American Library Association Blames YouTube Video for Benghazi Attack; Passes Policy Silencing Prayer After Jewish Man Prays for Dead Colleagues at ALA Meeting; Does Not Support Free Speech

ALA claims Benghazi attack was
"fueled" by a YouTube video.

The American Library Association [ALA] claims a YouTube video was responsible for the Benghazi attack.  Yet the video had absolutely nothing to do with the attack.  Instead its use supports Islamist efforts to use blasphemy laws to silence the free speech of those speaking out about Islam from a different point of view than the Islamists.  ALA now evidences agreement with that anti-free speech goal.

ALA, supposedly a supporter of free speech, has in the past censored a speaker in response to complaints from Islamists and maintains a block on speech from Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch.  Now it has joined with those promoting blasphemy laws to silence free speech.  The video had nothing to do with the Benghazi attack, yet ALA calls it, "the radical anti-Islamic video that fueled the attack on the American embassy in Benghazi"?

• "Appeals Court Decision Undermines Free Speech, Misinterpret Copyright Law," by Carrie Russell, Director of the Program on Public Access to Information in the Office for Information Technology Policy (OITP), American Library Association, 14 April 2014 (hyperlinks in original, emphasis mine, grammatical errors in title and text are in original):

  Last week, the American Library Association (ALA) joined an amicus brief calling for reconsideration of a 9th circuit court decision in Garcia v. Google, case where actress Cindy Sue Garcia sued Google for not removing a YouTube video in which she appears.  Garcia appears for five seconds in “Innocence of Muslims,” the radical anti-Islamic video that fueled the attack on the American embassy in Benghazi.  The video was uploaded on YouTube, exposing Garcia to threats and hate mail.  Garcia did not know that her five second performance would be used in a controversial video.

ALA Policy Silencing Impromptu Prayer at ALA Meetings

By the way, at ALA's latest annual conference, it passed a policy silencing prayer at ALA meetings in response to a Jewish ALA member saying a quick prayer over other ALA members who had just died:

As former ALA Councilor Ruth Gordon said, "When Mr. Friedman intoned the Jewish mourner's 'Kaddish' after the sudden deaths of 2 Councilors, I was highly indignant and walked out.  It never should have been allowed and before the second incident I begged Mr. Friedman not to repeat the prayer-at least on Council floor." Source: ALA Councilor Ruth Gordon.

Anyone is free to pray at any time, anywhere.  What people are not free to do is to force others to participate in their prayers, which is what happens when one prays aloud.  If Mr. Friedman wished to offer a prayer in his own particular religious format, he has a temple or synagogue in which to do so.  An ALA meeting is not a religious service, & if Mr. Friedman wished to express his sadness over the deaths of the councilors there, he's free to do so in a non-religious way.  Source: Sherry Rhodes.

So the self-arrogated free speech police who claim it violates free speech to keep children from inappropriate material and decry "banned books" think one has free speech to "express sadness over the deaths of the councilors" but only "in a non-religious way," unless you go your own "temple or synagogue."

A single ALA member (ALA Councilor Ruth Gordon) was incensed at a Jewish prayer being said in a single ALA meeting and ALA has now banned such prayer.  The free speech police banned free speech.  Remember, ALA claims a single parent should not be allowed to "censor what others students can read" in public schools; one parent should not control an entire school.  But it is okay for one person to react to Jewish prayer and cause ALA to block religious free speech ALA wide.  Just another double standard.

It is right that ALA is not a religious institution and should not have official prayers or prayer times, but a colleague saying an impromptu prayer upon news of the death of another colleague is not official ALA prayer and ALA had no right to silence people in such a fashion.

ALA Censorship Double Standard; ALA Does Not Support Free Speech

What we see here is ALA censorship promoted by impromptu Jewish prayer while ALA promotes censorship of those who oppose radical Islam.  All while telling communities it is censorship to block porn in public libraries and censorship to keep school children from inappropriate material.

ALA supports Islamic blasphemy laws that silence free speech, censors points of view that differ from Islamist views, and silences its own members after a Jewish man makes a quick Jewish prayer at an ALA meeting out of respect for a dead colleague.  ALA does not support free speech.

