Lara Logan, Nir Rosen… Nothing Funny Here

CBS News:

On Friday, Feb. 11, the day Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak stepped down, CBS chief foreign correspondent Lara Logan was covering the jubilation in Tahrir Square for a “60 Minutes” story when she and her team and their security were surrounded by a dangerous element amidst the celebration. It was a mob of more than 200 people whipped into frenzy.

In the crush of the mob, she was separated from her crew. She was surrounded and suffered a brutal and sustained sexual assault and beating before being saved by a group of women and an estimated 20 Egyptian soldiers. She reconnected with the CBS team, returned to her hotel and returned to the United States on the first flight the next morning. She is currently home recovering.

There will be no further comment from CBS News and correspondent Logan and her family respectfully request privacy at this time.

Doug Mataconis:

Best wishes to Logan for a speedy recovery, physically and emotionally.

Allah Pundit:

Logan wasn’t the only reporter in danger while covering the protests. Katie Couric and Brian Williams ended up leaving Egypt early because of the risk and Anderson Cooper freely admitted to being scared despite sticking it out for a few more days. Couric later told Howard Kurtz about an episode where she too was surrounded and shoved by an enraged lunatic. I wonder how close she came to Logan’s fate.

In an ideal world the army would have shot the attackers on the spot, but you can imagine the chaos that would have broken out in the Square if Egyptian soldiers suddenly started firing on people. As it is, were there even arrests made? And why does CBS’s statement feel compelled to note that the mob had been “whipped into frenzy”? Crowds at all sorts of events get pretty frenzied, but good luck trying that with a judge if you use it as a pretext to join in on a mass sexual assault.

Needless to say, the way journalists cover these events is going to change dramatically. And even more needless to say, America will never see those protests the same way again.

Jim Geraghty at NRO:

The news from CBS about correspondent Lara Logan’s assault in Egypt is awful beyond words.

At a time like this, we all feel helpless. And angry. The perpetrators, anonymous men in an angry mob, may never see justice.

Perhaps we can channel that frustration and anger towards righting a wrong closer to home. To some other outrage… say… the reaction to Logan’s assault from a fellow at the NYU Center for Law and Security, Nir Rosen.

Nir Rosen deleted some of his worst comments about Logan on his Twitter feed, but… it’s the Internet. It’s never gone forever.

I’m sure Rosen will apologize at some point, and perhaps we’ll get some tut-tutting statement from NYU about the need for “civility” and “restraint” and “sensitivity.” Brows will be furrowed. Maybe they’ll hold a seminar about technology and emotional reactions to breaking news events.

But let’s just remember one thing going forward: Nir Rosen believed this was the right moment to let the world know that he “ran out of sympathy for her” and that we should “remember her role as a major war monger” and that we “have to find humor in the small things.”

Your move, NYU.

UPDATE: Nir Rosen has departed Twitter. Your reaction to this development probably depends on whether you think the offense in this circumstance is the ability to broadcast that type of reaction to the crime to the entire Internet, or whether the problem is the reaction itself.

Debbie Schlussel:

So sad, too bad, Lara. No one told her to go there. She knew the risks. And she should have known what Islam is all about. Now she knows. Or so we’d hope. But in the case of the media vis-a-vis Islam, that’s a hope that’s generally unanswered.

This never happened to her or any other mainstream media reporter when Mubarak was allowed to treat his country of savages in the only way they can be controlled.

Now that’s all gone. How fitting that Lara Logan was “liberated” by Muslims in Liberation Square while she was gushing over the other part of the “liberation.”

Hope you’re enjoying the revolution, Lara! Alhamdilllullah [praise allah].

Jeffrey Goldberg:

Nir Rosen, the far-left journalist who joked about the sexual assault on Lara Logan, has company: Debbie Schlussel, the extreme right-wing commentator. Rosen calls for the elimination of Israel, and is a pro-Hamas Hezbollah apologist; Schlussel is a racist anti-Muslim commentator. They come from radically different places on the political spectrum, and yet they share a common inhumanity.

Colby Hall at Mediaite:

Tragic news broke yesterday that CBS News’ Lara Logan was victim to a sustained a brutal sexual attack at the hands of a dangerous element amidst the celebration in Cairo’s Tahrir Square. The news brought universal condemnation and empathy from Logan’s media peers, but it also seemed to also bring the worst out in some people as well. Take for example now former NYU Fellow Nir Rosen , who took to his Twitter feed to make inappropriate jokes that he soon deleted. In the firestorm of controversy that followed, Rosen offered his resignation, which NYU readily accepted.

Hamilton Nolan at Gawker:

What can we learn?

1. Twitter is dangerous.
2. Some things aren’t funny.
3. Even if you don’t like the person they happened to.

Useful lessons for all of us.

