on Israel Fuels Anti-Muslim Bigotry," here. 

Many thanks to Abdeen Jabara for his invaluable contributions to the development of this piece.

END NOTES

[1] There are early shots in Obsession of individuals with guns wearing a keffiyehs, a symbol of Palestinian resistance and culture, as well as a quite visible note that the Palestinian Media Watch is a source for images. “Radical Islam Documentary” [Obsession], http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AediQLpoGGM (accessed February 21, 2012).

[2] Sarah Posner, “Aish HaTorah’s New ‘Obsession’,” The Investigative Fund, October 29, 2008,http://www.theinvestigativefund.org/investigations/politicsandgovernment/1119/aish_hatorah%E2%80%99s_new_%E2%80%98obsession%27/?page=entire. Also see Sheila Musaji, “Who Is Behind Relentless, Obsession, and The Third Jihad?” The American Muslim, November 19, 2010,http://www.theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/features/articles/who_is_behind_relentless_obsession_and_the_third_jihad1/0016736(both accessed December 13, 2011).

[3] The Third Jihad, the FREE 30-Minute Version,http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-864522917532871834 (accessed February 21, 2012). Tom Robbins, “NYPD Cops’ Training Included an Anti-Muslim Horror Flick,” The Village Voice, January 19, 2011,http://www.villagevoice.com/content/printVersion/2337684/ (accessed December 13, 2011). Michael Powell, “In Police Training, a Dark Film on U.S. Muslims,” New York Times, January 23, 2012,http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/24/nyregion/in-police-training-a-dark-film-on-us-muslims.html?pagewanted=all); and J.J. Goldberg, “Islamophobic Film and Its Jewish Backers,” Jewish Daily Forward, February 2, 2012,http://forward.com/articles/150677/islamophobic-film-and-its-jewish-backers/ (both accessed February 3, 2012).

[4] Wayne Kopping, Obsession’s director, editor, and co-writer, had “previously co-edited and directed the documentary Relentless: The Struggle for Peace in the Middle East, a film about the failure of the Oslo Peace Accords.”http://www.obsessionthemovie.com/about_filmakers.php; Sarah Posner, “Aish HaTorah’s New ‘Obsession,’” The Investigative Fund, October 29, 2008,http://www.theinvestigativefund.org/investigations/politicsandgovernment/1119/aish_hatorah%E2%80%99s_new_%E2%80%98obsession%27/(both accessed August 30, 2012).

[5] For a discussion of distortions in Iranium, see Eli Clifton & Ali Gharib, “’Iranium’ or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Military Option,” Frontline, January 26, 2011,http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/tehranbureau/2011/01/iranium.html(accessed January 29 , 2011). Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order (New York: Free Press, 1996); and Huntington, “The Clash of Civilizations?” Foreign Affairs 72 (Summer, 1993): 22-28. As Edward Said has noted, between the 1993 essay and the 1996 book, Huntington’s work lost its question mark, going from a question to a statement. Said, “The Myth of ‘The Clash of Civilizations,’” Media Education Foundation Transcript, 1998, 2.http://www.mediaed.org/assets/products/404/transcript_404.pdf (accessed December 3, 2011).

[6] Dr. Muneer Fareed, “On the Distribution of Obsession,” Islamic Society of North America press release, no date, http://www.isna.net/articles/Press-Releases/ON-THE-DISTRIBUTION-OF-OBSESSION.aspx; Muslim Public Affairs Council, “Enough Is Enough: The Anti-Muslim Training Tide Must Turn,” press release, May 18, 2012, http://www.mpac.org/programs/government-relations/dc-news-and-views/enough-is-enough-the-anti-muslim-training-tide-must-turn.php(both accessed August 26, 2012).

[7] Rabbi Haim Dov Beliak, “Obsession’s Translation Errors,” Jews on First, November 2, 2008, http://www.jewsonfirst.org/obsession/translation.html(accessed August 27, 2012). Quotation about its “discredited conspiracy theory” from Sarah Posner, “The Third Jihad, Adelson, and Gingrich,” Religion Dispatches, January 27, 2012,http://www.religiondispatches.org/dispatches/sarahposner/5622/the_third_jihad,_adelson,_and_gingrich(accessed August 27, 2012).

[8] Quotation about “scary music” from Rabbi Haim Dov Beliak, Eli Clifton, Jane Hunter, & Robin Podolsky, “Rebutting Obsession: Historical Facts Topple Film's Premise That Violent Muslim Fundamentalists Are Nazis' Heirs, Expose Its Fear-mongering,” Jews on First, November 2, 2008,http://www.jewsonfirst.org/obsession/. Quotation about the Islamic flag from Arab American Anti-Discrimination Committee press release, quoted in Sheila Musaji, “The NYPD, the CIA, and ‘The Third Jihad,’” The American Muslim, May 26, 2012,http://theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/features/articles/nypd. Quotation about “cherry picking” from Ibrahim Hooper, Council on American-Islam Relations, quoted in Daphna Berman, “‘Obsession’ Stokes Passions, Fears and Controversy, Haaretz, June 22, 2007, http://www.haaretz.com/weekend/anglo-file/obsession-stokes-passions-fears-and-controversy-1.223820 (all accessed August 27, 2012).

