- 31 mei 2011
Israel's PR victory shames news broadcasters
Our latest analysis of news bulletins reveals how Israel continues to spin images of war.
The propaganda battle over the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has reached a new level of intensity. In 2004 the Glasgow University Media Group http://fwd4.me/02jN published a major study on TV coverage of the Second Intifada and its impact on public understanding. We analysed about 200 programmes and questioned more than 800 people. Our conclusion: reporting was dominated by Israeli accounts.
Since then we have been contacted by many journalists, especially from the BBC, and told of the intense pressures they are under that limit criticism of Israel. They asked us to raise the issue in public because they can't. They speak of "waiting in fear for the phone call from the Israelis" (meaning the embassy or higher), of the BBC's Jerusalem bureau having been "leant on by the Americans", of being "guilty of self-censorship" and of "urgently needing an external arbiter". Yet the public response of the BBC is to avoid reporting our latest findings. Those in control have the power to say what is not going to be the news.
For their part, the Israelis have increased their PR effort. The Arab spring has put demands for democracy and freedom at the heart of Middle East politics, and new technology has created more problems for the spin doctors. The most graphic images of war can now be brought immediately into public view, including the deaths of women and children.
When Israel planned its attack on Gaza in December 2008, it developed a new National Information Directorate http://fwd4.me/02jO , and the supply of possible material was limited by stopping reporters from entering Gaza during the fighting. In 2010, when Israel attacked the Gaza aid flotilla http://fwd4.me/02jP , it issued edited footage with its own captions about what was supposed to have happened. This highly contested account was nonetheless largely swallowed by TV news programmes. A UN-sponsored report, which later refuted the account, was barely covered. http://fwd4.me/02jQ
These new public relations were designed to co-ordinate specific messages across all information sources, repeated by every Israeli speaker. Each time a grim visual image appeared, the Israeli explanation would be alongside it. In the US, messages were exhaustively analysed by The Israel Project, a US-based group that, according to Shimon Peres http://fwd4.me/02jR , "has given Israel new tools in the battle to win the hearts and minds of the world". In a document of more than 100 pages (labelled "not for publication or distribution") an enormous range of possible statements about Israel was sorted into categories of "words that work" and "words that will turn listeners off".
There are strictures about what should be said and how to say it: avoid religion, Israeli messages should focus on security and peace, make sure you distinguish between the Palestinian people and Hamas (even though Hamas was elected). There is a remarkable likeness between these and the content of TV news headlines. Many journalists bought the message. Hamas was being attacked, and somehow not the Palestinians: "The bombardment continues on Hamas targets" http://fwd4.me/02jS (BBC1, 31 December 2008); "The offensive against Hamas enters its second week" http://fwd4.me/02jT (BBC1, 3 January 2009).
There were terrible images of Palestinian casualties but the message from Israel was relentless. Its attack was a necessary "response" to the firing of rockets by Palestinians. It was the Palestinian action that had started the trouble. In a new project http://fwd4.me/02jU , we have analysed more than 4,000 lines of text from the main UK news bulletins of the attack, but there was no coverage in these of the killing by the Israelis of more than 1,000 Palestinians, including hundreds of children, in the three years before it.
In the TV news coverage, Israeli statements on the causes of action overwhelmed those of the Palestinians by more than three to one. Palestinian statements tended to be only that they would seek revenge on Israel. The underlying reasons for the conflict were absent, such as being driven from their homes and land when Israel was created.
Journalists tended to stay on the firmest ground in reporting, such as the images of "innocent victims", and there was little said about why Palestinians were fighting Israel. We interviewed audience groups and found the gaps in their knowledge closely paralleled absences in the news. A majority believed Palestinians broke the ceasefire that existed before the December attack and did not know Israel had attacked Gaza during it, in November 2008, killing six Palestinians. http://fwd4.me/02jV
Members of the public expressed sorrow for the plight of Palestinians but, because of the Israeli message so firmly carried by TV, they thought the Palestinians had somehow brought it on themselves. As one put it: "When I saw the pictures of the dead children it was dreadful, I was in tears but it didn't make me feel that the Palestinians and Hamas were right … I think the Palestinians haven't taken the chance to work towards a peaceful solution.
Hamas called an end to the last ceasefire." This participant was surprised to hear Hamas was reported to have said it would have stopped the rockets if Israel had agreed to lift its economic siege. The source was Ephraim Halevy, former head of the Mossad intelligence service. http://fwd4.me/02jX
Images of suffering do not now in themselves affect how audiences see the validity of actions in war. People see the images as tragic, but judgments as to who is right and wrong are now firmly in the hands of the spin doctors.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/may/31/israel-pr-victory-images-war 8 jun 2011, 11:40 , Respect -
Maria 14 sept 2011
USA's No 1 problem: Israel and its lobby
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X0sZQf00DpA
The United States' massive support for Israel has cost the American people trillions of dollars and a multitude of lives. It has diminished the USA's moral standing in the world. It has undermined domestic freedoms. It has exposed the USA to unnecessary and growing peril.
8 juni 2011
The end of the media's Israel fixation?
Since the uprisings in the Middle East, the media's balance and scrutiny has been more proportionate.
The Arab spring http://fwd4.me/03Qe has had a remarkable effect on the media's appetite for Middle East news which doesn't revolve around Israel. Over the first three months of this year, correspondents usually engaged full time in counting Israeli bricks going down in the West Bank were dispatched to Tahrir Square and Tripoli, because something even bigger was happening.
A recent report http://fwd4.me/03Qf by Just Journalism documents how in 2010, when the stirrings of mass discontent were surely detectable across the region, Middle East coverage by the British broadsheets and the BBC News website was disproportionately focused on Israel. Across all outlets and in news, comment and editorial categories, Israel was by far the most discussed country. In the case of the BBC, coverage of Egypt, Libya and Tunisia combined and doubled still amounted to less than was produced about Israel.