Suzi Parker at Politics Daily:

A 2007 article in the Columbia Journalism Review exploring the threats to female foreign correspondents singles out Egypt: “The Committee to Protect Journalists, for example, cites rape threats against female reporters in Egypt who were seen as government critics.”

The CJR article states, “Female reporters are targets in lawless places where guns are common and punishment rare.” They face more sexual harassment and rape than their male counterparts. They are subjected to unwanted advances and “lewd come-ons . . . especially in places where Western women are viewed as promiscuous.”

Such risk is nothing new to Logan. A South African native, she entered Afghanistan after Sept. 11, 2001, by begging a Russian Embassy clerk in London to give her an expedited visa for travel there. She followed up that stint with one as an embedded journalist in Iraq.

Earlier this month, Logan and her crew were detained overnight by the Egyptian army and interrogated. She told Esquire’s “The Politics Blog” that during the ordeal her captors blindfolded her and kept her upright. She vomited frequently. They finally gave her intravenous fluids and released her and her crew.

Logan’s desire to venture into danger zones mirrors the brave actions of female war reporters who came before her. During World War II, many female correspondents had to write under male pseudonyms. They were banned from press briefings and had to submit stories after their male counterparts.

Dickey Chapelle was a World War II photojournalist, posted with the Marines during the Battle of Iwo Jima. She cultivated a signature look of fatigues, an Australian bush hat, dramatic Harlequin glasses and pearl earrings, but loved the grittiness of war. In 1956, the petite photographer covered the Hungarian Revolution, where she was captured and jailed for seven weeks.

In her forties, Chapelle covered the Vietnam War. In 1965, she was the first American female war correspondent killed in action. Famed war photographer Henri Huet photographed Chapelle receiving last rites. She was given a full Marine burial with six Marine honor guards.

Not much has changed in the way of training for such work. In the early days of war reporting, women wrote their own rules for covering conflict — and for surviving. Surprisingly, even in the 21^st century, many women travel to war zones with little training. The BBC is the only major news organization that offers special safety instruction for female journalists that is taught by women, according to CJR.

But training or precautions noted in the Handbook for Journalists may not have prepared Logan for the situation she faced on Friday. A mob of 200 abruptly surrounded her crew, from which she quickly became separated. Such tragedies are common during chaotic events.

A Pretty Girl Is Like A Conspiracy

Daniel Pipes:

News that Rima Fakih, 24, of Dearborn, Michigan, won the Miss USA beauty pageant today prompts me to recall some prior instances of Muslim women winning beauty contests in Western countries.

Rima Fakih .

Juliette Boubaaya, 19, was Mlle Picardie in 2009.

Julliette Boubaaya.

Nora Ali was America’s Junior Miss in 2007.

Nora Ali.

Hammasa Kohistani, 19, was Miss England in 2006.

Hammasa Kohistani.

Sarah Mendly, 23, was Miss Nottingham in 2005.

Sarah Mendly.

They are all attractive, but this surprising frequency of Muslims winning beauty pageants makes me suspect an odd form of affirmative action.

David Weigel:

Wow. Citing five Muslim victories in beauty pageants over the past five years, Pipes says that “this surprising frequency of Muslims winning beauty pageants makes me suspect an odd form of affirmative action,” then offers an update from a reader:

[O]n a more serious level, affirmative action appears to play a role in some of the Nobel Prizes.

And more reader insight:

No surprise here. Affirmative action was first applied in beauty contests for black women to win in the 1980s, then it was the turn of Latin, brown skinned women, and now it’s Muslims. That’s why most people ignore these rigged “events.” They are money losers and require controversy.

This comes not from a penny ante blogger but from a former State Department staffer, former member of the United States Institute of Peace (holding a recess appointment after being filibustered by Democrats), and former adviser to Rudy Giuliani’s presidential campaign. Just wow.

Steve Benen:

My favorite part of Pipes’ conspiracy theory? He noted that the results “prompted” him to “recall some prior instances of Muslim women winning beauty contests in Western countries.”

In other words, a prominent conservative “thinker” is not only bothered by the winner of the Miss USA pageant, but he cares enough about the matter to “recall” similar instances — as if he actually keeps track of such things.

Debbie Schlussel:

It’s a sad day in America but a very predictable one, given the politically correct, Islamo-pandering climate in which we’re mired.  The Hezbollah-supporting Shi’ite Muslim, Miss Michigan Rima Fakih–whose bid for the pageant was financed by an Islamic terrorist and immigration fraud perpetrator–won the Miss USA contest. I was on top of this story before anyone, telling you about who Fakih is and her extremist and deadly ties.

