[HN Gopher] Israel reportedly used fake social accounts to garne...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Israel reportedly used fake social accounts to garner support from
       US lawmakers
        
       Author : frob
       Score  : 557 points
       Date   : 2024-06-05 12:41 UTC (10 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.haaretz.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.haaretz.com)
        
       | throwaway55479 wrote:
       | https://archive.ph/sbAPI
        
       | pokepim wrote:
       | Just as russian bots, israeli bots spreading fake news are worst
       | thing that happened to our society. Crazy that people are falling
       | for this but here we are
        
         | greenavocado wrote:
         | How many congressmen are dual citizens with Israeli
         | citizenship? This is even worse. Also, AIPAC _is allowed to
         | exist_. As a thought experiment replace Israeli with Russian
         | citizenship for the Israeli dual citizens in Congress and
         | replace AIPAC with a hypothetical Russian ARPAC. Imagine how
         | crazy this would be. Yet the current situation is somehow
         | completely acceptable.
        
           | golergka wrote:
           | > As a thought experiment replace Israeli with Russian
           | citizenship for the Israeli dual citizens in Congress and
           | replace AIPAC with a hypothetical Russian ARPAC
           | 
           | Is Russia the main American ally in the region that
           | contributes enormously to American intelligence and R&D,
           | while also supporting American military operations?
        
             | Hikikomori wrote:
             | South Africa was also their ally in that region.
        
             | throw310822 wrote:
             | Have you considered that things might go the other way
             | around: if Russia had such a strong influence on the US
             | through its political action lobby as Israel does, Russia
             | would be considered by politicians the main ally of the US,
             | and the economic and military ties between the two
             | countries would be unbreakable. Because the purpose of
             | these lobbies is exactly to influence how a certain country
             | _feels_ and acts about another.
        
           | jhp123 wrote:
           | > How many congressmen are dual citizens with Israeli
           | citizenship?
           | 
           | Zero? I can't find a reliable source for any congress member
           | being an Israeli citizen
        
             | wonderwonder wrote:
             | OP means Jews
             | 
             | https://www.worldjewishcongress.org/en/news/defining-
             | antisem...
             | 
             | Lots of people going masks off now that is cool to be anti-
             | semitic again but now we call it anti-zionist.
        
               | tumsfestival wrote:
               | This post was brought to you by the IDF, remember if you
               | don't agree with us you're as bad as Nazis.
        
               | wonderwonder wrote:
               | so did OP not mean Jews or are we saying that anyone
               | inferring that someone is anti semitic is working for the
               | IDF?
        
           | wonderwonder wrote:
           | "How many congressmen are dual citizens with Israeli
           | citizenship"
           | 
           | By this do you mean Jews? Should be prevent Jewish people
           | from being allowed in congress?
           | 
           | "AIPAC is allowed to exist" Should we prevent it from
           | existing becuase it supports a Jewish state? You have no
           | issue with the hundreds of other lobbying groups, just the
           | jewish one.
        
             | throw310822 wrote:
             | It's not Jewish, it's pro-Israel (American _Israel_ Public
             | Affair Committee). Israel is a foreign country whose
             | interests might be conflicting with those of the US. That
             | 's different, don't you think?
        
               | wonderwonder wrote:
               | you going to ignore OP's mention of "Dual Citizens"
               | clearly meaning Jews?
               | 
               | Odd that people are only concerned with AIPAC and not the
               | other foreign PACS.
               | 
               | Wonder what the differentiating factor is?
               | 
               | https://www.opensecrets.org/political-action-committees-
               | pacs...
        
           | mountainofdeath wrote:
           | To my knowledge, zero. If you really mean Jews, I think there
           | are roughly 40 between both houses of Congress. None of them
           | are Israeli citizens. Jews are not automatically citizens of
           | Israel though they do have dedicated pathway to obtaining it,
           | but it's not as simple as merely showing up and claim you are
           | Jewish.
        
           | wk_end wrote:
           | > How many congressmen are dual citizens with Israeli
           | citizenship?
           | 
           | I don't know. How many? I was curious and Googled, and
           | couldn't find any good authoritative lists. This Quora answer
           | [0] implies that the answer is zero, as does this Snopes
           | article [1]. Both answers mention that there's various
           | incorrect lists going around that are white supremacist
           | propaganda.
           | 
           | [0] https://www.quora.com/Which-current-members-of-Congress-
           | have...
           | 
           | [1] https://www.snopes.com/news/2024/02/05/dual-citizenship-
           | elec...
        
       | SkipperCat wrote:
       | Not a comment about who's right or wrong in this war, but it is
       | fascinating that we have entered the age of the Internet being a
       | place where warfare is fought. There have always been people
       | posting web content about conflicts but now with Gaza and
       | Ukraine, it seems that the nations fighting are actively looking
       | at the internet as the fourth field of battle.
       | 
       | Just waiting for a random US future president to create an
       | "Internet" branch of the military. Maybe that's already happened.
        
         | germinalphrase wrote:
         | Espionage/propaganda/public relations/influence campaigns are
         | hardly new. Social media is just a new flavor to go along with
         | the others.
        
           | marginalia_nu wrote:
           | I do think the economy is different. You've always been able
           | to just hire a bunch of thugs to stage an event to shape the
           | narrative, like old-school cold war style. That takes money
           | and effort and a modicum of skill and the risk of being
           | caught with your pants down is not negligible.
           | 
           | Difference today is you can stoke the flames of public
           | outrage with just a few people, without even setting foot in
           | the country, while maintaining a lot of plausible
           | deniability, since the modern playbook relies heavily on
           | uncertainty and confusion, meaning you can safely target
           | allies without significant risk of being caught (even if
           | you're caught, you can deny it and say it's hostile
           | propaganda).
        
             | AnimalMuppet wrote:
             | Even in the old days, if your operation was caught, you
             | could always claim that it was an enemy false flag. (And if
             | it was your false flag and you were caught, you could
             | always claim that it was an enemy provocation.)
        
             | somenameforme wrote:
             | This seems reasonable, but it runs into a little problem.
             | If you engage in political discussion anywhere on the
             | internet, the first thing you'll find is that people, if
             | they have formed an opinion, have exactly 0 interest in
             | changing their mind. If you already hold a genuine and
             | internally formed view on e.g. the Israel - Palestine
             | conflict, then even if somebody sat you (or me) in front of
             | 24/7 propaganda for the other side, they'd be unlikely to
             | ever change either of our minds.
             | 
             | Propaganda only seems to work in two situations. The first
             | is on topics people know nothing about. Each time the US
             | invades some places most people couldn't even find on a
             | map, support for it rises in accordance with the
             | propaganda. But as people learn more, and gradually form
             | their own values, that support tends to rapidly decline.
             | And there are also long-term consequences, because people
             | will remember being lied to. My views on the US war machine
             | and geopolitics in general seem unlikely, at this point, to
             | ever change. And they were largely formed due to the Iraq
             | War. Irrefutable [1] _and_ Undeniable [2] are two 21 year
             | old articles I still go back to on occasion.
             | 
             | The other situation is when it's true. During the Cold War
             | we spread endless propaganda about things like having
             | stocked store shelves. This is doubly effective in the same
             | way that lying propaganda is doubly ineffective. Because
             | not only does it create a desired perception, but once
             | people gradually find out it's really true, it also tends
             | to turn them against their own government who invariably
             | misrepresents such situations. Again, people don't like
             | being lied to.
             | 
             | [1] - https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/opinions/2003/
             | 02/06/i...
             | 
             | [2] -
             | https://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/06/opinion/irrefutable-
             | and-u...
        
               | syncmaster913n wrote:
               | The purpose of propaganda, in its broadest definition,
               | isn't to change minds. It is to leverage the existing
               | contents of a mind in a way that makes you perform a
               | certain _action_ that is desired by the propagandist.
               | 
               | The belief that holding strong opinions protects against
               | propaganda is dangerous. Strong opinions is where
               | propaganda inserts its levers.
        
             | vharuck wrote:
             | People also seem to discount the effects of internet
             | operations by enemy states. For example, in 2022, the FBI
             | blamed the state of North Korea for a string of hacks on US
             | health systems. The "meatspace" equivalent would've been
             | North Korean operatives infiltrating dozens of hospitals
             | and destroying records or supplies. If that had happened,
             | there would've been a bigger response from the government
             | than "Mind your physical security, hospitals." But it's the
             | internet, so who cares (besides the people immediately
             | affected)?
        
           | paul7986 wrote:
           | Indeed and one reason i don't watch or pay attention to news
           | media(TV, online, etc) especially political news. What to
           | believe is real / the truth and with the advent of AI, Deep
           | fake voices and deep fake videos the Internet becomes an even
           | worse place for deciphering truth.
           | 
           | Here's AI Trump and AI Biden debating live now on Twitch
           | (video isnt great as of today but the voices are)
           | https://m.twitch.tv/videos/2157689323
        
           | akudha wrote:
           | Yes, they're not new. But it is ridiculously easy and cheap
           | today to do propaganda than even 30 years ago. We're
           | connected to the outrage machine 24/7 now because of
           | internet/social media/smartphones, vs say 1980.
           | 
           | God knows what % of the population has mental issues because
           | we watch too much Twitter and Facebook and other crap
        
         | gdsdfe wrote:
         | we entered the age ?! we've been here for at least a decade
        
         | runarberg wrote:
         | I'm of the opinion that what we are witnessing is the first
         | information age genocide. Just like how the holocaust was the
         | first genocide to use industrial technology and processes to
         | conduct the horrors, today, Israel is using information age
         | technology to commit and propagandize their genocide.
        
           | jamal-kumar wrote:
           | The holocaust came of age in the dawn of the information age
           | if you count the radio as information technology, albeit a
           | very one-sided information technology where you had the
           | government giving everyone cheap radios that were only marked
           | to tune to German and Austrian radio stations, unless you
           | dared to go out at night to get an antenna up to receive
           | others. [1]
           | 
           | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volksempf%C3%A4nger
        
             | runarberg wrote:
             | This also applies to the Rwandan genocide. A lot of it was
             | perpetrated via mass media, especially radio. But you can
             | also claim that there were Industrialized genocides before
             | the Holocaust, but what sets it apart is just how much it
             | was defined by industrialized processes.
             | 
             | The Gaza Genocide is similar, the use of AI for target
             | selection (or rather generation), the social media
             | campaigns, using drones for killings, etc. We haven't seen
             | a genocide before which uses information technology to the
             | extent it really defines whole processes of the genocide.
        
               | hedora wrote:
               | Germany pioneered a lot of modern propaganda techniques
               | in WWII:
               | 
               | The first television broadcast on earth was of Hitler,
               | and his chief propagandist, Goebbles, continues to have
               | significant influence on modern propagandists. For
               | instance, Biden's publicly compared the tactics Trump
               | used in the 2020 "Big Lie" campaign to those of Goebbles.
               | Of course, there was also the Hitler Youth, which was a
               | pretty successful social engineering campaign.
               | 
               | On the computer side of things: IBM mainframes were
               | famously an enabling technology for the holocaust and
               | german war machine.
        
             | dylan604 wrote:
             | Just look at how that's evolved into what's now referred to
             | a "talk radio". Only, you have multiple stations available
             | so you can choose your particular firebrand to listen.
        
           | hedgehog wrote:
           | Tigray region and Mynamar are two earlier candidates.
        
           | megous wrote:
           | A lot of people have both mechanisms to record what's
           | happening, and share it.
           | 
           | It's been that way with Syria conflict, too, though. A lot
           | was shared in twitter/youtube during that one.
           | 
           | One thing that's seemingly a bit new is how much ordinary
           | Israeli soldiers are sharing their behavior, empowered by
           | their self-righteousness, I guess. Videos from shooting
           | unarmed deaf people up close in their homes, to all kinds of
           | calls for atrocities, actual assaults on international
           | humanitarian aid trucks and violence against the drivers,
           | cheerful mocking of starving people, dedicating videos of
           | them blowing up peoples homes as gifts to their spouses back
           | home in Israel, looting and stealing, wanton destruction of
           | property (like going around and breaking things in someone's
           | gift shop), burning people's houses down, etc. There's so
           | much of this.
           | 
           | Entire 130k strong Israeli telegram channels are dedicated to
           | collective cheering on and mocking of dead and suffering
           | people: https://t.me/s/dead_terrorists Total dehumanization.
        
             | ignoramous wrote:
             | > _empowered by their self-righteousness_ ... _Total
             | dehumanisation_
             | 
             | Jeez, just like those supremacists of the yesteryears
             | Hollywood made movies to warn us about, then?
        
               | megous wrote:
               | Those warned us that we westerners are not immune from
               | getting manipulated into engaging in, and turning a blind
               | eye to mass atrocities against entire groups of people.
               | Even to attempts at their eradication. It was a lesson
               | about the west and humanity.
               | 
               | We didn't learn though.
        
           | nsguy wrote:
           | I think you got this the wrong way around. It's the first
           | time in the information age that a country [is] forced to
           | yield a war via false claims propagated through social media.
        
           | dang wrote:
           | Your account has continued to use HN primarily for political
           | battle after we asked you recently to stop:
           | 
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40519369 (May 2024)
           | 
           | If you keep this up we're going to have to ban you, for
           | reasons explained on many past occasions: https://hn.algolia.
           | com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme....
           | 
           | Edit for anyone concerned: yes, this principle applies
           | regardless of which side of any political conflict an account
           | is identified with.
        
             | oddtuple wrote:
             | Dang, We get you're frustrated but he's just stating his
             | opinion. It's not out of line relative to the other
             | discourse in this thread.
        
               | sir0010010 wrote:
               | I think if you read the guide that dang linked to, it is
               | clear that the account is breaking the rules for
               | flamebait.
        
               | oddtuple wrote:
               | I have read the guide, although i appreciate reaffirming
               | it as the source of truth. What's hard is from a glance
               | at the posters history their comments don't seem to break
               | the guidelines, but instead fall into the camp of
               | spirited (albeit strongly so) opinions. Are there
               | specific comments made that weren't in the spirit of the
               | guidelines? It feels "primarily for ideological purposes"
               | is hard to counter in a discussion because "ideological"
               | itself is a murky term at best.
        
