Spitfire List Web site and blog of anti-fascist researcher and radio personality Dave Emory.

For The Record  

FTR #661 Walkin’ the Snake in the Middle East, Part II: O.J. Agonistes and Palestinian Pornography

MP3: Side 1 | Side 2
REALAUDIO

War is decep­tion. — The Prophet Mohammed

Islamist, neo-Nazi and al-Taqwa direc­tor Achmed Huber made a pre­dic­tion in a 2002 news arti­cle: “The U.S. is the ally of 15 mil­lion Jews against 1.3 bil­lion Mus­lims; it is allied with 5 mil­lion Israelis against 200 mil­lion Arabs. . . We will bring down the Israel lobby and change for­eign pol­icy.  We’ll do it in Amer­ica. When it hap­pens, you’ll under­stand.” This broad­cast devel­ops the argu­ment that Huber’s pre­dic­tion is indeed com­ing true, uti­liz­ing (among other devices) dis­torted media cov­er­age tai­lored to inflame pub­lic opin­ion. Ref­er­enc­ing the Nazi tract Serpent’s Walk, the pro­gram com­pares the cov­er­age of the Israeli/Palestinian con­flict with the O.J. Simp­son case, both dra­mat­i­cally affected by bla­tant, deeply prej­u­diced advo­cacy journalism.

In recent years, jour­nal­is­tic cov­er­age of the Mid­dle East con­flict has fea­tured emblem­atic and sen­sa­tional sto­ries of Israeli atroc­i­ties. What has received lit­tle cov­er­age is the fact that many of them were either fal­si­fied or greatly embell­ished to gen­er­ate anti-Israeli sen­ti­ment. The France2 broad­cast of the alleged killing of Mohamed Al Dura by Israeli troops has been ruled fraud­u­lent by a French appel­late court. The tragic death of Rachel Cor­rie, the alleged Israeli attack on an ambu­lance dur­ing the Lebanon war of 2006, the “killing” of chil­dren at Qana dur­ing that same con­flict and–most recently–the cov­er­age of Pales­tin­ian casu­al­ties dur­ing the Gaza war have either been utterly fab­ri­cated or strate­gi­cally dis­torted. These media events are the “Pales­tin­ian pornog­ra­phy” referred to in the broadcast’s title.

Par­tic­u­larly note­wor­thy is the fact that some of these inci­dents such as the Qana “non-massacre” of 2006 and the alleged shelling of U.N. facil­i­ties and vehi­cles dur­ing the recent Gaza war have proved appar­ently deci­sive in per­suad­ing the Israelis to con­clude the con­flict before achiev­ing their strate­gic aims.

Reveal­ing also is the fact that when Hamas kills Pales­tin­ian rivals of the Fatah orga­ni­za­tion it does not gen­er­ate the same degree of out­rage or media attention.

After dis­cussing an Inter­net story/rumor that has been cir­cu­lat­ing for a num­ber of years con­cern­ing a direct Nazi her­itage for Karl Rove, the pro­gram notes a sig­nif­i­cant development–the deci­sive effect of col­lat­eral dam­age to Pales­tin­ian civilians–real, embell­ished, pro­voked or fabricated–with regard to the actual tac­ti­cal and strate­gic con­duct of the con­flict. As was the case in the 2006 Lebanon war against Hezbol­lah (whose youth wing is pic­tured in this photo essay from Time mag­a­zine) dur­ing which a largely fab­ri­cated inci­dent at Qana helped pre­cip­i­tate the Israeli with­drawal, inci­dents such as the shelling of a UN school helped to halt the Israeli offen­sive in Gaza. Accord­ing to wit­nesses, that shelling was delib­er­ately drawn by Hamas fire. After the record­ing and broad­cast of the pro­gram, the U.N. retracted its claim, clar­i­fy­ing that the shells fell out­side the compound!

In addi­tion to that inci­dent and a pat­tern of Hamas com­bat­ants dress­ing like civil­ians and uti­liz­ing civil­ian instal­la­tions as muni­tions or fir­ing posi­tions (actions des­ig­nated as war crimes), there have been a num­ber of fal­si­fied inci­dents such as a “doc­tor” sup­pos­edly admin­is­ter­ing CPR to a wounded civil­ian and a super­mar­ket sup­pos­edly devoid of food.

Cor­riere della Sera–Italy’s largest and most respected daily–reported that the actual Pales­tin­ian death toll was closer to 600 (not 1300) and that most of the dead were Hamas fighters.

Among the fac­tors dis­tort­ing cov­er­age of the war is the fact that much of the cov­er­age in the U.S. accessed an AP reporter named Ibrahim Barzak, a long­time Pales­tin­ian res­i­dent of Gaza, whose home was badly dam­aged in the fight­ing! Hardly an objec­tive source. Another major media source alleg­ing Israeli war crimes was a Nor­we­gian physi­cian who felt that the 9/11 attacks were justified!

Of para­mount impor­tance in assess­ing the Gaza war of 2008-09 is the fact that Hamas and its Mus­lim Broth­er­hood par­ent emerged the strate­gic vic­tor, due to the false per­cep­tion gen­er­ated by the cov­er­age of the con­flict, par­tic­u­larly those in the Arab street.

Pro­gram High­lights Include: Analy­sis of TV host Jon Stewart’s ridicu­lous and destruc­tively false analy­sis of the con­flict; review of the Asso­ci­ated Press Tele­vi­sion News Ser­vice and its deci­sive influ­ence on cov­er­age of the Mid­dle East con­flict; review of com­par­i­son between key points of infor­ma­tion in both the O.J. Simp­son case and the Israeli/Arab conflict–points of infor­ma­tion of which most peo­ple are not aware; review of the anti Semitic per­cep­tions pre­sented in Serpent’s Walk.

1. Tack­ling an Inter­net story that’s made the rounds for the last five years, the pro­gram sets forth alle­ga­tions that Karl Rove has an overt Nazi her­itage. [This turned out to be dis­in­for­ma­tion, as I suspected–D.E.]

” . . . Karl Rove has par­al­lel ties. The shad­owy Rove serves as ‘Bush’s Brain’ in the cur­rent White House. He is the polit­i­cal mas­ter­mind behind the Cal­i­for­nia coup, and is now in the head­lines for out­ing Valerie Plame, the CIA wife of Ambas­sador Joseph Wil­son. A con­sum­mate strate­gist, Rove may have outed Plame in retal­i­a­tion for Wilson’s fail­ure to back up the Bush claim that Sad­dam Hus­sein was buy­ing nuclear weapons mate­ri­als in Africa. Accord­ing to some pub­lished reports, as many as sev­enty CIA oper­a­tives have been put at risk by Rove’s retal­ia­tory strike.

Accord­ing to Wil­son, and to Retired U.S. Navy Lt. Com­man­der Al Mar­tin (www.almartinraw.com), Rove’s grand­fa­ther was Karl Heinz Roverer, the Gauleiter of Old­en­burg. Roverer was Reich-Statthalter — Nazi State Party Chair­man — for his region. He was also a part­ner and senior engi­neer in the Roverer Sud-Deutche Inge­nieur­buro A. G. engi­neer­ing firm, which built the Birke­nau death camp, at which tens of thou­sands of Jews, Gyp­sies, dis­si­dents and other were slaugh­tered en masse. . . . “

“Fourth Reich? The Bush-Rove-Schwarzenegger Nazi Nexus” by Bob Fitrakis and Har­vey Wasser­man;Coun­ter­punch; 10/6/2003.

