By David Miller 7 August 2010

Renewed attempts to remove censor the website Powerbase are being made by terrorism researcher Sagit Yehoshua.

A few weeks ago our website Powerbase (or rather its predecessor Spinprofiles) was temporarily removed from the internet after a complaint by neoconservative think tanks operative Alexander Meleagrou-Hitchens.

At the time we noted that Meleagrou-Hitchens attempt to have the entire page on him removed from our website was not the first. Back in February this year, Sagit Yehoshua complained to 1 & 1 Internet with which we had registered the domain name, that the page on her was defamatory. 1&1 refused to tell us the precise text that was alleged to be defamatory and insisted that the whole page be removed. At the time we did so, hoping to get clarity from the company.

It was not forthcoming, although the issue appeared to hinge on the question of ‘personal’ information; 1 & 1 told us that ‘Ms Sagit Yehoshua has expressly stated in a phone call to us that they do not want their personal information placed on the website.’ Now however we have reinstated that page, leading to further, ongoing, attempts to have the material removed. This time Yehoshua has targeted our ISP

In defending his attempts to censor the material on himself, Alexander Meleagrou-Hitchens rallied to the defence of Sagit Yehoshua saying that he had spoken to her and that she had informed him that our profile of her was ‘riddled with inaccuracies about her associations’.

Yes, in all the discussions between Yehoshua, her advisers and the ISP there has been no claim at all that the page contains any inaccuracies. In fact all assertions are carefully and fully referenced in line with our editorial policies.

Instead, the claim has been that the page is defamatory. In an email to our ISP Yehosha’s advisers claimed ‘a client of our has brought to our attention possible defamatory content regarding herself’, they went on to note that ‘the relevant page is http://www.powerbase.info/index.php?title=Sagit_Yehoshua Can we leave it with you to get the above material taken down’. Note that the request was for the whole page to be removed as opposed to any particular instance of defamation.

Both Yehoshua and her advisers have proved reluctant to specify what the exact nature of the defamation was. So far (in a process lasting more than six weeks), all we have learnt is that Yehoshua objects to two passages on the page. The first of these was our concluding sentence on Yehoshua’s research which has involved interviewing Palestinaian prisoners in Israeli jails as well as Middle Eastern students studying in London.:

It is perhaps possible that it was precisely Yehoshua's experience interviewing Palestinian prisoners that gave her Arab interlocutors pause, not least given the obvious relevance of her research to Israeli security policy.

We have not been given any explanation about why this sentence might be defamatory. The only clue we have at present is the account given by Meleagrou-Hitchens. According to Meleagrou-Hitchens we had originally ‘made a very clear, and totally unfounded, suggestion that she is a member of Israeli intelligence. (The existing profile has been revised, but still makes an insinuating allusion.)’

We have never suggested said that Yehoshua is a member of Israeli intelligence. What we have reported is her connections with institutions that are connected to Israeli intelligence. Meleagrou-Hitchens went on to note that ‘This appeared to be based solely on the fact that she is an Israeli Jew who studies terrorism’. This is simply false. In fact, the case of Sagit Yehoshua – simply one of many - illustrates well the problems when academics get too close to the powerful.

Let us review the evidence here. For example we note that Yehoshua is listed as a research fellow at the International Institute for Counter-Terrorism (ICT) at the Interdisciplinary Center Herzliya. IDC gives special preference to military personnel wishing to study at the centre. In 1999 the Jerusalem Post reported:

Some 15 percent of the spots in each class are set aside for graduates of elite army units whose matriculation exams may not be spectacular but who have shown significant leadership potential. Such applicants are invited for personal interviews, and former Mossad head Shabtai Shavit screens their personal military files to identify the most promising candidates.^[1]

According to its own literature, the International Institute for Counter-Terrorism (ICT) was founded in 1996 by Boaz Ganor, (counter-terrorism coordinator at the Israeli Prime Minister’s office from 1993-1996), the former head of Mossad Shabtai Shavit, and a number of other figures. The Center runs the World Summit on Counter-Terrorism that will be held for the tenth time in September 2010.

