Tuesday, December 24, 2013

Muslim Sisterhood Leader Influencing U.S. Elections?

Muslim Sisterhood Leader Influencing U.S. Elections?

In comments recently attributed to Muslim Sisterhood leader Naglaa Mahmoud – who is also the wife of ousted Egyptian president Mohammed Mursi – it might be worth taking a look at one excerpt we hadn’t really examined before. It has to do with her alleged claim that Barack Obama’s election and re-election was aided by the Muslim Brotherhood and that Hillary could benefit from similar assistance in 2016.
Naglaa Mahmood and Mohammed Mursi.
Naglaa Mahmood and Mohammed Mursi.
Here is a quote about Mahmoud’s comments, by an Arabic reporter, via Mehwar TV (translated here):
Mahmoud further stated that “Hillary depends on us tremendously to help her succeed in the coming presidential elections, just as we helped Barack Obama win twice.” She is quite the looney bin to believe she helped Obama win.
When asked about her relationship with Michelle Obama, Mahmoud said it is very good but it never developed to the point of close friendship, like with Hillary.
In that excerpt, the reporter mocked Mahmoud’s claims, implying that she was simply bloviating and had no such influence.
[Note: Before proceeding, it is worth noting that the number of credible Arabic sources that are reporting on the quotes attributed to Mahmoud is very significant. According to El-Aph, even Mursi's brother and son are not denying she made the comments, only that she isn't doing what she said she was doing and that it is the current Egyptian government that is committing the crimes. It is also not insignificant that Anatolia Press has not denied Mahmoud made the claims and that Egypt's Attorney General has escalated the complaint to the Homeland Security sector.]
Let us consider a separate track and seek where it leads.
In a 2011 New York Times article by Charlie Savage and Eric Schmitt, it was revealed that the FBI had unsealed the details of a case that implicated Pakistan’s intelligence agency in attempts to influence such elections:
Pakistan’s military, including its powerful spy agency, has spent $4 million over two decades in a covert attempt to tilt American policy against India’s control of much of Kashmir — including funneling campaign donations to members of Congress and presidential candidates, the F.B.I. claimed in court papers unsealed Tuesday.
The allegations of a long-running plan to influence American elections and foreign policy come at a time of deep tensions between the United States and Pakistan — and in particular its spy agency — amid the fallout over the American raid that killed Osama bin Laden at a compound deep inside Pakistan on May 2.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation made the allegations in a 43-page affidavit filed in connection with the indictment of two United States citizens on charges that they failed to register with the Justice Department as agents of Pakistan, as required by law. One of the men, Zaheer Ahmad, is in Pakistan, but the other, Syed Fai, lives in Virginia and was arrested on Tuesday.
The article goes on to explain that the entity Fai worked for – the Kashmiri American Council (KAC) – was based in Washington, D.C. and was funded in large part by Pakistan’s Inter-Service Intelligence (ISI). The part about the story that could make Mahmoud’s claims more relevant and worthy of further investigation involves KAC’s contributions to political campaigns in the U.S.
The FBI reported in December of 2011 that Fai pleaded guilty to related charges.
How they did it…
Law enforcement officials said Pakistan used a network of at least 10 unnamed straw contributors, which Mr. Ahmad helped organize, to make the campaign contributions and donate the bulk of the Kashmiri Center’s annual operating budget. The ISI would reimburse them — or their families in Pakistan — for the donations, the officials said.