2. Before enter­ing into dis­cus­sion of the recent Gaza war, the pro­gram accesses a col­umn by New York Times colum­nist Ethan Bron­ner, in which he sets forth his own frus­tra­tion at the seem­ing inabil­ity of par­ti­sans of the two sides in the Israeli/Palestinian con­flict to mod­er­ate their views.

“Faisal Hus­seini, a Pales­tin­ian leader who died at the start of this decade, used to tell a story about his first visit to Israel. The 1967 war had just ended, bor­ders were sud­denly opened and he took a drive to Tel Aviv, where at some point he found him­self detained by an Israeli police­man. Ques­tions and answers ensued. At one point the police­man said to him, ‘As a proud Zion­ist, I must tell you ....‘At which Mr. Hus­seini burst out laughing.

What’s so funny? the police­man asked. ‘I have never in my life,’ Mr. Hus­seini replied, ‘heard any­one refer to Zion­ism with any­thing but con­tempt. I had no idea you could be a proud Zionist.’

I have writ­ten about the Arab-Israeli con­flict on and off for more than a quarter-century and have spent the past four weeks cov­er­ing Israel’s war in Gaza. For me, Mr. Husseini’s story sums up how the two sides speak in two dis­tinct tongues, how the very words they use mean oppo­site things to each other, and how the war of lan­guage can con­found a reporter’s attempts to nar­rate — or a new president’s attempts to medi­ate — this con­flict in a way both sides can accept as fair.

Among Israel’s Jews, there is almost no higher value than Zion­ism. The word is bathed in a celes­tial glow, sug­gest­ing self­less­ness and nobil­ity. But go any­where else in the Mid­dle East and Zion­ism stands for theft, oppres­sion, racist exclusionism.

No place, date or event in this con­flicted land is spo­ken of in a com­mon lan­guage. The bar­rier snaking across and inside the West Bank is a wall to Pales­tini­ans, a fence to Israelis. The holi­est site in Jerusalem is the Tem­ple Mount to Jews, the Noble Sanc­tu­ary to Mus­lims. The 1948 con­flict that cre­ated Israel is one side’s War of Inde­pen­dence, the Cat­a­stro­phe for the other.

After Israel’s three-week air, sea and land assault in Gaza, aimed at halt­ing Hamas rocket fire, it is worth paus­ing to note how dif­fi­cult it has been to nar­rate this war in a fash­ion oth­ers view as neu­tral, and to con­tem­plate what that means for any attempt by the new Obama admin­is­tra­tion to try to end it.

It turns out that both nar­ra­tion and medi­a­tion require com­mon ground. But try­ing to tell the story so that both sides can hear it in the same way feels more and more to me like a Greek tragedy in which I play the despised cho­rus. It feels like I am only fan­ning the flames, adding to the mis­un­der­stand­ings and mutual antag­o­nism with every word I write because the fer­vent inner voice of each side is so loud that it drowns every­thing else out. . . .”

“The Bul­lets in My In-Box” by Ethan Bron­ner; The New York Times; 1/25/2009.

3. Tack­ling the sub­stance of the Gaza war itself, the pro­gram notes a sig­nif­i­cant development–the deci­sive effect of col­lat­eral dam­age to Pales­tin­ian civilians–real, embell­ished, pro­voked or fabricated–with regard to the actual tac­ti­cal and strate­gic con­duct of the con­flict. The shelling of a UN school in Gaza may well have been pro­voked and was cer­tainly a key ele­ment in help­ing to pre­cip­i­tate the Israeli cease­fire and with­drawal. After the record­ing and broad­cast of the pro­gram, the U.N. retracted its claim, clar­i­fy­ing that the shells fell out­side the compound!

” . . . Until now, the inter­na­tional community–including Egypt–has given Israel a long leash to strike a heavy blow against Hamas. But with the shelling of the U.N. school in the north­ern Gaza town of Jebaliya on Tues­day, the clock might start tick­ing for Israel to with­draw its troops. . . . The For­eign Min­istry also said it had good rea­son for tar­get­ing the school. ‘Ini­tial inves­ti­ga­tions indi­cate that Hamas ter­ror­ists fired mor­tar bombs from the area of the school towards Israeli forces, who returned fire towards the source of the shoot­ing. The Israeli return fire landed out­side the school, yet a series of explo­sions fol­lowed, indi­cat­ing the prob­a­ble pres­ence of muni­tions and explo­sives in the building.’

The Israeli army also accused Hamas of ‘cyn­i­cally’ using civil­ians Imad Abu Askar and Hasan Abu Askar, ‘two known Hamas mor­tar crew­men,’ the For­eign Min­istry said in a state­ment. two neigh­bor­hoods res­i­dents who spoke on con­di­tion of anonymity because they feared for their safety, con­firmed the Israeli account, telling the Asso­ci­ated Press that a group of mil­i­tants fired mor­tar rounds from a street near the school, then fled into a crowd of peo­ple in the streets. . . .

‘A ground inva­sion was expected and, in some Hamas quar­ters, hoped for,’ said the Inter­na­tional Cri­sis Group, a Brussels-based orga­ni­za­tion engaged in con­flict res­o­lu­tion, in a posi­tion paper pub­lished this week. ‘The islamist move­ment hopes to reap polit­i­cal ben­e­fit from mate­r­ial losses It knows it is no mil­i­tary match for Israel but it can claim vic­tory by with­stand­ing the unprece­dented onslaught.’

Shlomo Brom, the for­mer head of the strate­gic plan­ning divi­sion of the Israeli army, said min­i­miz­ing civil­ian casu­al­ties requires ‘a com­bi­na­tion of excel­lent intel­li­gence, very accu­rate weapons sys­tems and very good plan­ning that takes into account col­lat­eral dam­age. Mis­takes are bound to hap­pen, and they will hap­pen in this war.’ Ger­ald Stein­berg, pro­fes­sor of polit­i­cal sci­ence at Bar-Ilan Uni­vesity in Ramag Gan, said the strike against the U.N. school and ensu­ing diplo­matic pres­sure it could crate were not only fore­seen but dis­cussed in advance by israeli policymakers.

‘There were many meet­ings on how to deal with this before the fight­ing started. It hap­pens every time. The effect this time very much depends on how the story plays out in the next 24 hours,’ said Stein­ber. ‘If orga­ni­za­tions like Amnesty (Inter­na­tional) and Human Rights Wach give this issue much greater vis­i­bil­ity as they have in the past, the pres­sure on Israel will build and it will have some impact, but if it’s strictly Pales­tin­ian claims it won’t have much effect.’ But inter­na­tional pres­sure is mounting. . . .”

“Gaza School Attack Could Be a Trig­ger for Israeli Pull­out” by Matthew Kalman; San Fran­cisco Chron­i­cle; 1/07/2009.

4. Hamas has delib­er­ately pre­cip­i­tated sit­u­a­tions in which civil­ians would be exposed to Israeli retal­ia­tory fire.