[9] Calendar, Jewish Exponent (Philadelphia), August 12, 2010http://www.jewishexponent.com/article/21669/Calendar/; Federation E-Newsletter (Dallas), Volume 4, Issue 18, August 31,[2006].http://www.jewishdallas.org/page.aspx?id=; both cited in Sheila Musaji, “History of Obsession: Radical Islam’s War with the West,” The American Muslim, September 30, 2008,http://www.theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/features/articles/history_of_obsession_radical_islams_war_with_the_west/(all accessed December 13, 2011). “Iranium Screenings,”http://www.iraniumthemovie.com/news/premieres/ (accessed September 25, 2012). Also Berkshire Jewish Film Festival, schedule, August 20, 2007,http://www.lenoxps.org/theater/allimages/KI_flyer_BJFF.pdf; Zara Myers, “Film Provokes Action Toward Islamist Threat,” Jewish Exponent, March 30, 2006,http://www.jewishexponent.com/article/2864/Film_Provokes_Action_Toward/

Sheila Musaji, “Will the Wiesenthal Center Do the Right Thing About the Museum of ‘Tolerance’? ” The American Muslim, April 14, 2012,http://theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/features/print/will_the_wiesenthal_center_do_the_right_thing_about_the_museum_of_tole; Richard Silverstein, “Museum of In-Tolerance Screens Muslim-Hating Film, Third Jihad,” Tikun Olam, May 21, 2009,http://www.richardsilverstein.com/tikun_olam/tag/clarion-fund/page/2/ (all accessed December 13, 2011).

[10] Gal Beckerman, “What Sheldon’s Money Buys,” Jewish Daily Forward, January 26, 2012, http://forward.com/articles/150258/what-sheldons-money-buys/(accessed August 27, 2012); Daphna Berman, “‘Obsession’ Stokes Passions, Fears and Controversy”; Anshel Pfeffer, “Adelson in Israel on a Mission for Charity, Influence,” Haaretz, August 13, 2007, http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/adelson-in-israel-on-a-mission-for-charity-influence-1.227370(accessed February 21, 2012). JTA, “Adelsons Pledge Additional $13 Million to Birthright to Reduce Waiting List,” July 17, 2012, http://www.jta.org/news/article-print/2012/07/17/3100951/adelsons-pledge-additional-13-million-to-birthright-to-reduce-waiting-list?TB_iframe=true&width=750&height=500 (accessed August 28, 2012).

[11] Clifton & Gharib, “’Iranium’ or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Military Option.”

[12] Peter Overby & Will Evans, “Some Answers on Clarion, And Still Some Questions,” NPR, October 7, 2008,http://www.npr.org/blogs/secretmoney/2008/10/clarion_answers_some_questions.html; Right Web, “Clarion Fund,” Institute for Policy Studies, last updated December 20, 2011, http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/Clarion_Fund (both accessed February 10, 2012).

[13] Justin Elliott, “Mystery of Who Funded Right-Wing ‘Radical Islam’ Campaign Deepens,” Salon, November 16, 2010,http://www.salon.com/2010/11/16/clarion_fund_obsession_dvds/; Richard Silverstein, “Barre Seid Plausibly Denies Funding ‘Obsession,’ All the While Doing Precisely That,” Tikun Olam, November 17, 2010,http://www.richardsilverstein.com/tikun_olam/2010/11/17/how-barre-seid-can-deny-funding-obsession-and-still-do-so-anyway/; Clarion Fund 2008, 990 Form, Schedule A, http://www.scribd.com/doc/37371880/Clarion-Fund-08-990 (all accessed August 28, 2012).

[14] See, for example: Wajahat Ali, Eli Clifton, Matt Duss, Lee Fang, Scott Keyes, & Faiz Shakir, Fear Inc.: The Roots of the Islamophobia Network in America, August 2011, Center for American Progress,http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2011/08/pdf/islamophobia.pdf (accessed December 12, 2011). Also Common Cause New York with New York Neighbors for American Values, Park51 and Beyond: Building Community from Controversy, November 2011, http://www.commoncause.org/atf/cf/%7BFB3C17E2-CDD1-4DF6-92BE-BD4429893665%7D/PARK%2051%20AND%20BEYOND-FINAL%20REPORT.PDF (accessed February 10, 2012); and People for the American Way, The Right Wing Playbook on Anti-Muslim Extremism, 2011,http://www.pfaw.org/sites/default/files/rwwif-muslim-playbook.pdf (accessed February 10, 2012).

[15] Ali et al, Fear Inc., 14-15.

