Fascist “journalist” Claire Goforth, about whom I wrote previously here, apparently can’t stand the idea of dissenters from the far-Left agenda being allowed to state their positions in the public forum, and receiving funding from supporters. But in this lengthy hit piece on Laura Loomer and those who allegedly fund her campaign for Congress, Goforth goes even farther. Referring to the AFDI/Jihad Watch Muhammad Art Exhibit and Cartoon Contest in Garland, Texas in May 2015, Goforth writes: “The contest turned deadly when two men opened fire before being quickly killed by police.”
“The contest turned deadly when two men opened fire.” That gives the impression that those who opened fire were people who were attending the contest. Goforth appears to be trying to feed the Leftist myth of violent “right-wingers” by obscuring what really happened at the contest. The contest didn’t “turn deadly”; Islamic jihadis attacked it. They were the ones who opened fire. But this vicious opponent of the freedom of speech knows that she has to cover for Islamic jihadis and give the impression that Islam is peaceful, so she writes about what happened at the contest in a misleading way. No one who doesn’t already know what happened there would take this for a jihad attack. They’d just think that “white supremacists” were at it again. This is contemporary “journalism” at work.
“Laura Loomer may be a fringe candidate, but she’s being funded by big-time GOP donors,” by Claire Goforth, Daily Dot, November 18, 2019:
…Months after the 2015 mass shooting at Charlie Hebdo, Reuters quoted Shillman speaking approvingly of a controversial contest in Texas to draw the Prophet Muhammad. The contest turned deadly when two men opened fire before being quickly killed by police. These were the only casualties. The contest was in part organized by Jihad Watch, a website of the David Horowitz Freedom Center. (Earlier this year, Jihad Watch director Robert Spencer wrote an attack piece about this reporter following the publication of a piece about hate groups on Facebook.)
DHazard says
Perfect neutrality in speech and word never happens but good journalism attempts to get there. Otherwise all you have are more opinions….and opinions about opinions. No substance, no integrity, no professionalism, no honesty, but lots and lots of opinions. When these opinions get together they pretend to be journalists but are usually just preaching to the choir, which itself always sings the same songs over and over in unison and on the same pitch.
mortimer says
Neutrality? Or bias? If bias … then propaganda.
These words of Ross Douthat are directed at Claire Goforth:
“…the kind of blasphemy that Charlie Hebdo engaged in had deadly consequences, as everyone knew it could … and that kind of BLASPHEMY is precisely the kind that NEEDS to be defended, because it’s the kind that clearly serves a free society’s GREATER GOOD. If a large enough group of someones is willing to kill you for saying something, then it’s something that almost certainly NEEDS TO BE SAID, because otherwise the violent have veto power over liberal civilization, and when that scenario obtains it isn’t really a liberal civilization any more. Again, liberalism doesn’t depend on everyone offending everyone else all the time, and it’s okay to prefer a society where offense for its own sake is limited rather than pervasive. But WHEN OFFENSES ARE POLICED BY MURDER, that’s when we need MORE of them, not less, because the murderers cannot be allowed for a single moment to think that their strategy can succeed.”
– Ross Douthat, NYT, January 7, 2015
Leftist neo-Marxist Claire Goforth shields from criticism the first goal of Islam which is to crush freedom of expression. She is an ANTI-JOURNALIST … a mere propagandist.
There was a time that journalists agreed that it was a duty of real journalists to criticize religious suppression of thought.
Freedom of speech in the West was won primarily for the purpose of questioning and criticizing religious authority. Does Claire Goforth criticize other religions, but not Islam? Why not? Someone should ask her why Islam is off-limits.
Euripides wrote: “A Slave is he who cannot speak his thoughts.”
Islam is inherently based on the model of slavery: there is a slave; there is a slave-owner. The slave has no rights.
For a free person, the chief right that guarantees the other rights is freedom of speech. Free speech is the first right Mohammed took away from his opposition: the right to criticize him.
Claire Goforth shields a mind-bending Death Cult from criticism. Why?
To criticize religion, and even to ridicule it, is a profound obligation of journalists when that religion wants to turn all disbelievers into slaves under Sharia law … as Islam clearly wishes to do.
Esmerelda says
I guess Ms. Goforth doesn’t realize she is a kafir and the islam people would not think twice about slitting her throat. She needs some education about the Islam agenda and free speech is not one of their ideas for sure unless it is in their favor.