No, it’s not “just another beauty pageant.”  Donald Trump, Muslims (who mostly support Islamic terrorist groups, like Hezbollah, which features many of Fakih’s close relatives as top officials), and even Barack Obama will exploit this as propaganda for Islam.  Mark my word.  Hezbollah is laughing at us, tonight.  One of its auxiliary members won the Miss USA title without having to do a thing to denounce them and their bloody murder of hundreds of Americans, including the trampling/torture murder of Navy Diver Robert Dean Stethem aboard TWA flight 847, the 25th anniversary of which is next month.

Dhimmi Donald Trump simply didn’t have the guts to demand that Fakih denounce the Islamic group Hezbollah, whose martyrs and top terrorists are Fakih family members.  It doesn’t matter to the Donald that this is the terrorist group that murdered more Americans than any other after Al-Qaeda, and probably more, when you count its joint ventures with Hezbollah.  Trump made a bigger deal with Miss California USA and her bimbo activities, when–hellooooo–it’s a bimbo contest.  Now, Hezbollah has the chief USA bimbo.  And they’ll use it.

I don’t just wonder if this whole contest is rigged.  I have a feeling that it is.  Clearly, there is affirmative action for Muslim women in beauty pageants and other such “contests.”

Michelle Malkin:

She nearly tripped over her gown.

She called birth control a “controlled substance.”

She argued that contraceptives should be covered by health insurers because they are “expensive” — and then said you could get them for “free” from your OB/GYN’s office.

And now she is the new Miss USA:

Rima Fakih of Dearborn, Mich., won the pageant at the Planet Hollywood Resort & Casino on the Las Vegas Strip after swimsuit, evening gown and interview competitions. When asked how she felt about winning the crown, she said, “Ask me after I’ve had a pizza.”

Fakih nearly fell while finishing her walk in a long, strapless gown because of the length of its train, but she made it without a spill and went on to win.

During the interview portion, Fakih was asked whether she thought birth control should be paid for by health insurance, and she said she believed it should because it’s costly.

“I believe that birth control is just like every other medication even though it’s a controlled substance,” Fakih said.

Imagine if those words had come out of the mouth of Carrie Prejean or Sarah Palin.

Between the NYTimes, MSNBC, Jon Stewart, and the late night talkers, we wouldn’t hear the end of it.

Does this woman know what a “controlled substance” is?

More importantly: Does she even comprehend the concept of insurance? The purpose of insurance isn’t to cover every last medical expense. It’s supposed to cover events that are beyond your control. Should auto insurers now cover oil changes and satellite radio installations? I mean, hey, they’re “expensive,” too!

Fakih’s cheerleaders are too busy tooting the identity politics horn to care what comes out of her mouth

The Anchoress at First Things:

She may not be the smartest thing on two legs, but she is not supposed to be an intellectual. Think of the intellectuals you know or have read, and ask yourself if you want any of them to be your Miss USA.

Miss USA is supposed to be heart-stoppingly beautiful, and that is all; that Fakih certainly is.

Moreover, she is a testament to the fast-fading notion that in America, every avenue of opportunity is wide-open for every sort of person with a dream.

Some are declaring that Fakih won the contest because of politics, because the judges disliked another contestant’s answer on the recent Arizona immigration statutes. I suppose that’s possible.

It is also possible that the judges simply thought Fakih more naturally, and exotically beautiful than the rather over-produced-unto-softporn-looking Morgan Elizabeth Woolard, whose answer to the question, it must be said, seemed to strive for something like balance.

Donald Trump, who owns the pageant, is likely not bothered by these political questions; there is no such thing as bad publicity, after all, but the superficiality of the event itself, and its time constraints, only serve to cheapen questions that are deserving of weighty consideration. These crash-test Q & A’s only speed up America’s devolution into the “I hate this; I love that and I can’t tell you why” factions that are weakening public discourse and further balkanizing a nation already under heavy strain.

To those who are already half-crazed with paranoia and beholden to complicated conspiracy theories, this stuff is manna. But not the heavenly kind.

I am not sure how a beautiful Muslim woman strutting before millions in a bikini (or tripping in a low-cut evening gown) is going to somehow please those religious fundamentalists devoted to hijab. Rather than accuse Rima Fakih of serving Shari’a, perhaps we should be worried that she will be marked for destruction by those who would kill a daughter for the dishonorable action of having been raped.

Or, who knows, perhaps Miss Fakih’s victory will help Muslims feel more mainstreamed, and less marginalized in a way that helps them identify with America. Wouldn’t that be a kick? If the most superficial of events, a beauty pageant, brings diplomatic progress?

Who needs “smart” diplomacy? Bring on the pretty girls!

Melissa Clouthier:

She’s in America. She’s doing what beautiful American girls do. She’s acting Western.

In an Islamic country, she’d likely be hung, beheaded, tortured or “honor” killed for shaming her uptight, sexually repressed, backward, stone age husband or father.

So while I get that people are upset about this, I suggest taking the big picture here. We have a young Muslim woman, without a burqa, who won Miss USA.