Most of the straw donors who made contributions to the Kashmiri Center and to politicians in the United States were identified only by code in the court document, though the investigation was continuing and eight F.B.I. field offices executed 17 or 18 search warrants related to other suspected donors on Tuesday, an official said…
…a search in Federal Elections Commission databases for contributions by Mr. Fai showed that he has made more than $20,000 in campaign contributions over the past two decades. The bulk of his donations went to two recipients: the National Republican Senatorial Committee and Representative Dan Burton, a Republican from Indiana.
Mr. Fai made numerous — though smaller — contributions to Democrats as well, including to Representatives James P. Moran of Virginia, Dennis J. Kucinich of Ohio and Gregory W. Meeks of New York, and $250 donations to the 2000 and 2008 presidential campaigns of Al Gore and Barack Obama.
Let’s get back to Naglaa Mahmoud. What we have at this point is a claim attributed to her that the Brotherhood helped Barack Obama get elected twice and that “Hillary depends on (them) tremendously” for 2016.
The next question is ‘how’ a group like the Brotherhood might do this? In politics, it’s almost always about following the money.
Back in August, after the ouster of Mursi as president, we relayed the claims – published by Almesryoon – that Egypt’s Attorney General was investigating “a number of complaints” that the Muslim Brotherhood accepted ‘bribes’ from the U.S. Embassy in Cairo.
A document surfaced at the time – seen below – that showed Brotherhood leaders under Mursi were being paid significant ‘gifts’ in U.S. dollars. These annual payments were found to be more than $750,000 for each recipient, reaching tens of millions of dollars collectively.
Qatar Document indicates Bribes in U.S. Dollars
Qatar Document indicates Bribes in U.S. Dollars
In order to test the veracity of the claims attributed to Mahmoud – that Hillary was planning to count on her (Brotherhood / Sisterhood) in 2016 – consider what is known. During the time that these ‘gifts’ were meted out, the Muslim Brotherhood controlled Egypt; the ‘gifts’ were in U.S. dollars; the U.S. Embassy is an arm of the U.S. State Department; the State Department was led by Hillary Clinton at the time; and the U.S. administration held an extremely pro-Muslim Brotherhood stance.
If Brotherhood leaders were receiving monetary ‘gifts’ that collectively reached sums in the tens of millions of dollars, what were the ‘gifts’ buying?
Consider what happened with the 2009 stimulus package. Was it not about money laundering?
Via AWR Hawkins at Breitbart:
When Obama pushed through his stimulus package shortly after taking office, the money going to bail out GM and Chrysler was not so much intended to shore up those corporations as it was intended to shore up the unions at those corporations. In other words, although one of the ubiquitous reasons given was saving these two iconic American companies, the real goal was to pass tax-payer dollars to Democrat-dominated union members (to keep them voting for Democrat candidates for the foreseeable future). In a real sense, this is nothing more than a sophisticated money laundering scheme. And it’s one that should outrage every American taxpayer regardless of party affiliation.
Operation Fast and Furious proved that the Obama administration was willing to use ‘straw’ purchasers to push a political agenda which included the deaths of innocent people as collateral damage. One ATF supervisor said, ‘If you’re going to make an omelet, you’ve got to scramble some eggs’ (No one at ATF was fired and if that doesn’t communicate an ‘ends justify the means’ mentality, what does?). In the case of Pakistan’s ISI buying Kashmir policy influence, ‘straw donors’ were used. Obama himself appears to have benefited from that.
Of course, the cherry on top might just be that Hillary’s closest adviser – Huma Abedin – is the daughter of another Muslim Sisterhood leader – Saleha Abedin – who is a close colleague of Mahomoud.
Nothing to see here?
Hardly.

