Israel spends big on propaganda

Spotted in the Independent

A Zionist propaganda campaign is underway, aimed at counteracting the findings of the UN human rights investigators that Israel committed horrendous war crimes against a civilian population. See the sponsored google ad as featured in the Independent. There are also links to this same Zionist 'facts' [lies] site on many new sites carrying Reuters news articles. What was that motto? 'Don't be evil'?

Relevant today as it always was

Statesmen will invent cheap lies, putting blame upon the nation that is attacked, and every man will be glad of those conscience-soothing falsities, and will diligently study them, and refuse to examine any refutations of them; and thus he will by and by convince himself that the war is just, and will thank God for the better sleep he enjoys after this process of grotesque self-deception.

Mark Twain 1916

Two-state solution or one-state solution to the Palestine problem?

The argument regarding the so-called middle east peace process appears to centre around the premise that a two state solution is the best and only feasible alternative and that a one state solution is unthinkable because it would mean that the state of Israel would cease to exist due to demographic reasons. However, If you think about it, the existing situation is already a one-state situation. By refusing to recognise borders, by its seizure of legally owned lands for settlers, by refusing to accept the legitimacy of Palestinian claims to the land, and by controlling the whole of the territory in Palestine ( land, sea and air including Gaza ), Israel has in a meaningful sense imposed a one state solution already. The problem with this Greater-Israel state are apartheid policies, lack of democratic rights, legal discrimination and state terrorism against the Arabs whether they have Israeli identity papers or not. Arabs with Israeli identity are also not immune from the racist whims of the state and continue to suffer from discrimination, demolitions and settlement activity. The assumption that the one state solution means the disappearance of Israel is mistaken. It assumes that discrimination would automatically disappear and democratic rights would prevail. A single state can still subjugate and discriminate against a section of the population. This is the case in many states across the world.

The two state solution is really a mirage. It allows the Israelis to give the impression that they are allowing a viable state for the Arabs, but in practice they will never concede any kind of control over the borders, air space or waters of the whole of the territory. Any rump Palestinian state will have limited economic freedom, limited or no defence capability, and no control over their own airspace and borders. Realistically, that would not be a state at all but rather a a semi-autonomous enclave/province subject to Israeli control. The Palestinians would only have nominally more freedom than they have now.

The problem as I see it is perception rather than reality. As long as they can continue to sell the perception of a possiblity of an an autonomous Palestinian state, the Zionists are content to let things drift along and continue their racist policies. The Western states are happy to go along with this and sell this perception to their own public.

Many Israelis would prefer a final solution that involves expulsion of the Palestinians into Jordan, Lebanon and Egypt. However, they realise that international outrage makes this scenario difficult so they prefer a slow genocide/ethnic cleansing whereby they allow the Arabs limited ability to fight back so they can claim to be fighting 'terrorism'. By subjecting the Arab population to state terror they hope that most will leave of their own accord.

Debate in the West about which solution is preferable is ironic since the West hold the key to the solution. If they were not conniving with the Zionists, they would have long ago isolated the zionist reshime, stopped funding it and arming it. That is the only way that the politicians and public of Israel will be forced to accept that Arabs too have a right to democracy. They also must have rights to security, to land, to fresh water, to gas off the coast of Gaza, to fishing, to travel without restriction, to play football and take part in the other activities that are available to free people.

Genius from California

In response to an article reporting that Schwarzenegger intends to cut off Welfare completely for the poor in CA....

It is about time! I went to collage and paid every dime my own self. My husband made too much money ($18,000. a year ) ,but standing in line one day a girl from another country was there to get her $3500. pell grant. Always hearing people talk about what they was going to do with their money. These darn females needs to start taking birth control pills. I was 14 when I had my son with no help from anybody so don't tell me it can't be done. Just a bunch of girls want to suck tax paider money. get rid of the green cards and illegals. Also stop sending money to people who hates us. I also don't have insurance so will just have to lay down and die, but don't expect somebody to give it to me. Get a life and get off your butt dead beats!!!

Posted by: Kathleen | May 22, 2009 at 04:42 PM

Letter to the Office of Tony Blair

Dear Sir/Madam,

May I be one of the first to congratulate Tony Blair on a well deserved prize. He has been an outstanding leader and I agree that this prize

marks his "foresight", "exceptional intelligence" and "steadfast determination" to end conflicts.

Just like Lebanon in 2006 no doubt where he strove extremely hard to prevent a ceasefire! I thought he should get more than a measly 1 million dollars though. Perhaps they are saving the big prizes for his steadfast determination to 'end' conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan by creatively inventing threats and plagiarising PhD tomes?

