Posts

New York Times pushes Iran’s propaganda in its coverage of anti-government protests

The New York Times is standing with the Islamic regime in Iran and Iran proxy Hizb’Allah, which has, like the Times, “dismissed” the protests. Here the Times gives a full airing to the mullahs’ preposterous claims that foreign agents engineered the protests. There is no entity that hates America that the Times will not stand with and propagandize for, no matter how repressive. The Islamic regime now is torturing and killing its own people, solely for the crime of not wanting to live in a sharia dictatorship. That’s enough for the destroyers and saboteurs at the Times to regard them as enemies.

This unconscionable coverage epitomizes everything that is wrong with the enemedia establishment.

“Iranians, Like Their Leaders, See Foreign Hand in Protests,” by Margaret Coker, New York Times, January 3, 2018 (thanks to Amil Imani):

LONDON — Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has blamed unnamed foreign “enemies” for the antigovernment protests that have swept his country for the past week, putting the demonstrators at risk of being accused of espionage or treason.

The accusation resonates for many Iranians, whose country has long been subject to foreign interference, from the American- and British-led coup in the 1950s to more recent efforts by the United States and Israel to sabotage Iran’s nuclear program. President Trump’s public support for the protesters has only reinforced suspicions of a foreign hand at work.

While there has been no evidence that foreign governments orchestrated the protests, several countries are now trying to decide how to support a goal they share with many of the demonstrators: a less corrupt, more democratic and more open Iranian government.

The State Department urged Iran on Tuesday not to restrict access to social media services like Instagram and messaging platforms like Telegram, which the protesters have used to spread word of anti-government gatherings. It even encouraged Iranians to use virtual private networks to sidestep government censorship, advice Iranians see as interference.

Diplomats and analysts said discussions were underway in the capitals of Britain, Israel and other countries on whether or how to support the demonstrators.

American intelligence officials and Iran watchers say the protests appear to have started organically.

The demonstrations, which are widespread and amorphous, do not match the playbook that Western intelligence agencies have used to mount covert operations in Iran — namely, sustained resource-intense operations that focus on the narrowly defined and measurable goal of sabotaging the alleged nuclear weapons program, they say.

For now, they say, the evidence points to one catalyst of the unrest: widespread discontent with the government.

“You don’t need Americans or Israeli or British intelligence to convince people in Iran that there is a small ruling elite that is controlling the country’s economy and ruining it,” says Meir Javedanfar, a lecturer on Iranian studies at the Interdisciplinary Center in Herzliya, Israel.

A former American intelligence official said it was implausible that a foreign agency could organize protests in dozens of cities without the Iranian government catching wind of it beforehand. Additionally, Western spy agencies are leery of operations that rely on mass demonstrations, which have a high risk of failure and cannot be easily controlled, the official said.

“Certainly, the West doesn’t have the ground game to engage in that kind of activism, nor do Iran’s regional adversaries,” said Suzanne Maloney, the deputy director of the foreign policy program at the Brookings Institution and a former adviser to senior State Department officials on Iran.

That logic has not stopped Iranian officials from pointing fingers outside their borders.

On Wednesday, the government announced the arrest of an unidentified citizen of an unidentified European country who “had been trained by espionage organizations in Europe,” the Tasnim news agency reported.

Iran has also accused Saudi Arabia, its main regional rival, of fomenting unrest. On Tuesday, the head of Iran’s National Security Council, Ali Shamkhani, told a Lebanese television station that the Saudis were responsible for 27 percent of all anti-Iran hashtags on Twitter….

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in The Geller Report.

New York Times publishes op-ed by convicted murderer, calls him a ‘Palestinian leader’

But would the New York Times ever publish an op-ed by a foe of jihad terror who spoke honestly about the terrorists’ motivating ideology? Don’t be silly. That would be “Islamophobic.”

Marwan-Barghouti (1)

Marwan Barghouti. Photo: Reuters.

“New York Times Publishes Op-Ed by Convicted Terrorist, Describes Him as a ‘Palestinian Leader,’” by Alex Griswold, Washington Free Beacon, April 17, 2017:

The New York Times published an op-ed Monday written by a convicted terrorist, without informing readers that he is serving five life sentences in prison for helping murder five people and launch a failed suicide bombing.