“The grind­ing urban bat­tle unfold­ing in the densely pop­u­lated Gaza Strip is a war of new tac­tics, quick adap­ta­tion and lethal tricks.

Hamas, with train­ing from Iran and Hezbol­lah, has used the last two years to turn Gaza into a deadly maze of tun­nels, booby traps and sophis­ti­cated road­side bombs. Weapons are hid­den in mosques, school­yards and civil­ian houses, and the leadership’s war room is a bunker beneath Gaza’s largest hos­pi­tal, Israeli intel­li­gence offi­cials say.

Unwill­ing to take Israel’s bait and come into the open, Hamas mil­i­tants are fight­ing in civil­ian clothes; even the police have been ordered to take off their uni­forms. The mil­i­tants emerge from tun­nels to shoot auto­matic weapons or anti­tank mis­siles, then dis­ap­pear back inside, hop­ing to lure the Israeli sol­diers with their fire. . . .

Israeli press offi­cers call the tac­tics of Hamas cyn­i­cal, ille­gal and inhu­mane; even Israel’s crit­ics agree that Hamas’s reg­u­lar use of rock­ets to fire at civil­ians in Israel, and its use of civil­ians as shields in Gaza, are also vio­la­tions of the rules of war. Israeli mil­i­tary men and ana­lysts say that its urban guer­rilla tac­tics, includ­ing the wide­spread use of civil­ian struc­tures and tun­nels, are delib­er­ate and come from the Iran­ian Army’s tac­ti­cal train­ing and the lessons of the 2006 war between Israel and Iranian-backed Hezbol­lah in Lebanon.

Hamas rocket and weapons caches, includ­ing rocket launch­ers, have been dis­cov­ered in and under mosques, schools and civil­ian homes, the army says. The Israeli intel­li­gence chief, Yuval Diskin, in a report to the Israeli cab­i­net, said that the Gaza-based lead­er­ship of Hamas was in under­ground hous­ing beneath the No. 2 build­ing of Shifa Hos­pi­tal, the largest in Gaza. That alle­ga­tion can­not be confirmed.

While The New York Times and some other news orga­ni­za­tions have local or Gaza-based Pales­tin­ian cor­re­spon­dents, any Israeli cit­i­zen or Israeli with dual cit­i­zen­ship has been banned for more than two years from enter­ing Gaza, and any for­eign cor­re­spon­dent who did not enter the ter­ri­tory before a six-month cease-fire with Hamas ended last month has not been allowed in. . . .”

“A Gaza War Full of Traps and Trick­ery” by Steven Erlanger; The New York Times; 1/11/2009.

5. Real­iz­ing the strate­gic goals set forth in Serpent’s Walk–the gam­bits high­lighted above, cou­pled with favor­ably dis­torted news cov­er­age by the “opinion-forming media” are real­iz­ing the vision of al-Taqwa direc­tor, Islamist and neo-Nazi Achmed Huber. For The Record has long pre­sented the case that, like The Turner Diaries, a com­pan­ion vol­ume pub­lished by National Van­guard Books, Serpent’s Walk is in fact a blue­print and man­i­festo detail­ing Under­ground Reich strat­egy for its foot soldiers.

“The U.S. is the ally of 15 mil­lion Jews against 1.3 bil­lion Mus­lims; it is allied with 5 mil­lion Israelis against 200 mil­lion Arabs. . . We will bring down the Israel lobby and change for­eign pol­icy.  We’ll do it in Amer­ica. When it hap­pens, you’ll understand.”

”Swiss Probe Anti-U.S. Neo-Nazi”; San Fran­cisco Chron­i­cle; 3/12/2002; p. A12.

6. A nau­se­at­ing but telling event sup­port­ing the the­ory that Huber’s words are accu­rate, the bad PR that Israel has expe­ri­enced has been exac­er­bated by the com­ments of Jon Stew­art, the host of the “Daily Show.” Demon­strat­ing the super­fi­cial, triv­i­al­iz­ing nature of the medium of TV, Stew­art (nee “Lei­bowitz”) intoned to the great acclaim of his audi­ence that Israel attacked Gaza to inflict civil­ian car­nage before Barack Obama assumed the pres­i­dency. In fact, the tim­ing of the Israeli action had far more to do with the Feb­ru­ary Israeli elec­tions, with the right-wing Likud Party hav­ing been the odds-on favorite to win, as recently as Sep­tem­ber. (As of early Feb­ru­ary of 2009–the week before the elections–Likud and Kadima were in a vir­tual dead heat.)

“As war rages between Israel and Hamas in Gaza, and President-elect Barack Obama counts down the days until he has to deal directly with the con­flict as the leader of the free world, a war to con­trol the mes­sage is rag­ing at home. And it’s unusu­ally fierce.

This week, some jar­ring events made head­lines and illus­trated the nature of that war: Hugely pop­u­lar come­dian Jon Stew­art, who is Jewish–birth name, Jonathan Stu­art Leibowitz–was lauded by the Mus­lim Pub­lic Affairs Coun­cil this week for a scathing ‘Daily Show’ seg­ment enti­tled, ‘Israel Invades Gaza . . . Mis­sile Tov!’ The Com­edy Cen­tral host, not­ing that rock­ets lobbed from Hamas into Israel are not new, posed the ques­tion, ‘Why does Israel feel that they have to react so strongly right now?’ Answer the Obama inau­gu­ra­tion. ‘I get it. . . . Israel gets their bomb­ing in before the Jan. 20 ‘hope and change’ dead­line . . . it’s like a civil­ian car­nage Toyota-thon!’ he said to roars of approval from his audience. . . .”

“At War in Gaza, Israel Los­ing PR Bat­tle in the U.S.” by Carla Mar­in­ucci; San Fran­cisco Chron­i­cle; 1/10/2009; pp. A1-A7.

7. Illus­trat­ing the political/economic dynam­ics under­ly­ing the jour­nal­is­tic dis­tor­tion of the Mid­dle East is the rela­tion­ship between the non-profit Asso­ci­ated Press and its profit-making tele­vi­sion news sub­sidiary APTN. In turn, the pro­found influ­ence of the Arab mar­ket on the cov­er­age pro­vided by APTN and the influ­ence of APTN on other broad­cast out­lets is a major cause of the media dis­tor­tion of events in the Mid­dle East.

“The vast major­ity of the TV news pic­tures you see are pro­duced by two TV news com­pa­nies. Pre­sented here is a case for how a large amount of money has been used to inject a clear bias into the heart of the global TV news­gath­er­ing sys­tem. That this hap­pens is not at ques­tion, whether it is by acci­dent or design is harder to tell. You may not real­ize it, but if you watch any TV news broad­cast on any sta­tion any­where in the world, there is a bet­ter than even chance you will view pic­tures from APTN. BBC, Fox, Sky, CNN and every major broad­caster sub­scribes to and uses APTN pic­tures. While the method by which they oper­ate is inter­est­ing, it is the extra ser­vice this US owned and UK based com­pany offers to Arab states that is really interesting.”