I understand that the money will go to Mr Blair’s new charity for religious understanding. I guess that charity will be run by his wonderful and extremely tolerant Israeli friends who promote religious understanding by using 3000lb bombs, White Phosphorus and DIME bombs to spread the message of love and tolerance in the region. It is great to know that the prize will fund graduates in his field. Is this a combined degree in Genocide, Untruth and Hypocrisy? I must have missed this one when I did my UCAS application many years ago. Please could you send me the course number? I must enrol my own offspring on that course so they too can emulate this great statesman of modern times.

Yours truly,

David Milipede

If you would like to email your congratulations as well please do contact: faithsact@tonyblairfaithfoundation.org

Do journalists intentionally lie about Palestine?

I don't subscribe to the idea that journalists rarely lie intentionally. In the real world, there are a lot of scumbags in the media world who WILL and DO lie intentionally. We also know that they will deliberately distort facts, miss out facts and frame the argument to suit their own viewpoint. Other journalists will do it less readily and will be uncomfortable but will follow the editorial direction all the same.

Writing an article is about planning - working out a story flow. This is a very conscious process because you are forced to think about what you want the story to convey and put it together so that the ‘facts’ are framed in the context that you want them to read. You decide what ''facts' are the 'attention grabbers' and put those at the top so they can be easily internalised by the casual reader who reads the headline and the first paragraph. Then you arrange the rest according to your story flow using what is known as the pyramid approach. The approach helps you not only to capture attention but to structure your story. It is not necessary for the 'facts' to be true; they can be controversial or attention grabbing statements. The point is to convey YOUR message according to editorial direction. If it does not meet the standards expected (i.e. is not in keeping with the house style and politics) then you will have to redo it.

Why does the BBC always remind us in virtually every article that ‘Israeli invaded Gaza to stop the firing of rockets into Southern Israel’? Why has this Israeli explanation appear to be accepted in spite of all the evidence to the contrary and why does it have to be repeated endlessly? The BBC claim not to have the time or space to add vital context for example the continuing occupation, the Hamas offers for peace based on 1967 boundaries, over 11000 Palestinians currently rotting in Israel prisons (including over 400 children) but they are OK to repeatedly include the Zionist key message that they are merely 'reacting against rockets'. This is a good example of known context that is deliberately ignored. These facts are shocking enough to be headlines. The grotesque images of dead children are available to these media outlets but they are deliberately omitted on the grounds of 'taste'. The media decide for us what constitutes good taste just as they decide what we want to read about.

The lies and distortions would not be swallowed so readily by the public if they were not reasonably credible. It is not that journalists are unaware of the occupation, or unaware of the misery imposed by Israel. Most know full reasonably well the bloody history of ethnic cleansing.Why is it then that the real history does not reach our screens and airwaves? Why are the extremists murderers of Kadima and Labour in Israel portrayed as ‘centrists’ when they order the massacres of children in Gaza? The answer, at least partially, lies in the modern face of Israel with its high standard of living, its ‘democracy’, its Western outlook and lifestyle, which is a world away from misery on the other side of the wall. It is much easier develop relations with Israeli press officers who speak good English and fluently answer questions on ‘terror’. It is easier (and cheaper) to accept the Israeli press releases and dress them up as reporting. The Arabs are difficult to understand, difficult to reach and their culture appears alien. Like people passing by a beggar averting their eyes and pretending not to notice, it is a deliberate and conscious decision to ignore the Palestinians. This is why you see many more Zionist spokespeople on TV and hear them on the radio whilst fluent Palestinians are virtually absent (even though Palestinians are among the best educated peoples in the world).

Reality is complex and the Herman/Chomsky propaganda filters are relevant but it is possible for most intelligent journalists to recognize that what their employers/editors are demanding is not the truth but an angle that favours their proprietor or their own political leanings. Many consciously take the decision to either compromise their beliefs/ethics or do not care anyway and just want to further their careers. The commercial aspect of media business plays a part too despite the usual claims that their advertising is firewalled from the journalism. Which media outlet would risk losing an important advertising account, rather than tone down or ignore a story? It is no conspiracy theory that Zionist business links are spread throughout the corporate world whether it is media, banking, insurance or retail. Many politicians fall over themselves to be ‘friends of Israel’ because this eventually translates into powerful contacts, lucrative consultancies and business opportunities. The links that have been forged with the West are powerful and allow the Zionists to control the agenda to some extent. Establishment propaganda and commercial pressures do the rest.