Israel news media — News culture divorced from reality — Analysis propaganda The WE News Archives

US Israel Satanic Murder

March 12, 2008 Date you read this

BBC Complaints,
PO Box 1922,
Glasgow G2 3WT

Dear BBC,

Re: Coverage of Palestine.

Greetings.

I am aware that in the minefield of Middle East politics, that if the BBC voices Arab views it is accused of being anti-Israel and if Israel's views are presented, the corporation is accused of being anti-Arab.

That said, the wall to wall coverage of the tragedy of the deaths of eight people at the Mercav Harev Yeshiva, did seem disproportionate, compared to the coverage of the onslaught on Gaza by Israeli forces, where figures differ, but it seems at least 116 were killed in under a week, reportedly one third children, including a twenty day old baby shot in the head, a twenty one month old, a five month old and children playing football blown to bits.

Homes and businesses demolished in an orgy of collective punishment, illegal under international law.

Yours sincerely,

Place your name here.

Ask for a written reply.

Mail it off (If in the UK - post it)

Doesn't matter what date you read this, 1948, 2008, 200....

The BBC will get the message

Let's keep sending this message to the BBC, or whoever comes after, long after the Palestinian people have received their land back

Let the BBC never forget

Let us never forget

Mail your message today

March 12, 2008 Date you read this

BBC Complaints,
PO Box 1922,
Glasgow G2 3WT

Dear BBC,

Re: Coverage of Palestine.

Greetings.

Homes and businesses demolished in an orgy of collective punishment, illegal under international law.

Yours sincerely,

Place your name here.

Ask for a written reply.

Mail it off (If in the UK - post it)

Doesn't matter what date you read this, 1948, 2008, 200....

The BBC will get the message

Let's keep sending this message to the BBC, or whoever comes after, long after the Palestinian people have received their land back

Let the BBC never forget

Let us never forget

Mail your message today

The analysis, composed almost entirely of clichés, was worthy of a high-school pupil.

I was shocked to learn that the man was a former chief of the Mossad.

Anyway, we won this war and we are going to win the next one

September 2/3, 2006

In Israel, Nothing Changes But the Past
Israel News Media — Analysis propaganda

By P. SAINATH

US Israel airstrike
February 28, 2008
Caused by US taxpayers
Wounding of boy paid for by US taxpayers

N APOLEON WON the battle of Waterloo. The German Wehrmacht won World War II. The United States won in Vietnam, and the Soviets in Afghanistan. The Zealots won against the Romans, and Ehud Olmert won the Second Lebanon War.

You didn't know that? Well, during the last few days the Israeli media has paraded a long series of experts, who did not leave any room for doubt: the war has brought us huge achievements, Hizbullah was routed, Olmert is the great victor.

The TV talk-show hosts and anchormen put their microphones at the service of professors, publicity experts, "security personnel" and "strategists" (a title not denoting generals, but advisers of politicians). All of them agreed on the outcome: an honest-to-goodness victory.

Yesterday I switched on the TV and saw a person radiating self-assurance and explaining how our victory in Lebanon opens the way for the inevitable war with Iran. The analysis, composed almost entirely of clichés, was worthy of a high-school pupil. I was shocked to learn that the man was a former chief of the Mossad. Anyway, we won this war and we are going to win the next one.

So there is no need at all for a commission of inquiry. What is there to inquire into? All we need is a few committees to clear up the minor slips that occurred here and there.

Resignations are absolutely out. Why, what happened? Victors do not resign! Did Napoleon resign after Waterloo? Did Presidents Johnson and Nixon resign after what happened in Vietnam? Did the Zealots resign after the destruction of the Temple?

In Israel, Nothing Changes But the Past

Israel News Media — Analysis propaganda

US Israel aircraft strike
Mohammed al-Borai
6-month-old
Killing caused by US taxpayers
Death of baby paid for by US taxpayers

J OKING ASIDE, the parade of Olmert's stooges on TV, on the radio and in the newspapers tells us something.

Not about the achievements of Olmert as a statesman and strategist, but about the integrity of the media.

When the war broke out, the media people fell into line and and marched in step as a propaganda battalion.

All the media, without exception, became organs of the war effort, fawning on Olmert, Peretz and Halutz, waxing enthusiastic at the sight of the devastation in Lebanon and singing the praises of the "steadfastness of the civilian population" in the north of Israel.