The op-ed, titled “Why We Are on Hunger Strike in Israel’s Prisons,” was penned by Marwan Barghouti and appeared both online and in the print edition of the International New York Times. The Times author bio described Barghouti as “a Palestinian leader and parliamentarian.

“Having spent the last 15 years in an Israeli prison, I have been both a witness to and a victim of Israel’s illegal system of mass arbitrary arrests and ill-treatment of Palestinian prisoners,” Barghouti writes. “After exhausting all other options, I decided there was no choice but to resist these abuses by going on a hunger strike.”

Throughout the op-ed, Barghouti only vaguely alludes to the reason he is in prison.

“Israel has tried to brand us all as terrorists to legitimize its violations, including mass arbitrary arrests, torture, punitive measures, and severe restrictions,” he writes. “As part of Israel’s effort to undermine the Palestinian struggle for freedom, an Israeli court sentenced me to five life sentences and 40 years in prison in a political show trial that was denounced by international observers.”

In reality, Barghouti was sentenced in 2004 to five consecutive life sentences for masterminding a series of terrorist attacks on Israeli police and civilians, including a Greek Orthodox priest. Barghouti was also found responsible for a failed suicide bombing that ended up killing the terrorists instead.

Despite his claim of a “show trial,” Israeli judges actually acquitted Barghouti of most of the charges against him. Israeli authorities believed he was directly responsible for as many as 37 attacks, but judges ruled they lacked sufficient proof of his involvement in many of those cases.

Israeli media and American Jewish figures castigated the Times for omitting the full details of Barghouti’s activities.

“Shame on NYT for printing libelous op-ed by convicted killer Barghouti, the Palestinian Dylann Roof,” wrote former Israeli Ambassador to the United States Michael Oren. “Americans would be horrified. So are we.”….

RELATED ARTICLE: South Dakota Muslim brandishes weapons, Qur’an outside Christian conference, says “Be f**king terrified,” isn’t arrested

The Fitnaphobic ‘Establishment’ versus the ‘Dissidents’

What should those who oppose political Islam and Sharia call themselves? Some call themselves counter-Sharia or counter-jihad. We need a better name.

Look carefully at how Islam actually expands its power. It is not the Muslims who actually do the work of Islamification.

No, it is the Establishment media, schools, churches, government, and others who do the actual work. The Establishment is the near enemy and Islam is the far enemy. 

Our name needs to reflect both enemies. Since we dissent from the dogma of the Establishment and Islam, the name ‘”dissident” fulfills our needs. It also pays homage to the brave dissidents of the Soviet era.

If you agree, [let’s] start calling ourselves dissidents.

EDITORS NOTE: Dr. Warner understands that there must be resistance (i.e. Fitna) to political Islam and the “dogma of the Establishment.” The “Dissidents” talked about are those who wage Fitna against Islam and the Establishment. Those who wish to stop the dissidents from waging Fitna are the followers of Mohammed, those who adhere to political Islam, and those non-Muslim organizations (the Establishment) who defend Islam. We fully agree with Dr. Warner that the near enemy is the “Establishment” and the far enemy is Islam.

The contributors to Fitnaphobia.com are the Dissidents, those who oppose the Dissidents are the Fitnaphobes. As Dr. Warner states, “Since we dissent from the dogma of the Establishment and Islam, the name ‘dissident’ fulfills our needs.”

Fitnaphobia is defined as:

An overwhelming and unreasonable fear of forces that cause controversy, fragmentation, scandal, chaos or discord within the Muslim community, thereby disturbing social peace and order within the Ummah (the Muslim community).

Fitnaphobia is based upon Quran versus 2: 191-193, which reads:

And kill them wherever you overtake them and expel them from wherever they have expelled you, and fitnah is worse than killing. And do not fight them at al-Masjid al- Haram until they fight you there. But if they fight you, then kill them. Such is the recompense of the disbelievers.

And if they cease, then indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.

Fight them until there is no [more] fitnah and [until] worship is [acknowledged to be] for Allah . But if they cease, then there is to be no aggression except against the oppressors.

Fitnaphobia requires the killing, expelling and fighting disbelievers where ever they are found. Fitna (resistance) “is worse than killing.”