               | dang wrote:
               | The issue, in this case, isn't opinions nor the other
               | discourse in the thread. Rather, it is the account's
               | comments over a long stretch of time.
               | 
               | The question "has an account been using HN primarily for
               | political or ideological battle?" is one of the most
               | important criteria we use in HN moderation. When it is
               | the case, we ask an account to stop and/or end up banning
               | it.
               | 
               | This rule has many advantages. One is that it's a
               | reasonably objective call to make (and for readers to
               | verify) regardless of the specific views a user is
               | arguing for or against. Another is that it allows for a
               | certain amount of political and ideological discussion
               | (as long as it doesn't break the site guidelines in other
               | ways, of course:
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html).
               | 
               | More at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40589862
        
             | runarberg wrote:
             | I'm sorry, I did not mean for this comment to be a
             | political point, but rather an observation on how
             | technology is used in mass atrocities. I was hoping to
             | raise a point which I find interesting, which other may or
             | may not agree with. I've gotten a couple of excellent
             | replies here raising interesting counterpoints.
             | 
             | After posting this, and reading the replies, I'm actually
             | less convinced about my original point. That is, I've
             | learned something.
        
               | dang wrote:
               | I believe you, but it's too fine a distinction to make a
               | difference on the important point. Your account has
               | obviously been primarily (even exclusively) focused on
               | this one topic for quite a while now. That's not allowed
               | on HN because if we did allow it, HN would dramatically
               | shift towards becoming a current-affairs site, which is
               | not its mandate.
               | 
               | This is not to say that the topic doesn't matter. Of
               | course it matters, a great deal--more than almost
               | anything that gets discussed here. But that not only
               | doesn't change the above point, it makes it even more
               | important.
               | 
               | As I said the last time I replied to you, I appreciate
               | that your comments have mostly not been breaking the site
               | guidelines in other ways. But the "primarily" test
               | applies regardless.
               | 
               | I don't want to ban you as you've been here a long time
               | and have used the site as intended in the past. But I
               | have to go quite a long way back into the past before
               | that becomes visible. This is not ok.
        
             | racional wrote:
             | It seems you've been triggered by the mention of the
             | g-word. But when we calmly consider what the commenter is
             | saying:                  Israel is using information age
             | technology to commit and propagandize their genocide
             | 
             | It's plainly not an unreasonable proposition, nor does it
             | seem to be intended to engage in battle or provoke. They're
             | simply describing a perfectly horrible situation that
             | happening on the ground (that some recognized experts in
             | the field _do_ consider to be a form of genocide per the UN
             | definition of such) and the fact that modern information
             | technologies seem to be a part of the mechanism that is
             | bringing it about.
             | 
             | The post expresses an opinion, but it definitely wasn't
             | flamebait.
        
               | dang wrote:
               | I wasn't responding to any proposition, but rather to the
               | pattern of how the account is using Hacker News over a
               | long stretch of time. That's what the word "primarily"
               | refers to, and it's the most important thing to
               | understand.
               | 
               | Of course I _replied_ to a specific post because any
               | reply has to do that; but I was _responding_ to the
               | account 's use of HN over time. That's the issue here.
               | 
               | I wrote the GP in haste and can see how this point wasn't
               | obvious. On the other hand it should quickly become
               | obvious to anyone who clicks on the link I provided (http
               | s://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme.
               | ..), which is the purpose of providing the link.
               | 
               | (more at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40589978)
        
               | hombre_fatal wrote:
               | Oh come on, it's obviously flamebait to say Israel is
               | conducting a genocide even if you agree with the claim.
        
               | wordofx wrote:
               | There is no genocide. Why do people keep spreading this
               | false narrative.
        
           | dragonwriter wrote:
           | Its not at all, even if you mean "social media age", and not
           | "information age", it's just one of the first (there are
           | other disputed candidates, e.g., in Ukraine) that are getting
           | first world attention other than after-the-fact.
           | 
           | The Rohingya genocide in Myanmar in which Facebook's role was
           | widely discussed (largely, in the first world, after the
           | fact) was probably the first social media age genocide, if
           | you don't restrict it to ones with immediate first-world
           | attention at a significant level.
        
             | runarberg wrote:
             | I'm thinking in terms of processes _and_ propaganda. While
             | other genocides use information technology for
             | communication and propaganda, this one is unique in that
             | information technology is used throughout, including in
             | target selection and killings. The Rohingya Genocide does
             | not e.g. use drones to carry out killings with targets
             | selected by AI.
        
               | dragonwriter wrote:
               | > While other genocides use information technology for
               | communication and propaganda, this one is unique in that
               | information technology is used throughout, including in
               | target selection and killings.
               | 
               | No, its not. Heck, the _Holocaust_ used information
               | technology for target selection.
               | 
               | > The Rohingya Genocide does not e.g. use drones
               | 
               | The genocides in the former Yugoslavia used most of the
               | weapons of then-modern warfare, which may not have
               | included drones but certainly involved plenty of weapons
               | systems that incorporate "information technology" in
               | doing the killings.
        
         | vitus wrote:
         | > Just waiting for a random US future president to create an
         | "Internet" branch of the military. Maybe that's already
         | happened.
         | 
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Cyber_Command is
         | the closest thing that we have today. It's not a formal branch,
         | though, but rather a joint effort across the existing branches.
        
           | jowea wrote:
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cyber_warfare_forces
           | 
           | A cursory look and it seems Germany and China were first to
           | having a specific branch, but China dissolved theirs
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyber_and_Information_Domain_S.
           | ..
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People%27s_Liberation_Army_Str.
           | ..
        
             | greentxt wrote:
             | China's was disbanded like 1 wikipedia edit ago (46 days),
             | if you believe that.
        
               | caycep wrote:
               | edit made by whatever APT hacking group du jour the PLA
               | has in operation at the moment!
        
           | lucubratory wrote:
           | That's much more oriented to network security, spectrum and
           | hardware, stuff like that. For an American military
           | organisation engaged in internet influence operations you'd
           | want to look at the signature reduction program. Something
           | like 50,000 people strong at this point, insane amounts of
           | resources going into that.
        
         | axus wrote:
         | I've always been a keyboard warrior, volunteering to defend my
         | country on message boards.
        
         | anigbrowl wrote:
         | We entered that some time ago; or rather, the Internet
         | accelerates the use of such information operations. This is
         | (imho) why Musk bought Twitter.
        
         | pradn wrote:
         | There's a whole term for this:
         | 
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth-generation_warfare
        
         | wruza wrote:
         | The internet created a whole stratum of people who don't use
         | tv, radio and newspaper anymore. It's not that we _entered_
         | internet warfare, we just exited absolute control of large mass
         | media. Now every TLA has to deal with it somehow.
         | 
         | Why internet is the battlefield? Because everything in our
         | world is based on an opinion. You can sell a lot of bs to your
         | "client" if he has "correct" opinion.
         | 
         | Bad news, our opinion system was designed for groups and
         | villages, not for the internet.
        
         | xanthor wrote:
         | The Internet as we think of it is already a military project.
         | Why do you think so much emphasis is put on countries that
         | assert sovereignty over their own information space?
        
         | dfxm12 wrote:
         | "Manufacturing Consent" was written in the 80s mostly in
         | response to newspapers, but the ideas have been adapted to the
         | Internet for some time (and talk radio, and cable news, etc.).
         | I'm old enough to remember this from the Iraq war. Yeah, we
         | didn't have microblogging back then, but there were Email
         | campaigns, blogs, message boards, chat rooms, etc.
        
           | akudha wrote:
           | Propaganda, false news etc are as old as time. It was the
           | radio, TV and newspapers before, now it is social media and
           | the internet.
           | 
           | The difference now is the speed, cost and scale. It is super
           | cheap to spread crap today than ever. Also it is quick and
           | the reach is massive.
           | 
           | By the way, _Manufacturing Consent_ is a depressing book.
           | You'd lose what little faith you have in media, if you read
           | it...
        
             | SCUSKU wrote:
             | I think one of the big takeaways for me was aside from
             | deliberate manipulation of media by the government and
             | willing media partners, that journalists also self censor
             | in a way because they are operating in a professional
             | environment and within a certain Overton Window.
             | 
             | Maybe it's not what I should remember most, but it did help
             | remind me that when your livelihood is based on what you
             | say you will be much more measured, regardless of the
             | subject.
             | 
             | Probably why people look to social media or Substack for
             | more independent people who have a longer leash, less on
             | the line, and more to gain, since that's where you get your
             | interesting although many times wrong takes (e.g.
             | Ivermectin for Covid, or Lab Leak Theory)
        
           | bostik wrote:
           | And let's keep in mind that the term "Public Relations" was
           | _explicitly_ chosen as a Newspeak-term because Edward Bernays
           | realised that the actual term for a war time methodology,
           | "propaganda", was too loaded.[0] And honest.
           | 
           | Internet is a communications medium. It was destined to be
           | flooded with propaganda, whatever you try to call your
           | particular flavour.
           | 
           | Or as I have been saying since the 1990's, the only
           | difference between marketing and propaganda is that with
           | marketing at least you are trying to peddle a product instead
           | of an ideology.
           | 
           | 0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Bernays
        
             | Terr_ wrote:
             | > Or as I have been saying since the 1990's, the only
             | difference between marketing and propaganda is that with
             | marketing at least you are trying to peddle a product
             | instead of an ideology.
             | 
             | I disagree, ideologies are often already in there, even
             | when they are simplistic "power-tools are for men and all
             | men require power-tools", or "having better stuff than your
             | neighbors is a virtue, failing to do so will lead to
             | dangerous ostracization."
             | 
             | Very tame "Our blender spins twice as fast as the
             | competition" marketing might be arguably free of ideology,
             | but that's a decreasing minority.
        
             | dylan604 wrote:
             | > "propaganda", was too loaded.[0] And honest.
             | 
             | Quite often I default to the word propaganda when talking
             | about anyone's PR campaigns in my own personal battle with
             | trying to undo this. I ratchet it up when talking directly
             | to marketing/PR people. Pretty much every time I'm just
             | looked at as yet another crazy person.
        
             | chimpanzee wrote:
             | > the only difference between marketing and propaganda is
             | that with marketing at least you are trying to peddle a
             | product instead of an ideology
             | 
             | Marketing often includes the peddling of an ideology as a
             | foundation for the product buying, especially for big-
             | ticket items. (One buys the product that fits and signals
             | one's ideology.) To me, this makes marketing even more
             | insidious as we often focus on the product rather than the
             | message. Think Ford, Tesla, Apple ...
        
             | netsharc wrote:
             | My brain just came up with the phrase "You can't spell
             | propaganda without PR", which I think is clever. But I'm
             | going to put it into a search engine now and see that it's
             | not original...
        
               | trogdor wrote:
               | You also can't spell propaganda without pagan. I wonder
               | what that means.
        
         | shrubble wrote:
         | Eglin Air Force Base and their involvement with Reddit...
        
         | sva_ wrote:
         | Wasn't there something with the Canadian military fighting
         | (what they called) misinformation on social media during the
         | pandemic? Seems like it's already ongoing.
        
           | betaby wrote:
           | Canadian government was the source of misinformation on
           | social media during the pandemic! Literal curfews were in
           | place with propaganda machine saying how good idea it was.
        
             | dylan604 wrote:
             | For purposes of conversation and allowing for a moment your
             | idea is true, to what purpose was the curfews imposed? Who
             | benefited? How? Why were the curfews necessary to achieve
             | those goals?
        
               | tredre3 wrote:
               | > to what purpose was the curfews imposed?
               | 
               | The stated purpose was to flatten the curve.
               | 
               | > Who benefited?
               | 
               | The government.
               | 
               | > How?
               | 
               | By giving the impression that they were doing something.
               | 
               | > Why were the curfews necessary to achieve those goals?
               | 
               | They weren't, as far as we know. In Quebec's case they
               | were still scrambling to justify them a few hours before
               | the press conference:
               | 
               | https://www.thesuburban.com/news/legault-s-curfew-
               | decision-w...
               | 
               | https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/curfew-legality-
               | queb...
        
               | dylan604 wrote:
               | No, man, this is the problem I have conspiracy nutters.
               | They don't actually answer the questions. What was the
               | purpose, not the stated purpose. There's a huge
               | difference, and they know it. That's why people of their
               | tilt do not answer the questions. Lots of times, they
               | don't know and are actually just parroting someone else.
               | 
               | You believe there was ulterior motives for the curfew
               | being put in place. You say the used the reason to
               | flatten the curve, which clearly implies that's not what
               | you believe was the actual purpose. So, please, tell
               | me/us what you believe the actual purpose of the action
               | taken.
        
               | sva_ wrote:
               | I think the person you replied to named the purpose as _"
               | giving the impression that they were doing something"_,
               | which is shockingly often the case with politicians:
               | They'll do what they believe will get them voted for
               | again.
               | 
               | I don't think it is necessary to insult people as
               | 'conspiracy nutters' on here. If you don't want to
               | discuss something with someone, just give them a downvote
               | and move on. No need to be uncivil.
        
         | tintor wrote:
         | US already has
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Cyber_Command
        
         | bitcurious wrote:
         | >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In-Q-Tel
         | 
         | The US hasn't been especially loud about it, but it's been a
         | dominant force in 'internet warfare.'
        
         | caycep wrote:
         | https://www.cybercom.mil
         | 
         | how competent they actually are at this, who knows...
        
         | dwater wrote:
         | My first semester of college in Fall of 1999, I wrote a paper
         | about cyber warfare and the summary was that the superpowers
         | were already doing it, and the only thing expected to change in
         | the future was the resources that were online and susceptible
         | would increase the scale of cyber war.
        
         | s1k3s wrote:
         | Go to the Wikipedia pages of these events and click on "Talk"
         | at the top or see the history of those pages. The amount of
         | people fighting over this information war is mindblowing.
         | 
         | If anything, this makes me question the accuracy of historical
         | events that happened before humanity had access to such tools.
        
           | poincaredisk wrote:
           | My understanding is, historians know that the source material
           | is 90% bullshit (texts written to appease an ego of some
           | lord, chronicles of war against "subhuman" enemies, religious
           | scriptures), they just know how to find the remaining 10%.
        
         | throwup238 wrote:
         | _> Just waiting for a random US future president to create an
         | "Internet" branch of the military. Maybe that's already
         | happened._
         | 
         | Cyber Force!
         | 
         | They have cyber marines, cyber carriers, cyber destroyers,
         | cyber bombers, cyber jets, and cyber drones. They even have
         | their own sister agency called Veterans Affairs where veterans
         | can go to get virtual healthcare treatment.
        