The public was exposed to an incessant rain of victory reports, going on (literally) from early in the morning to late at night.

The government and army spokespersons, together with Olmert's spin team, decided what to publish and when, and, more importantly, what to suppress.

That found its expression in the "word laundry". Instead of accurate words came misleading expressions: when heavy battles were raging in Lebanon, the media spoke about "exchanges of fire".

The cowardly Hassan Nasrallah was "hiding" in his bunker, while our brave Chief-of-Staff was directing operations from his underground command post (nicknamed "the hole").

The chicken-hearted "terrorists" of Hizbullah were hiding behind women and children and operating from within villages, quite unlike our Ministry of Defense and General Staff which are located in the heart of the most densely populated area in Israel.

Our soldiers were not captured in a military action, but "abducted" like the victims of gangsters, while our army "arrests" the leaders of Hamas. Hizbullah, as is well known, is "financed" by Iran and Syria, quite unlike Israel, which "receives generous support" from our great friend and ally, the United States.

There was, of course, a difference of night and day between Hizbullah and us. How can one compare? After all, Hizbullah launched rockets at us with the express intent of killing civilians, and did indeed kill some thirty of them. While our military, "the most moral army in the world", took great care not to hurt civilians, and therefore only about 800 Lebanese civilians, half of them children, lost their lives in the bombardments which were all directed at purely military targets.

No general could compare with the military correspondents and commentators, who appeared daily on TV, striking impressive military poses, who reported on the fighting and demanded a deeper advance into Lebanon.

Only very observant viewers noticed that they did not accompany the fighters at all and did not share the dangers and pains of battle, something that is essential for honest reporting in war. During the entire war I saw only two correspondent's reports that really reflected the spirit of the soldiers - one by Itay Angel and the other by Nahum Barnea.

The deaths of soldiers were generally announced only after midnight, when most people were asleep. During the day the media spoke only about soldiers being "hurt". The official pretext was that the army had first to inform the families.

That's true - but only for announcing the names of the fallen soldiers. It does not apply at all to the number of the dead. (The public quickly caught on and realized that "hurt" meant "killed'.)

In Israel, Nothing Changes But the Past

Israel News Media — Analysis propaganda

US Israel aircraft strike
Father prays before body of son
Hamzah al-Hayya
Killing caused by US taxpayers
Death of baby paid for by US taxpayers

O F COURSE, among the almost one thousand people invited to the TV studios during the war to air their views, there were next to no voices criticizing the war itself. Two or three, who were invited for alibi purposes, were shown up as ridiculous weirdos. Two or three Arab citizens were also invited, but the talk-masters fell on them like hounds on their prey.

For weeks, the media suppressed the fact that hundreds of thousands of Israelis had abandoned the bombarded North, leaving only the poorest behind. That would have shaken the legend of the "steadfastness of the rear".

All the media (except the internet sites) completely suppressed the news about the demonstrations against the war that took place almost daily and that grew rapidly from dozens to hundreds, and from hundreds to thousands.

(Channel 1 alone devoted several seconds to the small demonstration of Meretz and Peace Now that took place just before the end of the war. Both had supported the war enthusiastically almost to the finish.)

I don't say these things as a professor for communications or a disgruntled politician.

I am a media-person from head to foot. Since the age of 17 I have been a working journalist, reporter, columnist and editor, and I know very well how media with integrity should behave. (The only prize I ever got in my own country was awarded by the Journalists' Association for my "life work in journalism".)

I do not think, by the way, that the behavior of our media was worse than that of their American colleagues at the start of the Iraq war, or the British media during the ridiculous Falklands/Malvinas war. But the scandals of others are no consolation for our own.

[Note from TheWE.biz - see article below from CHIMES OF FREEDOM Blog for British media, where the majority of daily paper junk posing as 'news' chose to ignore the Israel attack on Lebanon completely.]

Against the background of this pervasive brainwashing, one has to salute the few - who can be counted on the fingers of both hands - who did not join the general chorus and did indeed voice criticism in the written media, as much as they were allowed to. The names are well-known, and I shall not list them here, for fear of overlooking somebody and committing an unforgivable sin. They can hold their head high. The trouble is that their comments appeared only in the op-ed pages, which have a limited impact, and were completely absent from the news pages and news programs, which shape public opinion on a daily basis.