Let the Islamofascists put that in their pipe and smoke it.

Adam Serwer at Tapped:

Michelle Malkin is savvy enough to mostly cloak her freak-out behind horror over Fakih’s politics (although she can’t resist a dig at those “identity politics” people), while other conservative bloggers just go ahead and call her a terrorist. Professional Islamophobe Daniel Pipes combs the internet for other instances in which Muslim women have won beauty contests, and concludes there’s some kind of “an odd form of affirmative action” going on. Because how could anyone choose a Muslim over a “real American” in a beauty contest?

I’m not really a fan of beauty contests, but the tone and substance of the fever swamp’s reaction to an Arab-American winning a beauty contest is at least useful for pointing out how some people’s political opinions aren’t based so much in questions of policy as anti-Muslim animosity. The level of anger is just so plainly disproportionate to the matter at hand as to be self-implicating. These people aren’t worried about terrorism — they’re offended by the idea of Muslims being integrated into the most mundane and banal aspects of American society.

Jonathan Turley:

It is a sad commentary on our contemporary politics that an Arab-American cannot simply win such a pageant without unleashing such a torrent of hateful conspiracy theories. I do not even like such pageants but it is astonishing how little it takes to vent such anger and prejudice. Of course, even a scarf on a donut commercial in enough to trigger a national boycott today, here.

Steven L. Taylor:

Ultimately, we are talking here about the silliness that is beauty pageantry, make even more silly by the fact that it is run by Donald Trump.

UPDATE: Daniel Drezner

Right On Right Violence To A Soundtrack Of Lee Greenwood

Debbie Schlussel:

For the last several years, Sean Hannity and the Freedom Alliance “charity” have conducted “Freedom Concerts” across America. They’ve told you that they are raising money to pay for the college tuition of the children of fallen soldiers and to pay severely wounded war vets.  And on Friday Night, Hannity will be honored with an award for this “Outstanding Community Service by a Radio Talk Show Host” at Talkers Magazine’s  convention.

But it’s all a huge scam.

In fact, less than 20%–and in two recent years, less than 7% and 4%, respectively–of the money raised by Freedom Alliance went to these causes, while millions of dollars went to expenses, including consultants and apparently to ferry the Hannity posse of family and friends in high style. And, despite Hannity’s statements to the contrary on his nationally syndicated radio show, few of the children of fallen soldiers got more than $1,000-$2,000, with apparently none getting more than $6,000, while Freedom Alliance appears to have spent tens of thousands of dollars for private planes.  Moreover, despite written assurances to donors that all money raised would go directly to scholarships for kids of the fallen heroes and not to expenses, has begun charging expenses of nearly $500,000 to give out just over $800,000 in scholarships

David Frum at FrumForum:

It’s of course possible that this is a misunderstanding or mistake by Schlussel.

If mistaken, one would assume we’ll hear a defense from Hannity himself or his many admirers. If not mistaken, you’d assume we’d hear some kind of reaction from conservatives – and some kind of explanation/apology from Hannity. It’s not possible – is it? – that the conservative world will just pass by the affair in embarrassed silence?

True, Schlussel’s piece went up yesterday evening, and as of 9 am I can find no mention or reference in the conservative blogosphere. But its early.

So here’s my personal query. I’m going to set my google alert and twitter feed to find Hannity items. If anybody who can plausibly be considered a conservative discusses – even mentions – the Schlussel allegations, I’ll let you know. And if nobody does … well that’s not possible. Is it?

John Tabin at American Spectator:

I suppose it’s possible that Hannity himself wasn’t aware of what the balance sheet looks like, but a source tells Schlussel that Freedom Alliance founder Oliver North confronted Hannity at one point about how much of the charity’s money was being spent on private jets, luxury SUVs, and hotel suites. If that’s true, Hannity has a lot of explaining to do.

UPDATE: I’m hearing from reliable sources that Schlussel’s suggestion that Freedom Alliance pays for Hannity’s travel expenses is wrong. There’s little doubt that, if the numbers she cites are correct, the charity is seriously mismanaged, but it might not be as bad for Hannity personally as Schlussel’s report makes it look. Stay tuned.

ANOTHER UPDATE: Further exculpatory information here. Schlussel’s story seems to be falling apar

4 PM UPDATE:

Readers:

Information regarding Freedom Alliance that appeared earlier in this spot was innacurate or misleading and has been removed. Any further mention of this material as having appeared in this post will either mention or disavowal or be deceiving to readers.

— R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr.

