Enemedia: Qatari-bought Brookings Institution “think-tank” apologists for jihad terror

From here:

“The most influential, most quoted and most trusted think tank in the world” is bought and paid for by one of the world’s chief financiers of jihad terror.

This explains a great deal about why U.S. foreign policy and the mainstream media approach the jihad threat with so many disastrously wrongheaded assumptions.

The United States must designate Qatar a state sponsor of terrorism. Join our Stop Qatar Now coalition to call upon Western groups and individuals to stop aiding and abetting the world’s largest financier of jihad.

Sign the Petition
Visit www.stopqatarnow.com

Facebook: Stop Qatar Now
Twitter: @stopqatarnow

The Stop Qatar Now coalition is identifying and contacting companies, organizations, and individuals with significant investments and activities with and in Qatar, notifying them about Qatar’s support for jihad terror.  These letters will be sent to press outlets around the world.

“IPT Exclusive: Qatar’s Insidious Influence on the Brookings Institution,” by Steven Emerson, John Rossomando and Dave Yonkman, IPT News, October 28, 2014:

The Brookings Institution bills itself as “the most influential, most quoted and most trusted think tank in the world,” but should it be?

Brookings’ long-term relationship with the Qatari government – a notorious supporter of terror in the Middle East – casts a dark cloud over such a lofty claim to credibility.

A September New York Times exposé revealed Qatar’s status as the single largest foreign donor to the Brookings Institution. Qatar gave Brookings $14.8 million in 2013, $100,000 in 2012 and $2.9 million in 2011. In 2002, Qatar started subsidizing the Brookings outreach program to the Muslim World which has continues today. Between 2002 and 2010, Brookings never disclosed the annual amount of funds provided by the Government of Qatar.

Sources of funding should not automatically discredit an organization, but critical facts and claims about Brookings should be examined in light of them, starting with a harsh indictment by a former scholar.

The Investigative Project on Terrorism has reviewed the proceedings of 12 annual conferences co-sponsored by Brookings and the government of Qatar comprising more than 125 speeches, interviews, lectures and symposia; a dozen Brookings-based programs that were linked to the Qatari financed outreach to the Muslim world; and analyzed 27 papers sponsored and issued by the Brookings Institution and scholars based in Washington and at the Brookings Doha Center since 2002. Our review, which will be detailed in a four-part series beginning with this story, finds an organization that routinely hosts Islamists who justify terrorist attacks against Israeli civilians and American troops, who advocate blasphemy laws which would criminalize criticism of Islam, and which never scrutinizes or criticizes the government of Qatar, its largest benefactor.

“[T]there was a no-go zone when it came to criticizing the Qatari government,” Saleem Ali, who served as a visiting fellow at the Brookings Doha Center in Qatar in 2009, told the New York Times.

“If a member of Congress is using the Brookings reports, they should be aware — they are not getting the full story. They may not be getting a false story, but they are not getting the full story.” Ali noted that he had been told during his job interview that taking positions critical of the Qatari government in papers would not be allowed, a claim Brookings vigorously denies.

“Our scholars, in Doha and elsewhere, have a long record of objective, independent analysis of regional affairs, including critical analysis of the policies of Qatar and other governments in the region,” Brookings President Strobe Talbott said in response to the Times story.

Unfortunately for Talbott, Qatar’s own Ministry of Foreign Affairs openly acknowledges that the partnership gives Qatar exactly what it wants: a public-relations outlet that projects “the bright image of Qatar in the international media, especially the American ones,” a statement announcing a 2012 memorandum of understanding with Brookings said.

Indeed, their close collaboration stretches back more than a decade.

After Islamist terrorists flew planes into the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and a field in Shanksville, Pa. on September 11, 2001, the Brookings Institution looked to Qatar to answer the question, “Why do they hate us?”

Former Qatari emir, Sheik Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani answered Brookings’ call in 2002, providing the think tank with the necessary seed money and resources to initiate its engagement with the Islamic world.

The alliance culminated with the 2002 Doha Conference on U.S. Relations with the Islamic World, co-sponsored by the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution and Qatar. Qatar underwrote the conference’s cost.

Ambassador Martin Indyk, who headed the Saban Center at the time, and other Brookings leaders noted their desire to “build strong bridges of friendship” and avoid a “clash of civilizations.”

Indyk took a leave of absence from Brookings in 2013 and the first half of 2014 to serve as President Obama’s envoy for the Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiations. Indyk placed excessive blame on Israel for their failure.

At an April 2013 Brookings forum in Washington, Indyk mentioned that he and then Qatari Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Hamad bin Jassim bin Jabr al-Thani, a key player in Qatar’s engagement with Brookings, had remained friends for “two decades.” This relationship dates to when Indyk served as special assistant to President Clinton and senior director for Near East and South Asian affairs at the National Security Council.

