The Q&A's Forbidden Stories Doesn't Want You to Read
A team of "journalists" spent "over six months" writing a hit piece that accuses me of fearlessness, having a good education, & supporting Yemeni women. Here is what they deliberately left out...
First, the context.
Over the last few weeks I have responded to media inquiries by several publications best known for their involvement in the “Pegasus Project”, a media and NGO-driven BDS campaign accusing Israeli cybersecurity companies, but primarily NSOGroup, of violating its own rules to allow the abuse of its signature surveillance tool, Pegasus, by various governments allegedly for spying on journalists, human rights activists, and political opponents.
The Pegasus Project assumes that Western and Western aligned governments never have legitimate national security reasons (such as Russian infiltration and meddling in Spain or Russian-/Iranian-/Polisario-backed provocateurs in Morocco) to use surveillance software; Israeli companies are always and everywhere at fault for abuses; and the supposedly spied upon are always right.
A Toronto-based organization called Citizen Lab and its partners, Amnesty International and ACCESS NOW, are relied upon to provide the Pegasus Project with scientific proof for their allegations. However, this reporting has been questioned by independent experts, such as French-Lebanese cryptography researcher Nadim Kobeissi, who has consistently raised serious concerns about Citizen Lab’s objectivity and competence:
After years of being involved in this issue from geopolitical and legal points of view, I decided to interview on my radio show Jonathan Scott, a digital forensics expert, who had written a report addressing the technical issues arising in #Catalangate. No sooner had I publicly announced the interview then I received a wave of harassing tweets, DMs, and even phone calls— including from Ars Technica’s Security Editor Dan Goodin—compelling me to cancel. I refused. Instead, I offered to provide Citizen Lab’s representatives an equal opportunity to respond. Shortly after my interview aired, without warning or explanation, I was permanently suspended from Twitter, something celebrated by former hacker Marcus Hutchins and other Infosec Twitter influencers. But even Hutchins, in a now-deleted viral video celebrating my digital demise, conceded “typically, you don’t get banned from Twitter for being wrong.”
None of my appeals, or the inquiries of an award-winning Israel HaYom journalist, were acknowledged until months later. And then, as reported in Cybernews:
When Tsukerman appealed, she received a notification telling her the ban would not be revoked. She believes that Twitter has sided with an impostor account that was used to harass her and then kick her off the platform.
‘I received a formal notice of denial of appeal by Twitter, claiming not “disinformation” but “impersonation” – that's after I provided my passport verifying my identity,’ said Tsukerman. ‘What happened was the group of people who had mass reported me created a fake account with my identity, which they use to harass me and others. Despite the paucity of content and the fact that I had been on Twitter for many years before that account was created, Twitter chose to side with the fakes.’
Curiously, some of the same people, part of Twitter’s Infosec community, who had been calling for me to preemptively cancel Scott, reemerged after my ban to propose a quid pro quo - renounce my research of their campaigns and reporting, as well as my support for Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman against character assassination attacks, in return for the restoration of my Twitter account.
When I refused this Faustian bargain, they stole my Twitter identity, created a fake account (@IrinaTsukerman - a clear violation of Twitter’s Terms of Service), and have used this imposter account to attack me and my contacts, as well as to spread disinformation. These harassers have even targeted publications and journalists who quoted me, succeeding in one case to get my quotes stealth edited from a story.
Others, like Dark Reading and Stephen Lawton, have thankfully refused to be cowed:
Recently, after reading several of my Kyiv Post articles on disinformation methods, including Russia’s information warfare and geopolitical alliances with actors such as Qatar, Die Zeit’s Holger Stark reached out claiming he wanted to interview me about this work. I talked to him for over an hour on Zoom, and went into detail discussing my methods and the ways I ensure that I do not myself engage in disinformation. I discussed my recent findings with him, and also Stark’s own articles on the Gulf rivals, Qatar and Saudi Arabia, specifically disinformation campaigns by Qatari and Saudi Islamist bots.
He never mentioned that this particular interview was being done jointly with Forbidden Stories, although he mentioned working with Forbidden Stories and other journalists on articles on disinformation and digital influence campaigns, sharing information including information related to the situation of journalists facing harassment, according to the portion of the recording of the conversation that was shared with me. My impression from his email, in which he had specifically mentioned my work on Russia and related disinformation campaign was that the conversation with me would be related to that subject - even if his work overall, also dealt with journalists facing harassment. Therefore, I took his description to be nothing more than his description of his general line of work.
At the end of the conversation, I offered to respond to further questions as needed; however, Stark did not mention that his colleagues or another publication would be contacting me. Based on the overall tone of the communication, therefore, I assumed that if needed, he would be following up with me directly and that the questions would be related to the subjects Stark brought up or to the issues that I mentioned and offered to share. In the context of the conversation, it was entirely reasonable to assume that he was interested in particular perspective on particular issues from me.
Therefore, I was quite surprised after receiving an unexpected What’s App call and text messages from Karine Pfenniger, who identified herself as a Forbidden Stories journalist working with Mr. Stark on an article. Her questions were not in any way related to my conversation with Holger Stark or to the questions posed in his outreach email to me. She proceeded to ask me a series of biased and uninformed questions about my connection to the Yemen Coalition of Independent Women, “strong words” about Jamal Khashoggi and Agnes Callamard, my appearances in various media outlets, and other subjects. She later also sent me a written questionnaire, which I took time to answer.
The Forbidden Stories article Karine Pfenniger wrote makes no mention of my work on Russia or the fact that I offered Stark evidence of clandestine contacts between Sharon Van Rider and Marc Owen Jones (quoted in the article), who works for a Qatar-funded university. The relevance of the evidence would have been to show secret ties between Saudi Islamists, such as Sattam Al Saud and Alwaleed bin Talal (who had been detained in the 2017 corruption probe and who had previously donated to Muslim Brotherhood entities), and Qatar-backed activists, such as Marc Owen Jones, which both sides took measures to obfuscate. This evidence would have unraveled the strange collusion of interests in the now-dismissed lawsuit over the hack of Ghada Oueiss’ phone, and revealed that both sides were looking to discredit the Saudi Crown Prince.
I also offered publicly available evidence that Ghada Oueiss pursued her lawsuit in bad faith seeking to discredit the NSOGroup and Pegasus, rather than seeking justice against Dark Matter, which was actually the party to the lawsuit. None of these important details made it into the article. There was also no follow-up by Stark.
Not one single direct quote from either my phone or written interviews with Karine Pfenniger made it into the article. In the interest of transparency and journalistic ethics, I am fully reproducing Pfenniger’s unedited questionnaire and my answers below so everyone can see how Forbidden Stories knowingly published false allegations and insinuations as facts.
Pfenniger’s article makes unsubstantiated allegations about legal or financial matters, implies something untoward about a Muslim World League (MWL) interfaith conference in New York that I spoke at in 2018, and quotes Marc Owen Jones complaining about my willingness to go on the record and my good education. This is the work of propagandists, not journalists, and not even particularly good ones.
MWL is not identified in the article by name. Instead, the preeminent global Islamic organization based in Makkah is identified merely as a “Saudi-funded NGO”, which is more accurate than saying the Vatican is “Italy-funded” but reveals that the author is unaware of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia’s special significance as Guardian of the Two Holy Mosques.
In another portion of the article, Forbidden Stories alleges that my support for the Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman against the Khashoggi-related media campaign of the past several years is somehow shameful. In fact, in this particular case, they did not go far enough to characterize the level of my support and commitment to unraveling the ugly disinformation effort against him.
Character assassination is akin to murder in Judaism, and as someone dedicated to searching for truth, I could not be prouder of my involvement in countering lies and manipulation by the network of conspirators behind this scandalous smear campaign. Forbidden Stories is shocked that I am so dedicated to undoing the damage done to the reputation of someone falsely accused of a despicable crime. But, then again, Forbidden Stories also attacks me for and throws shade on—labeling as “shady”—courageous Yemeni women struggling to free themselves and their country from Iranian-backed Houthi oppression. As you can see below, Forbidden Stories is knowingly siding with the Houthis against the real journalists in their jails. This speaks volumes as to the agenda of Forbidden Stories.
Similarly, Forbidden Stories asked no follow-up questions and made no mention of the multi-year Islamist campaign against me:
Exiled Muslim Brotherhood broadcaster Moataz Matar dedicated an entire broadcast to uncovering a “mysterious woman,” me!
Former ISIS apologist Omar Abdulaziz Al-Zahrani and some of his cohort accounts dedicated long tweet threads and viral videos to attacking me, some of which were shared by Marc Owen Jones. @Yusefren and other anti-MBS accounts, carry on the legacy of #JihadJamal by openly espousing hatred, terrorism, misogyny, and calling for the roll back of reforms in the Kingdom:
Saudi hate preacher Salman Al Oudeh’s son, Abdullah Alaoudh (Research Director for Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates at DAWN), spoke at @Yusefren’s 4+ hour Clubhouse in Arabic, spreading antisemitic lies and conspiracies about me and Muslims who are fighting extremism.
While I was responding to Pfenniger’s written questions, another Islamist account with a huge following rehashed old anti-Israel and antisemitic conspiracies against me, using photos stolen after an old hack.
Finally, as soon as the Forbidden Stories article was published, a famous Muslim Brotherhood website picked it up and translated the article into Arabic.
It is astounding how Marc Owen Jones, Ghada Ouiess, and their ilk can present themselves as defenders of women while subjecting women who dare to stand up to them and to oppose their vile ideology with endless harassment. (Forbidden Stories failed to disclosed Marc Owen Jones’ conflict of interest). It is also astounding these “defenders of human rights” always end-up working with the oppressors, not the victims.
After the article came out, John Scott-Railton, Citizen Lab’s Senior Researcher, who often appears before government committees around the world testifying about the Pegasus Project and who had previously blocked me on Twitter, retweeted the Forbidden Stories article and disparaged my legal credentials (did he miss the quote from MOJ?) even though the article had not mentioned Pegasus or my research into Citizen Lab’s methods even once.
The instant amplification of the Forbidden Stories hit piece by Citizen Lab, Islamists, and their cohorts illustrates better than anything how these groups consider me and my work a significant threat to their agenda.
It is too bad that Forbidden Stories, funded by the likes of Edward Snowden’s Freedom of the Press Foundation and by George Soros’s Open Society Foundation, lacks any legitimacy or moral authority, and so had to completely censor my responses to their inquiry. TFY: Think For Yourself.
Q&As:
1. According to our reporting, you are, among other things, a New York-based attorney with a law degree from Fordham University, an information warfare specialist and the CEO of a US-based company offering information warfare services, Scarab Rising Inc.
Is this accurate and do you wish to comment?
I am a human rights and national security attorney in private practice, Editor of The Washington Outsider, host of The Washington Outsider Report on the Coalition Radio Network, a geopolitical analyst, and President of Scarab Rising, Inc, an advisory firm specializing in media, communications, reputational management, & security strategy. My writing has appeared in variety of publications, including the Kyiv Post, Jerusalem Post, Legal Insurrection, Fair Observer, Newsweek, NY Post, Arab News, Washington Near East Institute, and Begin-Sadat Center. My weekly show features interviews with distinguished experts and newsmakers on the hottest topics others are too afraid to touch. Past guests have included: Natan Sharansky, David Satter, Edward Lucas, Dr. Jason Jay Smart, Jere Van Dyk, Dr. Victoria Coates, and Kenneth R. Timmerman. In terms of information warfare, I have participated in international scholarly conferences on “Character Assassination and Reputational Politics” (George Mason University in 2017 and 2019) and Scandalogy (“Autobiography/Biography and Reputational Politics,” University of Vienna, 2020). One of the main areas of my work in information warfare is uncovering the strategies of Russian and Islamist propagandists, and devising counter disinformation campaigns.
2. According to our reporting, you regularly echo the narratives of governments including Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Azerbaijan, Morocco and Israel in videos, opinion pieces and television appearances.
Is this accurate and do you wish to comment?
Your “reporting” is grossly mistaken. I am a voice, not an echo. My positions are based solely on my principles and analysis of the facts, and delivered without fear or favor. I am an American analyst and my only allegiance is to the truth. Befitting my independence, you will see that I have been consistent in my positions for a very long time. The premise of your question that someone could echo the conflicting narratives of so many different governments simultaneously is incredibly simplistic and wrong. I have publicly disagreed with these countries and their policies on air, even in their own media. And I have used such appearances to suggest courses of action that would be better than whatever they were doing at the time. If they feel they want to invite me despite disagreements, voiced in my appearance and in my writing, that is up to them. But they know that I will never compromise my views to curry favor with anyone.
I go where people invite me when I have something to say, but I will never say things to please any government. I have appeared in a wide variety of US and international publications, including many with which I have disagreed or which have disagreed with me. When I disagree with something I am very vocal about it – such as my criticism of Gulf States’ and Israel's relations with Russia and China, or when I debated a Pro-Trump Fox Business host.
Obviously, any media, state sponsored or private, will invite an analyst to speak on points that they have a particular interest in or that they will have a shared opinion about, but not always. Sometimes I've had Western media that just invited me because they agreed with me. And sometimes it turned out that it wasn't necessarily the case and we found room for disagreement.
Not all of my comments have been aired or published by the media where I am invited to appear. The Iranian Regime's PressTV invited me on but never aired my interview, citing "technical issues." That is normal; I do not expect my every comment to appear in every media. Journalists of any background will choose their sources based on their angle and agenda, and not every comment will work with every story. If you read my own articles or watch my various media appearances, you will also see me frequently disagreeing with official narratives. My comments have even appeared in Qatari and Russian propaganda outlets, including Al Jazeera and Sputnik. But my views are consistent regardless of the outlet, whether al-Arabiya, CNN, Israeli media, or others. I will never pander to any country or media just to get approval.
3. According to our reporting, you targeted several critics of the Saudi regime on Twitter and used insults against them.
Is this accurate and do you wish to comment?
If you read my former Twitter feed carefully, you would see that I have criticized the Saudi government and I have criticized critics of the Saudi government when they were wrong. As an analyst in this field, I do not consider it “targeting” to criticize the positions and behavior of disinformation agents. These alleged critics are either supportive of the Islamists and the Old Guard (like Jamal Khashoggi was) or otherwise serve their agenda to mislead international audiences, undermine the reforms, and attempt to revert Saudi Arabia to the Dark Ages.
In the case of Jamal Kashoggi, it is important to note that when you are engaged in terrorism or in support of terrorism or extreme views of any kind, you are going to be in very bad company, and naturally something bad can happen to you. Drug dealers engage in a violent lifestyle, some of them end-up getting killed. I am not going to shed tears over drug dealers. I believe whoever kills them should be prosecuted and punished by law. Quite frankly people who are engaged in activities harmful to humanity suffer natural consequences and it is nothing to mourn. Jamal Kashoggi was a dealer in far worse than drugs. Khashoggi was a dealer in horrible, illiberal, extremist ideology, he was an open antisemite who was inciting antisemitism, he was someone who supported jihad in Syria, which is why I called him “Jihad Jamal,” he is someone who supported and cohorted with terrorists like Osama bin Ladin, and he censored journalists in Saudi Arabia and threatened a Saudi American journalist who had exposed his antisemitism in English not long before his death. Anyone who is for journalistic freedom, as Forbidden Stories claims to be, should have a problem with Jihad Jamal.
4. According to our reporting, after the murder of Jamal Khashoggi, you publicly questioned the murder and the work of independent investigators, taking a similar stance as the Saudi government.
Is this accurate and do you wish to comment?
Actually, my position on this issue was quite different from the Saudi government which wished to place blame on several low level operatives and to bury the hatchet on the higher level people responsible for Jamal Khas[h]oggi’s death and the media campaigns that followed. I have called for a truly independent investigation that would examine all parties that would have benefited from Khashoggi’s death based on my knowledge of his extremist networks, terrorist associations, conflicts of interest, and agendas. I went on i24 to raise many of these points [link added] in 2018, not long after his death. Real investigators, if they are interested in the truth, would not only have focused on one line of inquiry, ignoring all evidence that questions that line, and failing to explore other plausible theories, angles, and pieces of evidence. I thought it was entirely bizarre that the international community failed to reexamine the original and vague CIA report issued at the early stages of the investigation, and that there was no public and transparent examination of much of the technical evidence. I also thought it was strange that many of the witnesses were never fully questioned about contradictions and holes in their stories. That is not justice either to Khashoggi or to anyone responsible for his death.
The Yemeni Coalition of Independent Women
7. According to our reporting, you frequently participate in panels, demonstrations and interventions organized by the Yemeni Coalition of Independent Women, an NGO headquartered in Switzerland. Among others, according to our reporting, you spoke at the Human Rights Council during its 48th session on behalf of the Yemeni Coalition of Independent Women.
Is this accurate and do you wish to comment?
Yes, as a human rights lawyer, I am involved in human rights issues around the world, especially involving [Ukrainians], Ahwazis, Kurds, and issues concerning Yemen, and among those, events organized by the Yemeni Coalition of Independent Women.
How would you describe your relationship with the Yemeni Coalition of Independent Women?
I am a human rights lawyer and geopolitical analyst who occasionally engages in discussions concerning the situation in Yemen and the region, who occasionally provides expert testimony at local and international events, and who strives to bring human rights and humanitarian issues to the attention of the international community. I am not employed by the Yemeni Coalition of Independent Women, but rather have appeared as an expert witness at various events they have organized.
How is the Yemeni Coalition of Independent Women funded? By whom?
To the best of my knowledge, YCIW fundraises from Yemeni diaspora communities and receives in-kind support from European partner NGOs, but since I am not employed by this non-profit organization dedicated to raising awareness of the plight of Yemeni women under the Houthi regime, it is best you address the question of funding to their President.
For which(s) reason(s) do you participate in activities organized by the Yemeni Coalition of Independent Women?
As a human rights lawyer with a background in the Middle East, I am passionate about the rights of women, children, journalists, and others impacted by the Houthis and Iran regime that backs them. Why is Forbidden Stories targeting the Yemeni Coalition of Independent Women rather than the Houthis who regularly imprison and threaten with death journalists, some of whom have appeared at YCIW events? I have academic and professional knowledge and the ability to provide expert testimony that can shed light on the human rights and humanitarian situation in Yemen and its impact on the region. This is one of the interests I am quite passionate about and dedicated to doing all I can to help. I also am inspired by YCIW’s courageous leadership and vision.
Are you remunerated for your participation to panels, demonstrations and interventions organized by the Yemeni Coalition of Independent Women? If yes, by whom and how much?
I was repaid for my hard work as a human rights lawyer devoting my time to exposure of the worst imaginable Houthi abuses in Yemen that the international community has ignored for years with ugly online defamatory campaigns that falsely accuse me of being a former prostitute in Europe [link added], as well as endless harassment by Islamist trolls on social media.
8. According to our reporting, in July 2022, you accompanied the Yemeni Coalition of Independent Women in Washington D.C. to meet with US senators and representatives and lobby about reinstating the Houthi rebels on the list of foreign terrorist organizations.
Is this accurate and do you wish to comment?
No, I did not take part in lobbying; I appeared as an independent human rights lawyer and expert to answer questions about humanitarian aid and humanitarian and human rights issues in Yemen, as well as to share my analysis of US interests.
Who were the other members of the delegation?
All the members of the delegation are listed in public record; they included Dr. Wesam Basindowah, the head of the Yemeni Coalition of Independent Women, Dr. Manel Msalmi, and Elie Piepsz, who organized the meetings.
9. According to our reporting, neither you nor Scarab Rising appear in the FARA registry. According to our understanding, the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) requires anyone in the US lobbying on behalf of a foreign principal, such as a foreign NGO, to register with the Department of Justice and file public reports, and failing to do so can constitute a violation of federal law. According to our understanding, your involvement and presence during the Yemeni Coalition of Independent Women's coming to Washington D.C. to meet with US senators and representatives and lobby about reinstating the Houthi rebels on the list of foreign terrorist organizations could constitute a potential violation of federal law.
Is this accurate and do you wish to comment?
You have been misinformed about the law, which does not cover human rights lawyers/defenders and independent experts who provide consultations and briefings to members of the US Congress, Senate, and Executive Branch agencies. I was asked to join this delegation as an expert witness to address concerns and to provide clarifications, and was not remunerated for my participation. FARA is specifically concerned with lobbying on behalf of foreign entities, particularly those that are government-linked, and explicitly targets paid representation. If you look at all of the legal cases concerning FARA, every single lobbyist—such as the ongoing investigations or dismissed cases against Eliot Brody, Tom Barrack, and General John Allen from Brookings—received financial compensation for their services with respect to making introductions, organizing, or otherwise representing foreign governments or entities.
Were you aware of FARA and of the risk that your involvement and presence in the meetings with US representatives and senators might constitute a violation of FARA at the time it happened?
I am a lawyer and provide consultations to clients on FARA. There is no FARA risk for a human rights lawyer in dedicating her personal time to join a human rights delegation and to help her own government understand the risks from Houthi terrorists who have abducted and tortured American dual nationals, threatened US ships, and disrupted the flow of US humanitarian aid into the country. In fact, it is not only my right, but my duty to make such disclosures in the interests of US national security and humanitarian policy.
Isn’t it odd for Forbidden Stories, whose mission is to “protect, pursue and publish the work of other journalists facing threats, prison, or murder,” attempting to chill my speech by wielding a misunderstanding of FARA? It won’t work, but talk about mission creep. If you are so interested in FARA, I suggest investigating the Washington Post’s relationship with the Qatar Investment Authority International with respect to Jamal Khashoggi’s columns. Why was a US publication spreading information provided by a foreign state-backed entity via a hired cut-out? What financial interests were not disclosed throughout that process? Unfortunately, Forbidden Stories is more interested in targeting some of the few human rights defenders standing up to the Houthis, who are responsible for mass starvation, wanton murder, indoctrinating and deploying child soldiers, and an encyclopedia’s worth of other human rights abuses.