Freedom Alliance’s statement refuting the charges (pdf)

March 18, 2010

Dear Friends of Freedom Alliance:

This week, false and malicious allegations about Freedom Alliance were posted on the Internet and we want to address them with you. We don’t know the motivation for these vicious smears, but we will not allow them to go unanswered.
First, we want to thank you for your support and assure you that Freedom Alliance’s record of financial stewardship and programmatic achievements not only meets, but exceeds standards of program efficiency set by most charity evaluators. We are extraordinarily proud of our work at Freedom Alliance and stand by our efforts 100 percent.

False Accusations

1. The blog posting accuses our friend Sean Hannity of personally benefiting from Freedom Alliance. This is FALSE. Freedom Alliance has never provided planes, hotels, cars, limos, or anything else to Sean. Sean gets nothing from Freedom Alliance except our gratitude for his personal generosity and for all he has done to help the troops and our organization. We have never had to ask Sean for anything, he always generously offers his help before we have a chance to ask him. But to be clear Sean pays for all his own transportation, hotels, and all related expenses for himself and his family and friends and staff, which over the years has added up to tens of thousands of dollars. He does not use any Freedom Alliance Funds or Concert funds in any way, period.

2. Sean Hannity has contributed $100,000 to the Wounded Warriors Foundation, over $200,000 to the Freedom Alliance, and over tens of thousands of dollars to other military charities and individuals. We only make this information public because of the outrageous slander against him. Sean has no management or operational involvement in, or control over, Freedom Alliance. He has been a selfless patriot in his efforts to raise funds for the education of children of armed services personnel.

3. The blog posting accuses Freedom Alliance of spending less than 20% of money raised on program activities. This is FALSE. Listed below are the amounts that Freedom Alliance spent for each of the past three years and the categories on which they were spent. The figures are taken from our Federal Form 990 which is filed with the Internal Revenue Service and posted on our web site and audited by an independent auditor using Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. This financial record not only meets, but exceeds standards of program efficiency set by most charity evaluators.

4. In 2008, Freedom Alliance spent a total of $6,745,717. Of that:

•79 percent ($5,317,970) was spent on Program Activities 14 percent ($945,950) was spent on Fundraising 7 percent ($481,797) was spent on ManagementIn 2007, Freedom Alliance spent a total of $7,461,350. Of that:
• 81.5 percent ($6,084,474) was spent on Program Activities • 13.5 percent ($1,011,501) was spent on Fundraising • 5 percent ($365,375) was spent on Management

In 2006, Freedom Alliance spent a total of $7,064,839. Of that:

• 77 percent ($5,434,538) was spent on Program Activities • 18.5 percent ($1,308,414) was spent on Fundraising • 4.5 percent ($321,887) was spent on Management

5. The blog posting accuses Freedom Alliance of spending money intended for student scholarships on other expenses. This is FALSE. Freedom Alliance has distributed $3.4 million in Scholarships and created a Scholarship Trust Fund with the additional money that we have raised for that program. That fund now contains $15 million, over $10 million of which has been raised by Hannity and the concerts. Our scholarship program is managed with the understanding that it will be needed for at least the next 20 years as there are children who will ultimately receive a scholarship who are now only a few years old. As indicated on our Federal Form 990, these funds are restricted and used only for future scholarships.

6. Our Scholarship Fund is one of four programs operated by Freedom Alliance. Supporters may donate to a specific program or for general operating purposes. In 2008, Freedom Alliance received $2.1 million in scholarship donations. The same year, we awarded $802,250 in scholarships and applied $1.3 million to our Scholarship Trust Fund. The funds donated by Sean Hannity directly — or through the proceeds of the Freedom Concerts — and the support of thousands of Americans are used for these purposes:

• Freedom Alliance Scholarship Fund: Providing scholarships to those whose parents have been killed or severely injured in their service to our Country. There is now over $15 million in the scholarship fund for the students as they come of age.
• Support our Troops: Many events each year are planned and executed by our staff to show appreciate and provide special opportunities for those actively serving in the military.
• Leadership Academy: A program for high school students in which they are encouraged and trained to serve their country.

These programs would not be possible without the support of Mr. Hannity and many others.

We are proud of our work and numerous accomplishments. We are grateful to our supporters whose voluntary contributions make it possible and we thank you. While it is discouraging to have our record misrepresented in such a malicious way, our work is important and, with your support, it will continue.

Respectfully,
Thomas P. Kilgannon Oliver L. North President Founder & Honorary Chairman

Tim Mak at FrumForum:

Schlussel Accusation: Sean Hannity improperly benefited from Freedom Alliance by charging private jets, hotel stays and luxury cars.

Freedom Alliance’s press release today stated categorically that they have “never provided planes, hotels, cars, limos, or anything else to Sean [Hannity] … to be clear Sean pays for all his own transportation, hotels, and all related expenses for himself and his family and friends and staff.” We are satisfied that this is true.

It is true that Freedom Alliance spent $60,000 on aviation services in 2006, but there is no evidence that this was for Sean Hannity’s benefit, and it seems unlikely that the money was used to lease a Gulfstream 5. Rates for G5 aircraft average around $8,000 an hour. $60,000 would not buy much at that rate.