         | mrcartmeneses wrote:
         | How luxurious of you to have such thoughts in the face of
         | genocide
        
         | moate wrote:
         | I think we've been here for a while, and I don't think you make
         | an overt branch to fight covert wars, you just roll it into the
         | NSA or ops for some (all?) other branches of the military.
        
       | throw_a_grenade wrote:
       | related: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40583661
        
         | dang wrote:
         | We merged that one hither.
        
           | r721 wrote:
           | There is some discussion here too:
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40587325
        
             | dang wrote:
             | Merged. Thanks!
        
       | guerrilla wrote:
       | Of course it did. This is modern warfare. Welcome to the future.
       | 
       | Just like how we knew everyone was always spying on everyone else
       | long before Snowden, we should all know that everyone is doing
       | this to everyone else long before all the revaluations come down
       | to us. There is no benefit to assuming good faith here.
        
       | frob wrote:
       | This was on the front-page for a brief moment and is now nowhere
       | in the top 150. The irony writes itself.
        
         | dang wrote:
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40586961
        
       | nextstep wrote:
       | Also reported on by NY Times and posted here:
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40583068
       | 
       | but like most articles about Israeli hacking, US Big Tech
       | involvement in the war, etc it was immediately flagged once it
       | reached the front page.
       | 
       | I don't know how much of this is moderators removing posts, or if
       | there is a pro-Israel brigade that is censoring HN's front page.
        
         | dang wrote:
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40586961
        
         | 123yawaworht456 wrote:
         | they used to be really unapologetic about it
         | 
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Internet_Defense_Force
         | 
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DWD5xiiafBc
         | 
         | it's prudent to assume such operations are still ongoing
        
           | Animats wrote:
           | JIDF turned out to be one guy. That was a sideshow.
           | 
           | This article is from Hareetz, which is a major newspaper in
           | Israel.
           | 
           | There's a huge, organized Israel lobby aimed at the US. It's
           | no secret. There's AIPAC, the American-Israel Political
           | Action Committee. "Lobbying for Pro-Israel Policies", it says
           | on their web site. There are official organizations in the
           | government of Israel which do "public diplomacy".[1]
           | 
           | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_diplomacy_of_Israel
        
         | nickff wrote:
         | I'm one of the people who flags some of these articles (though
         | not this one), because they're generally uninteresting, and
         | repetitive. I'm not Jewish, have never been to Israel, and am
         | not part of any brigade.
        
         | davesque wrote:
         | I flagged it because it's really boring to see people go
         | through the same predictable, tribal motions on a topic that's
         | been covered to death by every media outlet.
        
       | Metacelsus wrote:
       | This was related to OpenAI announcing that they had shut down
       | several covert influence campaigns using ChatGPT-generated social
       | media posts. https://openai.com/index/disrupting-deceptive-uses-
       | of-AI-by-...
        
         | dang wrote:
         | _Disrupting deceptive uses of AI by covert influence
         | operations_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40526068 -
         | May 2024 (70 comments)
        
         | sva_ wrote:
         | This article itself seems to be written by chatgpt to some
         | degree at least? I've developed trust-issues with bullet point
         | lists in that format.
        
           | rfw300 wrote:
           | If anything, OpenAI's affection for bullet lists is probably
           | a window into why ChatGPT uses them so frequently.
        
             | choxi wrote:
             | Claude does bullet lists a lot too, I think people just
             | like bullet lists over blobs of text
        
         | dmix wrote:
         | > As of May 2024, these campaigns do not appear to have
         | meaningfully increased their audience engagement or reach as a
         | result of our services.
         | 
         | Just like I've predicted many times on HN.
         | 
         | Text generation is low on the list of things needed to
         | successfully engage in automated spam. Social media is built on
         | reputation, not who can write generic believable text the
         | quickest. And funny enough the ex-OpenAI people (mostly Helen)
         | calling for gov regulation said GPT should not have been
         | released to the public because of this risk.
        
           | sillyfluke wrote:
           | In a way, I find your comment unintentionally hilarious.
           | Sure, this may actually be true. Consider the source,
           | however. Congratulating yourself by quoting the tobacco
           | company's own research of (the lack of) adverse effects of
           | tobacco seems a tad ill-conceived. The talk of reputation
           | makes it doubly so, since on this topic Sam Altman or any
           | official OpenAI post has no credibility whatsoever.
        
       | cyclecount wrote:
       | ...and like that, it's flagged and gone. Discussion averted,
       | thanks mods!
        
         | dang wrote:
         | Mods didn't touch it*. Users flag things.
         | 
         | * (before I turned off the flags a few minutes ago)
         | 
         | edit: see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40586961 for
         | more
        
       | erellsworth wrote:
       | Why is this flagged? What rule does it violate?
        
         | raxxorraxor wrote:
         | Articles get flagged if users perceive it to not be desired
         | content and not necessarily because it violates a specific
         | rule.
        
         | dang wrote:
         | Posts on all sides of this topic get flagged quickly (by
         | users), and mods turn off the flags on limited occasions--
         | mostly when some significant new information arises and there's
         | at least some chance of a substantive discussion about it.
         | 
         | It's pretty important that most stories about this conflict and
         | similar current affairs get flagged, because otherwise HN's
         | front page would consist of little else, and that's not the
         | purpose of the site. But it's also important that the topics
         | not be ignored completely, even though they're painful. There's
         | no happy medium here, unfortunately.
         | 
         | Here are some links to previous explanations. If you (or
         | anyone, of course) have a look at these and still have a
         | question that isn't answered there, I'd be happy to take a
         | crack at it.
         | 
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40418881 (May 2024)
         | 
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39920732 (April 2024)
         | 
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39618973 (March 2024)
         | 
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39435324 (Feb 2024)
         | 
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39435024 (Feb 2024)
         | 
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39237176 (Feb 2024)
         | 
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39161344 (Jan 2024)
         | 
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38947003 (Jan 2024)
         | 
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38749162 (Dec 2023)
         | 
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38657527 (Dec 2023)
        
           | erellsworth wrote:
           | Thank you for the explanation.
        
           | jakupovic wrote:
           | Thanks Dang this is much better than previously.
        
           | DevX101 wrote:
           | Appreciate the case by case basis approach to moderation
           | here. There are quite a few topics where discussion becomes
           | suppressed when blanket bans are enforced.
        
           | jimbob45 wrote:
           | The problem is that we've already solved these issues many
           | times over on other sites that are decades old. HN simply
           | refuses to implement 21st-century forum enhancements.
           | 
           | Brigaded reports? 4chan solved it by adding a mandatory enum
           | to reports to specify what the report is reporting for.
           | Identifying bad reports and banning users as a result becomes
           | trivial.
           | 
           | Flooding with stories about a particular topic? That's what
           | stickies are for and they work particularly well so that mods
           | can auto-delete any non-sticky stories pertaining to the MOT.
           | 
           | Flamewar on a MOT? Add a sticky to the top of the thread like
           | reddit does saying moderation will be minimal and to enter
           | the thread at your own risk.
        
             | dannyobrien wrote:
             | I think I prefer dang's approach, at least at the scale
             | that HN operates.
        
             | zen928 wrote:
             | Use the appropriate forum to debate topics in the manner
             | you prefer instead of trying to force others to conform to
             | your standards.
        
               | pessimizer wrote:
               | There is no planet where the opinion above represents
               | "force." Stop telling people who disagree with you to
               | shut up.
        
               | zen928 wrote:
               | > There is no planet where the opinion above represents
               | "force."
               | 
               | How about one of the standard Merriam Webster definitions
               | of force: (verb) "to compel by physical, moral, or
               | intellectual means" i.e. by framing their argument to
               | compel by convincing it's from an intellectual
               | standpoint. Not too interested on your hangups for
               | definitions of basic words to be honest here though.
               | 
               | Throwing a tantrum about being unable to redirect outrage
               | freely onto others while masquerading adding
               | functionality to enable that discourse as an "already
               | solved problem implemented by others" with lack of
               | complying to their personal standards being perceived as
               | refusing "enhancements" isn't a discussion, its an
               | emotion driven stance attempting to make the other party
               | look unreasonable.
        
               | oddtuple wrote:
               | Gentle reminder that this is against the guidelines, it
               | comes across somewhat as sneering and dismissive (which i
               | don't think was the intent, but is there none the less).
        
             | Karawebnetwork wrote:
             | > HN simply refuses to implement 21st-century forum
             | enhancements.
             | 
             | I'd argue that the reason most of us are on HN is that it
             | doesn't use 21st century forum enhancements.
        
           | jules-jules wrote:
           | Thank you dang. Doing the lords work.
        
             | YeGoblynQueenne wrote:
             | Lord Sauron, obviously :P
        
           | pandeiro wrote:
           | Reasonable approach and I applaud your effort to maintain the
           | site's purpose while also not ignoring these issues (that do
           | have some relation to the tech industry, as we've seen).
           | Thank you.
        
           | 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
           | Where I can view all of the posts that had flags turned off?
        
       | KenArrari wrote:
       | Wow it's been up for a full hour.
        
         | jules-jules wrote:
         | No it's gone. We would need admin support to get it unflagged
         | again, most likely.
        
           | KenArrari wrote:
           | Woops. Hasbara-bots got it.
        
       | partiallypro wrote:
       | I'm sure the story is true, but I doubt it was effective. I don't
       | think most politicians are really looking at their social media
       | given most of it is trolling junk. I'm sure Russia/Iran/Hamas
       | adjacent countries were doing the same. I just don't think they
       | have been that effective in getting politician support. Direct
       | lobbying or phone/email is much more effective than an online
       | troll farm to get the attention of a politician in DC. I have
       | worked in DC and this still feels very true to this day.
       | 
       | I think the more worrying is going after the low information
       | voter. I didn't think Russia's election interference had much
       | effect in 2016, but now when you look at US Media (largely
       | conservative outlets) their footprint is very visible.
        
         | PurpleRamen wrote:
         | It's not just for the politicians, but the people around them,
         | the companies researching the mood, the normal citizen who will
         | carry the mood to others. It not simply to quantify the effect
         | of this type of social engineering.
        
           | partiallypro wrote:
           | I'm aware how it works. But those numbers just aren't that
           | compelling, because as I said every large social media
           | platform is full of large troll farms. It's more about
           | influencing actual constituents to write their Congress
           | person.
        
             | dylan604 wrote:
             | We're just arguing semantics at that point though aren't
             | we?
             | 
             | If the purpose of the trolling is to influence a decision,
             | does it matter if the target reads it and is trolled
             | directly or trolls enough constituents to call for action?
             | Either way, the influence was asserted making the effort
             | worthwhile.
        
         | Hikikomori wrote:
         | Politicians are already influenced by AIPAC and other powerful
         | groups working for Israel, doubt they needed more. They've
         | managed to push anti-bds laws/orders in most states.
        
         | laweijfmvo wrote:
         | One thing I've learned about old people (and in the US, the
         | people in charge are _OLD_) is that they have no concept of
         | being scammed like this.
         | 
         | So they may recognize trolling, but if you tell them "Hey, the
         | President of Israel tweeted at you," they just assume it was
         | the President of Israel.
        
           | partiallypro wrote:
           | Aside from the terminally online politicians (like Mike Lee,
           | AOC, Cruz, MTG) most do not use their own accounts or even
           | look at them. They might have a firm that measure constituent
           | engagement, but still to this day the most effective way to
           | complain to your congress person is a phone call or email. If
           | we're being serious, the latter is what these bot farms, etc
           | are after. They want to influence actual constituents to do
           | their ultimate bidding. Now if we can get evidence of a huge
           | phone campaign using AI voice, that would be much more
           | alarming. Israel is doing it, and Iran/Russia/Hamas adjacent
           | are doing it. There's absolutely no denying it.
        
           | cafard wrote:
           | I am in my upper 60s--if a bit junior for Congress, let alone
           | the White House--but like to think of myself as a bit more
           | skeptical than that.
        
             | some-guy wrote:
             | Helping my parents in their mid-70s is a constant uphill
             | battle with these things. I simply tell her to ignore
             | *everything* and if she needs confirmation to get in
             | contact with me.
        
           | The_Colonel wrote:
           | So the logic is something like this:
           | 
           | * my grandmother can't recognize fake information
           | 
           | * my grandmother is old
           | 
           | * politicians are old
           | 
           | * therefore politicians can't recognize fake information
           | 
           | Politics has always been full of deception, people doing
           | politics professionally for decades should know a bit or two
           | about it.
        
             | digging wrote:
             | > Politics has always been full of deception, people doing
             | politics professionally for decades should know a bit or
             | two about it.
             | 
             | I think it's worth pushing back on this. Deception works
             | when it's unexpected, and if the medium is something
             | politicians aren't familiar with, they may not even be
             | looking for the kinds of deception they're being targeted
             | with. They think themselves hardened to deception, but they
             | may not be open-minded enough to even realize there are
             | forms of deception they haven't prepared for.
        
         | seydor wrote:
         | OTOH i ve seen politicians care about social media much more
         | than average joe does.
        
         | greg_V wrote:
         | I'm not in the US but am familiar with some politicians here,
         | and they too have a problem with recognizing that the feed they
         | received is personalized, the comments are not representative,
         | etc.
         | 
         | If you're wondering why politics sometimes seem out of touch,
         | it's because politicians, their media and the commentariat are
         | locked into an echo chamber already.
         | 
         | If I were an actor interested in influencing the policy of
         | another country, why would I spend $$$ on manipulating the
         | voting populace if I can poison the feed of the people who
         | matter for far less?
        
         | hightrix wrote:
         | I would argue it is extremely effective.
         | 
         | Take a look a r/worldnews vs any other subreddit discussing
         | this topic. r/worldnews is controlled. Negative comments
         | towards Israel get comments deleted and users banned. Any other
         | subreddit, there are people arguing from multiple directions.
         | On r/worldnews, you only see dissenting opinions for the first
         | hour or so until the mods "clean up the thread".
         | 
         | Obviously, this is anecdotal information and probably slightly
         | biased.
        
           | objektif wrote:
           | This is not anecdotal come on. Worldnews is 100% now a
           | narrative control ops by pro Israel forces. Just looking at
           | one thread is enough to confirm this.
        
           | hersko wrote:
           | The only difference with r/worldnews vs r/news or the vast
           | majority of subreddits is that it leans right instead of far
           | left.
           | 
           | It's just a different echo chamber...
        
