Right Web

Tracking militarists’ efforts to influence U.S. foreign policy

Pushing Islamophobia

(Inter Press Service) A group of hardline U.S. neoconservatives and former Israeli diplomats, among others, are behind the mass distribution of Obsession, a controversial DVD...

(Inter Press Service)

A group of hardline U.S. neoconservatives and former Israeli diplomats, among others, are behind the mass distribution of Obsession, a controversial DVD that critics have denounced as Islamophobic.

The group, the Endowment for Middle East Truth (EMET), is working with the Clarion Fund, which producedthe 60-minute video and is tied closely to an Israeli organization called Aish HaTorah. The fund is distributing 28 million copies of the DVD through newspaper inserts in key electoral “swing” states—like Michigan, Ohio, and Florida—that, according to recent polling, could go either way in November’s presidential election.

According to Delaware incorporation papers, the Clarion Fund is based at the same New York address as Aish HaTorah, a self-described “apolitical” group dedicated to educating Jews about their heritage.

Critics allege that Obsession is hate propaganda that paints Muslims as violent extremists and, among other things, explicitly compares the threat posed by radical Islam to that posed by Nazi Germany in the 1930s.

At least two major metropolitan newspapers solicited to insert the paid advertisement into their product have refused to do so because of a perceived bias in the film.

“Despite the perilous state of American newspapers, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch advertising department took an ethical stand and refused to distribute the DVD of a film that for two years has troubled American Muslims," wrote reporter Tim Townsend after the Post-Dispatch rejected the ad.

While the initial press reports about the mass distribution focused on the Clarion Fund’s financing role, it was EMET that organized and oversaw the distribution, EMET’s spokesman, Ari Morgenstern, told the Inter Press Service (IPS). Morgenstern, a former press officer for the Israeli Embassy in Washington, D.C., said he contacted IPS at the Clarion Fund’s request.

EMET, according to a recent press release, is “a non-partisan, non-profit organization dedicated to policy research and analysis on democracy and the Middle East.”

According to filings made in compliance with its tax-exempt 501(c)(3) status, EMET “hosts seminars, debates and educational films featuring Middle East experts in order to educate policymakers and the public at large on the common threats facing Israel and the United States."

Morgenstern told IPS that EMET was "partnered with the Clarion Fund" on what he called the "Obsession Project," which he identified as "an initiative of EMET." He declined to name the project’s donors. A spokesman for the Clarion Fund, Gregory Ross, has also refused to name the fund’s donors.

Morgenstern also declined to specify the cost of the DVD distribution, but did say, "it costs a great deal—it’s a multimillion-dollar effort." Outside experts have estimated the cost of the operation, including reproduction and distribution, at between $15 million and $50 million.

Like hardline neoconservatives, EMET opposes any land concessions to Palestinians and takes other positions identified with Israel’s right-wing Likud Party and the “Settler Lobby” there. EMET’s website says, "We regard ourselves as ‘intellectual revolutionaries.’"

The group’s acronym, EMET, mirrors the name of a predecessor to the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, which was called Emet, meaning "truth" in Hebrew.

Two weeks ago, EMET sponsored a seminar series on Capitol Hill named for the controversial multibillionaire casino and hotel magnate Sheldon Adelson, a major donor to right-wing Zionist organizations in the United States.

EMET’s board of advisors includes a list of familiar neoconservative figures, as well as three former Israeli diplomats, including a former deputy chief of mission in Israel’s Washington embassy.

The group is headed by Sarah Stern, who began her activism on Israeli issues in opposition to the 1993 Oslo Accords between Israel and Palestinians. She worked for the hard-right Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) as its national policy coordinator from 1998 through 2004.

Notable members of EMET’s advisory board have included prominent hardline neoconservatives, including the late Jeane Kirkpatrick, onetime U.S. ambassador to the United Nations; Daniel Pipes of the Middle East Forum; and the Hudson Institute‘s Meyrav Wurmser, spouse of Vice President Dick Cheney‘s former top Middle East adviser, David Wurmser.

Other prominent neoconservative members of the board include Center for Security Policy (CSP) president Frank Gaffney; former CIA chief James Woolsey; and Heritage Foundation fellows Ariel Cohen and Nina Shea, who has also served for years on the quasi-governmental U.S. Commission for International Religious Freedom. The U.S.-born and -educated hardline deputy managing editor of the Jerusalem Post and senior fellow for Middle Eastern Affairs at Gaffney’s CSP, Caroline Glick, is also an EMET advisor.

Glick, Pipes, and Walid Shoebat, a "reformed" terrorist and EMET adviser, are featured as experts in Obsession.

Also among the listed advisors to EMET are three Israeli diplomats. Two of them, Yossi Ben Aharon and Yoram Ettinger, were among the three Israeli ambassadors whom then-Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin referred to as “the Three Musketeers” when they lobbied Washington in opposition to the Oslo accords. Indeed, Stern began her career at the behest of three unnamed Israeli diplomats who were based in Washington under Rabin’s predecessor, Yitzhak Shamir, according to EMET’s website.

Ben Aharon was the director general—effectively the chief of staff—of Shamir’s office. Ettinger was at one time the chairman of special projects, and is still listed as a contributing expert, at the Ariel Center for Policy Research, a hardline Likudist Israeli think tank that opposes the peace process.

The third Israeli ambassador, Lenny Ben-David, was appointed by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to serve as the deputy chief of mission—second in command—at the Israeli Embassy in Washington from 1997 until 2000. Ben-David had also held senior positions at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee for 25 years and is now a consultant and lobbyist.

EMET is not the only group involved in the Obsession controversy to have direct ties to Israel. The Clarion Fund has been criticized for initially denying its ties to Aish HaTorah, first disclosed publicly by an IPS investigation last year.