We have also been able to confirm that Sean Hannity has no operational control over the organization. Nor is he even a member of the group’s board.

If Schlussel stands behind her statement, then she will have to do better than a quote from a blind source, who is, as she admits, a friend of a friend.

Schlussel Accusation: Too Little of Freedom Alliance’s Spending Has Gone to Program Outcomes.

FrumForum has intensively investigated Freedom Alliance’s 990 Forms, which have been submitted to the IRS and checked by an independent auditor.

Debbie Schlussel alleges that only $1 million of the organization’s $8.8 million in revenue was going to soldiers and scholarships in 2008. This figure is the product of a misleading and selective reading of the organization’s tax forms.

The numbers that Schlussel cite refer to direct financial transfers to individuals – that is, if there is a direct grant that Freedom Alliance gives to a soldier. This does not include all the positive work that doesn’t involve a direct grant.

Freedom Alliance also spends money on non-cash benefits for military families, involving things like taking soldiers to sporting events and sending care packages to troops.

The highest paid employee earned $152,000 in 2006. The second highest paid employee earned $83,000. In 2007, Freedom Alliance spent about $1 in $7 on salary and benefits.

Total staffing costs may seem high, but they are not out of line with what is spent at many other charities. For example, the Armed Services branch of the YMCA spent about $1 in $2 on salaries and benefits in 2008.

Schlussel Accusation: Soldiers Get Grants of Very Low Value

Schlussel is unhappy with “the fact that in each year’s tax returns soldiers described as having brain trauma injuries, multiple amputated limbs, and severe burns over most of their bodies get a few hundred bucks each from Freedom Alliance and in almost every case, no more than $1,000.”

However, this accusation is much weaker when you examine the Department of Defense regulations regarding donations to active duty soldiers.

According to the DOD Joint Ethics Regulation, gifts with a value of over $1,000 must go through a lengthy bureaucratic process which involves ethics officials. Calls to the Department of Defense confirmed this point.

What becomes clear is that there is a bureaucratic process to get approval from an ethics official, and that the costs of working through the bureaucracy for this purpose may want to be avoided by a charity, especially one that is working in a lot of other areas.

Schlussel also decries Freedom Alliance donations of less than $1,000, complaining for example that Freedom Alliance only gave $200 to a serviceman who lost both legs and his left arm. FrumForum has determined that lower-value grants like these are approved for specific purposes, often requested by a DOD case officer. This applies to cases where, for example, a serviceman may need a bus ticket home to visit his family.

The sums may seem small, but a soldier who is already receiving a government benefit may greatly value an airline ticket that goes above and beyond the Department of Defense’s budget.

Schlussel Accusation: Too Little Money Is Being Spent on Scholarships for Children of the Fallen

Schlussel complains that “167 students got an average of just $4,803.89 each in tuition.  With the amount this charity raises, these kids should all be getting a free ride paid for by Freedom Alliance.”

The scholarships that she is referring to are considered and approved annually, meaning that a freshman can qualify for about $20,000 over four years.

Further, $4,800 covers more than a year’s tuition at an average Catholic private school and a substantial portion of tuition at many colleges. For example, it nearly covers a year’s tuition at the University of Georgia ($4,900), and covers about a third of a year’s tuition at the University of Michigan ($11,600 for freshmen, $13,000 for upper-classmen).

Overall, Freedom Alliance raised $2.1 million for scholarships in 2008. About $800,000 of that went to scholarships for that year.  Schlussel claims that the remainder, “$1,238,636 – all of which was supposed to go to scholarships for these kids of the fallen – went to Freedom Alliance.”

FrumForum was able to confirm with Freedom Alliance that the $1.2 million that Schlussel cites did not go into the general Freedom Alliance revenues, but instead to the organization’s Scholarship Trust Fund.

Why didn’t Freedom Alliance spend all of its $2.1 million on scholarships that year? Considering your average active duty combat soldier is in his mid-20s, many fallen soldiers have children that are not of age to go to college. Saving a substantial part of funds is simply good planning – the process of funding children of the fallen will continue for fifteen to twenty years. The organization’s trust fund now stands at around $15 million.

Schlussel Accusation: Freedom Alliance’s Postage Costs Are Too High

Debbie Schlussel complains that Freedom Alliance spends too much on postage. Freedom Alliance’s listed cost for postage was $775,599 in 2008, which may seem high given their overall expenses. However, Freedom Alliance sends care packages to active duty soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan, which explains a good deal of the cost behind the postage figure.