[16] Quotes and information in this paragraph are from RightWeb, “Frank Gaffney,” August 29, 2011, http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/gaffney_frank(accessed August 29, 2012).

[17] Campus Watch, “About Campus Watch.” http://www.campus-watch.org/about.php (accessed December 12, 2011).

[18] Southern Poverty Law Center, “Intelligence Files: Pamela Geller,”http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-files/profiles/pamela-geller. Spencer Ackerman, “FBI ‘Islam 101’ Guide Depicted Muslims as 7th-Century Simpletons,” Wired, July 27, 2011, http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/07/fbi-islam-101-guide/. For an extended analysis of Spencer’s writing by a Muslim scholar that discusses how Spencer “is highly selective by relying exclusively on Muslim sources that Muslims generally consider to be extremist and unreliable,” see Dr. Robert Dickson Crane, “‘Fascist-Islamophobia’: A Case Study in Totalitarian Demonization—Part 1,” The American Muslim, October 20, 2007,http://www.theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/features/articles/fascist_islamophobia_a_case_study_in_totalitarian_demonization/0014837. Pamela Geller, “Text of Pamela Geller's Remarks at Pro-Israel Rally, NYC [stings if your name is BHO],” Free Republic, April 29, 2010,http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2503461/posts (all accessed December 13, 2011). The rally was endorsed by, among others, Stop Islamization of America; David Horowitz Freedom Center; Dr. Daniel Pipes; the Zionist Organization of America, Morton Klein, President; and Charles Jacobs, founder of The David Project.

[19] Counterterrorism & Security Education and Research Foundation, “About CTSERF,” http://www.ctserf.org/about.html; Thomas Cincotta, Manufacturing the Muslim Menace: Private Firms, Public Servants, & the Threat to Rights and Security, Political Research Associates, 2011, 44,http://www.publiceye.org/liberty/training/Muslim_Menace_Complete.pdf; Robert I. Friedman, “One Man’s Jihad,” 657. Photocopied article from Muslim Public Affairs Council, Counterproductive Counterterrorism: How Anti-Islamic Rhetoric Is Impeding America’s Homeland Security, December 2004, 18-19,http://www.civilfreedoms.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/Counterproductive-Counterterrorism.pdf (all accessed December 13, 2011).

[20] Clarion Fund, “About Clarion Fund,”http://www.radicalislam.org/content/about-clarion-fund; Clarion Fund, Obsession, “About Us: Interviewees,”http://www.obsessionthemovie.com/about_interviews.html; Iranium, “About the Iranium Interviewees,” http://www.iraniumthemovie.com/about/interviewees/ (all accessed September 14, 2012).

[21] Ali et al, Fear, Inc., 87.

[22] SourceWatch, “Brigitte Gabriel,” http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Brigitte_Gabriel (accessed December 13, 2011).

[23] Eli Clifton & Ali Gharib, “EXCLUSIVE: Class Materials from Military’s Anti-Islam Class Repeatedly Cite Islamophobic Authors,” ThinkProgress, May 14, 2012, http://thinkprogress.org/security/2012/05/14/482667/exclusive-islamophobia-network-cited-liberally-in-military-anti-islam-class-materials/(accessed May 15, 2012). Muslim Public Affairs Council, Not Qualified: Exposing the Deception behind America’s 25 Top Pseudo Experts on Islam, September 11, 2012 http://www.mpac.org/assets/docs/publications/MPAC-25-Pseudo-Experts-On-Islam.pdf (accessed September 15, 2012).

[24] Deepa Kumar, Islamophobia and the Politics of Empire (Chicago, Illinois: Haymarket Books, 2012), 6.

[25] See, for example, Philip Weiss, “In Neocons’ ‘Parallel Establishment,’ a Foundation Hides Its Israel Concerns,” Mondoweiss, January 31, 2008,http://mondoweiss.net/2008/01/when-it-comes-t.html; Laura Rozen, “The Park51 Money Trail,” Salon, September 4, 2010,http://www.politico.com/blogs/laurarozen/0910/The_Park51_money_trail.html; Kenneth P. Vogel & Giovanni Russonello, “Latest Mosque Issue: The Money Trail,” Politico, September 4, 2010,http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0910/41767_Page3.html (all accessed December 13, 2011); and Max Blumenthal, “The Great Islamophobic Crusade,” TomDispatch, December 19, 2010,http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175334/tomgram:_max_blumenthal,_the_great_fear_(accessed December 22, 2010).

[26] Blumenthal, “The Great Islamophobic Crusade.”

[27] Economic Research Institute (ERI) http://www.eri-nonprofit-salaries.com/index.cfm?FuseAction=NPO.Search; National Center for Charitable Statistics (NCCS), http://nccs.urban.org/; Guidestar, http://www2.guidestar.org/(most recently accessed August 7, 2012). See also, for the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, “Bradley Foundation Grants Given Since 2001,” Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, November 15, 2011,http://www.jsonline.com/watchdog/dataondemand/133910113.html, and Bradley Foundation, “Annual Reports,”,http://www.bradleyfdn.org/pdfs/Grants2008/08IntellectualInfrastructure.pdfhttp://www.bradleyfdn.org/annual_reports.asp (both accessed December 13, 2011).