7 Ways To Get Verified on Twitter -- Including the Story of How I Did


7 Ways To Get Verified on Twitter -- Including the Story of How I Did

This is probably the No. 1 question I get on Twitter. Here's what I know.
Aug 22, 2013 at 10:00am | Leave a comment

image
I love Howie Mandel. And not just because he's verified on Twitter. But that helps.
Getting verified on Twitter is a bit of a mystery. Which I suppose is why many people want to find out how to do it.
To unravel the mystery a bit further, I decided to go down a rabbit hole of articles online to see if I could find every possible angle on this one, and here's My Complete Guide To Getting Verified On Twitter Which Probably Won't Get You Verified On Twitter (But It's The Best I Can Do). Or MCGTGVOTWPWGYVOTBITBICD for short. And yes, I realize some of these options are the equivalent of saying "You have to know someone," but as I discovered the more I looked, that's also not entirely true. Strategy can help.
So let's look at the routes to getting the blue.
Option 1: Have a good agent, and ask him or her to do the dirty work. Trust me, a good agent will be able to hook you up.
That's how Guy Raz, host of NPR's All Things Considered did it. He's not a celebrity, per se, but he does have an agent with a connection to Twitter to make it happen. His agency: UTA.
It's also how any new celebrities joining Twitter -- like the site's newest addition this week of Drew Barrymore -- get it done. They have people.
Option 2: Get a job at a company that has a deal with Twitter to get company-wide verification for its high-level employees.
That's what happened for employees at BuzzFeed, although not everyone wanted the blue check mark. Editor Katie Notopoulos declined the opportunity because she didn't want to lose her "street cred" as explained by Choire Sicha in this very funny piece in The Awl about "The Unverified."
Katie herself also wrote a delightful piece on the very randomness of the process of verification by highlighting "The Least Popular Verified Twitter Accounts." My favorite on her list? A very affable-seeming Philadelphia police officer named Roderick Walton (who has as of this writing 287 followers -- wait, no 288, I just followed him).
Option 3: See if you can angle (but don't beg) to get noticed by Twitter's @Verified account, and in a sense, "dress for the job you want" by following the best practices Twitter recommends to its newly verified users.
Anil Dash has a great post explaining what the new Twitter verification process entails, including the randomness of selection -- and how, literally, you might wake up one day to find that you have a direct message from @Verified. The message reads: "We at Twitter would like to verify your account. Please click this account and follow the instructions."
There are then three steps that essentially test you on your Twitter knowledge of how to get more followers and tweet effectively. Right before you get to the verification page you are told to "increase your trustworthiness by following other verified users."
So until you get that DM from @Verified, follow the old adage to "act as if." Essentially, make yourself stand out in your field, demonstrate value, tweet well and follow verified users. Show that you are following Twitter's guidelines, too, by embedding the "follow" button your website, as Twitter recommends.
After you've done all this, multiple articles recommend that you then DM @Verified yourself -- but it's a Catch 22 because you can only DM an account if they follow you back. I suppose you could ask someone who is followed by @Verified -- seeing as the account follows more than 54,000 users -- to send a DM on your behalf? You never know.
Or you could try what the user @Real_JuicyJones did and choose a name like "Real Juicy Jones." He recently tweeted, "I got verified accounts following me because of my twitter name. Turn up!"
Option 4: Network with -- or better yet, work for, or even better yet, be that person -- who has an "in" with someone powerful at Twitter who has pull.
Look at Howard Stern. He actually had Twitter founder Biz Stone on the show and asked him to verify one of his staff members right then and there. Biz provided the hookup, and Ronnie the Limo Driver is now verified.
It's also how I was able to get verified. In 2010, I emailed Biz directly because I had his contact info from writing one of the first articles on Twitter in 2009 and also reaching out to him for another article on networking. Rereading it now, the email I wrote is pretty sycophantic and cringe-inducing, but hey, transparency, right?
subject: Please read: Mandy Stadtmiller from the New York Post
"Hi Biz, I've interviewed you a couple of times for The Post and I'm truly sorry to bother you with this... but am really hoping you can help. I just had another person email me today to ask if it was really my Twitter account and if I really worked at The NY Post. In 2009, I wrote one of the very first articles about Twitter for The Post right after SXSW and am a huge advocate when old-school media people are often so quick to put it down. As I said, I'm very sorry to bother you with this as you clearly have a million more important things to do -- but I'm not sure what else to do and figured it was worth a shot. Thank you so much regardless... and as you can see I plug Twitter below in my signature file for The Post, too! I've even stepped up to the larger News Corp. organization as a whole and told them to get involved on a much bigger level here with the social media tool. I will see if I can reach you by cell phone later today as well. Hope all is terrific. Best, Mandy"
When I logged into Twitter later that day, the verified check mark was right there.
Option 5: It's rumor and anecdotal, but as one highly publicized case revealed, pay $15,000 in advertising and Twitter will verify your company's account.
At least that is the story that Ad Age reported about the magazine The Fader a year ago. I just checked, and the music mag's account is now verified so maybe bad press is another way to go?
Option 6: Not so subtly "reach out" to Twitter PR in the name of investigating this whole "verification" phenomenon.
Ask a bunch of questions to the Twitter team as you do your "research" and make yourself known. Get on the radar. You might just get verified and be able to write an article like this.
Option 7: Have your fans campaign for you on Twitter directly to @Verified to get the checkmark.
Check out the recently verified music group The Lylas. What is their most recent tweet? "We are so thankful to our amazing fans for getting us verified!" If you search @Verified, you'll see plenty of folks pleading for someone to get the badge. Apparently, sometimes it actually works.
Option 8: Photoshop it -- but risk getting suspended on Twitter.
Thanks to the header design of Twitter there's a hack that lets you embed the checkmark, although if you have fairly discerning vision you can tell it's not the real thing because the layers throw the shading off. Also, if you do this: Twitter might just suspend your account so, yeah, there's that.
Option 9: Realize that in the end, getting the verified badge really doesn't mean a whole lot anyway, and forget about it.
Just look at Brian Cuban's story of getting verified. He doesn't take himself or the process too seriously and concludes on a pretty great note: "I am here to tell you that in the end, except for some specific impersonation issues, it doesn’t mean squat. Have a nice day!"
***
You can subscribe to Mandy's free podcast at http://bit.ly/newswhore.

