Clarion Fund, the non-profit anti-Muslim group which created Obsession and Third Jihad, claims that its “educational” efforts to make the world aware of the menace of radical Islam are non-partisan. It has to do so to maintain its 501c3. But everything this outfit does is partisan. Reader Robin McLaren notes that a Phoenix newspaper said this about a local screening of the film:
Brent Lowder, a partner in Frontline Strategies LLC, represented the nonprofit Clarion Fund, which produced the film…
The Clarion Fund describes itself as a nonpartisan organization aimed at educating Americans about national security issues, particularly about the threat of radical Islam.
So who, you ask, is Front Line Strategies (the reporter likely spelled the company name wrong), which “represented” Clarion? Take a gander at their website:
Front Line Strategies was founded by Brett Doster following his widely successful performance as Executive Director of the Bush-Cheney Re-election campaign in Florida in 2004.
Ah yes, the PR firm of the guy that brought you the Florida hanging chad debacle is now marketing Third Jihad. Nothing partisan about that.
And there’s more: Lowder himself ran Rudy Guiliani’s California presidential primary campaign. He also ran Bill Simon’s unsuccessful CA. Republican primary campaign for governor. He also once worked for former Republican governor, Pete Wilson.
Guest of honor at the Third Jihad shindig was none other than token Muslim-Republican-free marketeer-libertarian Zuhdi Jasser, who is incidentally the star attraction of the film (aside from Rudy Giuliani, who is also featured prominently). Apparently, some of his local co-religionists don’t take kindly to Jasser’s views:
Jasser is not without his detractors. In 2005, the Arizona Muslim Voice newspaper published an editorial cartoon depicting Jasser as a dog dismembering and devouring another Muslim. His views have been criticized by members of his own mosque.
I keep adding incremental pieces of evidence that point to a very strong relationship between not just Clarion and Republicans, but likely the Republican Jewish Coalition (of whom Rudy is a beloved candidate btw).
Many of the journalists who’ve reported on the Clarion Fund and its anti-Islam “documentary” Obsession have wondered why the film credits listed fake names for the two producers. Yesterday we reported that the real name of one of the producers is Erik Werth. Thanks to Meg Laughlin of the St. Petersburg Times, we may have the answer. The Charlotte Observer reported the following in 1995:
Charlotte Observer (North Carolina)
August 2, 1995 Wednesday THREE EDITION
Man charged in Secret Service ruse
COLUMBIA – A former U.S. Treasury Department adviser has been charged with impersonating a Secret Service agent in order to get a airline service charge dropped, U.S. Attorney Pete Strom says.
A federal grand jury Tuesday indicted Erik Werth, 25, of Rosslyn, Va., a former policy adviser to the Treasury Department’s undersecretary for enforcement, Strom said. Assistant U.S. Attorney Erik Ruschky said the undersecretary oversees agents in the Secret Service; the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms; and the Customs Service.
The indictment accused Werth of impersonating a Secret Service agent by threatening to have an employee arrested at the Columbia airport on May 22. He caused a disturbance by demanding a waiver of a service charge for changing his plane ticket, Ruschky said. If convicted, Werth faces a maximum penalty of three years in prison and a $250,000 fine.
I can imagine why Clarion might’ve given Werth a false identity in fear that his past would damage the credibility (if it ever had any) of the film. I also find it ironic that Werth was arrested for assuming a false identity and Clarion did precisely the same thing in shielding Werth from scrutiny.
All of this skullduggery becomes all the more confusing given that the new Clarion documentary Third Jihad DOES list Werth as producer. I guess Clarion decided that they were no longer embarrassed by having someone accused of a federal crime connected to their project.
Maybe Hank Scheinkopf, Clarion’s new PR flack will have a ready explanation for this to journalists who call him asking for one. And to anyone in the Jewish community either contemplating hosting a screening of this film or attending one, I’d urge you to factor this little bit of sleaziness into your calculations.
If someone is sleazy enough to believe they can abuse their former role in the U.S. government’s national security apparatus in order to weasel out of an airline ticket fee, who knows what they wouldn’t do to smear Muslims in pursuit of a juicy story.
To any intrepid researcher who can confirm how this case was disposed I’d be grateful.