Comparing Freedom Alliance to other groups that specialize in sending care packages, Freedom Alliance’s expenditures seem ordinary. For example, Operation Gratitude is a group that specializes in “sending care packages addressed to individual Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines deployed overseas.” When reviewing their tax forms, FrumForum found that they spend similar amounts on postage. Operation Gratitude spent $773,680 in 2008; Freedom Alliance spent $775,599.

More Frum:

Our friend John Guardiano tweeted this afternoon: “Earlier today @DavidFrum asked why conservatives were “ignoring” the charges against Sean Hannity. Now we know why: because they were bogus!” The charges were indeed bogus. But sadly, that’s NOT “why” they were “ignored.” The people who ignored the charges did not know the charges were bogus, and in almost no case did they make any effort to find out. If conservatives now know the charges against Hannity are bogus, it’s because we at FrumForum asked on their behalf.

Freedom Alliance put out a statement earlier today. But that statement was not fully responsive to the charges. And while we appreciate Freedom Alliance’s willingness to invest the time to answer our questions, too often they seemed to take for granted that their plain statement should suffice to dispose of all concerns.

Conservatives rightly demand accountability from government. We need an accountability culture within our own institutions too however. We’re delighted to report that Sean Hannity has not betrayed his fans’ trust. But remember that old Reagan saying about needing to verify as well as trust? More of that please.

Andy McCarthy at The Corner:

The last time I was on the show a few weeks ago, Sean had just announced that his new book, Conservative Victory, would soon be released. With his platform he could have made a ton of money on it. But in a tradition we should laud here at NR, he’s in it to make a point, not a profit, so he insisted that it be put out in paperback at a modest price so that he could get the message out. As K-Lo points out, he and his wife give goo-gobs of money to our troops and, especially, our fallen heroes. Why do you know that? Not because of Sean. His friends feel it’s important to defend him against a libel.  If Sean had his way, he’d keep giving his time, his money, and his energy without anyone knowing the details. He’s from a long lost tradition in which doing the right thing for America is the least we can do, not something we expect a medal for.

It’s a ritual among the millions of Hannity fans that when they call in to Sean’s radio show, they say, “You’re a great American.” The reason the ritual got started — and the reason it’s not stale — is that he really is a great American. It’s a bad sign of the times that anyone should feel compelled to make such an obvious case, but, like K-Lo, I’m proud to make it.

Michelle Malkin:

My Fox News colleague and friend Sean Hannity has devoted countless hours helping the Freedom Alliance — which has a four-star rating from Charity Navigator – raise money for the dependent children of American soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines who have been killed or permanently disabled in the line of duty. The charity funds scholarships to students who have lost a parent on the battlefield in Persian Gulf War, the 1983 terrorist bombing of the Marine Corps barracks in Beirut, Lebanon, and terrorist attacks on the USS Cole and the Pentagon. Sean has hosted Freedom Concerts across the country and helped raise millions for troops and their families

[…]

Indeed, I’ve known her a long time, linked her work and praised her reporting over the years, and once made the mistake of sympathizing with one of her old gripes about Sean. She has accused me (and everyone else on the planet) of stealing her work, hating Jews, and being less intelligent, less brave, and less successful than she is. Some very vindictive people will never be happy and have made it their life’s mission to drag the world down with them. It is very, very sad.

And one more thing: Does David Frum realize what an ass he made of himself?

Frum responds to Malkin:

Michelle’s defense of Sean Hannity consists of three points:

1) An invocation of the heroism of the slain soldiers who have received citations from the Freedom Alliance. (Which proves nothing about the charity.)

2) The Freedom Alliance’s own press release. (Which is assertion but not proof.)

and 3) The reporting done by the FrumForum website! Malkin mentions the names of the reporters, but not, ahem, the name of the place at which the work was published. (Voila.)

Michelle Malkin might pause to consider the irony that those of us who do not stand up and salute at the mention of Sean Hannity’s name were the people who did the work that rebutted the allegations against him.

And then, as a matter of manners: If you’re going to rely on other people’s work, don’t insult them for doing it.

John Guardiano at FrumForum on Frum:

So first try and trash a man’s character and reputation without knowing all the facts. Then when the facts prove you wrong, admit this, but claim that it somehow proves your journalistic virtue. And then proceed to gratuitously dump on the charitable efforts of your target — despite his manifest innocence!

Needless to say, this is neither gracious nor classy; and it doesn’t correspond with the David Frum that I know, like and admire.

To be sure, there is nothing wrong with hard-hitting criticism of your political friends and allies. I myself, in fact, am often quite critical of many conservatives, including John McCain, Robert Spencer, and Ralph Peters.

What’s more, I have defended David, publicly and in print, for his criticism of Mark Levin and Rush Limbaugh.

But you attack a person’s ideas and policies, not the man himself. And you limit your criticism to what is known and truthful, not what is unknown and possibly false.