Recently, Greg Philo http://fwd4.me/03Qg of Glasgow University Media Unit complained on these pages that having pored over 4,000 lines of text from main UK broadcast bulletins during the 2008/9 Gaza war, not enough was said about Palestinians killed by Israel prior to the events being reported. Nothing could better illustrate the media obsession with Israel than the presence of such quantities of material for Philo to wade through. It is highly doubtful that 4,000 lines of text from main UK broadcast bulletins exist in relation to the closing weeks of the Sri Lanka war, also in 2009, in which up to 40 times more civilians died than in Gaza.
It's also worth noting that for all the dozens of headlines last month about Israeli prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu's "defiance" and "refusals" regarding taking the necessary steps for peace, the fresh proclamations by Hamas http://fwd4.me/03Qh about how they have zero intention of ever accepting the existence of Israel attracted virtually no coverage.
The battle for control over the narrative of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has led to accusations that Zionists control the media. This is hard to believe, given the daily offerings of Jerusalem correspondents about settlement expansion, the Gaza blockade, loyalty oaths, racist rabbis, demolitions, checkpoints etc. If anyone is leaning on these reporters it plainly has no effect. It's a different story in Gaza where Hamas thugs recently beat a Reuters journalist http://fwd4.me/03Qj with a metal pole and threatened another with being thrown out of a tall building.
In reality, what detractors of Israel refer to disparagingly as the "Israeli PR machine" usually consists of defensive appearances on TV and radio by government officials, who are grilled by newscasters about whatever Israeli behaviour is being fixated upon that day. The themes are always familiar: why is Israel so obstructive to peace? Why does it breach humanitarian law? Why is its use of force so disproportionate? Mark Regev is one such representative and a particular focal point for venomous attack, http://fwd4.me/03Qk generating headlines such as, "Mark Regev, Israel's master of public relations" with the attendant accusations of being "horribly compelling". Or inconveniently plausible.
Last year, however, something relatively unprecedented happened. In the midst of yet another Israel-centred media storm, after the deaths of nine passengers on the Mavi Marmara http://fwd4.me/03Qm during a violent confrontation on the high seas, Israel released clear footage, backing up its contention that its forces were attacked by a baying mob on board the boat.
Regev was around but this time his smooth talking was less important. The news-viewing public had seen for themselves Israeli commandos descending one by one on ropes on to the deck and being set upon by peace activists with sticks and poles, while their comrades could be seen carrying chairs and other objects for use against the brutal invaders at the bottom of the scrum.
The media response to this vindicating Israeli evidence is instructive on the issue of the British narrative on Israel-Palestine. A stalwart of the Palestinian PR machine, Sarah Colborne of the Palestine Solidarity Campaign, who was on board the boat, was generally given free rein across the media to accuse Israel of inexplicable mendacity. However, it was only when subjected to a rare grilling http://fwd4.me/03Qn on the BBC's Today programme that she came unstuck. Sarah Montague's questioning about who started the violence and the presence on board of wannabe martyrs, left her implausible tale of innocence seriously compromised.
The latent journalistic interest in previously unreported swaths of the Middle East landscape has revealed the horrors of Syrian torture chambers from which dead children are returned to their parents without their genitals, and endless other gruesome realities, previously concealed from British media consumers. Hopefully, in light of these major events, a more balanced and proportionate approach to reporting from a complex region will emerge and remain.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jun/08/media-obsession-with-israel 10 nov 2011, 20:41 , Respect -
Maria 10 nov 2011
Israel says initiative to increase Palestinian jobs
BETHLEHEM (Ma'an) -- Israeli officials held Wednesday an employment fair aimed at increasing the number of Palestinians working in Israel, the Israeli military announced.
The Efraim district coordination and liaison unit hosted chairmen and representatives of both the Israeli and Palestinian employment bureaus during the fair, the army said.
Israel's civil administration arranged the fair and the Palestinian Authority Ministry of Economy cooperated, the army said, adding that the purpose was to connect Israeli employers with Palestinian workers.
"The success of the employment fair will encourage us to hold additional fairs in the future, our next goal being an agriculture fair," said Maj. Sultan Hmadan, civil administration economy chief, in a statement.
The statement also said Israel made accommodations during the Muslim holiday of Eid al-Adha to ease the criteria for Palestinians to work in Israel such as reducing the age limit from 28 to 26.
http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=435684 20 nov 2011, 11:32 , Respect -
Maria 20 nov 2011
Judea Brigade Holds Emergency Response Exercise to IED Terror Attack
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kuN2oGdnwHI
The Judea Regional Brigade of the Judea and Samaria Division held an educational program for all its commanders and medical teams on Monday (November 14) in preparation for a terror attack with multiple casualties and injuries.
This is considered the largest exercise held in the Brigade in years, incorporating many forces and civilian simulators.
A brigade training exercise was held in the field simulating a terror attack with multiple casualties and the possibilities of treating it. The operational bodies examined the medical responses to various scenarios of terror attacks in the region, including a terror attack with multiple injuries and casualties at the Cave of Patriarchs in Hebron.
Hamas Terrorist Tactics in the Gaza Strip
(4:33) Hamas Terrorist Tactics in the Gaza Strip
This video explains the background to operation Cast Lead, specifically the terrorist tactics that Hamas employs. It shows how Hamas smuggles in weaponry in order to arm itself and how it employs the civilian population and infastructure in order to carry out terrorist attacks against Israel. Hamas' use of human shields during operation Cast Lead caused many civilian casualties.
http://fwd4.me/0h7l
Israeli Special Police YAMAS Counter Terror Unit
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZzLRC6dIAGk (part 1-5)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXNsMyMqDnY (part 2-5)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DpwzLuxc5Io (part 3-5)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g5qy60iAxRM (part 4-5)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7r9Rgvmzzac (part 5-5)
Yamas (Hebrew: Yehidat HaMista'arvim) is an elite undercover special operations unit attached to the Israeli Border Police (Magav). Its existence has long been denied by the Israeli government due to the ultra secret nature of the unit, but they are arguably the most brutal and efficient counter-terror unit in the world, drawing from an extremely grueling and ruthless training regimen and selection process where few survive to the end, forming one of Israel's most elite units. 11 jan 2012, 14:17 , Respect -
Maria Who Are The Israelites? (FULL MOVIE) True Christianity Supports True Jews, Zionist Jews Exposed 2011
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2ljZlCT9Bc
Revelation 2:9 I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan.