Yes, you read me right. Those crazy imams and ayatollahs want to destroy our American way of life and institute Sharia here in the U.S. of A. They plan on dismantling the Constitution and creating an Islamic state in place of our beloved republic. How do I know? Third Jihad tells me so. What’s Third Jihad? Brought to you by the Clarion Fund, the same folks who brought you Obsession. Their new film debuts October 5th. And not a moment too soon I might add, since those radical jihadis are burrowing into the American heartland as I write these words.
As reader Robin wrote, Third Jihad is “Obsession on steroids.” Right from the opening scene displaying the World Trade Center in ruins as ominous Arabic sounding music plays on the soundtrack, this film hammers you with one message and one message alone: radical Islam wants what you love and will do anything to get it.
For those of us who lived through the 1950s and remember the horrible TV shows and movies (i.e. I Married a Communist, I Was a Communist for the FBI, etc.) depicting American Communists insinuating themselves into the very fabric of American life in order to subvert and destroy it–Third Jihad will give you a sense of deja vu all over again (to quote Yogi Berra allegedly). Something there is in a human being which loves a bogeyman, someone to fear, someone who represents almost pure evil. I don’t quite understand this primeval urge that lurks within us. But it is there.
One of the MOs of the producers of Obsession and Third Jihad is to feature a “good,” moderate Muslim informant to “educate” their audience about the evils of radical Islam. In Obsession, those roles are played by faux PLO-terrorist Walid Shoebat, Nonie Darwish and Kahleel Mohammed (who has angrily disavowed the film and his participation in it).
In the new film, the “good” Muslim is played to the hilt by its “star,” one M. Zuhdi Jasser, founder of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy. He is a “devout practicing Muslim” (and he won’t let you forget that to distinguish himself from Christian-Arab Muslim haters, Shoebat and Darwish), former Navy Lieutenant Colonel, physician, and wannabe political thinker. He seems to have no special qualifications for taking on the role of analyst of political Islam, but assume it he does and with a vengeance.
To put it plain and simple, Jasser is a Muslim neocon. It’s a strange animal considering how hostile the Republican right is to Islam and Muslims. But if Jasser didn’t exist then the neocons would have to invent him (which is pretty much what they did in the case of Shoebat–or I should say that the latter re-invented himself to ingratiate himself with his neocon sponsors).
If you read Jasser carefully, he reminds me of the Log Cabin Republicans, American gays who believe that a Republican Party with no gay members is a Party that will treat gay interests even more shabbily than it does already. In other words, Jasser seems to have chosen to become a staunch Republican in order to, in his eyes, advance the Muslim agenda through the ranks of the Republican Party.
AIF’s political agenda is barely concealed radical-right Republicanism (though the group has 501c3 designation):
As United States citizens we support our American armed forces.
As United States citizens we support absolute and literal adherence to our citizenship pledge. [in case you feared Muslims as a potential fifth column]
…We will work to educate the public regarding the current threat to America of radicals who exploit Islam through militancy.
…We will work to express the consistency of the principles of Islam with economic principles of free markets and capitalism.
…We will work to promote the appreciation of the integral role of American patriotism and nationalism in the life of Muslim youth in America.
…we feel it is necessary to make a foundational position statement regarding the state of Israel. We stand in support of the existing unqualified recognition of the state of Israel
Let’s return to that AIF 501c3 designation, which requires the group not to meddle in partisan politics. Given that Jasser is clearly a neocon Republican, that would seem almost a contradiction in terms. Indeed, Jasser has himself publicly participated in the political process. In this endorsement of a far-right pro-Israel Colorado Republican legislative candidate, he strangely takes aim at the candidate’s Republican American Muslim opponent:
A brief word about Mr. Sharf’s primary opponent. Mrs. Rima Barakat Sinclair has no apparent record, prior to this election of…any traditional conservative issues. Previously, her sole political agenda seems to have been anti-Israel activism. Her candidacy seems to be more a product of Islamist politics than of ideas central to conservative American principles and activism. Sadly, candidates out of this mold, who conflate the Israeli-Palestinian crisis with their Islamic identity actually harm more than they help the genuine pluralistic advancement of American Muslims. Most Muslims are actually quite diverse in their domestic and foreign policy politics and do not accept the collectivist agenda of political Islam (Islamism).
It is certainly no accident that Sinclair’s opponent, Joshua Scharf, is a right-wing pro-Israel militant.
Lopez: Do you like what you’re hearing out of any of the presidential candidates?
Jasser: (First a necessary caveat — the following is my personal opinion only and in no way that of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy).