That’s why Dan Rather’s stories about Bush’s alleged National Guard failures were enough to drive Rather from journalism. Rather, you will recall, had made allegations on air that his reporting simply couldn’t support or back up. Rather charged Bush with being AWOL for much of his required National Guard service.

It would have been a great and legitimate story had Rather been able to prove it, but he could not. Rather’s reporting was flawed and inadequate. But rather than admit error, Rather forced the issue and thus committed an act of journalistic malpractice.

David Frum has not committed journalistic malpractice. In fact, quite the opposite: he committed today an important and civic-minded act of journalism; and for that he and Tim Mak are to be commended. Both gentlemen, after all, devoted themselves to ascertaining the truth or falsehood of Schlussel’s serious allegations against Sean Hannity.

But David never should have published these allegations in the first place unless and until he knew they were true or false and could say so with a reasonable degree of certainty!

David failed that test today; and, in so doing, he failed himself, journalism, and the conservative movement. Even worse, David initially helped smear a man who, so far as we can tell, has done absolutely nothing wrong other than try and raise money for severely wounded war veterans and their families.

David, fess’ up. You made a mistake. And you owe Sean Hannity an apology.

Erick Erickson at Redstate:

I know the value and necessity of cleaning up our own side. I regularly do it. But the good work the Freedom Alliance does means those who cast stones at it should check, double check, and check again before trying to smear it. Same with Sean Hannity. He does tremendously good work for our soldiers, sailors, and veterans.

Schlussel responds to Freedom Alliance and others:

The liars and frauds at Freedom Alliance want to keep the gravy train going for them and their cronies. So, instead of actually refuting a single fact, they make claims without any hard evidence . . . because they don’t have any. None of the circle-the-wagons, fraudulent “conservatives” defending this group have dared post the tax forms because they tell the unvarnished truth.  One of the “prominent bloggers” who posted the phony response is Erick Erickson, a nut from Kentucky, who supports the equally nutty, pro-Iran, anti-American, anti-Gitmo Rand Paul, and who defended Emily Zanotti, the lunatic who has been stalking me for four years, who praised Muslim death, rape, and torture threats against me and my family, and who recently lost a scurrilous, unhinged attempt to threaten my free speech rights by trying to challenge my law license (which she did with the participation of a number of the bloggers now defending Freedom Alliance).  And I love how because the wasteful, lying charity claims in its response that Vannity paid for all his travel (he, in fact, paid for none of it and it was in fancy private planes, which I’ll tell you about in the coming days), that’s now “fact.”  Yup, repeating CYA press releases by perpetrators is now deemed an “exhaustive investigation.”

Here is my initial response to Freedom Alliance’s extremely weak PR attempt at covering its hide  (I will be posting more, next week, as I’ve discovered even more sleaze on the group’s part):

In fact, the Freedom Alliance “response” doesn’t answer any of the questions I raised and goes on to lie more. They don’t address why they gave a triple amputee only $200—and in fact there are many of these examples provided in their tax return addendum, but I only cited a few for brevity’s sake. They also lie and claim that they gave a lot more money to charity b/c they categorize it as “program expenses.” But I’m sorry—calling over $3 million in consulting fees, printing, and postage “program expenses” doesn’t change the fact that it still went to their cronies, not to a fund and not the soldiers who only got on average less than $900 apiece. It also doesn’t change the fact that out of the money spent (I didn’t count the money they claim they raised for their scholarship fund in my percentages or the figures would have been even more outrageous against Freedom Alliance), the vast majority of spending goes to those kinds of expenses.

Also, the “scholarship fund” is really a war chest for something else, since it isn’t being used to fund scholarships for kids of soldiers now.  If it has $15 million dollars, as they claim, then the interest alone should fund a free ride for all of the soldiers’ children currently in college.  What are they waiting for?  Likely, to convert the fund to something else, not what the donors intended.  Do you really think people who held bake sales and bought tickets to the concerts thought they were funding a Merrill Lynch account for a nebulous promise that some kids of fallen troops might go to college from it in 20 years?  No.  They thought they were funding kids to go to college on a full ride now.  But it was all a lie.

As I noted, Hannity said on his nationally-syndicated radio show that a $30,000 donation from Boca Java will fund a full year for one of these kids in college.  Sadly, it never did.  I don’t think anyone listening to his show thought that he meant 20 years from now.  That’s not what Boca Java thought, according to a company spokeswoman.

Sean Scallon at The American Conservative:

Were the “Freedom Concerts” a part of the same kind of scam that has infected the “movement” for the past 30 years? It remains to be seen. But before you make your next donation to your favorite “cause” you may want to ask first where the money is going and how its being spent, otherwise it could very well wind in some stripper’s G-string in D.C. while you’re out beyond the Beltway believing it’s helping a soldier’s kid go to college.

UPDATE: The Huffington Post

UPDATE #2: Joe Conason in Salon