(“How Much Does It Cost to Buy Global TV News?”; Lit­tle Green Footballs)

8. The pro­gram encap­su­lates the his­tory of the AP and the oper­a­tions of its APTN subsidiary:

“The Asso­ci­ated Press (AP) is a not-for-profit news gath­er­ing and dis­sem­i­na­tion ser­vice based in the US. Formed in 1848, the AP grew up from an agree­ment between the six major New York news­pa­pers of the day. They wanted to defray the large teleg­ra­phy costs that they were all inde­pen­dently incur­ring for send­ing the same news coast to coast. Despite being highly com­pet­i­tive, they formed the Asso­ci­ated Press as a col­lec­tion agency and agreed to share the mate­r­ial. Today, that six-newspaper coop­er­a­tive is an orga­ni­za­tion serv­ing more than 1,500 news­pa­pers and 5,000 broad­cast out­lets in the United States. Abroad, AP ser­vices are printed and broad­cast in 112 coun­tries. Asso­ci­ated Press Tele­vi­sion News (APTN) is a wholly owned sub­sidiary of AP. It was for­mally set up as a sep­a­rate entity in 1994. It is run as a com­mer­cial entity and aims to make a profit. Any profit it does make is fed back to AP (which is non-profit mak­ing: APTN prof­its reduce the news­gath­er­ing costs incurred by the 1500 US news­pa­pers that col­lec­tively own the AP). APTN is the largest tele­vi­sion news-gathering player (larger than Reuters, its only true com­peti­tor in this field). While AP is based in the US, APTN oper­ates out of large premises in Cam­den, Lon­don. They have news teams, offices and broad­cast facil­i­ties in just about every impor­tant place in the world.”

(Idem.)

9. Note the role in gen­er­at­ing APTN’s cov­er­age of local sources—in many cases ‘stringers’ in Arab coun­tries who are sub­ject to the polit­i­cal and eth­nic prej­u­dices that obtain in that part of the world.

“APTN uses news crews and broad­cast facil­i­ties all over the world to record video of news­wor­thy events (in News, Sport and Enter­tain­ment). These pic­tures are either sent unedited or very par­tially edited back to Lon­don. Most news is fed back within hours but they also cover and feed cer­tain events live (news con­fer­ences in Iraq, press con­fer­ences after a sport­ing event etc.). Most of these sto­ries are sent in with ‘nat­ural sound’: there is no jour­nal­ist pro­vid­ing a voice over, but the choice of what to shoot is in the hands of the local pro­ducer and cam­era crew. Local crews are some­times employed directly by APTN, or more often ‘stringers’ are hired for a par­tic­u­lar event or paid for the footage they have already cap­tured. Once the sto­ries have been fed back to the UK they are edited. This is a round the clock oper­a­tion. The goal is to pro­duce a 30 minute news bul­letin com­pris­ing 6 or 7 sto­ries every few hours. These sto­ries are made by edit­ing down the raw ‘rushes’ that come in from all over the world. This is done by a team of pro­duc­ers who work for the news edi­tor. They don’t sup­ply a voice over but they do edit, dis­card and sequence pic­tures dic­tat­ing the empha­sis and direc­tion of the story. They will accom­pany each story with a writ­ten descrip­tion of each shot and the gen­eral rea­son this was a story. This is repeated for News, Sport & Enter­tain­ment with a geo­graph­i­cal empha­sis that shifts around the world as dif­fer­ent mar­kets wake and sleep. The out­put of this is called the ‘Global News Wire’ (GNW).”

(Idem.)

10. The pro­gram details how APTN makes its money:

“This is how APTN makes its money: news orga­ni­za­tions (mostly TV but not all) sub­scribe to APTN and pay an annual amount to both watch and then re-use the sto­ries that are fed over the GNW. The sto­ries are sup­plied with sound, but no jour­nal­ist to do a voice over. Most com­mer­cial news sta­tions (like the BBC, SKY, Fox or CNN) would take this feed, decide which pic­tures to use then re-edit it and sup­ply an appro­pri­ate voice over for the story. The video comes with a writ­ten descrip­tion of the shots and the events that occur in them. The fee for this feed depends on the size of the receiv­ing orga­ni­za­tion, their audi­ence size and a nego­ti­a­tion with APTN’s sales force. It is pretty much impos­si­ble, how­ever, to oper­ate a TV news orga­ni­za­tion with­out tak­ing feeds from either APTN or Reuters or usu­ally both. The agree­ment with APTN usu­ally allows the receiv­ing news chan­nel unlim­ited use of the video for two weeks. If they want to re-show those pic­tures after that they have to sep­a­rately license the pic­tures (which can cost any­thing from $100 to $10,000 per 30 sec­onds depend­ing on the content).”

(Idem.)

11. Of para­mount impor­tance in under­stand­ing tele­vi­sion cov­er­age of news in the Mid­dle East is the deci­sive influ­ence of the Arab states’ APTN sub­scrip­tion ser­vice. This service—specifically tai­lored for the vir­u­lently anti-Israeli Arab market—is pro­foundly influ­en­tial on APTN con­tent as a whole. And with the great influ­ence of APTN cov­er­age on TV cov­er­age as a whole, this badly skews the objec­tiv­ity of the cov­er­age of the Israel and the Lebanon war.

“How­ever, there is another sig­nif­i­cant part of their busi­ness model that affects the rest of the busi­ness. While most of the world takes news pic­tures with min­i­mal inter­pre­ta­tion beyond edit­ing, the Arab Gulf States have asked for and receive a dif­fer­ent and far more expen­sive ser­vice. These states pay for a com­plete news report ser­vice includ­ing full edit­ing and voice-overs from known jour­nal­ists. The news orga­ni­za­tions in the Arab coun­tries don’t do any­thing (beyond ver­ify that they are appro­pri­ate for local tastes) before broad­cast. What this means is that while there are around 50 peo­ple pro­duc­ing news pic­tures for the whole world work­ing in Cam­den at any time, there are a fur­ther 50 Ara­bic speak­ing staff pro­duc­ing fin­ished sto­ries exclu­sively for the Arab states of the gulf. This has a tremen­dous effect on the whole feel of the build­ing as these two teams feed pic­tures and peo­ple back and forth and sit in adja­cent work areas. The slant of the sto­ries required by the Gulf States has a def­i­nite effect on which footage is used and dis­carded. This affects both the Gulf news­room and the main global news­room. This full ser­vice feed is much more expen­sive for the cus­tomers than the usual ser­vice, but it is also much higher mar­gin for APTN. This is partly because there is great com­mon­al­ity in what they can send to most of the Gulf States tak­ing this ser­vice: sto­ries are made once and used in a num­ber of countries.”

(Idem.)

12. “Any­thing involv­ing Israel is a favorite with Gulf Arab states for show­ing to their view­ers. Could this be the rea­son why Israel receives such a dis­pro­por­tion­ate amount of par­tic­u­larly neg­a­tive cov­er­age espe­cially and increas­ingly ever since the early 1970’s? Hon­estRe­port­ing is usu­ally unable to decide which is most biased: AP or BBC. As the BBC is often using APTN footage, the dif­fer­ence is minor. A sig­nif­i­cant twist to what is seen, con­cerns what is not seen. Footage such as the Pales­tin­ian mob joy­fully lynch­ing two Israeli reservists in Ramal­lah in Octo­ber 2000 is held by APTN’s library: any attempt to license this film for reshow is care­fully vet­ted. Requests for the use of ‘sen­si­tive clips’ are referred directly to the Library direc­tor. This is not the case with clips that paint Israel in a bad light. Like­wise, the re-showing of Pales­tin­ian cel­e­bra­tions on 9/11 is con­sid­ered ‘sen­si­tive’. The way in which raw footage such as APTN’s is com­piled into a news report and sent round the world has also been ana­lyzed. The Sec­ond Draft gives a com­pre­hen­sive view of how edit­ing can make all the dif­fer­ence. APTN is the gate­keeper that sits between you and the actual event. You will never see what the edi­tors at APTN see before they com­pile your evening news. What do you think is cut out?”