Indyk noted that he approached the sheik after the 9/11 attacks, informing him that Brookings planned to launch a project focused on American engagement with the Islamic world.

“And he said immediately, ‘I will support it, but you have to do the conference in Doha.’ And I said, ‘Doha, well that sounds like an interesting idea,’” Indyk said at the 2013 forum. “Three years into that, he suddenly then told me we want to have a Brookings in Doha. And I said, ‘Well, okay, we’ll have a Brookings in Doha, too,’ and we ended up with the Brookings Doha Center” (BDC), in 2008.”

Brookings’ Qatar-based scholars see their host country with rosy spectacles, ignoring the emirate’s numerous terror ties.

Sultan Barakat, research director at the Brookings Doha Center (BDC), portrayed Qatar as an emerging peacemaker in the Muslim world and as a force for good in a 2012 report titled, “The Qatari Spring: Qatar’s Emerging Role In Peacemaking.”

“… [D]uring the Arab Spring, Qatar has emerged as a ‘reformer’; that is, as a vocal and progressive leader of modern Arab nations, with the willingness and the capacity to utilize a broad range of both hard- and soft-power initiatives to achieve its foreign policy goals,” Barakat wrote.

Highlighting Qatar as a regional peacemaker seems strange in the light of its longstanding support for Hamas and allegations that its leaders aided al-Qaida in the past. Cables released by Wikileaks and other U.S. government documents demonstrate these connections proved disturbing to American policymakers.

“Qatar’s overall level of [counter-terrorism] cooperation with the U.S. is considered the worst in the region,” a top level U.S. State Department official wrote in a secret Dec. 30, 2009 State Department cable. “Al-Qaida, the Taliban, UN-1267 listed LeT (Pakistan’s Lakshar- e-Taiba), and other terrorist groups exploit Qatar as a fundraising locale.”

The official also noted that Qatar’s security services fail to act against known terrorists because the Gulf state feared terrorist reprisals “out of concern for appearing to be aligned with the U.S.” Another 2008 State Department cable noted that Qatar’s government “has often been unwilling to cooperate on designations of certain terrorist financiers.”

Qatar’s royal family has a long history of harboring terrorists. Former Minister of Islamic Affairs Sheikh Abdallah bin Khalid bin Hamad al-Thani, a member of the royal family, personally invited 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed to relocate his family from Pakistan to the emirate during the 1990s, according to the 9/11 Commission Report. Mohammed accepted a position as project engineer with the Qatari Ministry of Electricity and Water which he held until 1996, when he fled back to Pakistan to evade capture by the United States.

Mohammed dedicated much of his considerable travel while working for the ministry to terrorist activity.

Qatar Charity, formerly the Qatar Charitable Society and currently headed by Hamad bin Nasser al-Thani, a member of Qatari royal family, demonstrates a lingering link between Qatar and terror financing.

Russia’s interior minister accused Qatar Charitable Society of funneling money to Chechen jihadist groups in 1999. Al-Thani responded to the accusation in a 1999 interview with Al-Jazeera, saying his government would not interfere with the funding because the Russian actions in Chechnya were “painful for us as Qatari, Arab, or Muslim citizens.”

Qatar Charitable Society played a key role in financing the 1998 bombings of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, according to the U.S. government.

Recent reports suggest the charity’s connection with al-Qaida persists. Maliweb, a U.S.-based independent news source, accused Qatar Charity of significantly financing “the terrorists in northern Mali operations.” French military intelligence reports accused Qatar of funding Ansar Dine – a group that works closely with al-Qaida in the Islamic Maghreb – and MUJAO in Mali at the time of France’s January 2013 intervention.

U.S. court documents note additional ties between Qatar Charity and al-Qaida dating back to the 1990s. Osama bin Laden complained to an al-Qaida member following a failed 1995 assassination attempt against former Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak that the then-Qatar Charitable Society funds had been spent in the operation. Consequently, the terror mastermind became concerned that his ability to exploit charities for al-Qaida’s ends would be compromised.

Qatar also funded the Ahfad al-Rasoul Brigade in Syria, which engaged in joint operations with Jabhat al-Nusra, al-Qaida’s Syrian affiliate.

Qatar played a similar role in Libya where it has openly funded and armed jihadists. IHS Jane’s Defence Weekly found that Qatar sent a C-17 cargo plane to provide arms to a militia loyal to Abdelhakim Belhadj, a Libyan warlord who fought alongside Osama bin Laden in Tora Bora in 2001 and was in touch with the leader of the 2004 Madrid train bombing.

Brookings scholar Bruce Reidel openly acknowledged in a Dec. 3, 2012 piece published in The Daily Beast that Syria’s al-Qaida branch benefitted from arms supplied by Qatar.