In the mid-eighth century, the ruling elite of the Khazars, a Turkic tribe in Eurasia, converted to Judaism. Their reason was political, not spiritual. By embracing Judaism, the Khazars were able to maintain their independence from rival monotheistic states, the Muslim caliphate and the Christian Byzantine empire. Governed by a version of rabbinical law, the Khazar Jewish kingdom flourished along the Volga basin until the beginning of the second millennium, at which point it dissolved, leaving behind a mystery: Did the Khazar converts to Judaism remain Jews, and, if so, what became of them?
Enter Shlomo Sand. In a new book, "The Invention of the Jewish People," the Tel Aviv University professor of history argues that large numbers of Khazar Jews migrated westward into Ukraine, Poland and Lithuania, where they played a decisive role in the establishment of Eastern European Jewry. The implications are far-reaching: If the bulk of Eastern European Jews are the descendents of Khazars—not the ancient Israelites—then most Jews have no ancestral links to Palestine. Put differently: If most Jews are not Semites, then what justification is there for a Jewish state in the Middle East?
Albert Pike (Illuminati and KKK) Albert Pike was born in Boston 1809, He studied at Harvard, wrote a blueprint of events that would play themselves out in the 20th century, with even more of these events yet to come. It is this blueprint which we believe unseen leaders are following today, knowingly or not, to engineer the planned Third and Final World War.
"The Third World War must be fomented by taking advantage of the differences caused by the "agentur" of the "Illuminati" between the political Zionists and the leaders of Islamic World. The war must be conducted in such a way that Islam (the Moslem Arabic World) and political Zionism (the State of Israel) mutually destroy each other.
Look at the time line (will post below) and the connection of the Rothschilds starting the Federal Reserve bank, Balfour Declaration "Zionist" (who were funded by Rothschild and the British), also first automobiles (need for oil), and the problems of the middle east.
The Balfour Declaration
In 1917, the British issued the Balfour Declaration. The Declaration was a letter to Jewish financier Lord Rothschild from British foreign secretary Lord Balfour, which stated that the British Government supported the creation of a Jewish homeland, and would aid in its creation. As a result, Jewish immigration to Palestine rose. This angered the Palestinians because they felt like the Jews were invading Palestinian land. Also, Britain did not go over the Balfour Declaration with them, so they did not know what was going on.
Start of the Federal Reserve
Linear connection between the Rothschilds and the Bank of England, and the London banking houses which ultimately control the Federal Reserve Banks through their stockholdings of bank stock and their subsidiary firms in New York. The two principal Rothschild representatives in New York, J. P. Morgan Co., and Kuhn, Loeb & Co. were the firms which set up the Jekyll Island Conference at which the Federal Reserve Act was drafted, who directed the subsequent successful campaign to have the plan enacted into law by Congress, and who purchased the controlling amounts of stock in the Federal Reserve Bank of New York in 1914.
The Khazars are impostors: well-suppressed knowledge is emerging about this war-like tribe of whites that rose to power in Eastern Europe and were hated by the other whites they conquered due to there severe, exploitative treatment of them. The Khazars all converted to Judaism as a political ploy during the Middle Ages. It appears that they learned all they could fromt he real Hebrews before usurping them, selling them into slavery (or killing them) and taking over in their place, -using the corrupted form of Judaism to hide behind while continuing their treachery right into modern times.
Much of Europe's historical hate for "Jews" is hate for the ruthless Khazars who continued to be hated in spite of becoming "Jews."
In fact, the word "Jew" originated during the 1700s to label them! (Hatonn: p3, 17) Counterfeit Blessings - The Anti-Chritst by Any Name: Khazars by G.C. Hatonn, expoes that the Khazars are the real "anti-Semites" who have labeled themselves as Zionists and "Jews" to deceive the world in furthering their own plans for global & political conquest. (See pages 22-24 in this document) In the 13th Tribe. Arthur Koesler traces teh history of the Khazars and their rise to power... Know The Truth TV KnowTheTruthTV 2 mar 2012, 13:12 , Respect
-
Maria 11 jan 2011
Israel media focus on PA settlement boycott
JERUSALEM (Ma'an) -- Israel's Channel Two opened its news bulletin Tuesday with a report on the Palestinian campaign to boycott settlement produce.
The report said Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Salam Fayyad had extended the boycott to include all Israeli produce.
Interviewed for the report, political analyst Odi Segal said the boycott was being heavily promoted on Palestinian TV.
Israelis were angered by French sponsorship of the campaign, Segal said.
The Israeli daily The Jerusalem Post reported Tuesday that Palestinian TV advertisements promoting the boycott were funded by the Spanish government and Spanish NGOs.
The Palestinian Authority announced the settlement boycott in early 2010, which includes a ban on working in settlements and trading in settlement-made goods.
Shortly after President Mahmoud Abbas approved a new law that would punish traders with up to five years in prison and hefty fines for selling settlement products.
http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=350318
12 jan 2011
Israel's public relations policy: never apologise, always confuse
Jesse Rosenfeld and Joseph Dana
Never believe the Israeli army killed an unarmed civilian until it's officially denied. This paraphrasing of Mark Twain's "never believe anything until it has officially been denied," should become a mantra for journalists operating in the Middle East.
It is a point reinforced recently by the death of a West Bank Palestinian resident, Jawaher abu Rahmah, who died from tear gas exposure during the recent demonstration against Israel's separation wall and land annexation in the village of Bil'in.
It has become an almost predictable pattern: a Palestinian civilian is killed during a demonstration or Israeli military incursion and the evidence and witness testimony clearly demonstrates Israeli culpability. Then, military sources give farfetched and contradictory statements that become the central focus in Israeli and American media reports.
