iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Max Blumenthal

Max Blumenthal

Posted January 5, 2009 | 08:17 AM (EST)

Why Aren't More Americans Dancing To Israel's Tune?


Almost as soon as the first Israeli missile struck the Gaza Strip, a veteran cheering squad suited up to support the home team. "Israel is so scrupulous about civilian life," Charles Krauthammer claimed in the Washington Post. Echoing Krauthammer, Alan Dershowitz called the Israeli attack on Gaza, "Perfectly 'Proportionate.'" And in the New York Times, Israeli historian Benny Morris described his country's airstrikes as "highly efficient."

While the cheerleaders testified to the superior moral fiber of their team, the Palestinian civilian death toll mounted. Israeli missiles tore at least fifteen Palestinian police cadets to shreds at a graduation ceremony, blew twelve worshipers to pieces (including six children) while they left evening prayers at a mosque, flattened the elite American International School, killed five sisters while they slept in their beds, and liquidated 9 women and children in order to kill a single Hamas leader. So far, Israeli forces have killed at least 500 Gazans and wounded some two thousand, including hundreds of children. Yesterday, the IDF blanketed parts of Gaza with white phosphorus, a chemical weapon Saddam Hussein once deployed against Kurdish rebels.

"It was Israel at its best," Yossi Klein Halevi declared in the New Republic.

By New Year's Day, Israel's cheering squad had turned the opinion pages of major American newspapers into their own personal romper room. Of all the editorial contributions published by the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, and the New York Times since the Israel's war on Gaza began, to my knowledge only one offered a skeptical view of the assault. But that editorial, by Israeli novelist David Grossman, contained not a single word about the Palestinian casualties of IDF attacks. Even while calling for a cease fire, Grossman promised, "We can always start shooting again."

Israeli public relations agents fanned out to broadcast studios from the US to Europe, fulfilling an aggressive strategy conceived after the country's catastrophic 2006 attack on Lebanon. An analysis by Israel's foreign ministry of eight hours of coverage across international broadcast media concluded that Israeli representatives received a whopping 58 minutes of airtime compared to only 19 minutes for Palestinians. "Quite a few outlets are very favorable to Israel, namely by showing [its] suffering. I am sure it is a result of the new co-ordination," said Major Avital Leibovich, an IDF spokesperson who has become a fixture on cable news in the past weeks.

But while Israel's PR machine cranked its Mighty Wurlitzer to full blast, drowning out all opposing voices with its droning sound, a surprisingly substantial portion of the American public decided to dance to its own tune. According to a December 31 Rasmussen poll (so far the only measure of US opinion on the Gaza assault), while Americans remained overwhelmingly supportive of Israel, they were split almost evenly on the question of whether Israel should attack Gaza -- 44% in favor of the assault and 41% against it. The internals are even more remarkable.

While Republicans supported the assault on Gaza by a large margin, a predictable finding, only 31% of Democrats did. Members of the Democratic base thus stood in sharp contrast to most of their elected representatives (freshman Rep. Donna Edwards is a notable exception), who backed the latest Israeli assault in lockstep, and seem to support Israel no matter what it does. The rift between the progressive base and the party played out on Barack Obama's Change.gov site, which was deluged in recent days with demands for a statement condemning Israel's assault on Gaza.

So what accounts for the surprising trend in American opinion on Gaza? The proliferation of progressive online media and social networking sites could be a factor, but I have another theory: The same pundits who are cheerleading Israel's assault on Gaza once sold the occupation of Iraq to America, and with a nearly identical set of arguments. In their voices and those of the grim Israeli PR agents carted out for cable news, many Americans hear echoes of the Bush administration's most fantastical lies. When they see images of Gazans under withering bombardment, they flash back to Fallujah and the assorted horrors of Iraq. When they look at Israel, they see themselves during the darkest days of the Bush era.

Now, an increasing share of Americans know what Israel is doing to Gaza. And they reject it, even when Israel is "at its best."

Update: Israeli shells killed 42 women and children who tried to flee gunfire at a United Nation-run school, bringing the Gazan death toll to an estimated 600. 100 children have died as a result of the Israeli assault on Gaza, according to Save the Children.

Almost as soon as the first Israeli missile struck the Gaza Strip, a veteran cheering squad suited up to support the home team. "Israel is so scrupulous about civilian life," Charles Krauthammer claim...
Almost as soon as the first Israeli missile struck the Gaza Strip, a veteran cheering squad suited up to support the home team. "Israel is so scrupulous about civilian life," Charles Krauthammer claim...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 361
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (10 total)
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
10:23 AM on 01/12/2009
Mr. Blumenthal,

As you may see, from the comments on your article, "the American people" are speaking out.