(Idem.)

13. There are indi­ca­tions that the Ara­bic APTN ser­vice may have been set up with this bias in mind.

“Was this orga­ni­za­tion set up with this in-built bias on pur­pose? Is there some way that the expen­sive pay­ments made by Gulf state gov­ern­ments form part of a delib­er­ate attempt to skew the media? In Islam and Dhim­mi­tude (2002) by Bat Ye’or on pp294-296 she recounts how deci­sions were taken in the wake of the Arab-Israeli war of 1967 to try to put across an anti-Jewish, anti-Zionist mes­sage. Suc­ces­sive con­fer­ences resolved to con­tribute vast sums ‘to uni­ver­si­ties, cen­ters for Islamic stud­ies, inter­na­tional com­mu­ni­ca­tions agen­cies, and pri­vate and gov­ern­men­tal orga­ni­za­tions in order to win over world opin­ion.’ (p296). The mes­sages from these con­fer­ences stressed an addi­tion to the more famil­iar vio­lent jihad: they also empha­sized the impor­tance of jihad by the writ­ten and spo­ken word—what we would rec­og­nize as clas­sic pro­pa­ganda. With­out ques­tion APTN’s inter­est­ing busi­ness model rep­re­sents a con­crete exam­ple of an ongo­ing finan­cial ‘con­tri­bu­tion’ to an impor­tant com­mu­ni­ca­tion agency pro­mot­ing a pro-Arab bias.”

(Idem.)

14. AP reporter Ibrahim Barzak did much of the report­ing on the con­flict that found itself into the West­ern news media. Barzak is a Pales­tin­ian res­i­dent of Gaza whose home was badly dam­aged in the fight­ing! Not exactly an objec­tive source.

“I live alone in my office. My wife and two young chil­dren moved in with her father after our apart­ment was shat­tered. The neigh­bor­hood mosque, where I have prayed since I was a child, had its roof blown off. All the gov­ern­ment build­ings on my beat have been obliterated.

After days of Israeli shelling, the city and life I have known no longer exist. . . .”

“News Reporter Finds His Gaza Home in Ruins” by Ibrahim Barzak; TheLedger.com; 1/8/2009.

15. As has so often been the case in recent episodes of the decades-old war between the Jews and the Arabs, cov­er­age of the con­flict has been badly skewed by embell­ished inci­dents and coverage.

” . . . The net­work was caught run­ning an obvi­ously faked video of a Gaza Pales­tin­ian sup­pos­edly being treated in the wake of an Israeli attack, sup­pos­edly recorded by a cam­era man who was his brother. The prob­lem was that the “doc­tor” who play­ing the role of an emer­gency room physi­cian admin­is­ter­ing CPR had not a clue what the real thing looks like. . . . Lit­tle Green Foot­balls exposed the fraud, so CNN pulled the video from its web­site with­out expla­na­tion. You can view the video, and keep in mind the com­ments of a real doc­tor posted on LGF: ‘I’m no mil­i­tary expert, but I am a doc­tor, and this video is bullsh-t. The chest com­pres­sions that were being per­formed at the begin­ning of this video were absolutely, pos­i­tively fake. The large man in the white coat was NOT per­form­ing CPR on that child. He was just sort of tap­ping on the child’s ster­num a lit­tle bit with his fin­gers. You can’t make blood flow like that. Fur­ther­more, there’s no point in doing chest com­pres­sions if you’re not also ven­ti­lat­ing the patient some­how. In this video, I can’t tell for sure if the patient has an endo­tra­cheal tube in place, but you can see that there is nobody bag-ventilating him (a bag is actu­ally hang­ing by the head of the bed), and there is no ven­ti­la­tor attached to the patient. In a hos­pi­tal, dur­ing a code on a ven­ti­lated patient, some­body would prob­a­bly be bag­ging the patient dur­ing the chest com­pres­sions. And they also would have moved the bed away from the wall, so that some­body could get back there to intu­bate the patient and/or bag him. In short, the ‘resus­ci­ta­tion scene’ at the begin­ning is fake, and it’s a pretty lame fake at that.’ . . .“

“CNN Busted Run­ning Phony Gaza Pro­pa­ganda, Doesn’t Fess Up (Updated)” by Thomas Lif­son; Amer­i­can Thinker; 1/9/2009.

16. The same French TV net­work that broad­cast the fab­ri­cated footage of the “death” of Mohammed al-Durra has once again trans­mit­ted phony information.

“But that pro­vides lit­tle com­fort to Jen­nifer Las­zlo Mizrahi, pres­i­dent and founder of The Israel Project in Wash­ing­ton. Accord­ing to Mizrahi, France 2 com­mit­ted an addi­tional infrac­tion of late: Staged footage.

In a report main­tain­ing peo­ple are starv­ing in Gaza, Mizrahi said, France 2 showed a Gaza res­i­dent in a food store say­ing: ‘Appar­ently, there is noth­ing, as you can see. There are no nat­ural prod­ucts for the kids. There is no milk. There is noth­ing here.’ . . .”

But, upon closer inspec­tion, shelves filled with food can be seen in the reflec­tion of a refrig­er­a­tor door. . . .”

“Crit­ics Say French TV Net­work Broad­cast Fab­ri­cated Footage in Gaza, Again” by Stephanie L. Freid; FoxNews; 1/12/2009.

17. Fur­ther cloud­ing any attempts at sep­a­rat­ing jour­nal­is­tic wheat from pro­pa­gan­dis­tic chaff–by both sides–are indi­ca­tions that the sta­tis­tics con­cern­ing Gazan civil­ian casu­al­ties have been greatly exag­ger­ated. This should not be mis­in­ter­preted as say­ing that there wasn’t col­lat­eral dam­age and the deaths of inno­cent civil­ians. Rather, it should lead an intel­li­gent observer to con­clude that what we have been told is not as adver­tised. Cor­riere della Sera–Italy’s largest and most pres­ti­gious daily–reported a vastly dif­fer­ent account of the Gazan casu­alty toll.

“There was a very inter­est­ing arti­cle in the Ital­ian news­pa­per Cor­riere della Sera last week.  It sug­gests that Pales­tin­ian hos­pi­tal admin­is­tra­tors and other gov­ern­ment offi­cials in the Gaza strip gave greatly exag­ger­ated casu­alty fig­ures to for­eign reporters and aid groups dur­ing Israel’s just-ended Oper­a­tion Cast Lead.