When the media people now passionately debate the need for all kinds of inquiry commissions and examination committees, perhaps they should set a personal example and establish a Commission of Inquiry to investigate the actions of the media themselves at the time of supreme test.

In Israel, Nothing Changes But the Past

Israel News Media — Analysis propaganda

US Israel aircraft strike
A boy next to body of 6-month-old Palestine baby Mohammed al-Borai
Killing caused by US taxpayers
Death of baby paid for by US taxpayers

I N GOETHE'S "Faust", the devil presents himself as the "force that always strives for the bad and always produces the good." I do not wish, God forbid, to compare the media to the devil, but the result is the same: by its enthusiastic support for the war, the media deepened the feeling of failure that came afterwards and which may in the end have a beneficial impact.

The media called Hizbullah a "terror organization", evoking the image of a small group of "terrorists" with negligible capabilities. When it became clear that this is an efficient and well-trained military force with brave and determined fighters, effective missiles and other weapons, that could hold out against our huge military machine for 33 days without breaking, the disappointment was even more bitter.

After the media had glorified our military commanders as supermen and treated every one of their boasts with adulation, almost as if they were divine revelations, the disappointment was even greater when severe failures in strategy, tactics, intelligence and logistics showed up in all levels of the senior command.

That contributed to the profound change in public opinion that set in at the end of the war. As elevated as the self-confidence had been, so deep was the sense of failure. The Gods had failed. The intoxication of war was replaced by the hangover of the morning after.

And who is that running in front of the mob clamoring for revenge, all the way to the Place de la Guillotine? The media, of course.

I don't know of a single talk-show host, anchorman. commentator, reporter or editor, who has confessed his guilt and begged for forgiveness for his part in the brainwashing. Everything that was said, written or photographed has been wiped off the slate. It just never happened.

Now, when the damage cannot be repaired anymore, the media are pushing to the head of those who demand the truth and clamor for punishment for all the scandalous decisions that were taken by the government and the general staff: prolonging the war unnecessarily after the first six days, abandoning the rear, neglecting the reserves, not sending the land army into Lebanon on day X and sending them into Lebanon on day Y, not accepting G8's call for a cease-fire, and so on.

But, just a moment --

During the last few days, the wheel may be turning again. What? We did not lose the war after all? Wait, wait, we did win? Nasrallah has apologized? (By strict orders from above, the full interview of Nasrallah was not broadcast at all, but the one passage in which he admitted to a mistake was broadcast over and over again.)

The sensitive nose of the media people has detected a change of the wind. Some of them have already altered course. If there is a new wave in public opinion, one should ride it, no?

In Israel, Nothing Changes But the Past

Israel News Media — Analysis propaganda

US Israel aircraft strike
A boy sits looks at body of 6-month-old Palestine baby Mohammed al-Borai
Killing caused by US taxpayers
Death of baby paid for by US taxpayers

W E CALL this the "Altalena Effect".

For those who don't know, or who have already forgotten: Altalena was a small ship that arrived off the coast of Israel in the middle of the 1948 war, carrying a group of Irgun men and quantities of weapons, it was not clear for whom. David Ben-Gurion was afraid of a putsch and ordered the shelling of the ship, off the coast of Tel-Aviv. Some of the men were killed, Menachem Begin, who had gone aboard, was pushed into the water and saved. The ship sank, the Irgun was dispersed and its members joined the new Israeli army.

29 years later Begin came to power. All the careerists joined him in haste. And then it appeared, retroactively, that practically everybody had been on board the Altalena. The little ship expanded into a huge aircraft carrier - until the Likud lost power and Altalena shrunk back to the size of a fishing boat.

The Second Lebanon War was a mighty Altalena. All the media crowded onto its deck. But the day after the war was over, we learned that this was an optical illusion: absolutely nobody had been there, except Captain Olmert, First Officer Peretz and Helmsman Halutz. However, that can change any minute now, if the trusting public can be convinced that we won the war after all.

As has been said before: in Israel nothing changes, except the past.