[28] Daniel Bice, Bill Glauber, & Ben Poston, “From Local Roots, Bradley Foundation Builds Conservative Empire,” Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, November 19, 2011, http://www.jsonline.com/news/milwaukee/from-local-roots-bradley-foundation-builds-conservative-empire-k7337pb-134187368.html; and Lee Fang, “How John Birch Society Extremism Never Dies: The Fortune Behind Scott Walker’s Union-Busting Campaign,” ThinkProgress, February 21, 2011,http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/02/21/145492/zombie-johnbirch-walker/(both accessed August 20, 2012.

[29] Alan J. Lichtman, White Protestant Nation: The Rise of the American Conservative Movement (New York, New York: Atlantic Monthly Press, 2008), 305.

[30] Scaife gave the Foundation for Defense of Democracies $1,325,000. FDD has also received funding from Anchorage/Rosenwald, Becker, Berrie, Bradley, and Fairbrook. Also see Eli Clifton, “Documents Shed Light on Those Underwriting the Foundation for Defense of Democracies,” ThinkProgress, July 19, 2011, http://thinkprogress.org/security/2011/07/19/271431/fdd-donors/; RightWeb, “Foundation for Defense of Democracies,” November 16, 2011 (both accessed August 12, 2012).

[31] Donors Trust, “What is Donors Capital Fund?”https://www.donorstrust.org/dcf/about_us.htm (accessed December 13, 2011); Pam Martens, “The Far Right’s Secret Slush Fund to Keep Fear Alive,” Counterpunch, October 26, 2010, http://www.counterpunch.org/2010/10/26/the-far-right-s-secret-slush-fund-to-keep-fear-alive/ (accessed August 20, 2012).

[32] In additionon to ties mentioned in the narrative, Newton Becker of the Becker family foundations, for instance, is a founder of the AIPAC Student Program and a major AIPAC donor; and David Steinmann, president of the Rosenwald Family Fund, is a founding member of One Jerusalem, a group committed to Israel’s maintaining rule over Jerusalem; and board member of the America-Israel Friendship League.

[33] Elad Benari, “Pro-Israel Philanthropist Newton Becker Dies at 83,” Arutz Sheva, January 9, 2012,http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/151525#.UDLc9qB1475; Ken Tysiac, “CPA Exam Prep Innovator Newton D. Becker Dies at 83,” Journal of Accountancy, January 5, 2012,http://www.journalofaccountancy.com/Web/20124964.htm (both accessed August 20, 2012).

[34] ThinkProgress, “Clarion Fund Donors,” http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/clarionfundnrs.pdf?mobile=nc (accessed August 20, 2012).

[35] Max Blumenthal, “The Sugar Mama of Anti-Muslim Hate,” The Nation, June 13, 2012, http://www.thenation.com/article/168374/sugar-mama-anti-muslim-hate# (accessed June 25, 2012).

[36] Ali et al, Fear, Inc., 21.

[37] Ali et al, Fear Inc., 22.

[38] Shalom Hartman Institute, “About Us: Angelica Berrie,”http://www.hartman.org.il/About_Us_View.asp?Cat_Id=334&Cat_Type=About&Title_Cat_Name=Angelica%20Berrie; Shalom Hartman Institute, Russell Berrie Foundation,http://www.russellberriefoundation.org/initiative_jr_shalomehartman.php (both accessed December 13, 2011).

[39] Reuters, “Study: Settlements Get More State Funding than Israeli Cities,” Haaretz, July 21, 2009, http://www.haaretz.com/misc/article-print-page/study-settlements-get-more-state-funding-than-israeli-cities-1.280448?trailingPath=2.169%2C2.216%2C; “Settlement Policy Will Cause Israel to Self-Destruct,” Editorial, Haaretz, March 22, 2012, http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/settlement-policy-will-cause-israel-to-self-destruct-1.420109 (both accessed April 10, 2012).

[40] Akiva Eldar, “U.S. Tax Dollars Fund Rabbi Who Excused Killing Gentile Babies,” Haaretz, December 15, 2009, http://www.haaretz.com/misc/article-print-page/akiva-eldar-u-s-tax-dollars-fund-rabbi-who-excused-killing-gentile-babies-1.2137?trailingPath=2.169%2C2.225%2C2.239%2C (accessed December 13, 2011).

[41] Chaim Levinson & Amos Harel, “Shin Bet Urges Israeli Government to Halt Funding of West Bank Yeshiva,” Haaretz, September 27, 2011,http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/shin-bet-urges-israeli-government-to-halt-funding-of-west-bank-yeshiva-1.386892 (accessed December 13, 2011).