.
Of course,,muslims ALWAYS use the victim card.
Savvy Kafir says
It’s very unlikely that Ms. Goforth would be open to any sort of education on Islam that runs counter to her PC assumptions.
mortimer says
Goforth SHOULD, but will likely not read the autobiographical An American Bride in Kabul by Phyllis Chesler.
Chesler would help Goforth understand what Islam is actually like for women.
Goforth defends the indefensible.
revereridesagain says
Ms. Goforth deserves a nice, Sharia-compliant Muslim husband. She really needs to spend some time in a major center of Islamic culture such as Riyadh, Islamabad, or Tehran, on her own as a single kafir woman amongst the native population. Some people just learn best via the school of experience.
James says
typical behavior of leftists. They want to exonerate islamists by calling terror attacaks radical extremism and pointing to cases of right-wing violence, while covering up islamist jihad. Nothing new here.
Angemon says
You mean, he rebuked your hit-piece. Where you write, for example, “Anders Breivik, the Norwegian mass murderer who cited Robert Spencer dozens of times in his manifesto” without adding that Anders denounced Robert Spencer for not calling for violence. You also wrote “The SPLC does have critics, among them many individuals affiliated with hate groups on this list, who question its methodology, politics, and motives. Proud Boys founder Gavin McInnes has filed a defamation suit against the SPLC for labeling his pro-Trump club for “Western chauvinists” a hate group“. Why not mention, for example, darling of the Left, Maajid Nawaz’s victory in court over the SPLC’s claim he was an “anti-muslim”? Could it be you’re trying to push the narrative that only “right-wing extremist” “hate groups” have a beef with the SPLC?
gravenimage says
+1
FYI says
allah art exhibit and cartoon contest?
NOBODY CARES in the islamic world
muhammed art exhibit and cartoon contest?
jihad attack,riots…leftist-MSM protests about “islamophobia”
That is beacuse in islam muhammed is ABOVE allah
In fact,truth be told:in islam,muhammed is God and allah is muhammed’s sock puppet
Westman says
Even Aisha, the favorite wife, caught onto that sock puppet routine sufficiently to suggest that Allah gives Muhammad whatever “revelations” he wanted. That’s documented in Islams own Hadith.
Charles says
Get used to it. Claire Goforth is a corporate journalist who writes hit pieces and fabricates propaganda to serve her clients. That’s how corporate media is making the big bucks these days. She’s a tool. I suggest we start doing some corporate espionage and set up fake Journalist outlets that target Islamophobes. We make lots of money on faux articles and charge big bucks that are funneled to our allies. We need to get smarter.
James Lincoln says
According to Collins dictionary:
Journalism is the job of collecting NEWS and writing about it for newspapers, magazines, television, or radio.
Claire Goforth is NOT a journalist.
gravenimage says
“Journalist” Claire Goforth obscures who was shooting at whom in jihad attack on Muhammad cartoon contest
Referring to the AFDI/Jihad Watch Muhammad Art Exhibit and Cartoon Contest in Garland, Texas in May 2015, Goforth writes: “The contest turned deadly when two men opened fire before being quickly killed by police.”
…………………..
This is sickening–anyone reading this would assume that the violence came from attendees at the contest, not that this was a Jihad terror plot to murder people at the contest. *Appalling*.
Westman says
There was something in the Bible about “Go forth” but it didn’t refer to obscuring the truth. Maybe Claire Goforth has dyslexia, got it wrong, and doesn’t realize she’s been working for the wrong side. Or, maybe she has aspirations to work in Europe and is just hedging her chances by reporting as if she was a German journalist. There is a lot of “let’s hate the US and become a state of world government” going about in globalist circles.
Uh, Claire, those two shooters who wanted to murder everyone at the Garland TX contest were Muslims doing Jihad. Now, read it several times until your visual cortex and brain get in sync. Now, doesn’t that feel better?
Norger says
“The contest turned deadly when two men opened fire before being quickly killed by police.”
Although equally offensive, I read this not so much as an attempt to obscure who the shooters were, but rather “see what those dastardly cartoonists made those poor Muslims do!’ The soft bigotry of low expectiatons.
Norger says
Charlie Hebdo magazine also “turned deadly” when machine guns opened fire, killing 12 staffers….