           | matteoraso wrote:
           | r/worldnews has been astroturfed by questionable entities for
           | a long time now. I'll never forget when they censored all
           | information about blood drives after the Pulse Nightclub
           | shooting.
        
       | mathgradthrow wrote:
       | Perhaps they are trying to achieve parity with the propaganda of
       | their adversaries, Russia, China, and Qatar.
        
         | hartator wrote:
         | Didn't we almost go to war against Russia for doing precisely
         | that?
        
           | 0xcafefood wrote:
           | Yes, but Israel is our Greatest Ally, so it's different when
           | they do it.
        
           | adolph wrote:
           | Isn't the US already in a (barely-proxy) war with Russia?
        
         | TillE wrote:
         | It's certainly striking that the quality of the propaganda is
         | very much on par with that of Russia. It's clumsy, it often
         | espouses political views (eg, the faux-anarchist stuff) which
         | are incoherent in America or really anywhere in the West.
        
           | pessimizer wrote:
           | You can't make a religious argument to people who don't share
           | your religion, so they're stuck with harassment and bald-
           | faced lies. Even non-Israelis who agree with them on
           | everything end up with a bad taste in their mouth after
           | reading or listening to it.
           | 
           | They don't have any practice making a secular argument about
           | the Palestinian situation, how could they? They fall back to
           | assuring people that Israel is a friend to the US, that
           | Israel is a democracy (a ton of its inhabitants are forced to
           | live in ghettos and refugee camps), that Israel loves gay
           | people (Israel doesn't have gay marriage, or even secular
           | marriage except by treaty), and the worst: "Why don't you
           | give America back to the Indians?"
           | 
           | Russian propaganda is bad, but it's also lazy: it gets them
           | nothing and they don't put a lot of effort into it. Israel is
           | trying as hard as it can. To not ethnically cleanse Israel
           | leaves a population that Europe _tried its best to
           | exterminate_ drifting the stormy seas of having to compromise
           | with their neighbors. This is a population whose neighbors
           | once built factories in order to slaughter them more
           | efficiently.
        
       | dang wrote:
       | We changed the URL from
       | https://www.forbes.com/sites/siladityaray/2024/06/05/israel-...
       | to what looks like a more original source.
        
       | cjk2 wrote:
       | Well their enemies used social accounts to garner support from US
       | citizens so you've got to start somewhere!
       | 
       | It's not like we haven't done this either. I worked for a company
       | in 2005 which was doing this paid for by politicians. Moment I
       | worked this out, I quit.
        
         | Kapura wrote:
         | This seems extremely unethical no matter who is doing it.
        
           | cjk2 wrote:
           | 100% agree (hence my point about quitting) but the problem is
           | it's a difficult position to be in when everything is
           | narrative driven and misreporting and propaganda are rife.
           | 
           | You can sit there and do nothing and wait for your enemy to
           | paint you in a bad light and the next thing you know your
           | usual political allies are throwing money and aid at your
           | enemy. Or you protect your citizens as best as possible by
           | entering the game. The moral high ground may have a higher
           | body count.
           | 
           | This point applies to both sides for ref. And because it's a
           | war, the rules of fair play go out of the window until people
           | are on trial afterwards.
        
             | FpUser wrote:
             | >"until people are on trial afterwards"
             | 
             | Speaking of trials: U.S. lawmakers had voted to sanction
             | ICC if it tries to prosecute citizens of the US or it's
             | allies.
             | 
             | I guess it is always one rule for thee and another one for
             | me. So much for rules based order.
        
               | cjk2 wrote:
               | Well there's a problem here. There are rules. But no one
               | really has to abide to them. There are no consequences
               | against a sovereign nation other than political
               | allegiance risk or travel risks for convicts.
        
             | gmdrd wrote:
             | > Or you protect your citizens as best as possible by
             | entering the game.
             | 
             | It doesn't seem reasonable to me to assume that the main
             | objective of any government is to protect its citizens.
        
               | cjk2 wrote:
               | I think that's just paranoia. The citizens generally are
               | the government. It's not optimal but without the citizens
               | there is no government.
        
         | croes wrote:
         | So it's ok to do something wrong, if others do it too?
        
           | cjk2 wrote:
           | It's a war. It's about doing wrong things until someone
           | capitulates.
           | 
           | I mean it'd be nice not to have them but as a species we're
           | stupid animals with stupid ideas so there's no end of it in
           | sight.
           | 
           | I don't agree with any of it for ref.
        
         | CommanderData wrote:
         | I think killing 15,000 children would garner organic support
         | from any human with a functioning conscious.
         | 
         | It is why Israel has already lost support globally with normal
         | people especially the young.
         | 
         | Those people are only to get more polarised, the political
         | stooges in government however (who are easily pressured - which
         | Israel does extremely effectively) have had to tow the line.
         | 
         | (before any Israeli PR bot tries to discredit the number of
         | children murders, Hamas's health ministry has historically been
         | extremely accurate in past conflicts, with past figures
         | verified by various external impartial authorities and there is
         | zero reason to not believe them, I scrutinized the number
         | myself before I decided to pick a side ... What's more is the
         | number is probably higher as children lay dead in collapsed
         | buildings)
         | 
         | Children do not deserve to die. Let alone be tortured, which
         | Israel has done without punishment.
        
           | cjk2 wrote:
           | An exercise with war casualty stats you can do is look at
           | previous wars and look at the variation in estimates in body
           | counts for each side. Then factor that into the news you are
           | reading it.
           | 
           | End game is there has _never_ been a credible body count from
           | even a small scale war. So to claim _anyone_ is right here on
           | either side is probably selective bias on your part. At best
           | when the dust has figuratively and literally settled, it 'll
           | be a decade before anyone has an even remotely credible
           | count.
           | 
           | Manipulation of the body counts is easy material for
           | propaganda. It has been since the dawn of war.
           | 
           | Factor child soldiers into these arguments and it gets very
           | grey. The number itself without compounding facts has little
           | meaning.
           | 
           | And for the sake of credibility, the figures were later
           | revised so you're not even quoting their current estimates
           | and compromising your own credibility!
           | 
           | https://reliefweb.int/report/occupied-palestinian-
           | territory/...
        
             | jedimind wrote:
             | "Two officials from the Palestinian Ministry of Health have
             | told CNN that although the ministry keeps a separate death
             | toll for identified and unidentified individuals, the total
             | number of people killed remains unchanged.
             | 
             | The total number of dead also does not include the
             | approximately 10,000 people who are still missing and
             | trapped under the rubble, the officials added.
             | 
             | CNN has seen a daily report from the Palestinian health
             | ministry which matches the number OCHA published in the
             | revised version. A total of 15,103 children and 9,961 women
             | have been killed in Gaza since October 7, the Gaza ministry
             | of health said in its latest report."
             | 
             | [0] https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/13/middleeast/death-toll-
             | gaza-fa... - Updated 2:12 AM EDT, Tue May 14, 2024
        
             | CommanderData wrote:
             | For the record I didn't verify the deaths, I looked at
             | information release in past conflicts for the last 10 or so
             | years *.
             | 
             | "MoH statistics have also been verified by Human Rights
             | Watch and used by the United States Department of State in
             | past conflicts and as recently as March 2023, despite US
             | President Joe Biden questioning those numbers without
             | evidence."
             | 
             | https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/5/14/has-the-un-
             | really-s...
             | 
             | Palestinian authorities were found to be releasing counts
             | in good faith and never inflated numbers for the sake of an
             | information war. This is a key point, why doubt an
             | organisation that hasn't lied about it's death count
             | before.
             | 
             | Deny, Discredit, Disinform, Diffuse and Defray are things
             | you'll see time and time again in threads like these.
             | 
             | Now, it's a sobering thought 15,000+ children have been
             | murdered, in 2023/2024. With full support of the US,
             | 'ironclad' apparently.
        
               | cjk2 wrote:
               | I've just gone through your post history. I encourage
               | other people to have a look. You are biased and are
               | pushing an agenda. I will stop replying now.
        
               | nsguy wrote:
               | The Palestinians did lie in the past about the
               | composition of those numbers.
               | 
               | https://time.com/3035937/gaza-israel-hamas-palestinian-
               | casua...
               | 
               | https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/16/opinion/hamas-israel-
               | medi...
               | 
               | I don't think the claim that Palestinian authorities were
               | found to be releasing numbers "in good faith" has much of
               | a leg to stand on. Do you have some authoritative sources
               | that are not Al-Jazeera (the propaganda arm of Qatar, the
               | country that hosts the Hamas leadership) for this claim?
               | 
               | https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/gaza-women-children-death-
               | toll...
               | 
               | UN ... "revised its tallies last week to show that
               | approximately 5,000 women and 7,800 children have been
               | killed as of April 30. "
               | 
               | We also need to keep in mind that e.g. the US considers
               | children to be <15yo when account for civilian casualties
               | in its wars vs. the <18yo definition used here. This
               | distinction is important given Hamas uses teenagers (and
               | children, but anyways) as combatants.
               | 
               | > Deny, Discredit, Disinform, Diffuse and Defray are
               | things you'll see time and time again in threads like
               | these.
               | 
               | I would say you're engaging in similar tactics by pushing
               | the 15,000+ children murdered narrative. I think that
               | claim is just false on many levels. The numbers are
               | almost certainly false. The "murdered" is false. If we
               | can't get facts right we can't have a discussion.
        
         | Levitz wrote:
         | >Well their enemies used social accounts to garner support from
         | US citizens so you've got to start somewhere!
         | 
         | I mean, if Israel started bombing me, I'd try to garner support
         | from US citizens too? There is a world of difference between
         | that and faking social media accounts
        
       | WhackyIdeas wrote:
       | Israel never got the memo about calming their propaganda
       | campaigns down - now even the most average Joe (at least in the
       | UK) can spot them a mile off. They aren't subtle about it.
       | 
       | For a country which is meant to be one of the smartest out there,
       | their propaganda campaigns are an utter disaster giveaway to
       | anyone with a pulse and a few dozen brain cells.
        
         | diggan wrote:
         | > For a country which is meant to be one of the smartest out
         | there
         | 
         | Seems their propaganda works just fine if that's a commonly
         | held belief :)
        
           | tehjoker wrote:
           | Yea, US propaganda is the same way. It's not subtle, it's
           | just so many people are onboard with it they don't really
           | care.
        
           | WhackyIdeas wrote:
           | Maybe that is just the dregs of a time when they used to be
           | half decent at propaganda ;)
           | 
           | I take it back. They are smart with their hacking and that's
           | where it ends.
        
             | jajko wrote:
             | > They are smart with their hacking and that's where it
             | ends
             | 
             | So are often russians, or chinese. Maybe the concentration
             | is on another level, they are a tiny country but highly
             | educated for generations.
             | 
             | I'd bet if we properly educated and developed whole world
             | we would discover Einsteins and Bolts in many many places
             | out there. Ie elite athletes often come from places around
             | where they could do sport, ie mountaineers but also many
             | others.
        
           | some-guy wrote:
           | My wife lived in Israel on and off for years, I got to visit
           | her for awhile during her dissertation work in the West Bank.
           | Only a few blocks of Tel Aviv deserve the "modern Middle
           | Eastern country" label in my mind. And even then it wasn't
           | nearly as impressive as I thought. Haifa is a lovely town
           | though :)
        
         | cjk2 wrote:
         | To be fair propagandists generally don't have to aim high. They
         | only have to shift the undecided and uninformed opinions a
         | little bit.
         | 
         | You want to see some of the crap the agencies were pushing out
         | pre-Brexit and it worked, so I wouldn't classify the average UK
         | citizen as much to be contended with (I am UK as well for ref).
        
           | WhackyIdeas wrote:
           | The only good thing to come from Brexit is that for some
           | people they woke up and smelt the more expensive coffee than
           | it used to be and had some self reflection. I have spoke with
           | a good few people now that were like 'I was lied to'... well
           | duh.
        
             | cjk2 wrote:
             | Unfortunately it was mostly "I was lied to, but I agree
             | with it anyway because of X" where X is some loose
             | justification to absolve themselves of the self-inflicted
             | mess they got themselves into.
             | 
             | My father was a fine one. His staff fucked off back to
             | Europe, he couldn't hire anyone else and had to fold his
             | company and retire. Then he found out he got cancer and
             | that the NHS had staffing problems due to Brexit.
             | 
             | Me, I am better off for it as I fill a niche demand, but I
             | voted against it because it was generally bad for society
             | and I do not always vote in self-interest.
        
               | WhackyIdeas wrote:
               | Our business lost around 90% of European customers. Then
               | the odd customer now from Europe emails in a rage because
               | they had to pay import duties... so then having to tell
               | them that 'Brexit' happened!
               | 
               | You are so right though - most people just will refuse to
               | accept they were taken for fools with all the nasty
               | rhetoric about 'people coming in to our country'... and
               | so many have even been convinced that ripping up the
               | Human Rights act is somehow a good thing (??? Wtf!).
               | 
               | Rich people manipulating the minds of poor people was
               | what Brexit was all about. At the time I was convinced
               | this was a Russian move to make UK weaker. But then
               | again, I was convinced for many years that Trump was a
               | Russian asset to make America implode (which is kind of
               | what happened).
               | 
               | All this hate for foreigners. It's disgusting.
        
           | jjk166 wrote:
           | Same playbook as scammers, you want to focus your efforts
           | where they are most likely to have the desired effect, and
           | those who fall for the obvious lies will always be more
           | easily manipulated than those who require a more subtle
           | approach.
        
         | r00fus wrote:
         | See, this is the thing - this propaganda is only meant as the
         | "rationale" that goes along with the real bribe - campaign
         | funding from the likes of AIPAC and DMfI.
         | 
         | The funding is what secures these politicians' votes. The
         | propaganda is what the politicians can use to justify their
         | actions to everyone else. That it's laughably bad is a function
         | less of the capabilities of Israel than the utter fealty that
         | these politicans have to the Israeli cause.
        
       | Simon_ORourke wrote:
       | How are those guys not treated as some hostile foreign power and
       | have half their embassy staff expelled is beyond me.
        
         | lprd wrote:
         | I've often pondered the same. Seems like Israel gets a lot of
         | special treatment from the US.
        
           | imzadi wrote:
           | Because anti-Semitism is used to derail any conversation
           | about Israel. If you criticize Israel, you're accused of
           | being an anti-Semite, and actual anti-Semites flood the
           | conversation with actual anti-Semitism that immediately shuts
           | everything down.
        