[42] Donald Macintyre, “Daniella Weiss: “‘The Arabs Are a Filter through which We Find Our Way to Land’,” The Independent (UK), October 12, 2008,http://groups.yahoo.com/group/IslamicNewsUpdates/message/8816 (accessed December 13, 2011). Daniella Weiss, former mayor of Kedumim and a founder of Gush Emunim, was expelled from the group because members found “her propensity for joining in often violent riots against the military and Palestinians to be too extreme”; she now mentors the “hilltop youth” or “Youth for a Greater Israel” who are militantly opposed to any removal of illegal settler outposts.

[43] Uri Blau, “U.S. Group Invests Tax-Free Millions in East Jerusalem Land,” Haaretz, August 17, 2009, http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/u-s-group-invests-tax-free-millions-in-east-jerusalem-land-1.282112; Eretz Israel Shelanu, “Campaign Launch—Friends of Gush Katif: Helping the Jewish Refugees Rebuild Their Lives,” 2006, http://www.eish-l.org/gush-katif-campaign.php (both accessed December 13, 2011).

[44] Tovah Lazaroff, “PM: Ariel Is the ‘Capital of Samaria,” Jerusalem Post, January 29, 2010, http://www.jpost.com/LandedPages/PrintArticle.aspx?id=167225# (accessed December 13, 2011).

[45] B’Tselem, “Ariel Settlement Fact Sheet,” August 30, 2010; updated July 17, 2012,http://www.btselem.org/settlements/20100830_facts_on_the_settlement_of_ariel(accessed August 20, 2012).

[46] Philip Weiss, “Producer of ‘Accidental Husband’ and Other Upstanding Jews Linked to Fabric Store Outfit that Funds Settler Militias,” Mondoweiss, December 13, 2008, http://mondoweiss.net/2008/12/philanthropistmovie-producer-neil-kadisha-is-linked-to-fabric-store-outfit-that-funds-settler-militi.html (accessed December 13, 2011).

[47] Matthew Duss, “Some Zionist Groups Stoke Fear of Islam for Political Gain,” Jewish Daily Forward, September 22, 2010,http://forward.com/articles/131502/some-zionist-groups-stoke-fear-of-islam-for-politi/ (accessed August 22, 2012).

[48] Blumenthal, “The Great Islamophobic Crusade.”

[49] Hillel, “Partner Agencies: The David Project,”http://www.hillel.org/hillelapps2/partners/partner.aspx?agencyid=18105; Hillel, “About Hillel,” http://www.hillel.org/about/default (both accessed September 14, 2012).

[50] Naomi Zeveloff, “JCPA Pressured to Push Title VI Fight,” Jewish Daily Forward, May 3, 2012, http://forward.com/articles/155685/jcpa-pressured-to-push-title-vi-fight/?p=all; Zeveloff, “Title VI Resolution Invokes First Amendment,” Jewish Daily Forward, May 7, 2012, http://forward.com/articles/155860/title-vi-resolution-invokes-first-amendment/ (both accessed August 30, 2012).

[51] Israel Campus Beat, “Who We Are,”http://israelcampusbeat.org/home/about/staff.aspx (accessed September 23, 2012).

[52] Zionist Organization of America (ZOA), “About,”http://www.zoa.org/content/about_us.asp (accessed December 13, 2011).

[53] ZOA National President Morton Klein & Susan B. Tuchman, Director of the ZOA’s Center for Law and Justice, quoted in “ZOA Praises UC President Yudof For Urging Jewish Leaders To ‘Hold Our Feet To The Fire’ On Campus Anti-Semitism,” ZOA press release, August 4, 2010,http://www.zoa.org/sitedocuments/pressrelease_view.asp?pressreleaseID=1916(accessed December 13, 2011).

[54] Linda Milazzo, “Jewish Federation Puts Kibosh on Extremist Pamela Geller,” Huffington Post, June 25, 2012, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/linda-milazzo/pamela-geller-speech-cancelled_b_1623958; CAIR, “Interfaith Coalition Decries Hate Group Leader's Appearance at L.A. Jewish Federation,” press release, June 23, 2012, http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/cair-interfaith-coalition-decries-hate-group-leaders-appearance-at-la-jewish-federation-160160915.html (both accessed June 26, 2012).

[55] J. Staff, “Jewish Groups Rip Bus Ads that Call Israel’s Enemies ‘Savages,’” j. weekly, August 16, 2012,http://www.jweekly.com/includes/print/66146/article/jewish-groups-rip-bus-ad-that-calls-israels-enemies-savage/ (accessed September 9, 2012); Jorge Rivas, “New Yorkers Tag Racist ‘Savage’ Jihad Subway Ads,” Colorlines, September 25, 2012,http://colorlines.com/archives/2012/09/new_yorkers_tag_racist_savage_jihad_subway_ads.html(accessed September 26, 2012).

[56] Israel Policy Forum, “Morton A. Klein,”http://www.israelpolicyforum.org/users/morton-klein (accessed December 13, 2011).