Jawaher, the 36-year-old sister of Bassem abu Rahmah - who was killed in 2009 from a high-velocity Israeli tear-gas canister fired directly at his chest - was seen by demonstrators, family members and the ambulance driver that took her to hospital, experiencing asphyxiation from a large amount of tear gas. Immediately following her death on January 1, quotes from unnamed Israeli military personnel began saturating the pro-Israel blogosphere. Statements ranging from claims that she was not at the protests and had cancer, to her being released from the hospital and later dying at home moved seamlessly from unvetted blogs to the headlines of Israeli dailies, and then into the main focus of news coverage in the American press.
Rather than make an official statement from the spokesperson's office, the Israeli military operated behind the scenes, briefing their right-wing English language activist support base to generate a counter-narrative of Palestinian conspiracy theories. Officially, the Israeli military only stated that the death needed further investigation, yet with the groundwork laid in their online networks and aided by complete disregard of journalistic ethics, Israel's widely read daily, Maariv, accused Palestinians of a "blood libel."
While the type of deflection was a display of public relations in the age of new media, the substance of the Israeli military's response was part of a well-established strategy of misinformation and victim blaming designed to obscure the reality of the situation. Rather than try and make a case of legitimacy when it's difficult to do so, the Israeli military's PR campaign has been one of saturating the media with so many conflicting reports, innuendos and outright lies that the public doesn't know what to believe and the main story is lost, effectively absolving the army.
This style of weathering scrutiny has marked some of Israel's most controversial killings: from the death of 12-year-old Muhammad al Durrha in Gaza in 2000 - who the army first accepted responsibility for shooting and then withdrew it in 2007 amid a manufactured controversy - to its defense of killing activists on the Gaza aid flotilla in May of last year. It has also underscored how Israel has avoided being held accountable in a series of highly questionable killings such as the death of two Palestinian farm boys in the village of Awarta, near the West Bank city of Nablus in March of last year.
By most testimonies from villagers, the boys were working their fields near an Israeli settlement when they were detained by the army. Moments later, shots were fired and the boys arrived at hospital, riddled with bullets in what appeared to be a straight execution. However, when it was reported, the army and settlement council had put out multiple contradicting versions of events that ultimately buried the story and any investigation.
Underscoring this PR strategy is the assumption that Israelis are always more credible than Palestinians, regardless of who they are or the facts. It is a position based on the assumption that Palestinian claims are based on unstated nefarious intentions, while Israeli positions are fact. This creates a context where the medical explanation by Jawaher abu Rahmah's doctor is presented as propagandised hyperbole, while the baseless, self-interested claims of the Israeli military are accepted as legitimate. http://bit.ly/gECAYx page 1
While this style of military information warfare is clearly exposed and condemned in western press coverage from Honduras to the Ivory Coast, where military claims are taken with significant doubt, what is surprising is the legitimacy that the Israeli military is granted by media at home and abroad.
It is this bestowing of false legitimacy that helps make sustainable what is otherwise an unsustainable military occupation.
Jesse Rosenfeld has been a freelance journalist based in Ramallah and Tel Aviv since 2007. Joseph Dana is a journalist and human rights advocate based in Jerusalem
http://bit.ly/fpwcMM page 2 15 jan 2011, 02:20 , Respect -
Maria 14 jan 2011
AIPAC's Man, Dennis Ross, Now In Charge of Middle East
Dennis Ross
By M.J. Rosenberg
If anyone was wondering why the Obama administration's policy on Israel-Palestine is such an epic fail, look no further than today's Forward. http://bit.ly/fI5tv4
Nathan Guttman, one of the best reporters on all matters Middle East/Washington, reveals that the problem is that Dennis Ross -- former chief of AIPAC's think-tank, the Washington Institute For Near East Policy http://huff.to/ehprAP -- has squeezed out former Senator George Mitchell, the President's Special Envoy to the Middle East.
And there's your problem. Mitchell achieved peace in Northern Ireland during a few years as President Clinton's envoy to that war zone. Ross achieved, uh, very little during three administrations as a Middle East peacemaker.
So why is he at the White House? Here is Guttman.
Ross' strong ties to Israel now make him indispensable to the administration. Those ties include his previous role as head of the Jewish People Policy Institute, a Jerusalem-based think tank founded by the Jewish Agency for Israel. His son, Gabe, is also married to an Israeli. These factors, together with Ross's strong personal sense of Jewish identity, have gained him a reputation of being pro-Israeli.
And this quote from the ADL's Abe Foxman which sums it up.
"Dennis is the closest thing you'll find to a melitz yosher, as far as Israel is concerned," said the Anti-Defamation League's national director, Abraham Foxman, who used the ancient Hebrew term for "advocate."
Think about it.. The lobby considers the guy in charge of US policy toward Israel an "advocate" for Israel, which he is. (Foxman's honesty is a rare delight).
Bottom line. The Obama administration views impeccable AIPAC credentials as a plus in a Middle East "mediator." It doesn't want an honest broker. It doesn't want a broker at all.
It wants, and it has, what former State Department official, Aaron Miller, described as "Israel's lawyer." Except Ross didn't go to law school.
http://bit.ly/fy9cvs
25 febr 2011
U.S. judge dismisses defamation lawsuit by former AIPAC official
Steve Rosen sued his former employers for publicly criticizing him after he was charged with passing sensitive information to Israeli diplomats.
A Washington D.C. Superior Court judge dismissed a lawsuit against AIPAC, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, on Wednesday, for allegedly defaming its former foreign policy boss when they publicly attributed their firing of him to what they described as his sub-standard performance.
Judge Erik Christian determined that the comments about Steve Rosen made by an AIPAC spokesperson and published in the New York Times did not constitute grounds for a defamation lawsuit.
In his suit, first filed in March 2009, Rosen demanded damages of $21 million for comments by AIPAC officials, which Rosen claims they knew to be lies, while criminally disregarding the damage it would do to his reputation.