URL of the page:  safelibraries.blogspot.com/2014/04/ALABlasphemy.html

On Twitter:  @ALALibrary @JihadWatchRS @OITP

Follow @SafeLibraries

Opposing FISA is the American Library Association's Latest Directive, on September 11, No Less

The American Library Association's [ALA] latest directive is to oppose FISA and its means to help prevent further terror attacks in the USA.  The ALA directive was made on September 11th, the eleventh anniversary of the 9/11 terror attacks.  It uses paranoid scare tactics to motivate people to act, such as: "Watch what you say and do on your phones, emails and other communications":

• "Oppose H.R. 5949, the FISA Amendments Act (FAA) Reauthorization Act of 2012," by Lynne Bradley, American Library Association, 11 September 2012, emphasis and hyperlinks in original:

Oppose H.R. 5949, the FISA Amendments Act (FAA) Reauthorization Act of 2012 

Posted on September 11, 2012 by Lynne Bradley  

URGENT:  September 13th vote pending in the House on FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act)

ACTIVISTS:  Use our legislative action center to send messages to House members opposing H.R. 5949, the FISA Amendments Act (FAA) Reauthorization Act of 2012 or call your congressional representative now!

The message to all House members:  Oppose H.R. 5949 the FISA Amendments Act Reauthorization Act of 2012, H.R. 5949.  Protect Americans’ privacy and constitutional rights.  Do not extend the FAA sunset until December 31, 2017.

ALA asks library supporters to ask the House to oppose this latest attempt to reauthorize the FAA.  Unexpectedly, a quick vote on H.R. 5949, is scheduled for this Thursday, September 13th.

BACKGROUND:  It’s déjà vu all over again: Watch what you say and do on your phones, emails and other communications because, once again, the House of Representatives appears ready to reauthorize the 2008 FAA law that legalized the Bush administration’s warrantless wiretapping program and more.  The American public, including our library patrons, will continue to be exposed to needless surveillance under this reauthorization.

The FISA Amendments Act Reauthorization Act of 2012, H.R. 5949, (yes, this is the correct name of the bill and the law) would extend the provisions of the 2008 FAA to December 31, 2017, rather than letting the FISA sunset on December 31, 2012.  The government is allowed to get 12-month orders from the secret FISA court to conduct “dragnet surveillance of Americans’ international communications—including phone calls, emails, and internet records—for the purpose of collecting foreign intelligence.” *

As we did in 2008, the American Library Association (ALA) continues to argue against the FISA Amendments Act because of the FAA’s lack of transparency and the potential for abuse of the system that has been created.

....

* From the ACLU Washington Legislative Office web site where additional details are available: ACLU’s Washington Markup.

Furthermore, the ALA literally joined as co-signer with the Council on American-Islamic Relations [CAIR] to oppose FISA in the past:

• "CAIR Co-Sponsors Letter to Congress on Wiretapping," by Unnamed, Council on American-Islamic Relations, 6 March 2008.

By contrast with ALA, the Obama Administration supports FAA:

• "President Pushes to Extend Surveillance Law," by Siobhan Gorman, Wall Street Journal, 11 September 2012:

  The Obama administration is lobbying for renewal of a controversial 2008 surveillance law, warning that the U.S. would lose a critical intelligence-collection tool if Congress allows the measure to expire at year's end.
  
  As President Barack Obama emphasizes his national-security record in his re-election campaign, he's facing strong resistance from some lawmakers who say the law lacks sufficient privacy protections.
  
  The Republican-dominated House is expected as soon as Wednesday to pass the bill, which would extend the law for five years.  But its fate is less clear in the Senate, where Sen. Ron Wyden (D, Ore.) is blocking Senate consideration, ...

• "FISA Fight; Congressional Vote to Reauthorize Surveillance Program Highlights Administration Reversals on Spying, Transparency," by CJ Ciaramella, Washington Free Beacon, 12 September 2012.

See also:

• "POMPEO: FISA Amendments Should be Extended; Hunting Terrorists, Protecting Americans," by Rep. Mike Pompeo, The Washington Times, 12 September 2012.
• "House Approves Sweeping, Warrantless Electronic Spy Powers," by David Kravets, Wired, 12 September 2012.
• "House Votes to Renew Controversial Surveillance Law," by Ellen Nakashima, The Washington Post, 12 September 2012.