             | recursivedoubts wrote:
             | if i were a government and any conversation that criticized
             | me could be shut down by calling it something I would pay
             | people to do that something
        
             | issafram wrote:
             | Also, people ignore that Palestinians are Semites as well.
        
               | nsguy wrote:
               | The word antisemitism is reserved for hate against Jews.
               | It has nothing to do with people that speak semitic
               | languages. This statement, which is often repeated, is
               | IMO a good example of antisemitic speech because it's an
               | attempt to claim that hating Jews is not antisemitic
               | since others are also "semites".
        
           | bell-cot wrote:
           | You might want to ask a few old politicians about what
           | effects "being perceived as insufficiently pro-Israel" has
           | historically had, on Election Day.
        
         | lenerdenator wrote:
         | General lack of countries with something even vaguely
         | resembling representative government in the Middle East.
         | 
         | Israel seems to only extend that sort of courtesy to a part of
         | its citizenry, but when you remember that the "stable"
         | countries in the region are all more-or-less absolute
         | monarchies, it becomes obvious why the US is willing to at
         | least work with Israel.
        
           | TedDoesntTalk wrote:
           | > Israel seems to only extend that sort of courtesy to a part
           | of its citizenry
           | 
           | There have been over 100 Arabs in the Israeli parliament: htt
           | ps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Arab_members_of_the_Kn...
        
             | lenerdenator wrote:
             | Good for them. But if you're Arab Israeli, you don't have
             | the same slate of rights and representation that Jewish
             | Israelis have. See: freedom of movement to and from the
             | Gaza Strip prior to October 7th.
        
               | idunnoman1222 wrote:
               | Hilarious go be a Jew in any Muslim country
        
           | pphysch wrote:
           | > Israel seems to only extend that sort of courtesy to a part
           | of its citizenry, but when you remember that the "stable"
           | countries in the region are all more-or-less absolute
           | monarchies, it becomes obvious why the US is willing to at
           | least work with Israel.
           | 
           | More directly: apartheid "democracy" > monarchy?
        
             | lenerdenator wrote:
             | According to the wisdom of US foreign policy, yes.
             | 
             | For what it's worth, the US has also tried to work a two-
             | state solution over the last 30 years with various degrees
             | of vigor. That became much harder to accomplish when the
             | Gaza Strip decided to elect Hamas to lead its government in
             | 2006-07.
        
               | dragonwriter wrote:
               | > For what it's worth, the US has also tried to work a
               | two-state solution over the last 30 years with various
               | degrees of vigor. That became much harder to accomplish
               | when the Gaza Strip decided to elect Hamas to lead its
               | government in 2006-07.
               | 
               | It became much harder when the Israeli hard Right
               | murdered Yitzhak Rabin in 1995 and then took over the
               | Israeli government with Netanyahu's election in 1996.
               | 
               | Both fairly explicitly in reaction against the idea of
               | ever accepting a Palestinian State.
        
               | Levitz wrote:
               | >That became much harder to accomplish when the Gaza
               | Strip decided to elect Hamas to lead its government in
               | 2006-07.
               | 
               | Which Israel can't be blamed for enough.
               | 
               | Let's just leave this place filled with insurgents
               | without any coordination with the authority. I wonder
               | what will happen.
        
           | tacheiordache wrote:
           | > the US is willing to at least work with Israel
           | 
           | What do you mean at least work with Israel? The US is
           | propping up Israel and without that ally Israel would
           | probably implode. What's messed up is how disrespectful
           | Israel and some of their politicians are to US and their
           | citizens. One thing I like about Israel is that they have a
           | variety of oppinions and schools of thought. What we're
           | currently seeing is coming from the radical right wing and
           | those atrocities will unfortunately stain Israelis of all
           | types. Hope they do at the next elections.
        
             | lenerdenator wrote:
             | Israel is a postindustrial economy with a 600,000-man
             | military reserve and (unofficially) a nuclear arsenal of
             | the size and capability needed to destroy the society of
             | any industrialized nation on Earth.
             | 
             | Almost all of the support and protection they've received
             | from the US since October has been mainly to keep leverage
             | on Netanyahu and to keep the war from spreading across the
             | Middle East. For example, if Iran's missiles had bombarded
             | Tel Aviv, you're probably going to see Israel bombarding
             | Tehran, which could pull in Iraq, etc., and Israel has yet
             | to lose a fight against its regional neighbors.
             | 
             | They don't need the US to prop them up economically or
             | militarily, which should bring about a conversation about
             | support come next budget, but I doubt it.
             | 
             | I too would like to see a more moderate group in charge.
        
               | mike50 wrote:
               | Which Israeli defense contractors build airplanes and
               | tanks? Without aircraft and spares you cannot have a
               | modern military. The US absolutely props up Israeli with
               | weapons and military technology that they do not produce
               | in country. Waving around nuclear weapons and a massive
               | number of troops are the actions of states that are
               | weaker then project as (Russia DPRK).
        
               | JumpCrisscross wrote:
               | > _Which Israeli defense contractors build airplanes and
               | tanks?_
               | 
               | Neither do the North Koreans [1][2]? (Caveats [3][4].)
               | 
               | America dropping Israel simply means it finds a new
               | supplier. Russia is out of the picture, given its
               | dependence on Iran, but China and India would be more
               | than willing to supply.
               | 
               | [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_People's_Army_
               | Air_For...
               | 
               | [2] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tanks_of_North_Korea
               | 
               | [3] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pokpung-ho
               | 
               | [4] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merkava
        
             | mrkeen wrote:
             | > What we're currently seeing is coming from the radical
             | right wing and those atrocities will unfortunately stain
             | Israelis of all types. Hope they do at the next elections.
             | 
             | Wishful thinking, regardless of which elections your
             | talking about. In the US, both sides are working hard to
             | prop up Israel. In Israel before October, Netanyahu was on
             | trial for fraud, bribery and breach of trust. Who's even
             | talking about that anymore? Now he gets to be a war Prime
             | Minister.
        
           | umanwizard wrote:
           | Iraq and Lebanon both more closely "vaguely resemble"
           | representative government than Israel does. For all their
           | problems, at least all the people they rule over are allowed
           | to be citizens and vote.
        
             | amitport wrote:
             | 500k Palestinians in Lebanon, 2nd-3rd generation
             | "refugees", are not allowed to be citizens and do not have
             | a vote. (Palestinians are the only people in the world who
             | the UN allow to inherit this status)
             | 
             | And now... Iraq?! you must be joking or cynic
        
               | umanwizard wrote:
               | That is a fair point. The way Lebanon treats Palestinians
               | is terrible and they should not get a free pass when
               | people criticize Israel.
        
             | nsguy wrote:
             | Iraq and Lebanon are far from free and democratic
             | countries.
             | 
             | https://freedomhouse.org/country/iraq/freedom-world/2024
             | https://freedomhouse.org/country/lebanon/freedom-world/2024
             | https://freedomhouse.org/country/israel/freedom-world/2024
        
               | umanwizard wrote:
               | That does not contradict my point.
        
           | nitwit005 wrote:
           | Most Americans have no idea how Israel is governed. Even
           | grasping the basics of how the United States government works
           | is sadly not guaranteed.
           | 
           | All most people know is the spin they've gotten from the
           | media and politicians. Both tend to be very pro Israel in the
           | US. That's changed a little recently, but not much.
        
         | pessimizer wrote:
         | Because all the aid for Israel comes back to arms dealers and
         | other wealthy creeps in the US, and they own our politics.
         | 
         | Israelis are just doing what their version of Judaism is
         | telling them to do, it's the neocon Zionists in the US that
         | finance it that are the real danger. It isn't just that they
         | don't care about Palestinian lives, they don't care about
         | Israeli lives, either. They care about Israeli contracts.
        
         | notaustinpowers wrote:
         | Because of the 535 politicians we have, 45 of them have
         | received donations just during the 2024 election cycle. Big
         | names like Ted Cruz, Marsha Blackburn, Rick Scott, Mitt Romney,
         | Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, etc.
         | 
         | It's bipartisan enough that I don't believe the parties will be
         | able to come to an agreement to enact any meaningful change.
         | This goes beyond the Republican vs. Democrat issues so it's
         | much more difficult to make this a partisan issue to rally mass
         | support from either party.
        
         | JumpCrisscross wrote:
         | > _How are those guys not treated as some hostile foreign
         | power_
         | 
         | Americans' views of the Israeli people are broadly positive
         | [1].
         | 
         | [1] https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/05/30/how-
         | ameri... _64%_
        
         | pedalpete wrote:
         | So would you also expel Russian and Chinese embassy staff?
         | 
         | Allies influencing other allies is part of the process. Don't
         | just think that it is Israel doing it in America. America is
         | also doing similar actions in other countries where they want
         | to win favour.
        
       | pessimizer wrote:
       | They really targeted the dumbest, most venal people in Congress.
       | These particular people will fight for anyone but the people who
       | elected them, so afraid to lose their jackpot.
        
       | michaeljhg wrote:
       | Is there a country that doesn't do this?
        
         | some-guy wrote:
         | Not the point here: Israel is our "greatest ally" and the
         | target is our lawmakers.
        
           | tptacek wrote:
           | I think you would be surprised by the list of countries the
           | US IC believes are our most important intelligence
           | "adversaries"; the list includes many of our allies.
        
           | rcpt wrote:
           | As far as I can tell "greatest ally" is just something these
           | accounts say.
           | 
           | Jordan seems to be a much stronger friend to us in the
           | region.
        
             | NoMoreNicksLeft wrote:
             | Jordan never sunk a US Navy ship and then machine-gunned
             | the sailors trying to escape in lifeboats. But if they did,
             | they wouldn't have painted over the jet's markings first.
        
           | jjtheblunt wrote:
           | "greatest ally" according to whose claim? that reads like
           | propaganda, just plain nonsense. perhaps a contender for
           | greatest external funding liability? not sure how the hard
           | data would rank such numerically.
        
             | CorrectingYou wrote:
             | I believe this was sarcarsm, since American politicians
             | like to always pitch Israel as "America's Greatest Ally",
             | thus making it a common target of sarcasm
        
               | jjtheblunt wrote:
               | ahhh....that makes sense then.
               | 
               | as i think of it, it's strange that the US supposedly has
               | a separation of religion from state, in the
               | constitution+amendments, yet funds an external country
               | based on a religion. i wonder what fraction of donations
               | to Israel come back as lobbyists paying politicians to
               | fund the next round of donations. there must be datasets
               | recorded somewhere, but i have no idea where to look.
        
               | JumpCrisscross wrote:
               | > _American politicians like to always pitch Israel as
               | "America's Greatest Ally"_
               | 
               | In the Middle East. Which is sort of true. (Cairo, Riyadh
               | and Doha aren't as reliable.)
               | 
               | Our traditional greatest ally is the U.K.
        
               | jjtheblunt wrote:
               | France and Poland from the revolutionary war, too,
               | perhaps.
        
               | JumpCrisscross wrote:
               | > _France and Poland from the revolutionary war_
               | 
               | France is our oldest ally. But it (and Poland) are weaker
               | and have been less reliably at our side than Britain has
               | been.
        
           | silisili wrote:
           | Yeah, AIPAC really opened my eyes to how deep the ties go.
           | They spend tons of money to put their preferred lawmakers in
           | place, and openly brag on Twitter about how much they spend
           | and their extremely successful track record. It just -feels-
           | like it should be illegal, seeing as it's a foreign country.
        
         | kergonath wrote:
         | So, enlighten us: is there? Any example of this sort of things
         | between allies? Or is this just an extreme case of both-sides?
         | 
         | Spying and keeping tabs on your friends is one thing. Influence
         | campaigns among close allies are generally not the way it
         | works.
        
           | gmarx wrote:
           | before the US entered WWII the british had an office of
           | propaganda with offices in New York that was dedicated to
           | getting the US to enter the war.
        
         | neves wrote:
         | USA censor Social Networks that don't allow them to do it.
        
         | Maxatar wrote:
         | I don't know of any government department in Canada, Mexico,
         | the UK, France, Germany, Australia that target U.S. law makers
         | with fake social media accounts.
         | 
         | Do you know of any? Can you cite them?
        
           | cooper_ganglia wrote:
           | I don't know of them, that's why I'm sure it's happening. I'd
           | assume that the US is doing this to our allied nations, too.
        
             | dylan604 wrote:
             | I'm not saying it's _not_ happening, however, the US has a
             | much bigger stick to use by withholding funds /arms/aid
             | before stooping to this level of influence*. Pretty much no
             | other country has the reciprocal influence to the US, so
             | these kinds of machinations is kind of expected.
             | 
             | *Historical examples of other forms of US
             | meddling/interference is not being ignored, and paves the
             | way to why I would not say _not_ being done.
        
           | NoMoreNicksLeft wrote:
           | I have a question of my own. Is there another country whose
           | citizens are regularly elected to Congress? Dual citizens are
           | not barred from holding office in Congress, and certainly
           | there are more than a few English Americans and French
           | Americans who hold citizens in both respective countries, but
           | I have never heard of any winning office (or even running,
           | for that matter).
        
             | burkaman wrote:
             | It is relatively common for people born outside the US to
             | be elected to Congress
             | (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_foreign-
             | born_United_St...,
             | https://www.senate.gov/senators/Foreign_born.htm), but
             | there is no requirement to publicly disclose dual
             | citizenship. Ted Cruz and Michelle Bachmann are the most
             | famous examples of holding dual citizenship during a
             | congressional career, there may be more examples that I'm
             | not aware of.
        
             | samatman wrote:
             | I'm not aware of any dual citizens in Congress, could you
             | provide some names please?
        
               | burkaman wrote:
               | I could be wrong but I think it's an intentional
               | misrepresentation of Israel's Law of Return
               | (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Return), which
               | allows any Jewish person to move to Israel and then
               | become a citizen. It doesn't mean that every Jewish
               | person anywhere in the world is automatically an Israeli
               | citizen whether they want to be or not, but some people
               | like to say that.
        
         | seydor wrote:
         | It's not common at all in liberal countries. Perhaps azerbaijan
         | or china do it
        
       | shmatt wrote:
       | Out: blame AIPAC for congress funding israel
       | 
       | In: blame FB comments for congress funding Israel
       | 
       | Is it really that hard to imagine congress supporting the
       | democratic country with one of the biggest pride parades in the
       | world vs the country that hasn't had elections in 18 years and is
       | split between 2 leaders who disagree on pretty much everything?
        