[57] Jamie Glazov, “See No Anti-Semitism, Hear No Anti-Semitism” (interview with Charles Jacobs), FrontPage Magazine, March 1, 2010,http://frontpagemag.com/2010/jamie-glazov/see-no-anti-semitism-hear-no-anti-semitism/ (accessed December 13, 2011);

[58] Quotation about Fairbrook from Blumenthal, “The Great Islamophobic Crusade.” For information about the Boston anti-Muslim campaign, see, for example, “Islamic Society of Boston Cultural Center—Timeline,” The Pluralism Project at Harvard University, n.d.,http://pluralism.org/files/wrgb/islam/ISBCC_Controversy_Timeline.pdf; “Damning Evidence against the David Project,” Islamic Society of Boston press release, Scoop Independent News, May 9, 2007,http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/WO0705/S00149.htm; Cecilie Surasky, “Campaign to Stop Mosque in Boston: The Islamic Society of Boston Drops Defamation Lawsuit against Opponents of Mosque, Construction to Proceed,” MuzzleWatch, June 4, 2007,http://www.muzzlewatch.com/2007/06/04/campaign-to-stop-mosque-in-bostonthe-islamic-society-of-boston-drops-lawsuit-construction-will-proce/ (all accessed December 30, 2011).

[59] Douglas M. Bloomfield, “Change the Policy, or Change the Subject?,” New Jersey News, July 9, 2009,http://njjewishnews.com/njjn.com/070909/opedChangePolicy.html; Gilad Halpern, “Israel Advocacy Group Calls Obama Settlement Policy ‘Ethnic Cleansing,’” Haaretz, August 24, 2009, http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/israel-advocacy-group-calls-obama-settlement-policy-ethnic-cleansing-1.282540(accessed September 12, 2012).

[60] Eric Fingerhut, “TIP: No More ‘Ethnic Cleansing,’” JTA, August 24, 2009,http://blogs.jta.org/politics/article/2009/08/24/1007435/tip-no-more-ethnic-cleansing (accessed September 12, 2012);

[61] Amy Gardner & Philip Rucker, “Gingrich Calls Palestinians an ‘Invented’ People,” Washington Post, December 9, 2011,http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/gingrich-calls-palestinians-an-invented-people/2011/12/09/gIQAlibCjO_story.html (accessed February 28, 2012); The Israel Project, “Newt Gingrich and the Palestinian Culture of Hate,” press release, December 14, 2011,http://www.theisraelproject.org/site/apps/nlnet/content3.aspx?c=ewJXKcOUJlIaG&b=7808887&ct=11550601#.UDYtTKB1474 (both accessed August 20, 2012).

[62] Nathan Guttman, “Ex-AIPAC Flack to Head The Israel Project,” Jewish Daily Forward, August 22, 2012, http://forward.com/articles/161458/ex-aipac-flack-to-head-the-israel-project/?p=all (accessed September 12, 2012).

[63] Guttman, “Ex-AIPAC Flack to Head The Israel Project.”

[64] ]The Israel Project, “Board of Advisers,”http://www.theisraelproject.org/site/c.ewJXKcOUJlIaG/b.7716889/k.9C55/Board_Advisors.htm(accessed September 12, 2012).

[65] Institute for Jewish and Community Research, “Projects: Anti-Semitism and Anti-Israelism,” http://jewishresearch.org/projects_security.htm (accessed February 22, 2012); Peter Schmidt, “Education Dept. Investigates Complaint of Anti-Semitism at UC-Santa Cruz,” The Chronicle of Higher Education, March 15, 2011, http://chronicle.com/article/Education-Dept-Investigates/126742/ (accessed December 13, 2011).

[66] Quotations are from JTA, “JCPA Endorses Title VI as Campus Tool,” May 8, 2012, http://www.jta.org/news/article/2012/05/08/3095021/jcpa-endorses-title-vi-as-campus-tool (accessed August 30, 2012). See also Naomi Zeveloff, “JCPA Pressured to Push Title VI Fight”; Naomi Zeveloff, “Title VI Resolution Invokes First Amendment”; Naomi Zeveloff, “JCPA Wades into Debate on Use of Civil Rights Law,” Jewish Daily Forward, October 14, 2011,http://www.forward.com/articles/144334/ (accessed February 22, 2012); Zeveloff, “JCPA Delays Action on Campus Civil Rights,” Jewish Daily Forward, October 25, 2011, http://www.forward.com/articles/144888/ (accessed August 30, 2012).

[67] Nathan Guttman, “StandWithUs Draws Line on Israel,” Jewish Daily Forward, November 27, 2011, http://www.forward.com/articles/146821/?p=all; Richard Silverstein, “Israeli Consul, StandWithUs Engage in Lawfare Against Olympia Food Coop, Tikun Olam, September 10, 2011,http://www.richardsilverstein.com/tikun_olam/2011/09/10/israeli-consul-standwithus-engage-in-lawfare-against-olympia-food-coop/; Ali Abunimah, “Uncovered: Israel’s Role in Planned US Lawsuit to Fight BDS,” The Electronic Intifada,” September 6, 2011, http://electronicintifada.net/content/uncovered-israels-role-planned-us-lawsuit-fight-bds/10350 (all accessed February 21, 2012).