Yes, I think most of the Republican presidential field is much more honest than the Democrats in articulating the real stakes in this war of ideas of the free world versus the Islamists. While most of the Republican candidates are in the right anti-Islamist arena, only a few have been able to articulate it clearly enough and with enough candor to get my attention. I am far from making up my mind on a candidate yet, but am encouraged by a lot of what I see from some of the candidates.
I am most heartened by what I am hearing from Rudy Guliani’s campaign, with Governor Mitt Romney very close behind in my mind. Mayor Guliani understands the toxicity of the Saudis and their Wahhabis…He is not afraid to articulate the conflict in ideas between Western freedom and Islamist theocracy…He names our enemies by name, and is not afraid to stand for principle and substance in foreign policy over diplomatic platitudes (i.e. against the Saudis, Iran, the Muslim Brotherhood), and other Islamists.
Governor Mitt Romney’s campaign has also demonstrated a willingness to mince no words when discussing the ideologies we are facing. He identifies jihadists as our enemies and uses his important position of national and global leadership to clearly frame the debate as one between the ideology of Islamism (Caliphism, jihadism, and theocracy) versus freedom.
…John McCain’s articulation of the stakes in the Iraq war has always been very impressive, and I hope that other candidates can look to his clarity on the issue as an example of principle.
His disclaimer is a laugh since the group’s website lists him as founder and president. Only one other individual is listed on the entire website as a staff member of the group. No board members are listed (though he refers to the existence of one). So Jasser IS AIF. If Jasser is a right-wing Republican, so is AIF. Which makes a 501c3 designation problematic.
This blog post notes that the author heard Jasser speak at a Republican women’s group dinner.
If you review Jasser’s credits, he largely inhabits the right-wing media universe: he’s appeared on Fox News and Glenn Beck, and in the pages of the Washington Times and National Review. He is a member of Podhoretz-Dechter creation, the pro-Israel and neocon Committee on the Present Danger. He has spoken before the Hudson Institute. He writes for Family Security Matters, a far-right website graced also by the elegant stylings of Rachel Neuwirth, my failed libel accuser. It’s a veritable who’s who of the neocon political-media universe.
Jasser has also been attacked from within the Muslim community. Apparently, he denies Islamic clerical authority (not just radical clerics), a system built over fourteen centuries. Islam, according to Jasser, provides complete freedom to the individual Muslim to interpret Koran as he wishes. No need to grapple with ideas and analysis from generations of Islamic scholars who’ve preceded. Just do your own thing. It’s quite a wild and radical idea. Especially coming from someone who freely concedes he has no training in the field.
I hope everyone reading this will put out the word that Third Jihad is an anti-Muslim train wreck of a film. That it reeks of partisan political bias. That it has no place in any fair political discourse. Let’s put Third Jihad back in the toilet bowl where it belongs.
JTA’s Eric Fingerhut reports that after EMET’s participation in a campaign to promote the anti-Muslim documentary, Obsession, was uncovered by Inter-Press Service, and CAIR filed an FEC complaint against the project, EMET backed away as fast as its little feet would carry it. Frankly, it makes EMET and its director look quite foolish. Before I quote from the story, you should know that Clarion Fund has created a vehicle to promote Obsession called the Obsession Project:
[EMET] had agreed to write a policy paper and lead an educational outreach effort subsequent to the distribution of 28 million DVDs of the film “Obsession: Radical Islam’s War Against the West.” The DVD distribution was funded and arranged by the Clarion Fund, and EMET was not involved with that portion of the project.
EMET founder and president Sarah Stern initially told JTA on Friday that she had been taken advantage of by the group and had never spoken with Ari Morgenstern, who was quoted in press reports as speaking for EMET and the Obsession Project.
But the communications strategists for the Project, Baron Communications LLC and 30 Point Strategies, shared e-mails and phone records that showed Stern had at least four telephone conversations earlier in the week with Morgenstern. In addition, they produced an e-mail from Sept. 22 which showed Stern approving of a press release and other materials announcing EMET’s participation. Another e-mail a day later from Stern included a lengthy note backing the project’s mission and the sign-off “Soldier On!”
Stern now does acknowledge having spoken to Morgenstern and approving involvement with the project, but now says she “made a mistake” in not getting approval from EMET’s board before agreeing to became a partner.
PR flacks are supposed to be loyal to their clients, but the Obsession Project’s publicists have dumped on poor Sarah Stern like an overflowing toilet. They really have the goods on her and gave Fingerhut a great story.