         | notaustinpowers wrote:
         | > biggest pride parades in the world
         | 
         | Do you mean NYC Pride or Sao Paolo Gay Pride Parade?
        
       | AzzyHN wrote:
       | Truly shocking. Who could've seen this coming.
       | 
       | On a more serious note, I figured the majority of US lawmakers
       | already supported the genocide. I'm surprised Israel feels the
       | need to use propaganda for this
        
       | nerdjon wrote:
       | I find it quite concerning just how much propaganda the US seems
       | to get from Israel. Where I live there are big billboards around,
       | I regularly see ads on YouTube.
       | 
       | I know propaganda is a thing, but it feels like we are getting
       | more about a foreign government than our own.
       | 
       | I feel like before what is going on now I was aware of some of
       | the groups responsible for this being a thing, but was not fully
       | aware just how much money there was in it those organizations
       | until recently.
       | 
       | Some of the practices are concerning, like I found out recently
       | apparently the Boston police regularly go over to Israel for
       | training?
       | 
       | Regardless of what is going on right now, I don't understand how
       | this much power over the US was ever deemed acceptable?
        
         | cempaka wrote:
         | The best part is when it comes from our own "newspaper of
         | record" i.e. with the extraordinarily dubious "mass rape"
         | article the NYT published. They finally dismissed the one
         | Israel-connected reporter who had liked tweets calling for a
         | brutal response against Gaza, but that of course has seen about
         | one billionth the attention that her original claims continue
         | to receive.
         | 
         | You also get stuff like the POTUS repeating lies like "40
         | beheaded babies" and "a mother and child had kerosene poured on
         | them" with none of the usual media freakout you usually see
         | over "misinformation."
        
           | nerdjon wrote:
           | I have struggled to even look at my News app anymore.
           | 
           | Next to articles about the protests or other things, there
           | are the articles about the hostages or something else that
           | just feels like a propaganda piece aimed at one thing.
           | 
           | And that is just the headlines.
        
             | segasaturn wrote:
             | The wiki article on Media Coverage of the Iraq War[0] is an
             | enlightening read. Most of the same tactics for
             | manufacturing consent that the mainstream media used during
             | the Iraq War are still being used in today's conflicts.
             | 
             | > An investigation by the New York Times discovered that
             | top Pentagon officials met with news analysts where they
             | gave the analysts 'special information' and then tried to
             | convince them to speak favorably about the Iraq war. The
             | discovery was based on 8000 pages of secret information
             | that had been revealed to The New York Times through a
             | lawsuit under the Freedom of Information Act. The article
             | states that top Pentagon officials would invite news
             | analysts to secret meetings, and urge the analysts to speak
             | positively of the war. Often, the US would give "classified
             | information," trips, and contracts to the news analysts.
             | 
             | 0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_coverage_of_the_Iraq
             | _War
        
           | megous wrote:
           | > You also get stuff like the POTUS repeating lies like "40
           | beheaded babies" and "a mother and child had kerosene poured
           | on them" with none of the usual media freakout you usually
           | see over "misinformation."
           | 
           | Yeah. The politicians who repeated this also never apologized
           | for inflaming tensions without any evidence or investigation
           | whatsoever. But anything Israel is accused of, requires
           | thorough investigation by Israel (or sometimes independently
           | - without ever mentioning Israel will not allow independent
           | investigators into Gaza), before we can even think about
           | trusting the people they're killing currently, regardless of
           | affiliation.
           | 
           | Then you read https://www.france24.com/en/live-
           | news/20231215-israel-social...
           | 
           | And you see that 20 children 15 and younger were killed in
           | total, and out of them 10 by rockets, which starts to paint
           | very different picture. So militants killed 20-36 children
           | depending on how you wish to define a child, out of 1200
           | people in total. So that's 1.7-3% of killed victims.
           | 
           | On the other hand, you get at least 16 000 killed children by
           | Israel in just the last 8 months. 60 a day at least.
           | 
           | https://time.com/6909636/gaza-death-toll/
           | 
           | And you can see 10-5 a day individually just scrolling
           | through video posts on telegram https://t.me/eyeonpal/
           | 
           | And we're supposed to think that Hamas are child killing
           | monsters and Israel is not and somehow uniquely righteous.
           | Yeah, right. Just the math alone on this doesn't compute for
           | me, at all.
        
         | neves wrote:
         | Imagine if it were Russia or China
        
           | croisillon wrote:
           | Well it can't be China because China don't kill their muslim
           | popula... oooh...
        
         | Retric wrote:
         | > I don't understand how this much power over the US was ever
         | deemed acceptable?
         | 
         | Free speech sometimes applies to things you don't like. There's
         | pro and anti propaganda for just about any foreign interest.
         | Some of it's just more subtle such as recommendations on
         | TikTok.
         | 
         | Ukraine had really obvious pro Ukraine requests for military
         | aid and images of destruction, but quite a bit of pro Russia
         | propaganda was more subtle aiming for people to stay out of it.
         | 
         | With Israel you see some really blatant pro Israel propaganda,
         | but both sides also have a lot of more subtle stuff.
        
           | ESTheComposer wrote:
           | I believe the issue here is how much sway Israel has on the
           | US and how rabid many US politicians are about Israel (to the
           | point where many straight up accuse you of anti semitism if
           | you just criticize the country or their policies)
           | 
           | Also issues like where you are not allowed to refuse to work
           | with Israel if you are an arms manufacturer in the US (but
           | you can refuse to work with the US military). I know that
           | part of that is due to Israel being part of the FMS list but
           | they are also the largest recipient on it...
        
           | justin66 wrote:
           | > Free speech sometimes applies to things you don't like.
           | 
           | ...and in the United States we've defined down "free speech"
           | to include "monetary donations."
        
             | fsckboy wrote:
             | somebody needs to pay for the billboard, or rent a hall to
             | give a speech, or printing the flyers for your lost cat.
             | How is money not essential to speech? Your proposal is that
             | to support a cause, one should only be allowed to go
             | outside and yell, because that's purer than the corrupting
             | influence of money?
        
               | pnut wrote:
               | Once money gets involved, you inherently have a
               | commercial interest. What's the ROI?
               | 
               | I personally think people misunderstand to whom "freedom"
               | is granted and defended in the US, it is demonstrably not
               | freedom of the individual, but of the powerful.
        
               | fsckboy wrote:
               | money is quite simply not inherently commercial
               | 
               | free speech is a legal concept, and ROI is not a legal
               | concept; when debts are enforced by courts, they
               | frequently don't even enforce interest as if time value
               | of money doesn't exist.
        
               | justin66 wrote:
               | The nature of the strawman you've stood up to to
               | represent my "proposal" (who knew I had a proposal?)
               | suggests you're not even familiar with the history of the
               | legal debate in the United States surrounding the 1st
               | amendment and political donations. So I guess I would
               | propose you read up on that.
        
           | 1shooner wrote:
           | Speaking of free speech, can you name another foreign
           | interest that has managed to make it illegal in the US to
           | boycott it's companies?
        
             | dfxm12 wrote:
             | To add some context in case people aren't aware:
             | https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20181218-texas-teacher-
             | fir...
        
             | Retric wrote:
             | "Texas enacted a law in May 2017 prohibiting state agencies
             | from signing contracts with companies that boycott Israel."
             | 
             | I'm not particularly happy about that law or similar ones
             | in other states, but what you said is inaccurate.
        
               | asadotzler wrote:
               | There's nothing inaccurate about what he said. These laws
               | make it illegal for Americans from boycotting Israel. As
               | an American state employee, organizing a boycott against
               | Israel will get you fired or arrested because allowing it
               | would be breaking the law.
        
               | ithkuil wrote:
               | There is an interesting caveat in the law: it only
               | applies to boycotts against u.s. allies that are promoted
               | or imposed by intergovernmental organizations (IGOs)
               | 
               | The moment anybody else in the world stops boycotting
               | Israel then finally Texas citizens will be fully free to
               | boycott Israel
        
               | Retric wrote:
               | Nope, being illegal means something else. Nobody is going
               | to be fined or go to jail for openly boycotting Israel.
               | An amusement park can boycott Israel, they can say so in
               | big bold letters on their commercials etc, and the state
               | isn't going to do anything.
               | 
               | Therefore All companies _ARE_ allowed to "boycott energy
               | companies, discriminate against firearm entities or
               | associations, or boycott Israel" https://texasattorneygen
               | eral.gov/sites/default/files/images/...
               | 
               | Not doing business is something else. States regularly
               | prohibit companies over 500 employees from signing
               | specific contracts, that doesn't make it illegal to be a
               | company with over 500 employees.
        
           | asadotzler wrote:
           | Like the kind of free speech you get when Israel's lobby
           | drafts and helps pass laws that making boycotts of Israel
           | illegal?
        
             | Retric wrote:
             | That's incorrect. There's zero US laws that make it illegal
             | to boycott Israel.
             | 
             | Open a carwash in Texas and you can put up big posers
             | saying you're boycotting Israel and the state isn't going
             | to do crap. There are state laws that prohibit state
             | agencies from contracting such companies, but that's a
             | different question and only really applies to a small
             | percentage of companies.
             | 
             | If you disagree try and post full text of the actual
             | legislation it's completely clear what's going on.
        
               | Levitz wrote:
               | Boycotting Israel is illegal for any company that works
               | with state agencies.
               | 
               | It's way more restrictive, yes. It's still surreal to me.
        
               | its_ethan wrote:
               | It's illegal for any company that works with state
               | agencies to boycott any of our allies.. Israel is a
               | common example because most (all?) countries surrounding
               | it in the middle east try to sneak in Israel boycott
               | terms into every little contract, so it's the most
               | common.
               | 
               | But the same is true if someone wanted to boycott Canada.
               | That company wouldn't be able to work/contract with state
               | agencies.
               | 
               | In what way is that surreal or surprising?
        
               | Retric wrote:
               | The distinction might seem subtle, but even then it's not
               | illegal.
               | 
               | Also it's not every contract between companies and the
               | state. Texas uses 10+ employees companies and 100,000+$
               | contracts as the minimum threshold before language must
               | be added to the contract during the terms of the
               | contract.
               | 
               | But after signing such a contract the company is still
               | only bound by a contract. Breaking contracts happens all
               | the time it's not illegal. Excluding Fraud etc it becomes
               | a civil rather than a criminal matter.
        
         | ajross wrote:
         | A message being on a billboard or in an advertisement on
         | YouTube doesn't make it "propaganda", though. In fact there a
         | very large constituency[1] for pro-Israel policymaking right
         | here in the United States, and they want you to know what they
         | think and why, and are willing to spend money to do it.
         | 
         | Now, you clearly don't agree with them. I don't either, in at
         | least some aspects[2]. But our beef with the AIPAC and the
         | Israel lobby isn't with a "propaganda" organization run by the
         | Israeli government. It's a _POLITICAL_ fight with our fellow
         | americans, and we shouldn 't conflate the two.
         | 
         | [1] Likely larger than in Israel proper, in fact, both in
         | headcount and budget.
         | 
         | [2] Though I stop way, way short of the eliminationist
         | sloganeering that has taken over a lot of the left. Handing the
         | region From the River to the Sea over to a Palestinian-
         | controlled army would be far more horrifying than anything
         | happening in Gaza today, and I really don't think that people
         | understand how intractably violent the situation in the Levand
         | really is.
        
           | nerdjon wrote:
           | I struggle with not calling this propaganda:
           | 
           | https://www.reddit.com/r/boston/comments/18skzb0/ah_behold_o.
           | ..
           | 
           | https://www.boston25news.com/news/local/new-billboards-
           | along...
        
             | ajross wrote:
             | Then you have a somewhat unconventional personal definition
             | for "propaganda". Almost always people use that word to
             | imply something clandestine, misleading, or both.
             | 
             | What you showed is a paid advertisement from a US-
             | registered 501(c)(3) nonprofit, JewBelong, with public
             | accounting on all donations, and a relatively clear mandate
             | for how it spends its money.
             | 
             | Again, you're simply saying that a (really only slightly
             | edgy) billboard paid for by your fellow americans with
             | their own money and aimed at changing your opinion via
             | argumentation should be disallowed as "propaganda" simply
             | because you disagree with it (and again: I disagree with it
             | too!).
             | 
             | Tough love: of the dueling philosophies at play here, yours
             | is by far the most dangerous. Let people argue with you,
             | for crying out loud.
        
               | nerdjon wrote:
               | I do not believe that is the case, you seem to have a
               | more narrow view of propaganda.
               | 
               | Just look at the Webster definition: https://www.merriam-
               | webster.com/dictionary/propaganda
               | 
               | What you describe is one form of propaganda but not the
               | only one.
               | 
               | Would you agree that Rosy the Riveter was Propaganda? Or
               | this one https://www.archives.gov/files/exhibits/powers-
               | of-persuasion...
               | 
               | Both very famous pieces of propaganda the US put out
               | during War. Neither of them are misleading. They were put
               | out to encourage people to take an action.
        
               | ajross wrote:
               | Then maybe cite the definition you're using? And explain
               | why it doesn't fit every kind of opinion broadcasting.
               | Like, are flyers for a protest "propaganda"? Is grafitti
               | propaganda? Is writing an opinion essay propaganda?
               | Hosting a blog propaganda? Where does it stop?
        
               | nerdjon wrote:
               | Do you cite a definition for every word you use? Of
               | course not. I am using the definition as defined by
               | Webster and every other source I can find.
               | 
               | I am using it the same way that the pieces I referenced,
               | were also considered propaganda.
               | 
               | I am using the excepted actual definition of Propaganda
               | and there is zero reason to expect I need to define
               | otherwise. That is just not a normal expectation when
               | communicating. You having your own definition that does
               | not follow the accepted definitions of the word with
               | examples, is not my problem.
               | 
               | You also didn't answer my question about rosy the riveter
               | which if we would consider that propaganda (which it is
               | considered propaganda) I would consider the billboards
               | propaganda.
        
               | pvg wrote:
               | _Like, are flyers for a protest "propaganda"? Is grafitti
               | propaganda?_
               | 
               | They easily can be. Same with opinion broadcasting. It's
               | not a matter of some strict definition, just whether you
               | prefer a negative connotation with "propaganda" and how
               | you feel about the thing being propagandized given that
               | the negative connotation is the most common English
               | usage.
        