Rosen was sacked by the AIPAC in 2005 after he and fellow staffer Keith Weissman were charged with the crimes "mishandling classified information" and passing sensitive information to Israeli diplomats and journalists.
The charges against the two, however, were dropped before the case reached a courtroom. The FBI claimed that it had enough evidence for convictions, but all the charges were dropped nonetheless.
An AIPAC spokesperson said, "We are very pleased that the Superior Court has granted summary judgment and ended Steve Rosen's defamation lawsuit against AIPAC and its spokesman."
"The court's decision, that the statements made by AIPAC and its spokesman were not defamatory, support AIPAC's continued assertion that this lawsuit was frivolous and had no basis in fact," AIPAC said.
Steve Rosen told Haaretz that he will likely appeal the court's decision to dismiss his defamation lawsuit.
http://bit.ly/e5Vvz0
15 mrt 2011
AIPAC's newest strategy
AIPAC is a useful tool when you want to predict the future of any peace talks between Israelis and Palestinians.
Prime minister Benyamin Netanyahu is being heavily criticised in Israel for his blatant exploitation of the murder of five members of one family (including three children) at the Itamar settlement near Nablus. Particularly egregious has been Netanyahu's demand that president Mahmoud Abbas personally appear on Palestinian radio and television to condemn the killings, although Abbas had issued an unusually strong statement as soon as he heard of the tragedy.
Forget for a minute that no one knows who committed the crime and that certainly no one believes that the killer was associated with Abbas. Also, lay aside the fact that Netanyahu has never condemned or even expressed remorse over the killing of 300 plus Palestinian children by the IDF during the Gaza war. (In fact, one would be hard pressed to find any Israeli government that ever even criticised the killing of Palestinian children by the IDF, although many hundreds have been killed over the last decade).
None of that is anything new. What is new is Israel's decision to libel the Palestinian Authority (and not just Hamas) which until very recently has been praised by Israel as its partner. That change became evident during the last month when AIPAC (Israel's lobby in America) started attacking Abbas and the PA, returning to the style of the bad old days when the lobby viewed all Palestinians as one and the same: as enemies of Israel.
There are three reasons why monitoring AIPAC http://fwd4.me/yzy (the American Israel Public Affairs Committee) is a valuable use of time for anyone following events in the Middle East.
The first is that AIPAC faithfully reflects the positions of the Netanyahu government (actually it often telegraphs them before Netanyahu does).
The second is that AIPAC's policies provide advance notice of the positions that will, not by coincidence, be taken by the United States Congress.
And third, AIPAC provides a reliable indicator of future policies of the Obama administration, which gets its "guidance" both from AIPAC itself and from Dennis Ross, former head of AIPAC's think tank http://fwd4.me/z00 , the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, and now the president's top adviser on Middle East issues.
The next few months, as AIPAC prepares for its annual conference (May 22-24), will be especially fruitful for AIPAC watchers. The conference is a huge event, attended by most members of the House and Senate, the prime minister of Israel, and either by the president or vice president of the United States. It is also attended by thousands of delegates from around the country and by candidates for Congress who raise money for their campaigns at the event. This year, the leading Republican candidates for president will also be in attendance, all vying for support by promising undying loyalty to the AIPAC agenda.
The conference or the egg?
The conference actually begins long before it convenes at the massive Washington Convention Centre. Right now, AIPAC's top officials are deciding which policies are the most important to be conveyed to the hundreds of officials who will be in attendance. Those policies will constitute AIPAC's agenda not just for the conference but for the next 12 months (see last year's AIPAC policy book here http://bit.ly/dKxyS0 [PDF]).
In recent years, AIPAC's main message has been about Iran and its view of the dangers posed by the Iranian nuclear programme. Speaker after speaker at various AIPAC conferences over the past decade (including, most histrionically, prime minister Benyamin Netanyahu) has invoked the Holocaust when discussing the possibility of an Iranian nuclear weapon.
These speakers laid the groundwork for AIPAC's presentation of legislation imposing "crippling sanctions" on Iran - along with the declaration that the military option remained "on the table" if sanctions failed to end Iran's nuclear program. Most of the sanctions legislation enacted by Congress and signed into law by the president originated at AIPAC.
But this year Iran will have to compete for attention with AIPAC's worries about the democratic revolutions that are sweeping the Arab world. For AIPAC, as for Netanyahu, those revolutions have already turned 2011 into an annus horribilis and the year is not even half over.
Themes
Early indications are that the main theme that will dominate the conference will be that Israel, once again, has "no partner" to negotiate with. This is an old theme, but one that receded as the Israeli right came to view the Palestinian Authority (led by Mahmoud Abbas and Salam Fayyad) as not only partners but as collaborators in maintaining the status quo.
As Al Jazeera's "Palestine Papers" http://fwd4.me/uTf demonstrated, Abbas and Fayyad rarely said "no" to the Netanyahu government - which made them the only kind of partners acceptable to the Netanyahu-Lieberman-Barak troika.
But, fearing that it might be next to fall to democracy, the PA started showing some spine recently. It refused to yield to US and Israeli demands that it shelve the United Nations Security Council resolution condemning settlements. It absolutely refuses to negotiate with Israelis until Israel stops gobbling up the land they would be negotiating over. And, most disturbing of all to Netanyahu and company, it says that it intends to unilaterally declare a Palestinian state this summer.
Netanyahu, who needs the illusion of movement to ensure that there isn't any, is suddenly feeling the heat. Even Angela Merkel, Germany's chancellor and a staunch Israel backer, both supported the UN resolution condemning settlements and told Netanyahu, in a well-publicised February 24 phone call, that the Europeans are sick and tired of him. Haaretz reported: http://fwd4.me/z06
Netanyahu told Merkel he was disappointed by Germany's vote....
Merkel was furious. "How dare you," she said...."You are the one who disappointed us. You haven't made a single step to advance peace."