What is truly bizarre about this report is that Fingerhut claims EMET was not involved with the controversial DVD distribution, yet IPS reported earlier:
…While the initial press reports about the mass distribution focused on the Clarion Fund’s financing role, it was Endowment for Middle East Truth that organised and oversaw the distribution, EMET’s spokesman, Ari Morgenstern, told IPS.
Unfortunately, Fingerhut’s report does not address this very important discrepancy or refer to the earlier IPS story. So my question is: why would Ari Morgenstern say EMET was funding the distribution and Stern deny this? Who, if anyone, is telling the truth? And an even more important question: who is the specific fatcat funding this sucker? Neither EMET nor Clarion on their own have the kind of funding to do this. The money comes directly from a private source. But who is it? I’d also like to know who is paying for the promotional work being done on behalf of the Obsession Project.
Fingerhut has unfortunately allowed an overly narrowly framed comment to enter into his reporting about the CAIR FEC complaint:
The Council on American-Islamic Relations asked the Federal Election Commission on Sept. 23 to investigate the distribution of the DVDs and whether it was intended to influence the election — even though the film includes no partisan political content.
Fingerhut here neglects important aspects of this case. That Clarion specifically endorsed McCain on its Radical Islam website. That the promotional packaging accompanying the DVD mailer specifically called on viewers to consider the message of the film when making their November election choice. That sending 28 million copies of the film to voters in swing states WAS a partisan political act. CAIR complained to the FEC not about the film per se, but rather about the film’s distribution in the context of a presidential election. This distinction seems to have escaped Fingerhut.
The Clarion Fund must be feeling some heat for their covert campaign to scare American voters into voting for John McCain by sending 28 million copies of the anti-Muslim film, Obsession to swing state voters. Will Evans of the Center for Investigative Reporting notes that Clarion has added Hank Sheinkopf to its media team. The latter is a long-time Democratic consultant who has worked for Hillary Clinton:
Clarion’s new voice is Hank Sheinkopf, a long-time Democratic consultant in New York, who worked on President Clinton’s re-election campaign. The choice of a Democratic flak is a smart move, since critics have said Clarion is covertly trying to help elect Republican McCain. That kind of active political work would violate its 501(c)(3) charity exemption.
Sheinkopf’s PR firm produced this masterpiece of doublespeak on behalf of its new client:
Obsession is the film opponents of free speech don’t want you to see. Terrorist attacks don’t distinguish between political parties- they kill everyone. America needs to know the truth about the threat without censorship.
By transforming the DVD distribution into a free speech issue they attempt to divert attention from the real issue, which is the group’s violation of its 501c3 status by injecting its partisan presence into a political campaign. It’s a bunch of gobbledygook from a long-time street fighter in New York Democratic politics.
I wonder if Hank Sheinkopf, before he accepted the hefty fee he’s undoubtedly earning from Clarion’s unnamed backers, asked which right-wing Jewish Republican is behind the film’s production and distribution. Or did Sheinkopf even care? Is it all just in a day’s work for him? Doesn’t care whether he’s flacking for Hillary or a possible Republican Jewish Coalition fatcat? Is that what they call principle in the circles Sheinkopf runs in?
I was just reviewing the site, Obsession With Hate, which provides a devastating critique of the film. It reveals that the only Islamic studies professor included among the talking heads in the film has denounced it fulsomely. Khaleel Mohammed writes:
“Sadly, it would seem…I have allowed myself to be used. I gave an interview to the makers of “obsession” wherein I explained the meaning of Jihad, and its misuse by extremists. I understood that the film would be used objectively, focusing on fanatics who seek to spread violence. I am aware that there is a disclaimer at the beginning of the film that says it is not about Islam in general, but only about extremist interpretations.
“But the material from some of the speakers gives the lie to the disclaimer: many of them are not experts, or have used the mantle of academic qualifications to purvey hate. That their alarmist drivel should be mixed with my whittled down interview proves that the intent of the film is not to educate, but to mislead. The free distribution of the film to voters in particular districts shows the political chicanery that is the motive, and the secrecy about the financing of the distribution only underlines the evil intent in circulating this vile piece of propaganda.
“Evidence seems to indicate the involvement of Aish ha-Torah in this dishonest enterprise. I find that particularly distressing, because any Jewish organization ought to realize what the film seeks to do: they demonize an entire community…This bigotry…is precisely what caused the Shoah…
“Yet — for all the nefarious intent of the distributors of the film — I must also accept culpability for allowing myself to be so used…I cannot stand by silently and allow my participation in such satanic demonization of innocents.