In September 2009 Yehoshua took part in a workshop entitled ‘Is the Prison System Rehabilitating Terrorists or Radicalizing Them? - Challenges of Working with Imprisoned Terrorists’ at ICT's 9th International Conference, the World Summit on Counter Terrorism: Terrorism's Global Impact. The IDC/ICT is a partner of a new terrorism centre the International Centre for the Study of Radicalisation(ICSR) based at King's College London where Yehoshua was Atkin Research Fellow in winter 2009. King’s has long had close links with the military.

To select one example among many, the Centre for Defence Studies was, according to the King’s College website, ‘established at King’s College London in 1990, with a grant from the UK Ministry of Defence but is now fully independent.’^[2] The Centre is separate from the Department of Defence Studies, which according to its own account ‘was created in 1997 as an integral part of the UK Joint services Command and Staff college’, which is itself part of the UK Defence Academy, the military body responsible for military education and training.^[3] This does suggest significant interactions and overlaps between the UK Ministry of Defence, the military and various parts of King’s College. While in London, Yehoshua contributed to the ICSR blog, writing of her research:

I have met and interviewed some Arab Muslims, while in London for my research - usually students that came to London to study or their friends that have finished their studies and decided to stay. During these meetings I felt that even though they are intelligent, arrived some years ago from their countries and that they have a similar background, it was very difficult to conduct the discussions. Though I didn't expect it to be easy, I did not believe that I might be considered (to be) a recruiter of (a) dark Israeli intelligence agencies every time I tried to get an Arab Muslim to talk to me or to introduce me to his friends.^[4]

She went on to add:

during the interviews that deal with life and thoughts, I had the feeling that there was some sort of barrier between us, one that I could not break, even after so many years of interview experience with tough criminals and terrorists.^[5]

These facts are a matter of public record. And it was on this basis that we went on to note that: ‘It is perhaps possible that it was precisely Yehoshua's experience interviewing Palestinian prisoners that gave her Arab interlocutors pause.’ To make this point even clearer we have added that this is ‘not least given that her research was intended to ‘give me and the IPS [Israeli Prison Service] more tools’ and her conclusion that Palestinian prisoners need a ‘length of time in prison’ to ensure they ‘go through a process of moderation.’^[6]

Let’s be clear: The issue here is that the military and intelligence agencies in the UK, US and Israel are parties to the conflicts in Afghanistan, Iraq and Israel/Palestine. This raises ethical difficulties and potential conflicts of interest for those academics who have affiliations with these protagonists, just as it would for academics with comparable links to Hamas, Hezbollah or any other organisation engaged in conflict.^[7]

To return to the complaint from Yehoshua and her advisers we can note that the second passage that was objected to was

As of 6 February 2010, Yehoshua was listed as an officer on the Facebook page of the online activist group, the Cheerleaders. As of 26 February 2010, Yehoshua was no longer listed as an officer although she was still a member of the Facebook group. On 27 February 2010, Yehoshua contacted SpinProfiles editors by email saying that she was listed as an officer of the Cheerleaders group without her consent, that she asked the manager of the group to remove her name immediately she became aware that it was listed, and that she has never been actively involved with the Cheerleaders group.

Just to be clear: The sources for these claims, which are available on the page as it currently stands, are screengrabs taken at the time from Facebook. So the evidence is there for readers to see. Despite repeated requests to elaborate on why this passage is considered defamatory we have had only the following message from Sagit Yehoshua via our ISP: ‘I was never an officer at the Cheerleaders group’ – a claim we have never denied.