Muslims Say “Jesus is a dog” And Throw Bags Of Urine At Christians

Muslims Say “Jesus is a dog” And Throw Bags Of Urine At Christians i guess now islam cant say they believe in jesus any more now what they really believe is exposed

By Theodore Shoebat

Last year a mob of Muslims surrounded a church in Indonesia, throwing rocks and frothing from their poisonous lips were their declarations of blasphemy. They hung up signs with demonic statements such as, “Jesus is a dog” and “Kill the Christians.” They threw rocks, dirt, and even bags of urine at the church and the Christians.
This is just scratching the service as to the depth of depravity and vileness in which the heresy of Islam plunges a man’s soul. And all of this deplorable violence took place as the police stood by and watched.
The liberty to have actually just having a church in Indonesia is grueling and unendurable to say the least. One church had to pay more than a million U.S. dollars to acquire a permit, and the permit is suppose to be free.
In the year 2012, International Christian Concern found that at least 50 churches were forced to close down in Indonesia.
And churches continue to close down in Indonesia, this is why we must help our brethren. Donate now to save Christian lives.
And the demons who fell from Heaven are ever so more taking the souls of the Muslims. Just look at this photo from a recent Islamic rally in Egypt — you can just see the demonic possession in this man’s eyes:
9a93f257-f25d-4bd2-8189-69a66c5fd6b1
Also, with all of the dangerous forces surrounding Christendom, it is time that we become militant. Get the new 2 disk DVD set, that contains almost 5 hours of footage on Christian militancy.
DONATE NOW TO SAVE CHRISTIAN LIVES

Outrage as Army bans word ‘Christmas’: ‘Treats pornography better than it does Christmas’

Outrage as Army bans word ‘Christmas’: ‘Treats pornography better than it does Christmas’

dont sat christmasThe Army got a stern warning from a Defense Department representative recently. Avoid the word “Christmas” under all circumstances.
An equal opportunity officer delivered the message to leaders of the 158th Infantry Brigade at Mississippi’s Camp Shelby, according to Fox News.
An unidentified soldier attending the meeting said that when the subject of the upcoming Christmas football game was brought up, the officer immediately told the attendees that the word “Christmas” couldn’t be used.
“Our equal opportunity representative stopped the briefing and told us that we can’t say Christmas,” the soldier told Fox News. “Almost the entire room blew up. Everybody was frustrated. The equal opportunity rep told our commander that not everyone celebrates Christmas and we couldn’t say Christmas celebration. It had to be holiday celebration.”
When a brief, heated discussion on political correctness ensued, the equal opportunity officer said those weren’t her rules — they were the Army’s.
“She said an individual can say Christmas, but as an organization in the Army, you can’t say Christmas,” the soldier said.
The soldier has since hired a lawyer.
“It’s unbelievable that the Army would ban ‘Christmas’ like it’s a bad word,” said Michael Berry, an attorney with the Liberty Institute, a legal firm representing the soldier. “Are they going to have the ‘Merry Christmas’ police going around issuing citations to an soldier who slips and says the word? They’re treating Christmas like it’s pornography. As a matter of fact, the Army actually treats pornography better than it does Christmas.”
Fox reported:
It’s not the first time Equal Opportunity officers have caused trouble at Camp Shelby. Earlier this year, I reported exclusively about a briefing at Camp Shelby that labeled the American Family Association as a domestic hate group.
After my story was published, the Secretary of the Army ordered military leaders to halt all briefings on extremist organizations that labeled Evangelical Christian ministries as domestic hate groups.
“Between the Air Force and the Army, it’s like they don’t like Christian values, they don’t like the word Christ or Christmas,” the soldier said. “They don’t like you talking about it.”
Until this gets all sorted out, the Department of Defense wishes everyone a very merry winter.