No doubt, Obsession’s producers will claim Mohammed has been cowed by Muslims into recanting his testimony in the film. It will allow Clarion to revert to its typical, single-minded view of Islam as a language of threats and violence. A view that it would like American voters to adopt as well when they enter the polling booth.
Speaking of demonization of innocents, Chris Rodda reports that a Dayton mosque was attacked during Ramadan prayers. Some wingnut wannabe terrorist sprayed gas into a childcare room that housed children whose parents were praying nearby. Rodda quotes a victim of the attack:
…Gas was sprayed into the room where the babies and children were being kept while their mothers prayed together their Ramadan prayers. Panicked mothers ran for their babies, crying for their children so they could flee from the gas that was burning their eyes and throats and lungs. She grabbed her youngest in her arms and grabbed the hand of her other daughter, moving with the others to exit the building and the irritating substance there.
“The paramedic said the young one was in shock, and gave her oxygen to help her breathe. The child couldn’t stop sobbing.
Is it an accident that thousands of copies of Obsession were hitting Ohio homes just as this outrage happened? After all, how does such hate originate if not with vile pieces of anti-Muslim propaganda like Obsession?
Promotional packaging for Obsession DVD (click for enlarged image)
After covering the campaign to distribute 28 million DVDs of the anti-Muslim documentary, Obsession, to sway voters to vote Republican in crucial swing states, I’ve decided to file an IRS complaint (form 13909) against the Clarion Fund, which produced the film and distributed it. There are too many subterfuges involved in the production of this film and the way that Clarion does business.
It is a 501c3 non-profit organization. That’s why the film’s packaging makes this bogus claim:
Clarion Fund is an independent, non-profit, non-partisan organization devoted to educating the public about national security issues.
501c3′s are prohibited from engaging in direct partisan political activity. Yet Radical Islam, another Clarion website, featured an endorsement of John McCain’s candidacy. It is Republican bedrock principle to frighten American voters with the bogeyman of Islamic terror. If they do, they figure they win as they have a lock on the national security vote. George Bush, Dick Cheney and now, John McCain have done this since 9/11. Similarly, Raphael Shore, the film’s producer and director of Clarion Fund, bets that any voter he can scare with this film is likely to vote Republican.
The Republican Jewish Coalition has sent out mass mailings of Obsession to various Jewish mailing lists. Right-wing evangelical groups distributed it at both national political conventions. The film’s packaging features this message:
The threat of Radical Islam is the most important issue facing us today. But it’s a topic that neither the presidential candidates nor the media are discussing openly (!). It’s our responsibility to ensure we can all make an informed decision come November.
In short, everything about this film and Clarion Fund is partisan and political. As such, the latter has clearly violated IRS regulations governing the behavior of non-profit organizations.
Further, every non-profit is required to file an IRS form 990 and make it accessible to the public. Clarion Fund acknowledges it has not done so. Gregory Ross, it’s PR flack claims it’s level of activity was not substantial enough to meet the threshold for filing a 990. I’m no expert on 501c3 regulations (though I AM a former non-profit fundraiser), but this sounds entirely bogus to me. This is another issue that the IRS should investigate as part of my complaint.
Will Evans of Truthdig writes that 501c3′s do not have to reveal their donor lists. This could be a golden reason why Shore has registered as a non-profit. He gives his donors the opportunity to make tax-deductible gifts to Clarion at the U.S. taxpayer’s expense. In the meantime, he can conceal their identity in ways that would not be possible were Clarion a different type of entity.
Finally, if anyone doubts the partisan nature of this film, the list of interviewees includes Alan Dershowitz, fake PLO terrorist Walid Shoebat, Nonie Darwish, Brigitte Gabriel, and Muslim-hater Daniel Pipes. Among the endorses with blurbs listed on the DVD are Jewish neocon Michael Medwed, an analyst from the right-wing Hudson Institute, and a professor from the U.S. Navy War College.
I’ve just discovered that CAIR has filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission against the Clarion Fund, claiming it is a front for Aish HaTorah and is shilling for the McCain campaign. CAIR believes the funding for distribution of the DVDs comes from Aish. My money is still on the RJC, but who knows.