Uri Avnery is an Israeli writer and peace activist with Gush Shalom.

www.gush-shalom.org - Hebrew, English and other language versions<.font>

MaanImages/Hatem Omar)


	BBC Sky — subliminal slime of a collective TV mind

Pop goes the Weasel on Channel 4 News

Of course, it’s not just the BBC that is a mouthpiece for Anglo-US imperialist propaganda.
As the British state’s broadcasting system the BBC has always maintained the myth of providing fair, balanced reporting.

It’s cynical old founder, Lord Reith, was fully aware of that hypocrisy when the BBC adopted the motto: "Nation Shall Speak Peace Unto Nation."

Who currently pays the piper for the tune

Today, still pretending to be the nice, fair-minded English Aunty BBC it has always been, it’s one of the major, global promoters of Washington’s War Party.

Some media-watching groups like the Medialens seem to focus on the BBC and The Guardian in an almost obsessional manner.

It’s what happens when you get sucked into long drawn-out exchanges with spent media hacks who only change their policies (and consciences) according to who currently pays their piper his tune.

Keeping public opinion in line

In Britain, I would make an intelligent guess that Britain’s media pipers are paid, or should I say being coerced, by individuals like Tony Blair and clandestine groups like MI5 and the CIA.

As the undeclared fifty-first state of the good ol’ United States of Paranoia both Blair and the latter have a vested interest in keeping public opinion in line and anyone who refuses to see that behind news management lies a spooky world of distorted facts, disinformation and overt propaganda lives in La La Land.

News management is about the science of twisting the truth to suit a certain, in this case the state apparat’s, viewpoint.

George Orwell worked for the BBC

George Orwell knew that when he coined the word ’newspeak’ and wrote his 1984.

What would he have to say in retrospect when, 22 years after, we find an Atlanticist, neo-con Nu Labour party leading the vanguard cadres of ’neo-liberal’ totalitarianism willy-nilly into a new dark battle of corporate capitalism versus the forces of Mother Nature?

What stupidity, what hubris!

Only the most ignorant amongst the human race could dare to believe in such an unequal struggle.

Make-believe world is tangibly real

Yet, the corrupted, amoral drug-addict we call capitalism is trying to do just that.

Knowing that it is already in its last days, it desperately hangs onto its trappings and lies.

Knowing that nobody really believes in its hollow message anymore, it is compelled to keep its road-show going until the bitter end.

And the propaganda machine it has spawned in the mass media keeps grinding away, day to day, turning out the same old obscene fabrications to reassure itself and its captive audience that it’s make-believe world is tangibly real.

Subliminal slime

A finite illustration of this: watching the Channel 4 TV’s 7 o’clock news last night, I distinctly heard the newscaster, Alex Thompson, state that Iran was developing a nuclear warhead.

Not having a video-recorder on at the time I searched the C4 web-site for a recording of that news item.

Despite the fact that it was itemised under ’Iran defies deadline’ the clip was not there.

Had it been removed in time by the company already faced with a deluge of complaints, including mine, of a blatant lie having been deliberately planted there as a subliminal trigger?

A slip of the tongue by the newscaster?

Highly unlikely, it’s more than his job’s worth.

No, if that is what I heard him say, and I would swear before my Maker that he did, then the words came off an autocue, already neatly prepared by the news editors.

Neat isn’t it?

You just slip in a nasty porky when you think your audience is nodding-off and wait for it to sink into the subliminal slime of a collective TV mind in an advanced state of attention deficit disorder.

Read — Anglo-US Imperium

The rest of the report is passable despite a few choice lines such as Iran’s "defiance" of the "United Nations" (read Anglo-US Imperium).

They even interviewed Larijani who, beamed in from Tehran, is unlikely to have heard Alex Thompson’s damning introduction.

That’s how the Mainstream Media’s brainwashing technique works: they know that it’s the headline that sells the message and that the collective mind switches off, runs down with all the detail that follows.

Only the few attentive ones, looking out for their sleight-of-hand, will keep listening, watching and registering.

If you slip in the Big Lie ever so quickly then few will notice and, even if they do, you can always remove the evidence.

In this case it was a dead give-away because the report, though advertised as a video replay, was withdrawn.

Meant to appeal not to rationality but emotions and tribal prejudices

This happens all the time!

Few will notice these little incidents.

But, believe me, they are no mistakes.