So who are the Cheerleaders? There is much that could be said, though it is also plain that they are a group that are known for using pseudonyms, creating organizational names and generally muddying the waters about their activities and identities. What we can say is the following. They have been accused by bloggers Tim Ireland and Richard Bartholomew of running a campaign of harassment - in particular of Tim Ireland - in the wake of their investigations of Glen Jenvey, Dominic Wightman and the VIGIL network - a grouping of amateur terror experts and would be agents provocateur which we have written about at Spinwatch too.^[8]

The harassment has included posting Ireland home address on the internet and sending repeated threats of physical violence.^[9] the Cheerleaders also have some kind of relationship with English nationalism, even with elements on the far-right such as the English Defence League.^[10]

As we noted above, the correspondence with our ISP has involved both Sagit Yehoshua and her adviser, who introduced himself as representing Yehoshua as a ‘client’. This was someone signing himself ‘Matt’ from an organization called ‘P-Group’. We asked our ISP to ascertain whther P-Group were lawyers and to confirm with Sagit Yehoshua whether they, in fact, acted for her. She confirmed that P-Group are not lawyers, but do ‘internet security advice’. The email from the advisers had come from a hotmail account: p-group AT hotmail.co.uk and not from any business related domain name and ‘Matt’ did not give a surname.

So what are Sagit Yehoshua’s connections with the Cheerleaders? Although she had her name removed as an officer of the Facebook group in February 2010, Sagit Yehoshua remains (last checked 6 August) a member of the Cheerleadered group on Facebook. But the more compelling clue that she is connected to them is that she has confirmed that ‘P-Group’ are acting for her in her current complaint. ‘P-Group’, appears not to be a real entity either. However it does seem to have featured in the communications of the Cheerleaders in the past.^[11]

So, in conclusion we can say that Sagit Yehoshua objects to the mention of Cheerleaders in relation to her and this is part of the reason she wants the page on her censored. Yet in the process of trying to convince us that she has no connections, she is pursuing her complaint by apparently using the help and advice of the Cheerleaders.

Let me reiterate.  We will correct anything inaccurate on the pages of Powerbase and we offer a right to reply for any organisation or individual who feels they have have been misreported.

Notes

1. 1 ↑ Michael S. Arnold, ‘Setting Private Standards’, Jerusalem Post, 15 October 1999, p. 12.
2. 2 ↑ King’s College, ‘Centre for Defence Studies’ http://www.kcl.ac.uk/schools/sspp/ws/research/groups/cds/, accessed 6 July 2010
3. 3 ↑ King’s College, ‘The Defence Studies Department’ http://www.kcl.ac.uk/schools/sspp/defence/index.html, accessed 6 July 2010
4. 4 ↑ Sagit Yehoshua, 'Freedom of Friendship- Can there be peace without normalisation?', FREErad!cals, International Centre for the Study of Radicalisation, 11 December 2009.
5. 5 ↑ Sagit Yehoshua, 'Freedom of Friendship- Can there be peace without normalisation?', FREErad!cals, International Centre for the Study of Radicalisation, 11 December 2009.
6. 6 ↑ Sagit Yehoshua, contribution to ‘Is the Prison System Rehabilitating Terrorists or Radicalizing Them? -Challenges of Working with Imprisoned Terrorists’, workshop, 9th Annual Summit of the International Institute for Counter-Terrorism at the Lauder School of Government, Diplomacy and Strategy at IDC Herzliya, 10 September 2009.
7. 7 ↑ David Miller and Tom Mills Counterinsurgency and terror expertise: the integration of social scientists into the war effort. Cambridge Review of International Affairs Vol. 23, No. 2: 203 – 221.
8. 8 ↑ Tom Mills and David Miller ‘The British amateur terror trackers: A case study in dubious politics’, Spinwatch, 26 August 2009
9. 9 ↑ See for example: Richard Bartholmew Tim Ireland Threatened with Violence Bartholomew’s Notes on Religion, 30 September 2009.
10. 10 ↑ See Richard Bartholomew ‘Charlie Flowers and English Nationalism’ Bartholomew’s Notes on Religion, February 6, 2010; Richard Bartholomew, ‘English Defence League Faction Meets with Charlie Flowers and “Cheerleader” Friends’, Bartholomew’s Notes on Religion, 6 February 2010.
11. 11 ↑ See, Tim Ireland 'Nick Catt’ Bloggerheads, 29 January 2010; Richard Bartholomew ‘Glen Jenvey: Manga Punk Link?’ Bartholomew’s Notes on Religion, 14 January 2010.