David Collier: SOAS Director – caught lying to the Jews to keep them quiet
Last week I reported on a Europal event due to take place on the SOAS campus. Europal have links to Hamas and have spread antisemitic material on a UK campus. Several Jewish organisations set up campaigns and angry members of the community sent emails to the university in protest. Eventually SOAS responded -and sent out a reassuring email from the SOAS Director. The event would go ahead but was a ‘student only’ event. There would be no Europal presence. SOAS promised they would be ‘no external speakers. The event took place and now we know the truth. SOAS has been caught lying to us.What Happened to the New York Times’ Man in Tehran?
This is the email SOAS sent out:
SOAS emailThe email is clear. This is a student only event – there will be no external speakers – and Europal are not going to be there either.
The SOAS Europal event
The event took place on Saturday. This is an image from one of the sessions.
SOAS Europal event
Speaking at the front is Shamiul Joarder. Jorder is Head of Public Affairs of Friends of Al Aqsa (FoA) – another Islamist group. For many years FoA supported the Iranian, pro-Hezbollah ‘Al Quds’ day march in London. The FoA founder Ismail Patel has spoken at the event. Patel has also recommended the writing of Roger Garaudy -a 9/11 truther and convicted Holocaust denier. Friends of Al-Aqsa has also published work by Holocaust denier Paul Eisen and antisemite Gilad Atzmon. In the following image Patel can be seen with Hamas leader Ismael Haniyeh:
Patel has openly said that Hamas ‘is not a terrorist organisation’ and fully supported the speaking tour’ of Raed Salah, who has since been found guilty of inciting terrorism. Patel himself has advocated the killing of adulterers.
The Iranian diaspora has coined a term for this kind of news management, hashtad-beest, or “80/20,” meaning that 80% of the reporting focuses on the obvious and unavoidable, including mild or implied criticism of the regime, in order to establish credibility among foreign readers. According to Iranian political activist Heshmat Alavi, “The remaining 20 percent of their published material focuses on pushing Iran’s talking points, such as justifying Zarif’s arguments, praising Soleimani as a popular figure and criticizing Iranian opposition groups.” And so the regime-friendly gaslighting produced by the Times’ man in Tehran highlighted a consistent array of topics pleasing to the ayatollahs and irritating to the U.S. administration: the Yemeni humanitarian disaster (always laid on Riyadh’s doorstep, never the Houthis’ or Iran’s), Brett Kavanaugh Bad, anti-refugee attacks in Germany, Israel bombing Hezbollah convoys in Syria (Bad), Saudi Crown Prince Muhammad bin Salman visiting the United States (Bad), Pompeo replacing Tillerson (Bad), John Bolton (Worse), Apple closing its App Store to Islamic Republic consumers (Apocalypse), and predictable logrolling between Erdbrink and Vali Nasr and Al Jazeera’s favorite Iranian-American, Yara Elmjouie.
Erdbrink deserves some credit, however. When NPR interviewed Erdbrink about the then-upcoming Our Man in Tehran release, the interviewer mentioned his longtime residency in Iran with his Iranian wife. Could he be truly objective? “If objectivity is measured by, do I see Iran exactly though a Western view? Then no,” was Erdbrink’s answer. With this artful dodge, he was admitting to being a functional hostage of the regime, and with its array of tools—granting entry visas and press credentials, revoking both at whim, banning, silencing, imprisonment, uniting or separating families, taking hostages—Tehran can dictate not only how it is covered but by whom.
What is striking here to an outsider is the value that Tehran places on intermediaries and proxies. I asked Reuel Marc Gerecht, the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies chief Iran expert, who has traveled through Iran and speaks fluent Persian, about this strategy. “I don’t think the Iranians are as strategic as many folks think,” Gerecht said. “They really are dependent upon Westerners leading on most issues. Most Westerners aren’t being led; if anything, Westerners have the rhetorical lead and Iranians follow. Ben Rhodes, Phil Gordon, Jake Sullivan, to name just a few, don’t need NIAC [National Iranian American Council] to frame arguments. As a rule, Iranian officials are pretty crude and stuck in a left-wing, Islamic, mindset of the 1970s, even if they are young. Zarif only looks good because the others are so bad, so inept with Westerners. The Islamic Republic is like Cuba: it exists in a time warp intellectually. It’s one of many reasons why it can’t evolve and reform.”
Keeping Thomas Erdbrink in limbo probably guarantees a certain level of compliance from his successor Fassihi. Why the New York Times so readily accedes to what looks from here like blackmail is another question. On Feb. 12, 2020, the Washington, D.C., think tank the Atlantic Council convoked a panel titled “Iran: Propaganda and Perception 41 Years After the Revolution,” starring, among others, its own Barbara Slavin, Farnaz Fassihi, and others. In a two-hour discussion about the rigors of reporting from Tehran, Erdbrink’s name did not come up once.
Rubin Report: Muslim On The Real Danger Of Ilhan Omar’s Agenda (Pt. 1) | Dalia al-Aqidi
Dave Rubin of The Rubin Report talks to Dalia al-Aqidi (Journalist, Republican Candidate) about why she is challenging Rep Ilhan Omar for her congressional seat in the fifth district of Minnesota. Dalia is a Muslim refugee who grew up in Iraq under Saddam Hussein. She immigrated to the US when she was 20. She shares her concerns about groups like CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) and how they worked with and groomed congresswomen Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib. She reveals how CAIR is a front for the Muslim Brotherhood and is working to train many more candidates in the same progressive mold.
This is the man who endorsed Ilhan Omar and Bernie Sanders.
— Dalia al-Aqidi (@Dalia4Congress) March 10, 2020
I urge all the Liberals to watch it. https://t.co/IlrebfwhkJ