HonestReporting.com, an organization set up by Aish HaTorah and also a client of Ben-David, told IPS that it had aided the production of the film.

The Clarion Fund and Aish HaTorah are headed by twin Israeli-Canadian brothers Raphael and Ephraim Shore, respectively. The two groups appear to be connected, as Clarion is incorporated in Delaware to the New York offices of Aish HaTorah.

"It seems that the Clarion Fund, from what we can tell, is just a virtual organization that is a front for Aish HaTorah," Ibrahim Hooper, spokesman for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), told IPS. "They don’t have staff, they don’t have a physical address. Nothing."

Little is known about the shadowy Clarion Fund, which is listed with the New York Secretary of State’s office as a "foreign not-for-profit foundation." The group has rejected requests for information about its donors.

IPS has, however, uncovered one donor to the Clarion Fund: the Mamiye Foundation, which gave $25,000 in August 2007, according to tax filings. Four Mamiyes, Charles M., Charles D., Hyman, and Abraham, are listed as trustees on the forms.

According to filings with New York state, a contact listed for a Mamiye company is also the same man listed as a contact and counsel for the Clarion Fund: Eli D. Greenberg of the law firm Wolf, Haldenstein, Adler, Freeman and Herz.

Foreign nationals and companies, and domestic tax-exempt 501(c)(3) nonprofits, are prohibited by federal election law from attempting to sway U.S. elections at any level through either contributions to campaigns or advocacy.

Morgenstern, EMET’s spokesman, said that the DVD distribution only went to swing states because media attention is focused there, and EMET is hoping to spark a public debate about the threats posed by “radical Islam."

But CAIR has filed a complaint asking the Federal Election Commission to review the actions of the Clarion Fund both as a foreign entity and as a nonprofit. The complaint, filed by Nadhira Al-Khalili, CAIR’s legal counsel, asked that both charges be investigated.

Eli Clifton and Ali Gharib write for Inter Press Service, as does Jim Lobe, who contributed to this story. All are also contributors to PRA’s Right Web (/).

Citations

Ali Gharib and Eli Clifton, "Pushing Islamophobia" Right Web with permission from Inter Press Service (Somerville, MA: PRA, 2008). Web location:
/rw/4955.html Production Information:
Author(s): Right Web
Editor(s): Right Web
Production: Political Research Associates   IRC logo 1310 Broadway, #201, Somerville, MA   02144 | pra@publiceye.org

Share RightWeb

Featured Profiles

Bernard Lewis was a renowned historian of Islam and the Middle East who stirred controversy with his often chauvinistic attitude towards the Muslim world and his associations with high-profile neoconservatives and foreign policy hawks.


John Bolton, the controversial former U.S. ambassador to the UN and dyed-in the-wool foreign policy hawk, is President Trump’s National Security Adviser McMaster, reflecting a sharp move to the hawkish extreme by the administration.


Michael Joyce, who passed away in 2006, was once described by neoconservative guru Irving Kristol as the “godfather of modern philanthropy.”


Mike Pompeo, the Trump administration’s second secretary of state, is a long time foreign policy hawk and has led the public charge for an aggressive policy toward Iran.


Max Boot, neoconservative military historian at the Council on Foreign Relations, on Trump and Russia: “At every turn Trump is undercutting the ‘get tough on Russia’ message because he just can’t help himself, he just loves Putin too much.”


Michael Flynn is a former Trump administration National Security Advisor who was forced to step down only weeks on the job because of his controversial contacts with Russian officials before Trump took office.


Since taking office Donald Trump has revealed an erratic and extremely hawkish approach to U.S. foreign affairs, which has been marked by controversial actions like dropping out of the Iran nuclear agreement that have raised tensions across much of the world and threatened relations with key allies.


For media inquiries,
email rightwebproject@gmail.com

From the Wires

Soon after a Saudi-led coalition strike on a bus killed 40 children on August 9, a CENTCOM spokesperson stated to Vox, “We may never know if the munition [used] was one that the U.S. sold to them.”


The West has dominated the post-war narrative with its doctrine of liberal values, arguing that not only were they right in themselves but that economic success itself depended on their application. Two developments have challenged those claims. The first was the West’s own betrayal of its principles: on too many occasions the self interest of the powerful, and disdain for the victims of collateral damage, has showed through. The second dates from more recently: the growth of Chinese capitalism owes nothing to a democratic system of government, let alone liberal values.


Falsely demonizing all Muslims, their beliefs, and their institutions is exactly the wrong way to make Americans safer, because the more we scare ourselves with imaginary enemies, the harder it will be to find and protect ourselves from real ones.


Division in the ranks of the conservative movement is a critical sign that a war with Iran isn’t inevitable.


Donald Trump stole the headlines, but the declaration from the recent NATO summit suggests the odds of an unnecessary conflict are rising. Instead of inviting a dialogue, the document boasts that the Alliance has “suspended all practical civilian and military cooperation between NATO and Russia.” The fact is, NATO was a child of the Cold War, when the West believed that the Soviets were a threat. But Russia today is not the Soviet Union, and there’s no way Moscow would be stupid enough to attack a superior military force.


War with Iran may not be imminent, but neither was war with Iraq in late 2001.


Donald Trump was one of the many bets the Russians routinely place, recognizing that while most such bets will never pay off a few will, often in unpredictable ways. Trump’s actions since taking office provide the strongest evidence that this one bet is paying off handsomely for the Russians. Putin could hardly have made the script for Trump’s conduct at the recent NATO meeting any more to his liking—and any better designed to foment division and distrust within the Western alliance—than the way Trump actually behaved.


RightWeb
share