[68] Jeremy Pawloski, “Judge Tosses Lawsuit to Overturn Co-op’s Boycott,” The Olympian, February 27, 2012, http://www.theolympian.com/2012/02/27/v-print/2007774/judge-tosses-lawsuit-that-sought.html; JTA, “Anti-Boycott Lawsuit Against Food Co-op Is Dismissed,” February 28, 2012,http://www.jta.org/news/article/2012/02/28/3091881/anti-boycott-lawsuit-against-food-co-op-declared-illegal; (both accessed March 7, 2012); Center for Constitutional Rights, “Plaintiffs in Olympia Food Co-op SLAPP Case Assessed Penalty, Costs and Attorneys’ Fees for Suit over Boycott of Israeli Goods,” press release, July 12, 2012, http://ccrjustice.org/newsroom/press-releases/plaintiffs-olympia-food-co-op-slapp-case-assessed-penalty,-costs-and-attorneys%E2%80%99-fees-suit-over-boyco (accessed August 25, 2012).

[69] Cecilie Surasky, “Out of Answers on How to Confront BDS, StandWithUs Comic Book Portrays Palestinians (and Allies) as Vermin, Reminiscent of Nazi Propaganda,” Mondoweiss, January 13, 2011,http://mondoweiss.net/2011/01/out-of-answers-on-how-to-confront-bds-standwithus-comic-book-portrays-palestinians-and-allies-as-vermin-reminiscent-of-nazi-propaganda.html (accessed February 21, 2012).

[70] SourceWatch, “Brigitte Gabriel,” http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Brigitte_Gabriel (accessed December 13, 2011).

[71] Jewish Policy Center, “Board,” http://www.jewishpolicycenter.org/board.php(accessed August 5, 2012). Among those listed as on the Board of Fellows are Midge Decter, David Frum, David Horowitz, the late Irving Kristol, Daniel Pipes, John Podhoretz, and Norman Podhoretz.

[72] Jeff Zeleny, “Mogul’s Latest Foray Courts Votes for the GOP,” New York Times, July 25, 2012, http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/25/us/politics/adelsons-latest-foray-courts-jews-for-the-gop.html?pagewanted=all (accessed August 20, 2012).

[73] Jewish Policy Center, “About the Jewish Policy Center,”http://www.jewishpolicycenter.org/about.php (accessed August 5, 2012).

[74] Jewish Policy Center “About the Jewish Policy Center.”

[75] Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs, “About JINSA’s Generals and Admirals Trip to Israel,” http://www.jinsa.org/programs/about-jinsas-generals-and-admirals-trip-israel#.UED0SiL8Lmk; Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs, “About the Military Academies Program,” http://www.jinsa.org/programs/military-academies-program/military-academies-program-israel/about-military-academies-progr#.UED0zyL8Lmk (both accessed August 30, 2012).

[76] Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs, “Empowering Law Enforcement/Protecting America,”http://www.jinsa.org/files/LEEPbookletforweb.pdf (accessed August 30, 2012).

[77] Philip Weiss, “JINSA Whips Clash-of-Civilization Pony as It Fades in the Stretch,” Mondoweiss, February 23, 2011, http://mondoweiss.net/2011/02/jinsa-whips-clash-of-civilizations-pony-as-it-fades-in-the-stretch.html; and “Disconnect, Part III: The West,” JINSA Report #1064, February 21, 2011,http://www.jinsa.org/print/2218 (both accessed December 13, 2011).

[78] Blumenthal, “The Sugar Mama of Anti-Muslim Hate.”

[79] Jane Hunter & Rabbi Haim Dov Beliak, “Pushback on Armageddon,” Jews on First!, March 7, 2007,http://www.jewsonfirst.org/07a/pushback_armageddon.html; Sarah Posner, “Christian Zionists, Bibi, Obama, and Armageddon, Religion Dispatches, May 26, 2011,http://www.religiondispatches.org/dispatches/sarahposner/4673/christian_zionists,_bibi,_obama,_and_armageddon/; Sarah Posner, “Evangelicals Call Christian Zionist Uncritical ‘Support’ for Israel ‘Appalling’ and ‘Intolerable,’” Religion Dispatches, September 20, 2011,http://www.religiondispatches.org/dispatches/sarahposner/5139/evangelicals_call_christian_zionist_uncritical_%22support%22_for_israel_%22appalling%22_and_%22intolerable%22(all accessed March 20, 2012).

[80] Interview with Dr. Jean Hardisty, Founder and President Emerita of Political Research Associates, September 22, 2012.