Raphael Shore: from Aish to anti-Muslim impressario
Here’s an update on last night’s post about the dirty tricks campaign involving the circulation of 28 million DVDs of the anti-Muslim propaganda film, Obsession, in U.S. swing states. In my last post, I noted that Obsession was produced by Raphael Shore with the financial backing on an anonymous backer.
Haaretz has already reported that Sheldon Adelson personally distributes copies of Obsession to participants in the Taglit-Birthright Israel indoctrination tours he funds. Given this, plus his deep pockets support for neocon groups like Freedom’s Watch, it almost seems a no-brainer to guess that Adelson may be the sugar daddy.
The Republican Jewish Coalition has also distributed free copies of the film in promotional mailings to U.S. rabbis and other Jewish mailing lists.
Jews on First reports that Obsession has been distributed by other highly partisan neocon/Islamophobic groups:
Tom Trento, who heads www.watchobsession.org, the group that distributed the movie at the Democratic and Republican parties’ nominating conventions, told JewsOnFirst that their goal is to awaken the country…before the election so everyone can “see the insidious nature of radical Islam.” Trento said, his group’s website then directs viewers of the video to “a scorecard that shows how elected officials have voted” on terrorism-related issues so they can decide “how they can intelligently vote” in November.
The scorecard is on the website of Act for America, a group that says it has tabulated electeds’ “votes related to national security and the threat of Islamofascism.” Its Senate scorecard consistently favors Republicans over Democrats…
Brigitte Gabriel heads Act for America. In an interview last month with the New York Times about her anti-Muslim book They Must Be Stopped, Gabriel said “The moderate Muslims at this point are truly irrelevant.” The Timescalled Gabriel a “radical Islamophobe.”
Asked how he thinks the political parties compare on the issues raised by Obsession, Tom Trento said, “In my personal opinion, the Republicans seem to get it much better than the Democrats — and they get it that the problem is not a police problem, but a military problem.”
NEW EXCITING JOB OPPORTUNITIES AT AISH HATORAH
……………………..
1. ONLINE ACTIVISM FACILITATOR: NY, JERUSALEM OR HOME-BASED
The Clarion Fund – a new organization dedicated to educating people about the threat of radical Islam – is seeking to hire an Activism Facilitator for a new website-based project.
Launching in conjunction with the new documentary film “Obsession: Radical Islam’s War Against the West”, this website will serve as a resource of historical and current information about the issue, and ultimately facilitate the transfer of people’s desire to get involved into organized, concrete action…
2. “OBSESSION” WEB AND RETAIL MARKETER: JERUSALEM
The Clarion Fund is seeking to hire a web and retail marketing professional for the new film “Obsession: Radical Islam’s War Against the West.” This rewarding and exciting role requires an experienced web marketing expert with superior communication and writing skills.
Your primary responsibilities will include marketing “Obsession” over the web, which involves advertising on a variety of websites and generating links from other sites as well as promoting the film using e-groups and e-lists. You will be required to form retail deals with major stores, distributors, chains and websites for the purpose of maximizing exposure and public access to the film. You will also need to coordinate press with “Obsession’s” PR firm in the lead-up to the March 2007 launch of the film…
A Haaretz story about the film reveals Shore’s direct affiliation with Aish:
Shore, incidentally, was the director of both Aish HaTorah International and the Hasbara Fellowships, a pro-Israel advocacy group.
Aish Hatorah is making common cause with Jewish anti-Muslim activists. Several weeks ago the N.Y. Times featured a glowing article about Aish rabbis tutoring Jewish alpha male executives in the comfort of their own corporate lairs for the cool sum of $10,000+ a year. I’d urge anyone who knows such a corporate titan to point them to this post and the film to see if this is the way they’d like their donation to Aish spent. Teaching Torah is one thing and a goal almost every Jew approves of–but teaching hate? Is that something Aish wishes to be known for?
Shore also helped found the pro-Israel media watchdog, HonestReporting, which serves similar functions to advocacy groups like MEMRI, CAMERA, and the Israel Project.
The Haaretz story also notes the surreptitious funding of Obsession:
…Funding sources for the film remain hazy. Shore and director Wayne Kopping of South Africa are the only figures associated with the film willing to release their real names and appear in media interviews; the executive producer is listed as Peter Mier, while the production manager is listed as Brett Halperin.
But Mier and Halperin are just aliases, Shore says.
According to Shore, about 80 percent of the film’s $400,000 budget was provided by Mier.