In a separate Aug. 28, 2013 column in Foreign Policy magazine titled, “The Qatar problem,” Brookings scholar Jeremy Shapiro observed that Qatar had undermined “U.S. efforts to isolate and delegitimize Hamas.” Shapiro laid blame for Qatar’s misbehavior at the feet of American policymakers. Yet he argued that the U.S. should not “oppose Qatar at every turn” and that it should “thus should seek to get the best deal on every transaction” with the emirate, which he classed as neither a friend nor a foe of the United States.

However, such observations have not translated into public criticism of Qatar or recommendations that the emirate alter its stances by Indyk, Talbott or other top people who been involved in managing Brookings’ partnership with Qatar. They also have not brought about any public talk of reassessing Brookings relationship with the emirate.

The think tank denies that Qatari money and the involvement of a senior member of the emirate’s royal family in its BDC translates into subservience to Qatar’s foreign policy objectives.

“Brookings is an independent research institution, none of whose funders are able to determine its research projects,” Indyk said after the New York Times story. “I hope nobody really believes that I cashed a check for $14.8 million dollars, which is what’s going around in right-wing Jewish circles. We should all take a deep breath about some of these lurid, scandalous stories.”

The figure Indyk cites stems from Brookings Foreign Government Disclosure. The nearby United Arab Emirates ranked a distant second among foreign government donors with a $3 million donation in 2010 and another $3 million in 2012.

Qatari involvement in Brookings goes beyond conventional donor relations, evidenced by Sheik Hamad bin Jassim bin Jabr Thani’s appointment as chairman of the BDC’s board of advisers.

Even if Qatar exerts no overt control over Brookings’ activities and policy positions, partnering with Qatar to discuss bridge-building with the Islamic world following 9/11 appears peculiar considering the oil-rich emirate’s established ties with Islamic extremist groups and individuals at the time of the attacks.

Heritage Foundation scholar James Phillips slammed Brookings’ cooperation with Qatar in comments to the Investigative Project on Terrorism.

“Qatar finances foreign entities for a reason: to advance its own foreign policy goals, which entail working closely with Islamist ideologues to empower Sunni Arab movements, including Hamas,” Phillips said. “By accepting Qatar’s money, Brookings risks appearing to be a tool of Qatar and unfortunately could help to legitimize such Islamist groups in the West.

“The implicit quid pro quo inherent in accepting money from foreign governments is one reason that the Heritage Foundation does not accept funding from foreign governments, which often attach strings to their donations, or even from the U.S. government.”

Despite denials from both Talbott and Indyk, numerous examples illustrate how Brookings’ pro-Qatar bias manifests itself, not always in what its Qatar-based scholars say, but in what they omit. A review of Brookings studies mentioning Qatar finds a consistent description of the emirate as a force for peace; complimenting its commitment to democracy and human rights; and education.

Even worse, Brookings reports gloss over the harsh realities of jihad terror and Islamism, instead recommending that the U.S. reach out to and cooperate with Islamist and jihadist groups.

Brookings calls for U.S. rapprochement with al-Qaida-linked group

In a January Foreign Policy magazine piece, Brookings scholars Will McCants, Michael Doran and Clint Watts urged the Obama administration against classifying Ahrar al-Sham, an organization backed by Turkey and Qatar and linked to al-Qaida, as a terror organization. Ahrar al-Sham founder Mohamed Bahiaiah, aka Abu Khalid al-Suri, was a senior al-Qaida operative, and the group routinely fights alongside Jabhat al-Nusra and the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), both of which were affiliated with al-Qaida at the time.

Al-Qaida leaders mourned the Islamic State’s killing of Ahrar al-Sham’s top leadership in September on their Twitter accounts.

“The al Qaeda of yesterday is gone. What is left is a collection of many different splinter organizations, some of which have their own – and profoundly local – agendas. The U.S. response to each should be, as Obama put it, ‘defined and specific enough that it doesn’t lead us to think that any horrible actions that take place around the world that are motivated in part by an extremist Islamic ideology are a direct threat to us or something that we have to wade into,’” the Brookings scholars wrote.

They argued that U.S. policymakers required “flexibility” in dealing with Ahrar al-Sham because it stood as a lesser of two evils when compared to the greater threat posed by ISIS.

“The Islamic Front, including Ahrar al-Sham, represents the best hope in Syria for defeating ISIS,” the article said. “[D]esignating Ahrar al-Sham as a terrorist group would destroy what little chance the United States has of building relationships with the other militias in the Islamic Front.”

Thus far, the Obama administration has not designated Ahrar al-Sham as a terrorist group despite its intimate ties to al-Qaida.

An October 2013 report by Human Rights Watch (HRW) accused Ahrar al-Sham of war crimes….

FacebookTwitterLinkedInDeliciousDiggBlogger PostBookmark/FavoritesEmailPinterestRedditTumblrStumbleUponPrint

There Are 13 Comments

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. john spielman

    our oil money at work for us- NOT!
    just more academic WHORES the likes John Esposito!