They are coldly premeditated, meant to appeal not to rationality but emotions and tribal prejudices ...

"That’s the way the Money goes, pop goes the weasel!"

CHIMES OF FREEDOM Blog http://urlsnip.com/609513

September Friday 1st 2006

Critics of Israel 'fuelling hatred of British Jews'

Ned Temko, chief political correspondent
Sunday September 3, 2006
The Observer

A group of prominent MPs, alarmed at the rise of anti-semitism in Britain, will accuse some left-wing activists and Muslim extremists this week of using criticism of Israel as 'a pretext' for spreading hatred against British Jews.

The charge is made in a hard-hitting report — by MPs from all three major political parties — which will be unveiled at a Downing Street meeting with Tony Blair on Thursday.

The report is published in the wake of an alarming increase in verbal harassment, abusive emails and letters, and even violent assaults on British Jews. The number of incidents that took place in July, which came in the middle of escalating violence in the Middle East, was the third highest on record.

The 10-month inquiry into anti-semitism in Britain was chaired by the former Europe Minister Denis MacShane and included the former Tory leader Iain Duncan Smith and the Liberal Democrat environment spokesman Chris Huhne.

Details of the report are being kept confidential until its formal release. However, a draft of the document — seen by The Observer — reveals that incidents of verbal abuse, harassment and violence against Jewish community members and their institutions is reaching worrying levels.

It urges more consistent action by police, prosecutors and the government. All have failed to tackle antisemitism with the same determination as other forms of racism, the report suggests.

The report voices particular concern over 'a minority of Islamic extremists who are inciting hatred towards Jews', and it criticises recent moves by left-wing academics to boycott links with Israel. Though emphasising the right of people to criticise or protest against Israeli government actions, it says 'rage' over Israeli policies has sometimes 'provided a pretext' for anti-semitism.

'Calls to boycott contacts with intellectuals and academics working in Israel are an assault on academic freedom and intellectual exchange,' the report says, adding that the response of university vice-chancellors to such campaigns has been patchy.

Pro-boycott activists have angrily rejected allegations of anti-semitism and accused their critics of using the charge to ward off political criticism of Israel.

MacShane, speaking last week on a BBC radio programme devoted to Jewish community issues, said British Jews were right to 'shudder' at the 'aggressive' comparison of Israeli policies with the Holocaust. He also spoke of a 'witch's brew' of anti-semitism including the far left and 'ultra-Islamist' extremists who reject Israel's right to exist.

Among the report's dozens of recommendations is a call for the government to adopt the broad-ranging European Union definition of anti-semitism — including activities targeting 'the state of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity' with 'symbols and images associated with classical anti-semitism'.

It also recommends greater security support for the community, which spends millions of pounds on fencing, CCTV cameras and other measures to safeguard synagogues, schools and other communal institutions. 'It is not right for any group of British citizens to dig into their own pocket because they feel there is not adequate protection for their right to express themselves religiously or culturally,' MacShane said.

What they say

Jonathan Sachs, Chief Rabbi
Anti-semitism used to be a product of national cultures. Today's is global, communicated by satellite television, email and the internet. It is not broadcast but narrowcast, targeted at specific audiences, sometimes in Arabic. Its breeding ground is in radical Islamist circles, and its targets — synagogues, Jewish schools and community centres, Jews in the street — often have nothing to do with Israel.

Anthony Lerman, executive director, the Institute for Jewish Policy Research
Anti-semitism today is a serious problem for Jews and for society as a whole. But what of the vexed question of whether anti-Zionism or singling out Israel for extreme criticism is anti-semitic? While very many Jews feel a deep attachment to Israel, it is the opposite of clear thinking to assume that all expressions of anti-Zionism are simply a cloak for, or a form of, anti-semitism. It drains the word of any useful value, confusing a strongly held political view with prejudice against a whole people.

Mitch Simmons, campaigns director, Union of Jewish Students
When a Jewish student waves their family goodbye, their parents have an additional concern: will they be a victim of anti-semitism? University campuses, perhaps more than anywhere else, have been the laboratory for the changing vocabulary of contemporary anti-semitism. If a Jewish student feels it necessary to wear a baseball cap on campus to hide his skullcap for fear of physical or verbal assault, then that campus can no longer be considered a safe space for all students.