A shaken Netanyahu immediately put out the word that he is getting ready to announce his own plan to end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. He told political allies that he has to act fast to deter pressure from the so-called Quartet (composed of the United Nations, the United States, the European Union, and Russia). It is due to meet later this month to set out the parameters for a final agreement. In advance of that meeting, British Foreign Minister William Hague said that the territorial basis for any agreement must be the pre-'67 borders, the last thing Netanyahu wants to hear. http://fwd4.me/z07
Reports from Israel indicate that Netanyahu's plan rules out any withdrawal to the '67 lines, offering instead a Palestinian state within temporary borders and only a very partial settlement freeze (no freeze in East Jerusalem at all). http://fwd4.me/z09
Knowing that the PA can no longer afford to even consider such an offer, Netanyahu has decided to preemptively label Israel's old friends in the Palestinian Authority as extremists, with the goal of ensuring that both Congress and the Obama administration back his plan. His hope is that with the United States safely in his corner, any Quartet initiative will be blocked. As always, his goal is to maintain the status quo, which requires US acquiescence in his schemes. Thus far, the tactic has worked.
Smear tactics
Hence, the new AIPAC approach: smear the PA. By the time the AIPAC conference ends, the "there is no partner" mantra will have returned to its position as one of Israel's greatest hits - a true golden oldie.
Check out a few of the messages AIPAC has sent out over Twitter these past few days (the message is old but the technology is new):
AIPAC: PA doesn't want a terrorist organisation to be called a terrorist organisation, instead wants unity gov with it http://fwd4.me/z0A
AIPAC: PA seeks to isolate Israel to gain statehood; Obama admin plans to block the effort, calling it a "strategic mistake" http://fwd4.me/z0C
AIPAC: Palestinian Authority to Israel: NO. http://fwd4.me/z0D
By contrast, this is a typical AIPAC tweet before the Palestinian Authority started pushing back.
AIPAC: Can direct talks with PA President Abbas lead to a peace agreement in a year? "Yes, I think so," says Israeli PM Netanyahu http://fwd4.me/z0F
The bottom line is this. The Europeans, the United Nations, and, it is safe to say, the entire world (except the United States) fear that the Palestinian Authority is on the verge of collapsing and, along with it, the whole notion of a peace process. These same forces are determined to re-start negotiations, which will require seeing Israel actual freeze settlements, at the very least. It seems to understand that a PA that is perceived as Israel's lackey (which is precisely how it is perceived) will not survive. It has no faith whatsoever in the good intentions of the Netanyahu government.
Deflecting the issue
The Israeli government, understanding all this, is determined to put the onus back on the Palestinians to forestall any pressure. Most important of all, it is terrified that the Palestinian Authority will go ahead with its plan to unilaterally declare a state this summer, the only PA plan in years that actually has real momentum.
It needs the United States to block that plan by any means necessary, including a full cut-off of US (and even international) aid to the Palestinians (this at a time when defence minister Barak is requesting another $20 billion in aid to Israel from the United States) http://fwd4.me/z0G . Stopping a Palestinian unilateral declaration of independence dead in its tracks is now Netanyahu's number one goal. And getting Obama to go along with him (which shouldn't be too difficult with the 2012 election looming) is the way he intends to do it.
That is why we are about to see a new Netanyahu plan. It is why AIPAC is busy denigrating the PA. And it is why AIPAC will soon have the United States Congress saying, practically in unison, that "there is no Palestinian partner". That will be followed by the demand that the Obama administration support the Netanyahu plan, which will be labelled the most generous offer in history.
At this rate, the Israeli government and its lobby will soon be back to its old mantra (1948-1977) that "there is no such thing as the Palestinian people" at all.
All this to preserve an ugly and deadly status quo. So far, this tactic has worked every time. Don't bet against it winning again. As so often, a winning strategy for AIPAC and Netanyahu is a losing strategy for Israel and the United States.
The Palestinians, on the other hand, would do well to work on achieving some kind of unified strategy and to stick with the idea of a unilateral declaration. As David Ben-Gurion would tell them, self-determination often requires going it alone.
MJ Rosenberg is a Senior Foreign Policy Fellow at Media Matters Action Network. The above article first appeared in Foreign Policy Matters, a part of the Media Matters Action Network.
You can follow MJ on twitter @MJayRosenberg. http://fwd4.me/z0H
The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera's editorial policy.
http://fwd4.me/yzx 26 apr 2011, 18:22 , Respect -
Maria 28 feb 2011
The Unlikely Bigot
5 apr 2011
'Israeli lobby dictates US views on ME'
The Israeli lobby influences the American public opinion on the current uprisings across the Arab world and the Middle East, says a Hezbollah official.
The mainstream media [in the US] is being dominated by pro-Israeli lobbies and there is no alternative for the people to know what is really going on, says Head of Hezbollah's Media Relations Ibrahim Moussawi in a Press TV interview.
This (the US) is a place where the Israeli lobby exercises its full power, Moussawi emphasized, describing America as a territory occupied by the Israelis.
The Hezbollah official argued that only those that have traveled abroad and had a chance to experience the calamities, sufferings and the atrocities imposed by the Israeli regime on the people in the Middle East and the Arab world can understand what is really happening in the region.
In recent months, a wave of revolutions and anti-government uprisings has been sweeping the Arab world.
In January, a revolution in Tunisia ended the 23-year rule of its former despotic President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali.
In February, another revolution in a North African Arab nation led to the ouster of former Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, after three decades of authoritarian rule.
Other revolutions have erupted in Libya, Yemen and Bahrain, while other anti-government unrests have swept other Arab nations such as Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Oman, Kuwait and Algeria.