  2. CogitoErgoSum

    “After Islamist terrorists flew planes into the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and a field in Shanksville, Pa. on September 11, 2001, the Brookings Institution looked to Qatar to answer the question, “Why do they hate us?””

    They looked to Qatar for the answer? Why didn’t they look to the Quran? The answer’s there to see, same as it’s always been, same as it will always be … for those who wish to see it. How much does a copy of the Quran cost?

  3. Jaladhi

    It is not just the Brookings Institution but several of the prestigious universities that have departments of Islamic or ME studies and are funded by Saudi Arabia, or Qatar an other ME oil-gas flush countries are also guilty of being Islamic apologists. These institutions are just whores for Muslim/Islamic countries. They can never tell the truth about Islam and Muslims and always are in the forefront of defending Islami/Muslims terror acts by saying those doing such acts are not acting according Islam and therefore not Muslims. In other words they deny what is written in Quran – just like those so called “moderate Muslims!! Liars are all of the!!

    This is just laughable, even a six year old can tell their lies that is how ridiculous they are. And they think they are the elite of the country which they maybe but they have no morals – they are just in the business of prostitution foir Islam!! After all they get a fat check from them to support themselves!!

  4. Wellington

    The problem is even larger than with a liberal think tank like the Brookings Institution. Just yesterday I was paging through a copy of Forbes Magazine, hardly a publication identified with the Left, and there within it was a full page add for Qatari Airlines, with a very beautiful stewardess in the photograph accompanying the advertisement (taqiyya in “babe form” perhaps?).

    My first thought when I came across it was this is an airline of a country which is tied-at-the hip with al-Jazeera and is a major funder of ISIS to boot. My second thought, which almost immediately followed upon my first one, was does Forbes Magazine understand what they have done? Well, if Forbes doesn’t, then shame on it. If Forbes does, then far deeper shame on it.

    Ah yes, the rot and penetration of Islam in the West is extensive—–at Brookings, at Forbes, at Georgetown University, in the Obama Administration, at or in…, at or in…, at or in…. Yes, indeed, the Age of Nonsense shows no signs of abatement. It’s still definitely in full throttle mode. Time for a Yuengling Porter (bet they don’t serve this fine brew on Qatari airlines).

  5. duh_swami

    It’s all mass cognitive dissonance…What you hear from the clever, and what you see for yourself, are antagonistic to each other. Someone is lying. It’s either your eye’s or the clever.
    If you are a seer, the clever have little effect except maybe to earn your disgust. But if you are a looker and not a seer, the clever have you cornered with word magick, and word trickery…In other words intense taqiyya. Don’t be a looker, become a seer, your own eyes are worth more than the false testimony of hundreds of the clever…Seeing is believing…

  6. “The United States must designate Qatar a state sponsor of terrorism.”

    We, the free peoples of the West, must first designate our respective governments and elites, who sold us out for a few Qatari dollars, TRAITORS. Then we’ll be able to take care of Qatar, Turkey, jihad, Islam etc.

  7. Dave J

    These self-described “scholars” are actually intellectual whores and traitors to this country. They have no moral backbone and will evidently sell themselves to the highest bidder.

    The financing of universities and institutions by Qatar, Saudi Arabia and other Islamic terror sponsors should be made ILLEGAL.

    • Wellington

      Actually, Dave J, I would keep it legal but require full, regular, unremitting disclosure of such funding. We need to keep freedom alive, which means allowing malevolence (no greater example of which is Islam) to distribute its rot, but not in any kind of undercover or unknown or subterfuge way.

      Liberty does not need to be shut down in order to preserve liberty. Besides, this is oxymoronic and counter-productive. Rather, sunlight needs to be shined upon those who abuse liberty or would even use liberty to end liberty. This, I would argue, is the best way to deal with the totalitarianism which is Islam. Allow it, just like secular fascism and Marxism, to advertise its nonsense, but just make certain that it is widely understood that it is nonsense, parasitical to the max and, in general, the stuff that fools and worse believe in.

  8. Albert Shanker

    Create a North American Federation for ALL our energy resources. This problem exists solely because of dependence on foreign oil. 100 years ago , the Mid East was the same as a thousand years ago. Then oil discovery,by the west. If the situation was reversed, the middle east countries would have killed off western civilization by now.

  9. Thomas Wells

    A New York whore with syphilis is more trustworthy than these suit swine”non profit” NGOs that exist to excrete lies and “independent ” views flashed to their teleprompter by their big brother . Since they pay no income taxes, they are your tax money at work.

  10. Emma Barnes

    The same is happening in the UK. All Cameron is doing is telling off the Emir of Qatar….

  11. Criminally negligent TREASON.

    Indict Indyk.

    Reply

Advertisements

Tags: ,

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: