Let's Talk About That "Anti-Islam Video" Produced By Nakoula and a Shady Financier Named Eiad Salameh

Aside

Innocence of Muslims Film was Made by Terrorists

by Shoebat Foundation on September 25, 2012 in Blog, General

Walid Shoebat

When it comes to the film Innocence of Muslims, our government and the media uses a narrative mired in contradictions and false statements provided by the filmmaker, who himself is an untrustworthy source.

If we stick to what can be proven we might obtain the possibility that terror supporters produced the film. Muhammad Al Dura and Paliwood are two cases in point showing the type of stunts used by Palestinian terrorists.

So lets examine facts instead of the filmmaker’s fiction.

Court documents reveal that Nakoula Bacile Nakoula, producer of the movie Innocence of Muslims, partnered in a scheme with Eiad Salameh, my first cousin.

Eiad is a Muslim terror supporter and is not an Egyptian Copt.

He comes from Beit Sahour, Bethlehem and is well known by the FBI and the Arab community as a conduit for Middle Easterners who can obtain authentic, legitimate identifications, from passports to credit cards that include many nationalities. He then places these forms of identification into the hands of dubious characters that are not the real identity.

In fact, I revealed Eiad Salameh way before this whole fiasco erupted—in 2008 and the first reporting on the connection between Eiad and Nakoula was revealed on September 14th, 2012 by the Smoking Gun, which published court documents that prove these two were connected in 2009, as part of a major financial fraud scheme.

The narrative that circulates the media fails to address crucial questions about the mystery of this film.

For example, to date, no one has stepped forward or can confirm for certain that whoever holds an identity by the name of Nakoula Bacile Nakoula is even that man. After all, he held several identifications, including Muslim names. He could have easily presented a valid I.D. when he was arrested, yet he was likely not the man on that I.D.

Such a claim isn’t easily dismissed; if an Egyptian by the name of Nakoula Bacile Nakoula is blamed for angering over a billion Muslims, it would not be that difficult to find the entire family in Egypt, to include brothers, cousins, aunts, siblings wife, wives, ex-wives, mistresses, and pets, et. al., especially since the riots that spanned across 30 nations were sparked in Egypt.

In the Middle East, you are known by your clan. Yet, Egypt cannot produce neither this man’s family or his background?

Besides, why would Nakoula – who claims to be a religious Coptic activist – have extensive connections with Eiad, a man who I know hates Copts and is well-known to be among the best schemers the Middle East produced and has contacts with terror networks?

This terror connect is not devoid of evidence. The Daily Beast reported on Nakoula’s arrest:

The bust came around the time the feds were launching Operation Mountain Express, which would become a huge investigation into pseudoephedrine-dealing involving numerous people of a Middle Eastern background. The authorities initially insisted there were no links to terrorism, but suddenly switched and decided that a chunk of the money was going to Hizbullah.

The Eiad Nakoula connection was likely terror-related.

Nakoula impersonated himself as an Israeli Jew, a thing Eiad also did for years and fraudulently holds an authentic Israeli passport.

To date, no one has produced proof to authenticate Nakoula. Yet, evidence shows with 100% certainty that both my cousin Eiad and Nakoula had multiple, fraudulent identities as we showed in our detailed report, which includes valid court records, a U.S. Trustee report, credit reports and our correspondence with Canadian intelligence.

How is it possible that these two strange bedfellows would snuggle up together? On the one hand, we have an Egyptian-Coptic-anti-Muslim-activist-fundamentalist-Christian turned Meth-dealer and on the other hand, we have a Muslim-Palestinian scam-artist-terrorist.

Some might counter that these two only had a fling. After all, Nakoula was simply a runner for Eiad in 2009.

What has never been disclosed until now is that the two were linked for at least a decade, from year 2000 through a bank fraud relationship in 2009.

Nakoula had used the name “P.J Tobacco” and Eiad was linked to a tobacco smuggling operation into Syria in 2001 by using a fictitious name (A & M Trading) as revealed in the U.S. Trustee report in 2001.

Nakoula used M & A Trading in 2009 with his pseudoephedrine dealings.

He simply switched letters; “A & M” became “M & A”.

Nakoula used Eiad’s last name when he assumed the identity of a one “Erwin Salameh”, portraying himself as Eiad’s brother.

We also learned – from our contact in the Peel Police Intelligence Bureau in Canada (hereafter referred to as IBC) – that Eiad was involved with someone having the last name “Tanas” and Nakoula had used the name “Thomas J. Tanas”.

Both clans “Nakoula” and clan “Tanas” exist in Eiad’s village, in Beit Sahour Bethlehem. It is still the little town of Bethlehem as it was in biblical times.

Now let’s examine “Nakoula’s” motives.

I obtained the Sawa radio interview in Arabic in which he was identified as “Nakoula Bacile”.

In that interview, he was asked:

What is your position on the Jewish and the Christian faiths?

Nakoula responded,

“I have no calling for these religions.”

He continued to state that he was an author of several anti-Islam books (written in Arabic) but refused to give the titles of his books.

Yet, if court documents give his legal name as Nakoula Bacile Nakoula, I found no books under that name. Nothing – and neither was anyone able to produce any.

The media’s narrative has nothing and this supposed Nakoula was proven a liar a hundred times over.

Yet, the media purports that the man is a Christian activist Copt. All of this man’s claims have been proven to be lies.

However, this one is believed?

Even what his friend stated to the court, that Nakoula is “a God-fearing man whose first priority is his family” contradicts what he said in Arabic. He is not interested in Christianity or Judaism and is possibly a Muslim.

So who funded the film? Nakoula claimed that he produced the film with money ($50,000 to $60,000) that came from his wife’s family in Egypt.

None of this has been proven.

What has been proven is that he embezzled millions with Eiad. The money must have come from these scandalous operations, which our government finally admitted is linked to terrorist activity.

Who ever made this film, claimed Jews funded him and that he was Copt. Obviously, this was intended to do harm to his real enemies — Israel and the Copts.

Both Copts and Israel are Eiad’s ardent enemies. This is indisputable.

Now, to prove beyond a shadow of doubt that the feds were complacent…

Justice Department lawyers and federal agents, despite Nakoula’s two previous offenses, defended Nakoula and gave several excuses to Judge Snyder, and pushed for leniency, all because of himsupposedly promising to help them catch Eiad:

…he [Nakoula] has implicated Mr. Salamay [aka Salameh] there is no question that Mr. Salamay at some point is gonna be indicted if he hasn’t already been… we all know what’s gonna happen. Salamay is gonna get arrested some day and based on the debriefing information turned over he is gonna enter a guilty plea, or if he doesn’t, then Mr. Nakoula is going to be called in to testify…

If the feds were looking to catch Eiad, he had been engaged his shenanigans for three decades, warrants were issued, his location was known and no arrests were ever made… in thirty some years.

The evidence mounted. However, Eiad was not immune in Canada and was finally caught and locked up there in January 2011. We have emails from our IBC contact who wrote us. The Canadians wanted to keep Eiad in custody as long as it took to extradite him to the United States. Yet, the U.S. refused for seven months to take him and preferred to fly him to Palestine.

On July 15th, 2011, the Canadians wrote me:

He is awaiting deportation to Palestine, unless the US hurry up and indict him…

The feds never responded to the Canadians’ last appeal and within a few days, Eiad was sent to Palestine.

I realize that people might try to shoot holes in what we are saying. However, the media has very little evidence to prove its narrative, while we present much validated facts that prove much while leaving more to uncover.

The results of this entire Innocence of Muslims fiasco will not be the apprehension of terrorists, but the continual chipping away at our First-Amendment freedoms.

Unfortunately, many Americans still practice self-blame. The film was made in the U.S., a nation that is not used to schemes like Muhammad Al Dura or what was shown in Pallywood.

Welcome to Pallywood II.

Aside

Exclusive: ‘Innocence of Muslims’… a Game of Predators and Scapegoats

by Shoebat Foundation on October 5, 2012 in Blog, General

Walid Shoebat

The Innocence of Muslims and the spark of an Islamic revolution can be linked to a handful of culprits. The mystery is unlocked when we review the original YouTube page of one named Sam Bacile (the same name attributed to the filmmaker at one time). Bacile forgot to cover his tracks, leaving two links to three very crucial videos. On the “Feed” tab are two of those videos.

One features a Muslim named Wisam Abdul Waris, uploaded to YouTube on September 9th (linked from the Bacile page no later than September 10th). Wisam’s video was uploaded to Bacile’s page because Bacile commented on the video. Yet, when one attempts to view the comments, all have been scrubbed and the comment feature disabled, though the comment allegedly made by Sam Bacile appears on the “Feed” tab, just above the video.

Here is a screen shot of the Sam Bacile YouTube page:

The second video on the Sam Bacile “Feed” tab is none other Nader Bakkar, from as far back as May of 2012. This video was added to Bacile’s YouTube page as a “Favorite” about one week prior to the embassy attack in Cairo on 9/11.

The third video is on the “Likes” tab of the Sam Bacile YouTube page. It consists of an interview with an English speaking western woman who converted to Islam.

Why would a supposed Christian filmmaker “like” this video?

Who are these two named Wisam Abdul Waris and Nader Bakkar?

Waris and Bakkar, the two main interests on Sam Bacile’s YouTube channel, were the two men we identified back on September 13th as being the two primary culprits behind the Cairo riots on 9/11.

These two have been conspicuously absent, all along, from all western media narratives. For example, days after the attacks in Egypt and Libya, Reuters reported an incomplete narrative that the “flashpoint” of the violence was when Sheikh Khalid Abdallah on Al-Nas TV in Egypt aired portions of the film Innocence of Muslims.

The clip Reuters is referring to (uploaded September 9th) was a TV interview on al-Nas, where Sheikh Khalid Abdallah interviewed an activist named Mohammad Hamdy, who was engaged in a blatant form of guilt by association, creating a link between the Copts in Egypt and the Copts in the Diaspora. He blamed all Copts worldwide, not just the ones involved in the film.

Then came these two on September 9th, Wisam Abdul Waris, a Salafist who announced the formation of a new organization, the Coalition of Dar al-Hekma, an activist group wanting to enforce blasphemy laws worldwide and especially in the West. Nader Bakkar was the head of the Nour Salafist party, who gladly announced his new membership in the coalition on the day these two condemned the film.

Contrary to what Reuters reported, what caused the riots was when Waris called in to Khalid to promote them. Khalid simply asked for the date and accepted the invitation. The details and evidence of how the riots erupted by these two was explained here. The rest is history.

The conclusion is that all evidence reveals a small circle of predators—the filmmaker and two individuals prominently displayed on the Sam Bacile YouTube channel.

Wisam and Bakkar planned and executed the riots.

New York Times Interview with Innocence of Muslims filmmaker raises question about YouTube channel

by Ben Barrack on November 29, 2012 in Blog, General

There was an interesting tidbit found toward the end of a 6-page article written by Serge Kovaleski and Brooks Barnes of the New York Times – in which the two reporters revealed the contents of their interview with Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, the man behind the Innocence of Muslims video. Until now, it was only assumed that the Sam Bacile YouTube channel belonged to the filmmaker.

According to Kovaleski and Barnes, the person responsible for creating and maintaining the YouTube account is Nakoula’s twenty one year-old son, Abanob Nakoula:

On July 2, the trailer was posted on YouTube by someone using the name Sam Bacile. Mr. Nakoula’s son said he was the one who did it.

“My dad is not tech-savvy at all, and does not know how to work social media,” Abanob Nakoula said. “So he asked me to take the initiative to spread the word, and I did my best.”

He explained that using the name Sam Bacile, he created a Facebook account before production started and then the YouTube account.

Now that we know who is responsible for the YouTube account, how about some questions about content?

This screenshot was captured on October 5, 2012 (converted from tiff to jpeg on November 28th). At the time, it was the only video found under the channel’s “Likes” tab. The video consists of an interview between a woman from the U.K. who had converted to Islam and an Arabic-speaking man. The woman is effusive in her praise of Islam. The video has since disappeared from the Sam Bacile YouTube account:

Here is a screenshot of the YouTube page today. Note, there are no more “Likes” on the page (the video is no longer posted):

This is the video once liked by Abanob, based on what can logically be deduced from the New York Times piece:

The question it’d be nice to know the answer to is:

Why would someone so anti-Islam “like” a very pro-Islam video?

A logical follow-up question would be:

What made Abanob “un-Like” the video?

Questions about this YouTube account have been raised before.