[81] Max Blumenthal, “AIPAC Cheers an Anti-Semitic Holocaust Revisionist (and Abe Foxman Approves),” Huffington Post, March 14, 2007,http://www.huffingtonpost.com/max-blumenthal/aipac-cheers-an-antisemit_b_43377.html; Sam Stein, “McCain Backer Hagee Said Hitler Was Fulfilling God’s Will,” Huffington Post, May 29, 2008,http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/21/mccain-backer-hagee-said_n_102892.html (both accessed September 6, 2012).

[82] Jews on First, “Republican Jewish Coalition Responsible for Mailing Anti-Muslim Film,” February 15, 2007,http://www.jewsonfirst.org/08a/cufi_obsession.html (accessed December 13, 2011).

[83] Jews on First, “Republican Jewish Coalition Responsible for Mailing Anti-Muslim Film.”

[84] Hillel served as the fiscal conduit for the Berrie grant of $100,000 to the Israel Coalition on Campus.

[85] Rahel Musleah, “Defending Israel on Campus,” Hadassah Magazine, April 11, 2011, http://Israelcc.org/docs/icc-in-the-news/hadassah-magazine--defending-Israel-on-campus.pdf (accessed December 13, 2011).

[86] Kiera Feldman, “The Romance of Birthright Israel,” The Nation, June 15, 2011, http://www.thenation.com/print/article/161460/romance-birthright-Israel(accessed December 13, 2011). According to its 2006 990 tax form, Berrie committed, but did not pay, $250,000 to Birthright in 2006 and paid it an additional $150,000. The 2007 990 tax form shows an unpaid balance of $250,000 at the end of 2007. We could not confirm payment of this amount in 2008 because Berrie did not include a list of grantee names and amounts with its 2008 990 form; the 2009 990 tax form contains no mention of the $250,000 grant to Birthright. We are reporting the $250,000 as a grant to Birthright, with this caveat.

[87] JTA, “Adelsons Pledge Additional $13 Million to Birthright to Reduce Waiting List”; Ben Harris, “Major Funding Boost for Birthright from Israel Gov’t. Ups Ante for Philanthropists,” JTA, January 10, 2011,http://www.jta.org/news/article/2011/01/10/2742490/Israel-to-increase-support-for-birthright-if-jewish-philanthropist-increase-theirs (accessed December 13, 2011). The gift by the Adelson Family Foundation was announced on the media network of the Israeli settler movement: “Elad Benari, “Adelson Foundation Gives Taglit an Extra $5 Million Boost, Arutz Sheva 7, December 1, 2011,http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/150285#.TybsiIGt3dx(accessed January 30, 2012). Feldman, “The Romance of Birthright Israel.”

[88] Raquel Rolnik, “Special Rapporteur on Adequate Housing as a Component of the Right to an Adequate Standard of Living, and on the Right to Non-Discrimination in this Context: Preliminary Remarks on the Mission to Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territory” (30 January to 12 February 2012),” Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR)http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=11815&LangID=E; Human Rights Watch, “Israel: New Laws Marginalize Palestinian Arab Citizens,” March 30, 2011,http://www.hrw.org/news/2011/03/30/israel-new-laws-marginalize-palestinian-arab-citizens (both accessed April 24, 2012). Nefesh B’Nefesh, “Nefesh B'Nefesh and Russell Berrie Foundation Launch $10 Million 'Go North' Aliyah’ Project,” press release, December 9, [2009], http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/nefesh-bnefesh-and-russell-berrie-foundation-launch-10-million-go-north-aliyah-project-65355942.html; Adam Horowitz, “Is This ‘Natural Growth’? American Immigrants Flood Israeli Settlements, Backed by Israeli Government,” Mondoweiss, July 8, 2009, http://mondoweiss.net/2009/07/is-this-natural-growth-non-profits-help-american-jews-move-to-the-settlements.html; “Christian Zionist Hagee Gives Nearly $1 Million to Nefesh B’Nefesh,” The New York Jewish Week, November 3, 2011,http://www.thejewishweek.com/news/breaking_news/christian_zionist_hagee_gives_nearly_1_million_nefesh_bnefesh(all accessed December 13, 2011).

[89] Barak Ravid, “Think Tank: Israel Faces Global Delegitimation Campaign,” Haaretz, February 12, 2010, http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/think-tank-israel-faces-global-delegitimization-campaign-1.265967; Adam Horowitz, “Reut Institute: The Boycott Law Helps Israel’s Critics (and Alienates American Jews),” Mondoweiss, August 2, 2011, http://mondoweiss.net/2011/08/reut-institute-the-boycott-law-helps-israels-critics-and-alienates-american-jews.html(both accessed April 24, 2012).

Elly Bulkin is a writer and editor. Donna Nevel is a community psychologist and educator. Both were founding members of Jews Against Islamophobia and steering committee members of Communities in Support of the Khalil Gibran International Academy. They can be reached at challengingislamophobia@gmail.com