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/173138.html
26 apr 2011
Quick Facts: AIPAC
Highlights
The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) has a dangerous stranglehold over U.S. foreign policy towards the Middle East. Moveoveraipac.org
In April 2005, AIPAC policy director Steven Rosen and AIPAC senior Iran analyst Keith Weissman were fired by AIPAC amid an FBI investigation into whether they passed classified U.S. information on to Israel. Democraticunderground.com
AIPAC has also lobbied heavily for U.S. funding of various Israeli weapons programs, including Israel's Arrow missile defense system. Rightweb.irc-online.org
AIPAC
AIPAC's unrelenting support for the illegal policies of the Israeli government-separation walls, settlements, the siege of Gaza-in addition to its bellicose policies across the region, especially Iran, has been devastating for Palestinians and the Middle East, including Israel. Moveoveraipac.org
The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) was incorporated in 1963 by Isaiah L. Si Kenen. Waronyou.com
AIPAC claims to have more than 100,000 members and its website prominently displays a New York Times blurb about the group, which claims that the group is the most important organization affecting America's relationship with Israel. Rightweb.irc-online.org
AIPAC & US Politics
Pro-Israel interests have contributed $56.8 million in individual, group, and soft money donations to federal candidates and party committees since 1990, according to the non-partisan Center for Responsive Politics. Metapedia.org
Between the 2000 and the 2004 elections, the 50 members of AIPAC's board donated an average of $72,000 each to campaigns and political action committees. Metapedia.org
AIPAC claims it has a stranglehold on Congress. With a $47 million a year budget and more than 100 full-time staffers, it is no doubt a formidable advocate for Israel's interests. Isreview.org
In March 2009, AIPAC executive director Howard Kohr appeared before the House Committee on Appropriations Foreign Operations subcommittee to testify about the importance of U.S. aid to Israel. Worldwideinfoforum.com
Kohr requested that Israel receive $2.775 billion in military aid in fiscal year 2010, as called for in the 2007 Memorandum of Understanding between the U.S. and Israel that allocates $30 billion in aid for Israel over 10 years. Worldwideinfoforum.com
AIPAC Controversies
In 1992, AIPAC president David Steiner was forced to resign after he was recorded boasting about his political influence in obtaining aid for Israel. Metapedia.org
Steiner claimed that he had met with then Bush U.S. Secretary of State Jim Baker and he cut a deal with him. Sherdog.net
I got, besides the $3 billion, you know they're looking for the Jewish votes, and I'll tell him whatever he wants to hear. Besides the $10 billion in loan guarantees which was a fabulous thing, $3 billion in foreign, in military aid, and I got almost a billion dollars in other goodies that people don't even know about. Sherdog.net
Steiner also claimed to be negotiating with the incoming Clinton administration over who Clinton would appoint as Secretary of State and Secretary of the National Security Agency. Docstoc.com
In 2004 it was reported that an FBI investigation had gained evidence that a senior Pentagon analyst with close ties to Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz and Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith had provided a draft presidential directive onIran to AIPAC that was then passed to the Israeli government. Sourcewatch.org
In April 2005, AIPAC policy director Steven Rosen and AIPAC senior Iran analyst Keith Weissman were fired by AIPAC amid an FBI investigation into whether they passed classified U.S. information received from (Lawrence Anthony) Franklin (a U.S. Air Force Reserves colonel) on to the government of Israel. Democraticunderground.com
In May 2005, the Justice Department announced that Lawrence Anthony Franklin, a U.S. Air Force Reserves colonel working as a Department of Defense analyst at the Pentagon in the office of Douglas Feith, had been arrested and charged by the FBI with providing classified national defense information to Israel. Metapedia.org
On January 20, 2006, Franklin was sentenced to 151 months (almost 13 years) in prison and fined $10,000. As part of the plea agreement, Franklin agreed to cooperate in the larger federal investigation. All charges against the former AIPAC employees were dropped in 2009. Powerbot.org
AIPAC & Israeli Military
AIPAC has also lobbied heavily for U.S. funding of various Israeli weapons programs, including Israel's Arrow missile defense system. Rightweb.irc-online.org
This military cooperation between the United States and Israel has resulted in the deployment of the Arrow missile defense system, and the continuing development of the Tactical High Energy Laser. Rightweb.irc-online.org
Former U.S. Secretary of State Alexander Haig reportedly called Israel the largest American aircraft carrier in the world. Without it, the U.S. would have to spend additional tens of billions of dollars to police the Middle East with its own troops. Isreview.org
In the final decades of the 20th century, the United States and Israel moved into tight alliance. Every year from 1976 on, Israel was the lead recipient of U.S. foreign aid. The U.S. supported Israel as it maintained its artificial Jewish demographicmajority, attacked the refugee-led Palestinian resistance, and expanded settlements further into occupied territory. Zcommunications.org
As long as U.S. weapons continue to flow, Israel will feel free to disregard the Obama Administration's mild blandishments and half-hearted attempts to bring Israel to the negotiating table. Unfortunately this disincentive structure is set to be reinforced over the coming years. Josh Ruebner, Counterpunch.org
Under a Bush-era agreement, U.S. weapons transfers to Israel are scheduled to total $30 billion from 2009-2018, an annual average increase of 25 percent above previous levels. With this 2007 Memorandum of Understanding, the United States solidified Israel's position as the largest recipient of U.S. military aid this decade. In line with increases proposed under this arrangement, President Obama asked for a record-breaking $3.075 billion of weapons for Israel in his 2012 budget request. Josh Ruebner, Counterpunch.org
A new online database-How Many Weapons to Israel?-casts doubt on whether the United States can afford, either morally, financially or politically, to continue transferring weapons to Israel at taxpayer expense without examining the ramifications of this policy. Josh Ruebner, Counterpunch.org
From 2000-2009, the United States licensed, paid for, and delivered to Israel more than 670 million weapons and related equipment, valued at nearly $19 billion, through three main weapons transfer programs (Foreign Military Sales, Direct Commercial Sales, and Excess Defense Articles). These weapons transfer programs accounted for nearly 80 percent of the more than $24 billion in military aid appropriated to Israel during these years. The bulk of the remaining money was spent by Israel on its own domestic arms industry, a unique exemption written into law for Israel. All other countries receiving U.S. military aid are required to spend the whole sum within the United States. Josh Ruebner, Counterpunch.org
Military aid to Israel ran the gamut from the patently absurd-one used food steamer valued at $2,100-to the lethal-93 F-16D fighter jets valued at a total of nearly $2.5 billion. With nearly 500 categories of weapons transferred to Israel, the United States is pervasively, intricately, and comprehensively involved in arming its military. Josh Ruebner, Counterpunch.org.
http://fwd4.me/00Jk
3 mei 2011
The Zionist War on Free Speech
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Ao-IHBHiPw
13 mei 2011
Israeli lobby, architect of AUMF bill
Author and security affairs consultant Alan Sabrosky says new bids to expand the president's power to unilaterally declare wars would be directed at Iran.