Do people realize George Soros is funding the ALA to shill for his own interests in support of terrorists?  Do people realize as self-arrogated "censorship" police, the ALA joined with CAIR to use pro-terrorist censorship to censor Robert Spencer, but parents keeping inappropriate material from children being "censorship" is the message of ALA's "Banned Books Week"?  Do people realize the ALA joined CAIR to oppose radicalization hearings?  And wasn't ALA uncharacteristically silent as terrorists destroyed a famous library in Timbuktu, Mali?

What does any of this have to do with librarianship, the proclaimed mission of the ALA?  Is the ALA in your community library having any influence at all?  Is it okay that a terrorist-friendly organization has influence over your local community library and local school library?

Has ALA political capital just been further attenuated by once again lining up on the losing side of yet another non-library matter?

While it is legitimate to oppose FISA, the ALA that supports terrorists remains true to form.  On September 11, no less.  On the day the U.S. Ambassador to Libya is killed.  On the day the U.S. Embassy in Egypt is attacked and destroyed.  Will ALA members do nothing about this?

The Third Jihad: Radical Islam's Vision for America was used by the NYPD for counterterrorism training.  The ALA is part of the problem described therein when it works with CAIR to censor perceived/presumed opposition such as Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch, uses Soros funding to support Soros/CAIR's interests, or directly joins with CAIR to oppose national security interests having nothing to do with librarianship.

Oh, for the people shocked to hear the ALA supports terrorists, here's one more example, showing the ALA wished library patron privacy laws had protected a 9/11 terrorist from being reported to the police:

• "A Nation Challenged: Questions of Confidentiality; Competing Principles Leave Some Professionals Debating Responsibility to Government," by David E. Rosenbaum, The New York Times, 23 November 2001:  

  When the names and photographs were first released, Kathleen Hensman, a public librarian in Delray Beach, Fla., recognized some of the suspected hijackers in the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon as men who had used the computers in her small library.
  
  She immediately called the police.
  
  That broke a Florida law that guarantees confidentiality to library patrons.  It also violated a cardinal principle of librarians never to tell the police, in absence of a court order, about who uses their rooms and what books they check out.
  
  But almost no one thinks Ms. Hensman did the wrong thing.  Of course, she will not be prosecuted.
  
  ....
  
  Judith Krug, director of the American Library Association's office of intellectual freedom, said, "I would have felt better if she had followed the Florida law."

ALA has a lot of positive influence in our communities.  However, let's get the negative influence of the ALA's "Office for Intellectual Freedom" out of our public libraries, out of our school libraries, and out of our minds.  Its actions do not warrant our blind acquiescence.

Follow @SafeLibraries

Al Qaeda Threatens Timbuktu Library; Expect No Help from the American Library Association

Al Qaeda-linked terrorists have destroyed a United Nations World Heritage site in Timbuktu, Mali, and are threatening to destroy a library:  "Elderly men were keeping watch Saturday over Timbuktu's main library after Islamists burned a tomb listed as a UNESCO World Heritage site."

Religious leader Baba Cheick Sekou said the occupying rebel groups have no respect for Timbuktu's religious and historic importance. 

Sekou said he feared for the protection of the prestigious Koranic Sankore University and ancient manuscripts that are kept there, as well as other tombs and mosques of historic significance. 

"All Muslims know the tomb is a holy place," he said.  "It's not something you attack and destroy.  It's anti-Islamic.  People in the community are angry."

Source:  "Rebels Burn Timbuktu Tomb Listed as U.N. World Heritage Site," by CNN Wire Staff, WPLG Local 10, 5 May 2012.  See also, "Islamic Extremists Desecrate Muslim Saint's Timbuktu Tomb," by Agence France-Presse, The Raw Story, 5 May 2012:  "It was also a renowned centre of Islamic scholarship, with manuscripts written in Arabic and Fulani by scholars of the ancient Mali empire, covering a range of subjects including Islam, history, astronomy, music, botany, genealogy and anatomy."

Further, it is possible this is in part due to United States policy that has unleashed intolerance throughout the Ummah:  "After the ouster of Moammar Gadhafi, armed Tuaregs who had been fighting in Libya streamed back across the border into Mali."  "The ancient city in Mali was captured by at least two separatist Tuareg rebel groups—one of which is Ansar Dine"—"a militant group that seeks to impose strict Sharia law" and "who have been linked to al Qaeda."