The num­ber that has come to be seen as ‘offi­cial’ — only because of rep­e­ti­tion — is 1,200 to 1,300.   But reporter Lorenzo Cre­monesi spoke to a Gazan doc­tor who told him, ‘The num­ber of deaths was between 500–600...Most were young men between 17 and 23 who were recruited into the ranks of Hamas, which sent them to be slaughtered...It was strange that the non-governmental orga­ni­za­tions, includ­ing West­ern ones, repeated the high num­ber with­out check­ing, but the truth will come to light in the end.’

‘It’s like what hap­pened in Jenin in 2002,’ the doc­tor said, refer­ring to a UN inves­ti­ga­tion which con­tra­dicted media claims of a Israeli Defense Force ‘mas­sacre’ in the West Bank and set the num­ber of Pales­tin­ian dead at about 45.  ‘At the begin­ning they spoke of 500 dead; after­wards [sic] it was clear there were only 54 dead, at least 45 of them fighters.’

‘It is suf­fi­cient to visit sev­eral hos­pi­tals [in the Gaza Strip] to under­stand that the num­bers don’t add up. ‘Cre­monesi wrote.  He also noted that in nearly all of Gaza’s major hos­pi­tals, and espe­cially those in major con­flict zones, he found most beds empty. . . .”

“Cor­riere della Sera Chal­lenges the Con­ven­tional Wis­dom on Gaza” by Stephanie Guttman; Telegraph.co.uk; 1/25/2009.

18. One can only won­der how many of the accounts that found their way into the world’s media came from indi­vid­u­als such as a Nor­we­gian doc­tor who felt that the 9/11 attacks were, on the bal­ance, fair and justifiable.

“Nor­we­gian doc­tor Mads Gilbert entered the Gaza Strip sev­eral days before Israel launched its mil­i­tary offen­sive there. In the course of the oper­a­tion Gilbert spoke to numer­ous media out­lets, pre­sented him­self as “an objec­tive physi­cian” and repeat­edly con­demned the IDF’s actions in Gaza. How­ever, it recently became known that Gilbert might have been less impar­tial than he claimed to be. The only West­ern doc­tor allowed into the Strip dur­ing the fight­ing is a mem­ber of the Nor­we­gian social­ist party Red, and a man who in the past expressed sup­port for al-Qaeda’s Sep­tem­ber 11 attack on the World Trade Cen­ter in New York. . . .”

“Doc­tor Who Slammed Gaza Vio­lence Sup­ported 9/11 Attacks” by Sha­har Ginosar; YnetNews.com; 2/4/09.

19. It should be noted that the net result of the war and its cov­er­age was to increase Hamas’s pop­u­lar­ity and to increase Mus­lim anger. A major ben­e­fi­ciary of the war was the Mus­lim Broth­er­hood, par­ent orga­ni­za­tion of Hamas and an Islamic fas­cist organization.

“Inside Al Azhar Mosque, a 1,000-year-old cen­ter of reli­gious learn­ing, the preacher was rail­ing on Fri­day against Jews. Out­side were rows of riot police offi­cers backed by water can­nons and dozens of plain­clothes offi­cers, there to pre­vent wor­shipers from charg­ing into the street to protest against the war in Gaza.

“Mus­lim broth­ers,” said the government-appointed preacher, Sheik Eid Abdel Hamid Youssef, “God has inflicted the Mus­lim nation with a peo­ple whom God has become angry at and whom he cursed so he made mon­keys and pigs out of them. They killed prophets and mes­sen­gers and sowed cor­rup­tion on Earth. They are the most evil on Earth.”

As the war in Gaza burned through its 14th day, Arab gov­ern­ments have felt their legit­i­macy chal­lenged with an uncom­mon vir­u­lence. With each pass­ing day, and each Pales­tin­ian death, the pop­u­lar­ity of Hamas and other rad­i­cal move­ments has ratch­eted higher on the Arab street, while the stand­ing of Arab lead­ers has suffered.. . .

‘The pres­sure is mount­ing on Egypt,’ said Abdel Raouf el-Reedy, a for­mer Egypt­ian ambas­sador to the United States. ‘How come you keep the Israeli ambas­sador here? How come you keep the Egypt­ian ambas­sador in Israel? How come you still export gas to Israel in spite of a court order to stop? The sys­tem is on the defen­sive. Pub­lic opin­ion is more clearly on the side of Hamas.’

The mood on the streets of Cairo feels somber, dark, dejected. There is a heavy secu­rity pres­ence. Armed riot police offi­cers are massed out­side of pro­fes­sional orga­ni­za­tions, like the Doctor’s Syn­di­cate, that are often run by mem­bers aligned with the Mus­lim Broth­er­hood, the offi­cially out­lawed but tol­er­ated Islamic move­ment. Mas­sive troop car­ri­ers clog small side streets.

Over three days of inter­views here, peo­ple seemed deflated about the pub­lic crit­i­cism their coun­try had received, let down by the fail­ure of their own gov­ern­ment to help the Pales­tini­ans and sick­ened by the deaths of hun­dreds of Pales­tini­ans, not only com­bat­ants but many women and chil­dren as well. Over and over, Egyp­tians said they felt the only ones they could trust were the Islamists — not their government.

‘The Mus­lim Brotherhood’s work gives them cred­i­bil­ity,’ said Heba Omar, 27, who col­lected about $4,000 from her neigh­bors to donate to a char­ity con­trolled by broth­er­hood mem­bers. ‘They do what they can do at times of crisis.’ . . .”

“Egyp­tians Seethe Over Gaza, and Their Lead­ers Feel Heat” by Michael Slack­man; The New York Times; 12/10/2009.

20. In the past, For The Record com­pared the expe­ri­ence of cov­er­ing the Israeli/Palestinian con­flict to cov­er­ing the O.J. Simp­son case. Peo­ple are stri­dently, viciously polar­ized on both issues and fun­da­men­tally misinformed—misinformed BECAUSE THE MEDIA UPON WHICH THEY DEPEND FOR THEIR INFORMATION ARE NOT PROPERLY INFORMING THEM. Although the pub­lic is not, for the most part, aware of it, there was a moun­tain of excul­pa­tory evi­dence in the O.J. Simp­son case, as well as enough evi­dence to indict, and per­haps con­vict, Mark Fuhrman, the detec­tive who con­ducted the ille­gal search of O.J.’s prop­erty. In the next para­graph, we will exam­ine some of that evi­dence. Note that this is from a fire­side chat. It is an infor­mal talk. Mr. Emory did not source his dis­cus­sion of the OJ case. For the over­whelm­ing major­ity of the infor­ma­tion, use the search func­tion to locate old pro­grams about the case. They are all avail­able on the archive page main­tained by WFMU.