Sabrosky said the new legislation would affect future conflicts and since no domestic lobby, other than the pro-Israeli faction, was currently pushing for a conflict, the only possible targets would be Iran and Syria.
The Israeli lobby has never stopped its drumbeat of a path to war against Iran. The pursuit of this legislation and in fact its orientation I am sure originated with AIPAC the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee.
The intent is one more push on the Obama administration toward Iran.
Sabrosky stressed that there is nothing in the U.S. constitution to stop the president from dragging the country into war.
In fact, any president has always had the power, not the authority, but the power to use American military force to take the Unites States to war whenever chosen, he told Press TV's U.S. Desk in a phone interview on Thursday.
There is nothing in the system to stop him, unless military commanders said No. And from what I have gathered military leaders don't say no Sabrosky added, noting that a Congressional approval only played a political role when it came to funding and sustaining a war.
[facts]
Republican chair of the Armed Services Committee, Howard McKeon, R-CA, revealed The National Defense Authorization Act on Monday [May 9], which includes a bill renewing an act passed just days after 9/11, the Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF). Salon
AUMF gave then-President George W. Bush carte blanche to hunt down the 9/11 perpetrators and their allies. Salon
The [new] provision states that Congress affirms that the United States is engaged in an armed conflict with al-Qaeda, the Taliban, and associated forces, and that the president is authorized to use military force including detention without trial of members and substantial supporters of those forces. NYT
http://presstvmobile.com/blog/2011/05/13/israeli-lobby-architect-of-aumf-bill/ 15 may 2011, 10:29 , Respect -
Maria 14 mei 2011
‘Debunk the myths that AIPAC is putting out’
“Move over AIPAC” is a campaign that aims to wean U.S. policy away from the American Israel Public Affairs Committees (AIPAC) grip towards an even-handed position that respects international law and the human rights of all people in the Middle East.
“Move over AIPAC is a grassroots people powered movement to expose the Israel lobby AIPAC and what it is doing in the United States,” Rae Abileah, national organizer of ‘Codepink’ said in an interview with Press TV’s U.S. Desk on Saturday.
“AIPAC guides a lot of the political discourse around Israel but leaves out the realities of the occupation of Palestine, the oppression of the Palestinian people and the inequality and undemocratic laws that Israel has,” Abileah continued.
The organization will hold a counter conference on May 21 in Washington DC and a series of cultural events May 21-24 which is the same time Israeli Prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu will be meeting with the Congress and President Barack Obama.
We want to debunk the myths that AIPAC is putting out, break the stranglehold and siege that AIPAC has on the U.S. Congress, Rae also told Press TV’s U.S. Desk.
http://fwd4.me/01Su
29 mei 2011
New FBI Files Alleging AIPAC Theft of Government Property and Israeli Espionage Released
WASHINGTON, /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Declassified files detailing an FBI investigation targeting the American Israel Public Affairs Committee are now available on the Internet. AIPAC was investigated after it acquired and circulated classified government information provided in strict confidence by US industry and worker groups opposed to AIPAC sponsored economic legislation.
The 50 pages now available as portable document files (PDF) include:
FBI reports of Israelis circulating classified documents in the US Congress, "compromising" the authority of the U.S. President. http://fwd4.me/02ZC pdf
US Trade Representative concerns that AIPAC was tactically "divulging" classified information supplied by US industries opposed to AIPAC lobbying initiatives. http://fwd4.me/02ZD pdf
Reports from the International Trade Commission that AIPAC and Israeli operatives "usurped" US government authority and that an Israeli intelligence service operative was working undercover on AIPAC's staff: http://fwd4.me/02ZE pdf
Internal Department of Justice prosecutorial opinions that "theft of government property" had occurred: http://fwd4.me/02ZF pdf
An FBI director order that the Washington Field office give the AIPAC investigation top priority after Israeli spy Jonathan Pollard was caught on video surveillance stealing classified US national defense information: http://fwd4.me/02ZF pdf
FBI special agent interviews of Israeli minister of economics Dan Halpern who claimed diplomatic immunity. Halpern admitted passing classified US documents to AIPAC but refused to name his source: http://fwd4.me/02ZG pdf
FBI special agent interviews of AIPAC's former director of legislative affairs detailing how he made copies of the classified documents for AIPAC's lobbying use after being ordered to return them to the US government. http://fwd4.me/02ZI pdf
FBI interviews of key AIPAC employees involved in handling the classified US government information (full document listing): http://fwd4.me/02ZJ
According to research director Grant F. Smith, the newly released files present startling new insights into AIPAC's activities in the United States. "These files, available on the Internet for the first time, reveal activities that undermined rule of law and governance. They have wrought massive economic harm to American businesses and workers. We urge all concerned Americans to carefully review and ponder the implications of these FBI files and other documents now available from the Israel Lobby Archive."
The Israel Lobby Archive, http://IRmep.org/ila is a unit of the Institute for Research: Middle Eastern Policy in Washington. The Archive digitizes declassified documents obtained through Freedom of Information Act filings with law enforcement, economic, diplomatic and intelligence agencies. IRmep is a Washington-based nonprofit that studies U.S. Middle East policy formulation.
SOURCE Institute for Research: Middle Eastern Policy
RELATED LINKS
http://irmep.org/ila
http://fwd4.me/02ZB