Nobody should look for help from the American Library Association [ALA] (that otherwise takes action when terrorist libraries are claimed by the terrorists to be threatened, see "Librarians for Terror," by Lee Kaplan, FrontPage Magazine, 17 Aug 2004):

• The ALA expressed dismay when a Florida librarian reported the presence of an actual 9/11 terrorist in her library, one of the nineteen, since, she apparently believed, the librarian violated his library patron privacy rights.  
• The ALA has responded to Islamist groups seeking to spread Sharia in the United States by banning/censoring from ALA activities Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch.
• The ALA opposed legislation by Senator Bond to amend the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act [FISA] to facilitate surveillance of overseas communications that is essential to stopping terrorist attacks.
• The ALA opposed radicalization hearings on Capitol Hill.
• See, generally, Librarians for Fairness at LibrariansForFairness.org.

Mind you, this is a "library" association.  The "American" Library Association.  Right?  One should "Know the ALA."


NOTE ADDED EVEN DATE:

This story has been picked up by other sources, including Education News, Editor and Chief Jimmy Kilpatrick:

• "Al Qaeda Threatens Timbuktu Library; Expect No Help from the American Library Association," by Editor's Pick, Society, Education News, 6 May 2012:

Follow @SafeLibraries

Book Burning Game: Max Damage 2

Think burning books is fun?  Well, if you don't want to be fired from NJ Transit for burning a Koran, you could always play Max Damage 2.  Level 29 is one of the levels where you get to burn books, and it's labelled "Book burning."  Here's a screen shot of that level, where the books to burn are in the lower left:

Max Damage 2 - Level 29 - "Book burning"

Of course if you were burning books in Cuba, that would be okay.  The American Library Association defends book burning in Cuba.

“Using the threat of the destruction of books to wage a war on ideas some may disagree with is offensive to the American Library Association,” said ALA Office for Intellectual Freedom Director Barbara Jones.  “Book burning is the most insidious form of censorship, and such an action or threat should not be taken lightly."

That's nice.  If the ALA was serious, if would send another invitation to Robert Spencer to speak since the ALA censored him the first time, then burned him.  See "ALA is Duplicitous and Fraudulent, Censors Whomever It Wants, Suppresses Intellectual Freedom, and Joins the Jihad."  Also, see what the Annoyed Librarian said about the ALA at "Free Speech, Book Burning, and Other Stuff," and see what Will Manley said about the Annoyed Librarian at "WILL UNWOUND #229: Library Journal and the Use of the Racial Epithet ‘Cracker’ by Will Manley."

Apparently, the ALA's censoring Robert Spencer is not offensive to the ALA, neither is it an insidious form of censorship not to be taken lightly.  Do you see how the double standard works?

.

ALA is Duplicitous and Fraudulent, Censors Whomever It Wants, Suppresses Intellectual Freedom, and Joins the Jihad

The title of this blog post is strongly worded. Not a single one of those descriptions is made up. They come directly from the American Library Association's [ALA] latest censorship victim or his attorney. It's unbelievable how the ALA gets away with this given it is the nation's self-arrogated "censorship" police.

Is the ALA trying to convince your community to sidestep legal means to protect children, like in Owosso, MI? Is the ALA telling your community not to "censor"? Is "Banned Books Week" promoted heavily? Do you think the ALA is authoritative? Then you need to know exactly how two-faced is the ALA.

Fully read the following from the attorney for the latest of the ALA's censorship victims—your eyes will pop out:

• "The American Library Association's Stealth Jihad Against Free Speech," by William J. Becker, Jr., FrontPage Magazine, 9 October 2009.

And hear directly from the victim of the ALA's scorn:

• "The American Library Association Joins the Jihad," by Robert Spencer, Jihad Watch, 9 October 2009.

See also my previous blog post on this topic when it first occurred, and also the comments where I link to the ALA making more excuses, and I renew my call for the ALA to include the speaker it censored at the next opportunity:

• "Proof of ALA Pro-Terrorist Censorship; ALA Challenged to Explain and to Include Censored Speaker Next Time,"by SafeLibraries, SafeLibraries, 23 July 2009.

Hey, ALA! You read my blog posts, do you have anything to say about this? Deborah-Caldwell Stone, you decry "censorship" to convince communities to leave children unprotected by legal means available to protect them, can you please comment on this ALA censorship matter? The ALA looks really bad right now; somebody better say something to explain or correct the ALA's "suppression of intellectual freedom."

.