Federal Courts: Obama Partnership With Drug Cartels Deeper Than Weapons

Federal Courts: Obama Partnership With Drug Cartels Deeper Than Weapons

federal
via The Free Patriot
by: Brandon Walker
Presented in a Federal Judge’s court ruling is an insight we have never seen in Federal Courts. It seems very prominent that Obama’s partnership with drug cartels go way beyond the weapons we knew about!
A federal court in Texas has issued a formal opinion on the court case United States of America v. Mirtha Veronica Nava-Martinez. The judge, Andrew Hanen, presented his opinion from the case that threw open the doors to watch the travesty of justice that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the shear lawlessness of the Obama Administration. This goes way beyond the Fast and Furious weapons Scandal.
While most the Mainstream Media is concentrating on Duck Dynasty, a Federal Court in Texas was hearing a little unheard about case. It seems that the defendant, Nava-Martinez, had a little bit of work behind closed doors smuggling children from El Salvador into the United States to be given to illegal immigrants so that they could stay in the US with drug cartel money. The problem was after paying $8500 to smuggle a little girl out of South America to the US, the person in charge of smuggling the child got caught in human trafficking by DHS at the border.
Then the unusual happened. Instead of turning the human trafficker over to Mexico, or turning them around and securing the boarders, DHS delivered the child to the destination in Virginia!
What is the worst part, Nava-Martinez is a prior felon for food stamp fraud in 2011, and suspected of being a drug cartel go between. The person that hired her to smuggle the child is a woman named Patricia Elizabeth Salmeron Santos. Santos has been denied legally entry into the United States more than once, with the last time being 2001. She lives in Virginia since that time illegally and is hoping for the Amnesty bill to go through.
Town Hall and the Daily Caller both touch on what the judge says in his opinion. We also would like to thank Jonh Hinderaker and Powerline for bringing it to our attention.
Mind you that the basis of this one child is just the tip of the iceberg according to the reports, and the judges opinion. This may go deeper and darker than any Presidential Administration in history.
Here is what the judge had to say:
The criminal conspiracy instigated by Salmeron Santos [the mother in Virginia] was temporarily interrupted when Nava-Martinez [the professional human trafficker] was arrested. Despite this setback, the goal of the conspiracy was successfully completed thanks to the actions of the United States Government. The Court is quite concerned with the apparent policy of the Department of Homeland Security (hereinafter “HHS”) of completing the criminal missions of individuals who are violating the border security of the United States. Customs and Border Protection agents stopped the Defendant at the border inspection point. She was arrested, and the child was taken into custody. The DHS officials were notified that Salmeron Santos instigated this illegal conduct. Yet, instead of arresting Salmeron Santos for instigating the conspiracy to violate our border security laws, the DHS delivered the child to her–thus successfully completing the mission of the criminal conspiracy. It did not arrest her. It did not prosecute her. It did not even initiate deportation proceedings for her. This DHS policy is a dangerous course of action.
Mind you, for the record, that this is not personal opinion on calling it a conspiracy. This comes from the actual court order attached to this.
The DHS, instead of enforcing our border security laws, actually assisted the criminal conspiracy in achieving its illegal goals. The Government’s actions were not done in connection with a sting operation or a controlled delivery situation. Rather, the actions it took were directly in furtherance of Y.P.S.’s [the little girl's] illegal presence in the United States. … In summary, instead of enforcing the laws of the United States, the Government took direct steps to help the individuals who violated it. A private citizen would, and should, be prosecuted for this conduct.
The judge is very accurate on this. There have been several cases along the border including some brought by the Free Patriot paper that have been prosecuted. If this was a private citizen or company, they would be facing 25 to life in Texas if the child was not harmed. It is a capital offense in Texas if the child is harmed.
This is the fourth case with the same factual situation this Court has had in as many weeks. In all of the cases, human traffickers who smuggled minor children were apprehended short of delivering the children to their ultimate destination. In all cases, a parent, if not both parents, of the children was in this country illegally. That parent initiated the conspiracy to smuggle the minors into the country illegally. He or she also funded the conspiracy. In each case, the DHS completed the criminal conspiracy, instead of enforcing the laws of the United States, by delivering the minors to the custody of the parent illegally living in the United States….
[T]here is no explanation. The DHS has simply chosen not to enforce the United States’ border security laws.
We have reports from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents off the record saying they are told not to enforce border security at this time. Again, this is not just one judge’s opinion but fact.
In each of these cases, the Government also incurred significant expense to help complete the conspiracy. In all cases when the Government apprehended some of the traffickers, the Government transported the children across the country to unite them with a parent (or parents) who was in the country illegally. In one situation, the Government flew a child to multiple locations in different parts of the United States. The taxpayers of the United States suffer the expense of delivering these minors.
First, and most importantly, these illegal activities help fund the illegal drug cartels which are a very real danger for both citizens of this country and Mexico.
Mexican cartels control most of the human smuggling and human trafficking routes and networks in Texas. The nature of the cartels’ command and control of human smuggling and human trafficking networks along the border is varied, including cartel members having direct organizational involvement and responsibility over human smuggling and human trafficking operations.
This Court need not list the dangers involved for minors, or even adults, who are being smuggled into the United States. In the last year, this Court has seen instances where aliens being smuggled were assaulted, raped, kidnapped and/or killed.
There is more, but this seems confirmation of every thing we have feared about the President and the Drug Cartels. He goes further than this, but this in itself is treason without delving further into the case. This implicates the Commander-in-Chief in espionage, drug trafficking, human trafficking, murder, rape, and a list of felonies. Either Eric Holder or President Obama had to be directly involved as the orders came from the top of the department, and either way someone needs to be in prison over this.
The judge closes the case with one final statement. “DHS should enforce the laws of the United States-not break them.”