               | ajross wrote:
               | That was exactly my point. The use of "propaganda" by
               | nerdjon really just means "an opinion I disagree with".
        
               | nerdjon wrote:
               | That is quite a simplistic view.
               | 
               | Generally, Propaganda is used to sway opinion, get
               | action, or similar when people may not be inclined a
               | certain way on their own.
               | 
               | Ask yourself this: if there was not opposition to what
               | Israel is doing right now, would they have made these
               | billboards. Most likely no.
               | 
               | Would Rosie the Riveter happen if there was not a need
               | for Woman in the workforce during the war?
               | 
               | Could keep giving examples, but you get the idea.
               | 
               | There are plenty of examples out there of established
               | propaganda that isn't misleading or negative. It depends
               | on the message they are trying to send and the action
               | they are looking for.
        
               | ajross wrote:
               | > sway opinion, get action, or similar when people may
               | not be inclined a certain way on their own.
               | 
               | This is tiresome and seems like it's in bad faith. Once
               | more: that's just a definition for "argument". You can
               | apply it to "propaganda" if you insist, but I can only
               | repeat that this is not the way others interpret it.
               | 
               | You don't go around calling your friends propagandists
               | when they try to sway your opinion, so don't do it here
               | just because you dislike seeing billboards by Jewish
               | advocacy groups.
        
               | ithkuil wrote:
               | The broader meaning of propaganda then just means
               | "spreading ideas to further a cause". If that's true then
               | it would be a neutral word.
               | 
               | But "propaganda" is not a neutral word in practice. It
               | implies something intentionally misleading.
               | 
               | I don't think expressing concern about Hamas is
               | propaganda.
               | 
               | If the billboard said (or implied) "all Palestinians are
               | Hamas terrorists" that would be propaganda
        
               | realreality wrote:
               | > Almost always people use that word to imply something
               | clandestine, misleading, or both.
               | 
               | No, propaganda is often quite blatant. Look at the
               | posters from both of the World Wars, depicting US enemies
               | as vicious, inhuman monsters.
               | 
               | Even the "Rosie the Riveter" and Uncle Sam imagery is
               | propaganda.
               | 
               | Propaganda can be any sort of one-sided media used to
               | manipulate public opinion. It doesn't necessarily have to
               | be banned, but people need to learn more media literacy
               | to recognize it.
        
               | anigbrowl wrote:
               | Don't know about other countries, but in the Bay Area a
               | bunch of those billboards have been vandalized/edited by
               | non-Zionist Jewish groups.
               | 
               | Anyway, advertising media are antithetical to debate,
               | which presumes approximately equal access to an audience
               | to lay out two or more competing ideas at once. You can't
               | argue with a billboard, you can only rent another
               | billboard, and pretty soon you have billboards
               | everywhere. This is a garbage concept of political
               | discourse.
        
         | 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
         | > I find it quite concerning just how much propaganda the US
         | seems to get from Israel.
         | 
         | How do you know how much we get from Israel relative to others?
        
         | zardo wrote:
         | > Regardless of what is going on right now, I don't understand
         | how this much power over the US was ever deemed acceptable?
         | 
         | US politicians can direct funds to Israel and Israel can
         | support them or attack their rivals.
        
           | octopoc wrote:
           | More like, Israel can spend some of that money to keep the
           | money flow coming, kind of like a parasite. The rest it can
           | use for its own interests.
        
         | ravenstine wrote:
         | On the other side of town where I live, billboards appeared
         | with slogans like "Be pro-Semitic." This happened almost
         | immediately after the latest conflict involving Israel began.
         | So I can't just be against anti-Semites, but I have to be _pro_
         | Jewish ethnicity? Interesting. There was also one stating that
         | anti-zionism is anti-Semitic; I guess my Jewish friends and
         | family who are not Zionists didn 't get the memo.
         | 
         | I can't prove that these are somehow connected to funding from
         | Israel, but it seemed like these billboards were ready to go at
         | a moment's notice.
         | 
         | As far as why we deem foreign propaganda as acceptable, I like
         | to think that we play dumb about it in part so we can
         | strategically point it out when it is in the favor of
         | politicians and/or elites. Remember how Russian propaganda
         | supposedly got Trump elected even though it was going on during
         | prior years when the establishment insisted on the integrity of
         | the elections? On the other hand, maybe we are just dumb.
        
           | nerdjon wrote:
           | > I can't prove that these are somehow connected to funding
           | from Israel, but it seemed like these billboards were ready
           | to go at a moment's notice.
           | 
           | Right, that is what we got in Boston. The timing is just too
           | convenient.
           | 
           | Whether or not it is from Israel themselves or funding here
           | for Israel is kinda a moot point when both have the same
           | purpose: Propaganda for a foreign government.
        
             | pvg wrote:
             | _Whether or not it is from Israel themselves or funding
             | here for Israel is kinda a moot point_
             | 
             | It's not at all a moot point and you're coming pretty close
             | to a generic 'dual loyalties' trope.
        
               | jedimind wrote:
               | If there is overwhelming evidence for a claim, it's
               | absurd to smear it as "trope". So when Nancy Pelosi says:
               | "If the capital crumbles to the ground,one thing that
               | will remain is our commitment to Israel"[0] that's
               | because she has in fact dual loyalty, to dismiss that as
               | "trope" is to dismiss & deny reality.
               | 
               | Some of "our" politicians work overtime for israel's
               | interests and neglect their actual job and obligations
               | towards America.
               | 
               | [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=53x_zrkJwDs
        
         | shrubble wrote:
         | Wait until you read up on NUMEC and Rafael Eitan.
        
         | ein0p wrote:
         | Do you find it concerning that no presidential candidate can
         | even pass the primary without first kissing the ring of AIPAC?
         | That Zionist lobby openly attacks insufficiently pro-Zionist
         | candidates and then openly brags when they lose elections? With
         | Zionist lobby trying to outlaw any criticism of Israel in
         | direct violation of 1st amendment? Etc, etc. IDK about others,
         | but I think this is insane.
        
           | nerdjon wrote:
           | 100% yes.
           | 
           | TBH when I said "propaganda" I was grouping a lot of that
           | under that when I should have been more specific.
           | 
           | But that and similar things is what I was referring to with
           | "I don't understand how this much power over the US was ever
           | deemed acceptable".
           | 
           | I remember seeing the articles about them funding the
           | campaign of someone opposing someone else who had been
           | critical if Israel. I don't remember which state or what
           | position, but it wasn't just a one off either.
        
             | leoh wrote:
             | What the actual fuck
        
             | dfxm12 wrote:
             | AIPAC is one such group. Here's an article about their
             | spending in 2022:
             | https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2022/11/american-israel-
             | pub...
             | 
             | and also a story from earlier this year:
             | https://www.politico.com/news/2024/03/03/aipac-israel-
             | spendi...
             | 
             | The MO is basically to try and defeat democrats in
             | primaries who aren't giving carte blanche in terms of
             | spending or support. If their candidate wins the primary,
             | it doesn't matter much who wins the general election, since
             | they have support of R's.
        
         | jimbob45 wrote:
         | _like I found out recently apparently the Boston police
         | regularly go over to Israel for training?_
         | 
         | That's really common for most countries on earth though[0].
         | Gaining exposure and experience from other countries is very
         | valuable for police forces.
         | 
         | [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_Enforcement_
         | ...
        
         | StriverGuy wrote:
         | AIPAC is dwarfed in comparison to some other countries in terms
         | of wielding influence. Just look at how much Qatar has spent
         | trying to influence the top universities in the world.
        
         | spamizbad wrote:
         | Weirdest thing about their propaganda is that it seems squarely
         | aimed at older wealthier Americans and politicians. The amount
         | of content produced targeted at anyone under the age of 40 is
         | much smaller and less sophisticated. There's this narrative
         | that Israel is "losing the propaganda war" but I think they're
         | just targeting it towards major stakeholders. We're not the
         | intended audience of the billboard - it's the editorial writer,
         | the business leader, the member of congress (and their staff).
         | 
         | The Israel / Palestine conflict is one of those low-valence
         | issues with the general public where a politician rarely gets
         | punished for voting one way or another with the notable
         | exception of cash lobbying and super PACs for/against a given
         | candidate.
        
         | downWidOutaFite wrote:
         | It's crazy that AIPAC is not registered as a foreign agent.
         | They funnel orders directly from Netanyahu to our politicians.
        
           | rcpt wrote:
           | The trick is to have influence over the laws that define
           | "foreign agent"
        
           | arandomusername wrote:
           | There was one president that wanted to change that. But then
           | something happened
        
       | odiroot wrote:
       | I guess two can play that game https://www.microsoft.com/en-
       | us/security/security-insider/in...
        
       | SimbaOnSteroids wrote:
       | The wild part about this, at least to me, is the wholesale
       | incompetence demonstrated by Israel in this regard. If I couldn't
       | google the talking points the bots make and see Israeli officials
       | saying the same things, one would think these bots were Iranians
       | acting with the intent to make Israel look bad.
        
         | refulgentis wrote:
         | It's a very interesting thing, it demonstrates something
         | uncomfortable & scary to me as a goy Zionist, who hangs out in
         | a private, predominantly Jewish, space.
         | 
         | Note the biggest word in the cloud: UNRWA. All my confirmation
         | bias was in one direction in October. The oddly dissonant and
         | desperate messaging you'd see made things extremely difficult
         | to maintain that, like, you have to be of a very specific
         | mindset to see message after message about the evil UN and not
         | say, "uh, did we go off the rails somewhere?"
         | 
         | (n.b. this was in a lefty Jewish space, broadly denigrating
         | governmental institutions isn't a usual virtue signal)
         | 
         | Going back to the beginning, there's an uncomfortable
         | willingness/ignorance of Overton window widening, in a way that
         | reduces sympathy rather than engenders it, and all of a sudden,
         | otherwise kind people are engaging in rank racism*,
         | glorification of destruction, and extreme conspiracies**.
         | 
         | * lots of "no such thing as innocent Palestineans",
         | "Palestineans love _redacted_ ", when questioned, turns into
         | "it's not racist if they're not a race, and they aren't because
         | bla bla bla"
         | 
         | ** Day after day after day of the bailey, "World Central
         | Kitchen was trying to smuggle terrorists", coupled to the motte
         | "Jose Andres held a barbecue buffet! Lol!"
        
           | sixQuarks wrote:
           | This is an enlightening comment. Thanks for sharing
        
           | myth_drannon wrote:
           | * Assuming the comments came from Israelis/Jews. All the left
           | and right-wing channels are infiltrated with Iranian
           | agents(plenty of news on that topic in Haaretz/Walla). They
           | are causing rift and radicalization in society.
           | 
           | That's a solvable tech problem to shut it down.
           | Unfortunately, it's not a priority on a state level because
           | everyone is doing it.
        
             | cess11 wrote:
             | Really?
             | 
             | Closest I've seen would be campaigns like this,
             | https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/security-
             | aviation/2024-0... .
             | 
             | Then there's the stuff by IDF soldiers on TikTok, and the
             | stuff settlers put out.
             | 
             | I have the impression that the iranians don't need to do
             | stuff like that.
        
           | bawolff wrote:
           | > like, you have to be of a very specific mindset to see
           | message after message about the evil UN and not say, "uh, did
           | we go off the rails somewhere?"
           | 
           | I think saying "evil" anything is wrong. But the UN is still
           | a body made up of people, and like everything has its flaws.
           | Its done some things that have turned out great and truly
           | made the world a better place. Its done other things that
           | haven't worked out so well. I certainly don't think it is
           | above criticism.
        
             | refulgentis wrote:
             | For the record, I agree wholeheartedly. It's hard to word
             | these things. I hope it's clear the meaning is short of
             | "The UN/UNWRA is above all criticism", happy to explicate
             | at length if it isn't (I wouldn't be surprised, at all,
             | anything I write on this looks like an unnecessarily mousey
             | person's verbal diarrhea to me :) )
        
               | bawolff wrote:
               | That's fair, i maybe overinterpreted.
               | 
               | I can understand why Israelis might be suspicious of the
               | UN. The relationship between UN and Israel seems kind of
               | fraught in a way that isn't true of pretty much any other
               | country. The not allowing israel to fully vote until 2010
               | (edit: 2014), the (arguably) unequal focus only Israel's
               | human rights record relative to other countries, and the
               | whole UNRWA being totally different with different rules
               | than any other refugee group, all make israel a bit
               | unique in its relationship to the UN. I could easily
               | understand how someone from Israel might feel that the UN
               | treats them differently from other countries and is
               | perhaps biased against them.
        
               | refulgentis wrote:
               | +1, the thing that jumps to mind is how "U N Schmu En"
               | dates back to the...50s? I was disappointed people were
               | 'shocked' by Gvir tweeting it because it sounded new. I
               | am no fan of Gvir, but again, goes back to what a complex
               | mess there is.
               | 
               | (source https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Um-Shmum)
        
               | FireBeyond wrote:
               | > The not allowing israel to fully vote until 2010
               | 
               | You're not going to throw that out without reference to
               | how the US and Israel have consistently been the only
               | countries to oppose Palestinian UN membership and voting.
        
               | bawolff wrote:
               | I mean, i was trying to talk about why Israelis might
               | feel the UN is against them. That doesn't preclude
               | Palestinians feeling the same way.
               | 
               | It is possible to talk about why X might feel Y without
               | talking about why other groups might feel the same way or
               | even whether or not that feeling is justified.
               | 
               | Talking about motivations is different than determining
               | what is "fair"
        
               | ToucanLoucan wrote:
               | > the (arguably) unequal focus only Israel's human rights
               | record relative to other countries
               | 
               | Two thoughts on this:
               | 
               | Firstly, every time a country is getting criticized for
               | it's human rights abuses it, like clockwork, raises the
               | spectre of being "unjustly singled out" about it's human
               | rights abuses. To be clear, I would very much like every
               | country on earth that engages in human rights abuses
               | prosecuted for it, including mine, and specifically every
               | U.S. President that's still currently alive since they
               | are ALL guilty of them in varying degrees. And that way,
               | we can't be accused of biases.
               | 
               | Secondly, I believe it's fair, even if we are biased
               | against Israel in this way, to be biased since it has the
               | rather unique position of being a state that exists
               | solely because of and by the authority of the West. It is
               | a colonialist project and has been from it's inception
               | and I don't think you can take this situation on fully
               | without acknowledging that fact.
               | 
               | Debating whether it should or shouldn't exist is rather
               | moot at this point because it does, and tons of people
               | live there who have committed no crime and done no wrong.
               | That said, it is at the end all, an ethno-nationalist
               | state built on a foundation of war crimes too numerous to
               | count, that is currently incrementing as they barrage an
               | utterly impotent neighbor to death, and it is doing so
               | with the enthusiastic encouragement of FAR, FAR too many
               | colonial powers. Maybe that's enough to say, ethically,
               | that all of it's citizens should be displaced, maybe not.
               | I do not know the solution. My point is that _Israel 's
               | existence, in entirety, is violence_ perpetrated against
               | every country it borders with, it wars with, and who's
               | land it sits upon. That cannot be ignored.
        