21. In FTR #571, we enu­mer­ated a num­ber of essen­tial facts about the O.J. Simp­son case that the media did not (for the most part) com­mu­ni­cate. The media did not tell peo­ple: that a report was sub­mit­ted to pros­e­cu­tor Mar­cia Clark a week or so after the killings indi­cat­ing that Mark Fuhrman had a sex­ual inter­est in Nicole Brown Simp­son and may well have had an affair with her; that Mark Fuhrman was the head of a white suprema­cist group within the Los Ange­les Police Depart­ment called WASP (“White Anglo-Saxon Police­men”); that O.J. and Nicole Simp­son were receiv­ing death threats from white suprema­cist groups (includ­ing some affil­i­ated with the Los Ange­les Police Depart­ment); that Judge Lance Ito’s wife was the high­est rank­ing female mem­ber of the LAPD; that Ito’s wife had been Fuhrman’s watch com­man­der and had to dis­ci­pline Fuhrman when he wrote “KKK” on the Mar­tin Luther King Hol­i­day on the sta­tion house cal­en­dar; that Ito’s wife later claimed she had no rec­ol­lec­tion of Fuhrman and that, there­fore, Judge Ito had no con­flict of inter­est; that Fuhrman lied on the stand dur­ing the pre-trial hear­ings about where he was and what he was doing on the night of the killings; that Nicole wasn’t liv­ing in fear of O.J.—she had a pizza party at O.J.’s a few weeks before the killings; that all of the prin­ci­ples in the case had links to “orga­nized vice’; that Nicole appears to have been work­ing as a call girl for Heidi Fleiss’s ring (the call girl oper­a­tion of “the Hol­ly­wood Madam”); that Ron Gold­man was openly gay and had no pas­sion­ate inter­est in Nicole; that Ron Gold­man may well have been work­ing as a gay pros­ti­tute and that he was receiv­ing death threats from his jeal­ous gay lover; that Michael Nigg—a defense witness—was mur­dered shortly before he was to tes­tify; that Casimir “Butch Casey” Sucharski—a reputed orga­nized crime asso­ciate of O.J.’s from his play­ing days was mur­dered shortly after being writ­ten about in the Buf­falo News; that Cowl­ings and Robert Kar­dashian (O.J.’s friend and attor­ney) were under inves­ti­ga­tion by a grand jury for pos­si­ble involve­ment in the largest sports-betting ring in Cal­i­for­nia; that Cowl­ings was a dri­ver and body­guard for Joey Ippolito, a major South­ern Cal­i­for­nia orga­nized crime fig­ure; that Nicole tes­ti­fied in her divorce tes­ti­mony that the New Year’s eve inci­dent was the only time O.J. had been vio­lent with her; that Duane Garrett—a Bay Area AM radio talk show host—reported that O.J. had approached by Edward J. DeBar­tolo, Jr. (the owner of the San Fran­cisco 49’ers) and offered mil­lions of dol­lars to become the first black NFL fran­chise owner; that O.J. (accord­ing to Gar­rett) turned the offer down because of the alleged orga­nized crime con­nec­tions of DeBar­tolo; that Gar­rett began receiv­ing death threats shortly after he made the report; that roughly a year after mak­ing the report, Gar­rett went off the Golden Gate Bridge (an alleged sui­cide); that the Mez­za­luna restau­rant (at which Ron Gold­man worked and which was man­aged by Nicole’s boy friend) was well known to have been an orga­nized crime front; that Ron Goldman’s father is alleged in a book pub­lished in Swe­den to be a money-launderer for orga­nized crime; that Denise Brown (Nicole’s sis­ter) was dat­ing Tony “the Ani­mal” Fiatto (a for­mer mob enforcer turned Fed­eral infor­mant); that there is abun­dant, irrefutable evi­dence that the LAPD fal­si­fied evi­dence to frame O.J.; that the Los Ange­les County grand jury would not indict O.J.; that wit­nesses who saw the real killers were intim­i­dated into silence; that knowl­edge­able inside sources allege that the killing of Ron and Nicole was videotaped—the ulti­mate snuff flick.

22. Per­haps the most dis­turb­ing aspect of the O.J. case was the per­ver­sion of the judi­cial process and the estab­lish­ment of legal prece­dents that fun­da­men­tally under­mine cen­turies of Anglo-Saxon legal tra­di­tion. The Cal­i­for­nia leg­is­la­ture passed a spe­cial law, vir­tu­ally in secret, which allowed Nicole’s “diary” to be intro­duced as evi­dence. The vol­ume was not, how­ever, a diary but a thought jour­nal that was main­tained for her ther­a­pist. It included her dreams and fan­tasies. With that rul­ing, Cal­i­for­nia law (and poten­tially U.S. law) reverted to the Salem Witch Tri­als. In the civil case, one of the prin­ci­pal fac­tors decid­ing the case for the plain­tiffs was the intro­duc­tion of some crudely forged pic­tures of O.J. wear­ing “Bruno Magli shoes.” One set of the forged pic­tures showed O.J. wear­ing what pur­port to be “gray” Bruno Magli shoes. Bruno Magli has never made a gray shoe! This evi­den­tiary trav­esty was allowed to stand because O.J.’s coun­sel was pre­vented from exam­in­ing the evi­dence against his client! Mr. Emory hasn’t done much pro­gram­ming about the breach of civil lib­er­ties imple­mented by some of the legal maneu­ver­ing around the “war on ter­ror.” The dam­age occurred a long time ago.