NSA Threatens To Leak Pics of Reid & Gay Lover Geraldo If Agency Punished

NSA Threatens To Leak Pics of Reid & Gay Lover Geraldo If Agency Punished

Senior officials at the National Security Agency said they will leak compromising photos of Harry Reid and who they say is his gay lover, Geraldo Rivera, if Reid seeks to restrict their data collection practices. “These photos will effectively end Senator Reid’s political career” said one official. “We have photos of Reid & Rivera tongue kissing, and pictures of Reid with a ball gag in his mouth being whipped by Geraldo. It’s truly disgusting,” the official continued.
The threat to leak the photos came after Reid said that he was open to legislation that would rein in the NSA.bulletproof
“We know that senators, both Democrats and Republicans, would like to change the law that relates to some of the collection activities,” Reid said. “And I think that’s good…”
Reached for comment, Senator Reid said, “Yes, Geraldo is my gay lover, and has been for some time. It should come as no surprise to anyone. I got him a Midnight Fantasy Baby Doll Tap for Christmas. He better like it, too.”
Calls to Rivera’s office were not returned. It’s been reported that he’s in hiding after losing national radio syndication because, well, basically, he sucks. Also, his selfie was just horrendous. Ugh.
harry-reid-geraldo-2
source: patdollard.com

Treason Exposed! Obama Used Benghazi Attack to Cover Up Arms Shipments to Muslim Brotherhood

Published on Dec 4, 2013
Despite evidence showing the Benghazi attack was staged by a State Department hired jihadist security outfit in connection with an arms transfer to al-Qaeda mercenaries in Syria, the establishment media is pretending it does not know what happened in Libya on September 11, 2012.

The corporate media has yet to point out that the Obama administration attempted to cover-up the real reason for the murder of ambassador Stevens -- U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice and the State Department initially pointing to a lame anti-Muslim video -- and has consistently downplayed the incident and characterized it as a non-event not requiring congressional investigation and the impeachment of President Obama.

Covert War Between the Pentagon and CIA

A number of people came forward following the attack have built an indisputable case that the CIA was shipping arms from U.S.-controlled facilities located at the U.S. mission in Benghazi to its mercenaries in Syria and the murder of ambassador Stevens was carried out by an al-Qaeda affiliated group as part of a turf war between the CIA and elements in the Pentagon.
"The real issue is very simple, you have to think of two elements of the government fighting each other that are covert," Pieczenik said. "The government is never unified, it never has been unified. For over thirty or forty years there has been a conflict between the military and the CIA and the FBI... The CIA has been run for the last fifty years by civilians who are out of control."

Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use.