               | pessimizer wrote:
               | > Firstly, every time a country is getting criticized for
               | it's human rights abuses it, like clockwork, raises the
               | spectre of being "unjustly singled out" about it's human
               | rights abuses.
               | 
               | My favorite one of these is when South Africa would say
               | that the only reason people were angry about Apartheid
               | was their obvious "anti-Boer prejudice." Which sounds
               | stupid, until you remember that the British rounded up
               | Boers and put them into concentration camps. It's still
               | stupid, but if you accept the premise that being abused
               | gives you the right to abuse, it's a claim as legitimate
               | as any other of that type.
               | 
               | > My point is that Israel's existence, in entirety, is
               | violence perpetrated against every country it borders
               | with, it wars with, and who's land it sits upon.
               | 
               | They could have just torn down the walls, and still can.
               | Israelis can call the resulting country Israel, and
               | Palestinians can call it Palestine. It only requires both
               | groups to give up any dreams of theocracy. What made the
               | PLO and Arafat so distasteful to Israeli power players
               | was the fact that they were secular, reasonable, and
               | making moral arguments, not theological ones. People
               | whose goal was to wipe out the Palestinians _vastly_
               | preferred Hamas.
        
             | g15jv2dp wrote:
             | > I think saying "evil" anything is wrong
             | 
             | Really? I think the nazi party was evil, for example. Are
             | you saying I'm wrong?
        
             | mrcartmeneses wrote:
             | Waste of time point scoring?
        
           | StockHuman wrote:
           | Out of idle curiosity, how did you arrive at Zionism from a
           | non-jewish and leftist background? That has to be one of the
           | rarest identities to simultaneously associate with.
        
             | anoncareer0212 wrote:
             | Thank you for asking, it's sublime to see that you're
             | unique in others eyes, very hard to see yourself
             | 
             | Let me really blow your mind: also, raised very
             | conservative Catholic, didn't do Confirmation, then was
             | Muslim for about 6 years
             | 
             | It's all a long story. Catholic, LGBTQ stuff rubbed me the
             | wrong way and in some of the deepest grace I've seen, my
             | religious educator encourage it.
             | 
             | Muslim, I was essentially on my own once I turned 15
             | (abusive and absentee parents) and transferred from
             | Catholic school to public school (save $$), and the most
             | welcoming people were foreign, the rest had been in the
             | same classes for a decade. They didn't prostelyize, it was
             | fun going there on Friday nights to play dodge ball, it was
             | little incremental work to show up earlier and it felt
             | good.
             | 
             | Zionist...I swear to God there wasn't a single negative
             | word about Jews or Israel or other religions at either of
             | the 2 mosques I went to. There was a quiet understanding
             | that Palestinians were hurt and that it was a bit
             | melodramatic at times, given they had structural issues on
             | their own side.
             | 
             | In general, I'm an inveterate both sides er, and I'm
             | guessing knowing a lot of avowed older Zionist as well as
             | Muslims makes me feel secure in "ugh there's some
             | extremists / ignorant people in group X" rather than "wow
             | group X is inherently evil"
             | 
             | And now you're making me think maybe the parents have more
             | to do with it than I realize. It took a _lot_ to finally
             | say...wait, no...what they 're doing is wrong and I don't
             | owe them anything. As long as I'm thinking things out and
             | rational, I'm doing my best. Adds to the comfort with
             | tendatiousness/both sides and confidence in holding to it.
             | 
             | (Ran out of posts on main, so this is from my old backup
             | when I was gainfully employed at FAANG)
        
               | StockHuman wrote:
               | Ah! You're your own Jerusalem; ever in the middle. :)
               | 
               | That does make more sense: unless I read you wrong,
               | leftism wasn't a real sway here - and that's easier to
               | square away. Leftist Zionism is (as far as I can tell),
               | almost only advanced by Jews.
               | 
               | Neat, though I'm perhaps confused as to how you might
               | even arrive at Zionism (a rather polar position to take).
        
           | 616c wrote:
           | It's amusing you can self identify this way without much
           | hesitation. My personal experience with colleagues and family
           | on both sides of the regional, religious, lijguistic, and
           | cultural debate is that if you talked about being a non-
           | Muslim supporter of political Islamists or up to including
           | Hamas or similar groups, so anywhere in that continuum
           | inclusive, few in Western or Israeli media will hesistate in
           | labelling you in a way common with these talking points: a
           | terrorist.
           | 
           | So good luck to you, but I'm not surprised you'd stay private
           | But my anecdata (or some may call life experience) tell me
           | you'd be fine and fare well where a similarly extreme
           | position on the opposite end of the spectrum would cost you a
           | lot personally and professionally. I wish we all reflected in
           | the West or in tje region or conflict area, well, why is
           | that?
           | 
           | For the record since I inevitably get routinely called an
           | anti-Semite anyway: I think Hamas and groups like them are
           | vile, but many in the region opposing them don't take the
           | high road by comparison either. Im nkt sure if its recent or
           | monitoring that become easier and more economical, but that
           | means their opponents with this crap and other tactics have
           | really screwed up. This HN post further supports my cynicism
           | and disappointment.
        
         | HL33tibCe7 wrote:
         | This is presumably just the tip of the iceberg
        
         | xkcd-sucks wrote:
         | Even the spooky spy and torture people choose the crappy low
         | bidding implementation partner
        
         | CommanderData wrote:
         | At this point they have a wiki or discord somewhere where they
         | share talking points between each other.
         | 
         | Someone from their group is clearly thinking ahead and
         | automating all of them out of a job :)
        
       | 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
       | If there are influence operations online is it ethical to counter
       | them with your own? Obviously none would be preferable.
       | 
       | We need to better define what propaganda _is_. To me it 's
       | misleading or false information with the purpose of facilitating
       | a political outcome. Or deceptive information not meant for
       | selling a product.
        
         | shmatt wrote:
         | So buy comments on Israeli MK Facebook accounts? I think the
         | only ones that would move any needle here is Meta profits on
         | DAU and the company being paid to run the bots. You think your
         | congressman goes to FB comments to decide how they're voting?
        
           | 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
           | Anywhere a voting public gets their information.
           | Unfortunately that means FB comments. Could you answer my
           | question though? Would it be ethical to counter an influence
           | operation with your own?
        
         | kelthuzad wrote:
         | prop*a*gan*da /,prap@'gand@/ noun 1. information, especially of
         | a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a
         | particular political cause or point of view.
         | 
         | This definition is good enough, I don't see why it would need a
         | redefinition.
        
           | 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
           | Sure. But why does it seem like everyone here calls
           | everything propaganda all of the time?
           | 
           | I think those who overuse the term ought to explain it in
           | their own words.
        
             | NoMoreNicksLeft wrote:
             | Propaganda is media designed to manipulate your opinion,
             | without going to the trouble of rationally convincing you
             | to change your mind. And yeh, most of what we see day to
             | day is propaganda. If anything, everyone's under-using that
             | word.
        
               | 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
               | How does propaganda differ from advertisement?
        
       | davesque wrote:
       | Criticizing Israel is the like the "Anti Social Social Club"
       | t-shirt of our time. I really don't get why people find this news
       | surprising or interesting.
       | 
       | What's that? A political organization or world government is
       | astroturfing on social media you say? And they're targeting
       | lawmakers directly? Well, clutch my pearls!
        
         | HL33tibCe7 wrote:
         | > Criticizing Israel is the like the "Anti Social Social Club"
         | t-shirt of our time
         | 
         | Nice bit of deflection. It's not even true, either. People are
         | being blacklisted from companies for speaking out against
         | Israel, their faces being paraded through streets with threats
         | made against them. Speaking out against Israel comes with
         | significant risk, particularly for politicians and journalists
         | - the proof is in the pudding, when you look at their insanely
         | soft-balled coverage of anything Israel does. Anyway...
         | 
         | > A political organization or world government is astroturfing
         | on social media you say? And they're targeting lawmakers
         | directly? Well, clutch my pearls!
         | 
         | Sure, if it was Russia or China I wouldn't be surprised. But
         | it's Israel. The US gives Israel $1,000,000,000s and
         | $1,000,000,000s of dollars per year and is supposedly Israel's
         | closest "ally". _That_ is what makes this interesting.
         | 
         | I don't really know why I'm bothering replying to you, given
         | your incredibly thinly veiled bias. But here I am nonetheless.
        
           | davesque wrote:
           | > given your incredibly thinly veiled bias
           | 
           | What bias is that?
        
             | mrcartmeneses wrote:
             | This troll is hungry. I forget the name of the playbook,
             | but it's so obvious it's painful
        
       | zdragnar wrote:
       | I was part of a company that "hunted" terrorist groups that did
       | this. Start with sympathizers publicly posting on Twitter, find
       | who they are connected to, and fan out and cross reference to the
       | people who are either organizing violence or running drug
       | operations for funding.
       | 
       | I assume most countries with designs in foreign politics do much
       | the same.
        
         | elfbargpt wrote:
         | Can you share what company that is? Palantir?
        
       | jjtheblunt wrote:
       | it would be interesting to know how global politics and wars
       | would change if the US were to stop shoveling money to foreign
       | countries.
        
         | mrcartmeneses wrote:
         | Much, much more peaceful. Once parties lack the resources for
         | war and have to come to peace, it often takes hold in
         | unexpectedly strong ways
        
           | jjtheblunt wrote:
           | i expect the same.
        
           | yonixwm wrote:
           | It really doesn't seem so when we experience Russia doing the
           | opposite. It only seem to work if both parties to the
           | conflict are democracies where meaningless war can put a toll
           | on the government
        
           | JumpCrisscross wrote:
           | > _Much, much more peaceful_
           | 
           | The entire history of our species runs counter to this. The
           | most peaceful periods are uni or bipolar dynamic. _Pax
           | Americana_ is statistically meaningful [1].
           | 
           | > _Once parties lack the resources for war_
           | 
           | Generally speaking, impoverishment increases violence.
           | 
           | [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pax_Americana
        
       | cuku0078 wrote:
       | Everytime Iam reading manupilations in social media I remind the
       | documentation The Dissident
        
       | greentxt wrote:
       | Crtl+f "NAFO" > zero hits
       | 
       | So I want to say that it's not entirely clear to me that social
       | media peer pressure campaigns are not on occassion counter
       | productive. Automating it seems like it would be potentially
       | disasterous. At the end of the day, there's much we still dont
       | know about psychology, particularly when it comes to efforts at
       | online persuasion.
        
       | aszantu wrote:
       | i recommend looking at 9gag.com news... these places are flooded
       | with propaganda from all sides, it's impossible to not get
       | influenced...
        
       | kats wrote:
       | https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/11/nsa-americans-...
        
       | SrslyJosh wrote:
       | Israel: The "ally" that acts like an enemy. =)
       | 
       | (Alternately, the client state that controls its patron.)
        
         | CommanderData wrote:
         | Once a glorified US military base in the middle east served to
         | expand US interests has become a parasitic entities and
         | controls the host.
         | 
         | The upside is the relationship is symbiotic, US expands
         | Israel's borders, wreaking havock in the region, but tests US's
         | war apparatus under "defence" and prevents a unified
         | Arab/Asia/Indo state.
         | 
         | Israel gets free reign to ignore international law, billions,
         | while touting some story about a 'promised land'.
        
       | issafram wrote:
       | You know what else garners support from US lawmakers? AIPAC. They
       | give money directly to members of the house and Senate. And that
       | is somehow considered ok.
        
       | bamboozled wrote:
       | 2024, dammed if you do, dammed if you don't.
        
       | gptretdevnull wrote:
       | There is zero need for Israel to garner support from the US.
       | 
       | The point of this campaign was to highlight "fake social accounts
       | tricking" "Black lawmakers and young progressives" (>Black
       | lawmakers in the U.S., particularly Democrats., >young Americans,
       | >Black Americans) because at least someone wants them to think
       | that they, their teams and their followers are weak & easy
       | targets, thus reducing their perceived competence and credibility
       | without the necessity of success of the campaign itself, except
       | that similar campaigns existed for pro-Russia and fuck-Russia
       | content all while celebrating Ukraine's destruction, sorry, fight
       | for independence, officially.
       | 
       | These campaigns are part of a cluster. They are not meant to
       | merely polarize but to make some people resign and follow public/
       | the states' opinions much quicker than they normally would. At
       | the same time, buffs, journalists, educated people and the
       | rational kind spend more time sieving through information sources
       | that are bloated.
       | 
       | I'm not saying this is a conspiracy, hell no, it's entanglement,
       | it's marketing, it's the business of politics and national
       | establishments and companies challenging each other to test
       | ludicrous strategies to sway public opinion. It's all from the
       | modern "The Drump" playbook. Just imagine how at least enough
       | people who fall for campaigns like this, feel when they are told
       | the truth. How many will get angry, really? How many are going to
       | start gearing and studying up? Who are they to trust if their own
       | government supports governments who have the need to run
       | campaigns like this?
       | 
       | This whole "making people support conflicting causes" has been
       | working pretty damn well for the (alt)Right, who is desperately
       | trying to diminish young peoples' independence and turn them all
       | into obedient followers to sell their 'stones are really hard'
       | books and narratives and time on screen.
       | 
       | It's just dozens of millions but that's the few you need make the
       | elected look your way when they are ready to pay2win "at all
       | cost".
       | 
       | So how can we fight this with engineering? We need analysis run
       | by red and blue teams from universities worldwide. I mean it's
       | 2024. The scientific community does it, but their time is
       | dictated by the scientific method. Or are there live projects
       | already?
        
       | GenerocUsername wrote:
       | Always makes me wonder how many false threads exist on other
       | platforms, even this one. There are many chats happening in this
       | thread that seem oddly written. Either excentrics, or automatons.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-06-05 23:01 UTC)