23. Like the O.J. Simp­son case, the Israeli-Palestinian con­flict is fun­da­men­tally mis­un­der­stood, due in large mea­sure to delib­er­ately dis­torted research, report­ing and his­tor­i­cal archiv­ing. Most peo­ple view­ing the Arab/Israeli con­flict do not under­stand that: the Pales­tin­ian cause and its lead­ers are affil­i­ated with geno­cide and fas­cism through­out its his­tory; that the gen­e­sis of the Nazi/Palestinian axis derives from the Ottoman Empire’s impe­r­ial dynamic of sup­port­ing the Hus­seini clan against the Hasemite and Nashashibi clans; that Haj Amin al-Husseini (the first leader of the Pales­tin­ian national move­ment) began his pro­fes­sional life as an offi­cer in the Turk­ish army dur­ing World War I (which was com­mit­ting geno­cide against the Chris­t­ian Arme­ni­ans and per­pe­trat­ing a bru­tal, atrocity-ridden counter-insurgency cam­paign against Arab insur­gents); that the British adopted the same pro-Husseini impe­r­ial dynamic as the Turks when they assumed stew­ard­ship of that part of the Ottoman Empire; that Hus­seini began per­pe­trat­ing pogroms against Jews liv­ing in Pales­tine decades before the state of Israel came into being; that Hus­seini later became an SS offi­cer, recruited three Balkan Mus­lim Waf­fen SS divi­sions for the Third Reich and also worked for Impe­r­ial Japan; that the League of Nations (and the British) endorsed a 23/77 per­cent divi­sion of Pales­tine between, respec­tively Jews and Arabs; that the British (in the run-up to the Sec­ond World War and in an attempt to curry favor with the Arabs) first reduced, and then negated, their com­mit­ment to the Bal­four Dec­la­ra­tion grant­ing the Jews a Mid­dle East­ern home­land; that the 1948 U.N. res­o­lu­tion estab­lish­ing the state of Israel also called for the estab­lish­ment of a Pales­tin­ian state (which nei­ther the Arabs nor the Pales­tini­ans made any attempt to estab­lish); that the Saudis are the pri­mary financier of the Pales­tin­ian cause; that the Saudis (despite being an orig­i­nal mem­ber of the United Nations) have never acknowl­edged the Uni­ver­sal Dec­la­ra­tion of Human Rights—the legal and philo­soph­i­cal foun­da­tion of the United Nations; that Saudi Ara­bia issued a com­pet­ing “Uni­ver­sal Dec­la­ra­tion of Mus­lim Rights” which (in effect) said that only Mus­lims had rights; that the major­ity of Pales­tini­ans left their homes at the request of their lead­ers so that the Jews could be wiped out when the Arab armies were pro­vided with a clear field of fire; that (under the statutes of inter­na­tional law) Israel’s occu­pa­tion of the West Bank is not illegal—no sov­er­eign state claims the ter­ri­tory as its own (the Pales­tini­ans are not, and never have been, a sov­er­eign state); that the U.N. res­o­lu­tions call­ing for Israel to with­draw from the West Bank are rec­om­men­da­tion (not enforce­ment) res­o­lu­tions and, as such, are fun­da­men­tally dif­fer­ent from enforce­ment res­o­lu­tions; that, in the sum­mer of 1967, Israel offered to with­draw from all of the ter­ri­to­ries occu­pied dur­ing the Six Day War if the Arabs would rec­og­nize their exis­tence (the Arabs refused and vowed to exter­mi­nate them); that the 2000 peace res­o­lu­tion rejected by Yasser Arafat called for the estab­lish­ment of a com­mon mar­ket to be shared by Israel and the Pales­tini­ans; that (prior to Israel’s with­drawal from the Gaza Strip) a group of wealthy Amer­i­can Jews con­tributed mil­lions of dol­lars to buy some hydro­ponic veg­etable grow­ing facil­i­ties and ware­houses to give to the Pales­tini­ans as a good-will ges­ture; that those facil­i­ties had gen­er­ated between 10 and 20 per­cent of Israel’s agri­cul­ture exports; that those hydro­pon­ics facil­i­ties would have pro­vided the Pales­tini­ans with 24,000 good jobs; that the Pales­tini­ans destroyed those facil­i­ties almost imme­di­ately upon re-occupying the Gaza Strip; that (fol­low­ing Israel’s war of inde­pen­dence in 1948) the Arab nations eth­ni­cally cleansed most of their own Jew­ish pop­u­la­tions; that the num­ber of Jews so cleansed (about 900,000 by best esti­mates) exceeds the orig­i­nal num­ber of Pales­tini­ans cleansed by the Israelis (about 660,000 accord­ing to the best avail­able sta­tis­tics); that most of the eth­ni­cally cleansed Mid­dle East­ern Jews set­tled in Israel where (known as “the Mizrahi”) they con­sti­tute the foun­da­tion of the Israeli polit­i­cal and elec­toral right-wing, that gay mem­bers of the IDF (the Israel Defense Force) receive full spousal ben­e­fits for their domes­tic partners.

24. The goal of the dis­torted cov­er­age of the Israeli-Palestinian con­flict is to bring about a mind­set like that pre­sented in Serpent’s Walk. In Serpent’s Walk, a Nazi pro­pa­ganda tract and teach­ing tool, like The Turner Diaries, the Nazi Fuehrer (Alan Less­ing) inveighs against the Jews. (This takes place after the Under­ground Reich has infil­trated the US Army, a dev­as­tat­ing bio/terror attack involv­ing genetically-engineered micro-organisms has wiped out much of the US pop­u­la­tion, mar­tial law is declared, Israel gets wiped out by an Under­ground Reich “pre­emp­tive strike”, and the Under­ground Reich takes over the world.) The premise of the tract is that the US and the world are being manip­u­lated by a “Jew­ish conspiracy”-a theme one hears with increas­ing fre­quency these days from the so-called pro­gres­sive sec­tor, as well as overtly fas­cist elements.

“‘A pre­emp­tive, sur­gi­cal first strike, just like the Izzies pulled on the Arabs a few times.’ He picked up a sheaf of doc­u­ments. ‘We keep this stuff, right? It’s evi­dence of their inten­tions. I’ll give it to Liese’s pub­lic­ity peo­ple right away, and we’ll have it on Home-Net before night­fall. I think we can promise you support.’”

(Serpent’s Walk by ‘Ran­dolph D. Calver­hall;’ Copy­right 1991 [SC]; National Van­guard Books; 0–937944-05-X; pp. 432–433.)

25. “‘They deserved it!’ Kenow growled. ‘We didn’t do nothin’ to ‘em.’” (Ibid.; p. 433.)

26. “‘Even if you did, I doubt if our eth­nos group’ll make more than token objec­tions. The world’s had it. Any­body as unpop­u­lar as the Jews have always been . . . Egypt, Baby­lon, Rome, Spain, every coun­try in Europe dur­ing the Mid­dle Ages, Rus­sia, Amer­ica, the Third Reich . . . must be doing some­thing wrong! We’d have pre­ferred peace­ful . . . and sep­a­rate . . . and dis­tant . . . co-existence, but they never got the mes­sage. Now we don’t care any­more.’” (Idem.)

27. “‘It’s too bad . . .’ Wrench began.” (Idem.)

28. “‘Don’t waste your pity!’ Less­ing snapped. ‘They wouldn’t waste any on you. Sure, it’s sad that inno­cent peo­ple have to suf­fer, but it can’t be helped. That’s real­ity! That’s Nature! You can’t save the dodo, the con­dors, and the other losers in the bat­tle for sur­vival. Species-extinction hap­pens over and over, like rain in the summer-time. For­get ethics and moral­ity and ‘do-unto-others.’ The Izzies said ‘never again!’ about the ‘Holo­caust,’ but then they turned around and did to the Pales­tini­ans every­thing they claimed the Ger­mans had done to them! They called it ‘self-defense’: war under the pre­text of peace, oppres­sion in the name of jus­tice and sta­bil­ity! The Arabs were weak and went under, but we’re a dif­fer­ent story. We’re going to make it, no mat­ter who gets in our way.’” (Idem.)

29. “‘I hear Bill God­dard again,’ Wrench mur­mured.” (Idem.)

30. “‘No, you hear me, Alan Less­ing! There was a time when I’d have waf­fled and gone for ‘turn the other cheek,’ but not any­more! Now you hear me, and you hear our Party, our eth­nos, our major­ity . . . our First Fuhrer! You hear the past, you hear the present, and you hear the future! We are the future!’” (Idem.)

31. “‘No, you hear me, Alan Less­ing! There was a time when I’d have waf­fled and gone for ‘turn the other cheek,’ but not any­more! Now you hear me, and you hear our Party, our eth­nos, our major­ity . . . our First Fuhrer! You hear the past, you hear the present, and you hear the future! We are the future!’” (Idem.)

Discussion

2 comments for “FTR #661 Walkin’ the Snake in the Middle East, Part II: O.J. Agonistes and Palestinian Pornography”

  1. To Dave’s list of ques­tion­able evi­dence regard­ing the Simp­son mur­der I would add the autopsy evi­dence. A fuller expla­na­tion can be found here:

    http://southofheaven.typepad.com/south_of_heaven/2005/04/no_aspiration_o.html

    Posted by Bob In Pacifica | February 16, 2009, 4:02 pm
  2. This does seem to add to and bear out Achmed Huber’s predictions...

    http://english.aljazeera.net/news/americas/2009/03/200931113340555177.html

    Posted by Sandra | March 12, 2009, 9:30 pm

Post a comment