I find it odd that some of America’s finest newspapers would allow themselves to disseminate propaganda of this “quality” essentially meant to bolster John McCain’s campaign. They’re sending 28-million Americans copies of a film whose producers won’t even reveal who financed their project? One has to ask why the latter are holding back? What are they afraid of? Why would a Sheldon Adelson, Michael Steinhardt or other similar Republican Jewish Coalition donor try to hide their association with this film? And why should America’s newspapers be a party to this fraud?
Joachim also reveals that besides Shore, another Clarion Fund director is Richard Green of Miami-Ft. Lauderdale.
You do the hanky-panky and you smear the other guy
That’s what it’s all about.
Yes, the right-wing pro-Israel crowd is up to its usual shenanigans I’m afraid…and going about it in their typically sly, surreptitious way. Greg Mitchell reports that the Clarion Fund, founded by Israeli-Canadian Raphael Shore, is distributing 28-million copies of the anti-Muslim propaganda film, Obsession, to voters in election swing states. This is a film that is such noxious propaganda that no major film distributor would touch it with a 10 foot pole. Until now, it’s been relegated to the university film circuit where right-wing and pro-Israel campus groups have organized screenings. Among its other subtleties, the film attempts to equate Islam with Nazism, as Mitchell writes:
The documentary showcases scenes of Muslim children being encouraged to become suicide bombers, interspersed with shots of Nazi rallies.
Raphael Shore clearly doesn’t have the funds to distribute 28 million copies of his film since one of his PR flacks acknowledged that the film was produced for less than $500,000 by a secret Sugar Daddy (I assume not Shore himself):
The film was financed by a concerned citizen who has a long standing relationship with our organization.
Therefore, one must ask who is funding this venture? If you go to the Clarion Fund site you won’t learn much. Unlike, almost every non-profit website I’ve ever visited it doesn’t list its staff or board of directors. If you visit Guidestar, which archives IRS form 990s for every non-profit in the nation, you’ll find that Guidestar oddly enough doesn’t have one on file. That’s a big IRS no-no since 990s must be available to the public and if there was one Guidestar would have a copy.
This one smells of right-wing Jewish money. I’d venture to say something connected to Aipac, Republican Jewish Coalition, Freedom’s Watch-type donors.
There is a lawyer, Eli D Greenberg, listed as Clarion Fund’s contact. He is a New York lawyer whose practice helps non-profits attain tax-deductible status. I’m wondering what kind of advice he gave to his client about this film distribution campaign since it clearly seems to skirt the edge of permissible non-profit conduct under IRS guidelines.
I’m mystified by the newspapers which have accepted advertising money from Clarion to distribute the film to their subscribers. Et tu, N.Y. Times:
New York Times Co. spokeswoman Diane McNulty about the policy on this insert. She replied:
“We believe the broad principles of freedom of the press confer on us an obligation to keep our advertising columns as open as possible. Therefore our acceptance or rejection of an advertisement does not depend on whether it coincides with our editorial positions. In fact, there are many instances when we have published opinion advertisements that run counter to the stance we take on our own editorial pages.
But tell me this, Ms. McNulty: are there many instances in which your advertising department was hoodwinked by an out and out right-wing scam to influence a presidential election via distributing a fraudulent anti-Muslim film to scare people into voting for John McCain? I’d hope the Times would re-evaluate their decision on this pronto.
Shore’s other website, Radical Islam, featured an editorial endorsing McCain for president. When an enterprising reporter pointed this out to Clarion’s PR flack, he was ‘appalled’ and promised it would be removed. But before he did, the reporter did us the favor of quoting it:
The article discusses both candidates and concludes:
“McCain’s policies seek to confront radical Islamic extremism and terrorism and roll it back while Obama’s, although intending to do the same, could in fact make the situation facing the West even worse.”
Ross said the article “crossed the line” into an endorsement of sorts and would be taken down. He added he had not been aware of the article on the site, which he said will be officially launched next week.
“I was completely appalled and taken by surprise at the article … put on our Web site. It will be taken down immediately,” Ross said. “If I had seen that article, it would never have gone up.”
That’s another big no-no: 501 c3′s don’t endorse candidates–unless they’re willing to lose their non-profit status, which hopefully they’ve just done.
In the meantime, we need to find out which Jewish donor/s are funding Obsession and this bit of electoral dirty tricks. Thanks to reader Ann of People’s Geography for alerting me to this story.
.jpg){kind=small}
mini.jpg)