The Congress of the United States, as is usually the case on most controversies, is way behind public opinion.

The House and the Senate have no problem at all, in passing resolutions in support of massacre, and genocide.

"The People" of the country, however, think otherwise.
apoyo
Micro-bio? Sounds serious.
05:07 PM on 01/11/2009
This genocide needs to be stopped. It is unconscionable.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Fein
Either everybody counts or nobody does.
01:14 PM on 01/11/2009
This war has gone a long way toward informing the American public of Israel/Aipac's progrom.

We need to seize the initiative, and force our legislators to break the connection. Yes we can.
12:03 PM on 01/11/2009
The majority Are . (especially in Congress and in the Media ) it will take a while to free the Americans from the Israeli Control .
01:37 AM on 01/11/2009
"Of all the editorial contributions published by the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, and the New York Times since the Israel's war on Gaza began, to my knowledge only one offered a skeptical view of the assault."

Maybe so, but these papers are eager to publish photos of carnage in Gaza. Hamas seems to have pretty good P.R. partners in the newsrooms.
overcat
My micro-bio is so full, it's bursting at the seam
07:18 PM on 01/11/2009
Utter bullshit.
05:14 PM on 01/08/2009
Israel simply wants to be left alone in peace so that they can continue their progress and productivity. At heart, they are builders, not destroyers; but if provoked, who can blame them for fighting back in any way they can in order to stop being picked at, picked at again and again. The Arab countries need to leave them alone....that's it! Simple.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
01:01 PM on 01/09/2009
No its not. Its the abused turned into the abuser, they are not builders they are using chenical weapons against a civilan population. I call that genocide, not building.
12:08 PM on 01/11/2009
Actually it is the Arabs (citizens not the coward Puppets) who want to be left alone without the US embassy telling them what to do and what should be their educational curriculum and what are their priorities . the US embassy runs the show in most Arab capitals . Condoleeza rice is like a teacher , and the Arab puppets are like children around her , you should see when they meet . there is even a song about it called shater shater in Youtube .
Israel has not yet finished the Big Project of zionist Organistion of 1919 in Paris when they had decided to control the Jordan River (done ) the Golan Heights (Done ) and the Litani river (south Lebanon Failed miserably twice because the Lebanese have read History . we want Bully arrogant Israel to leave us alone and END Its Occupation and allow the people in Gaza to live a normal life instead of subjecting them to a life of a ghetto , controlling their air , their land , their skies , and lock all the gates . how are they going to have an economy ?? how ??
06:08 PM on 01/06/2009
@chamberslee

}}}}
Are you saying the innocent people I listed above were not killed by Israel bombs? You say I am incorrect. Why? Are th reports wrong? Why? If you don't give a reason, then, it is because you say so.
{{{{{

I am saying that because HAMAS committed terrorism against Israel and then HAMAS placed their military equipment within crowded civilian areas, that makes HAMAS primarily responsible for the deaths of the innocent civilians.

This is fact....

Michale......
05:59 AM on 01/11/2009
Hamas is now a legitimate resistance against Israeli aggression.
12:12 PM on 01/11/2009
Absolutely ! the UN charter gives all people a right to resist Occupation . IF IN America people do not believe in resistance , remememer your Hero washington and how he fought the British Crown to be free from them .
hamas is fighting OCCUPATION , NO they have not left they only took away the settlers and subjected the people to inhumane conditions . they locked the gates and killed many and shoot sometimes while a car is moving killing everyone around that car , and destroyed homes and allowed crops to rot at the gates , locked the gates so people can not import food or fuel , reduced the electricity and clean watter . even their fishermen are targeted daily by the Israeli Gunships . AID was stopped 2 years ago , even Arabs are not allowed to help or else America will teach them a lesson . so how can you say they left Gaza .
05:31 PM on 01/06/2009
@chamberslee

}}}}
Terrorism is definded by those in power who make the rules. It is not applied objectively but in the interest of those in power at the detriment of the weaker group(s). If you believe it is applied objectively, then, there isno need wasting my time trying to convince otherwise.
}}}}}

Again, you are wrong.... I KNOW it's being applied objectively because I am applying it..

If you have some FACTS to dispute my facts, then let's see them...

}}}}}
Law is NEVER definded or used objectively. There are simply too many shades of gray, no black and white
}}}}}

Terrorism IS black and white..

Or are you saying that there is justification for terrorism???

Michale.....
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
chamberslee
05:48 PM on 01/06/2009
Here is an example of terrorism being applied in the interest of the Powers that be. The U.S. used Osama bin Laden's services, even trained him in warfare, when it was convenient.
05:53 PM on 01/06/2009
At the time, it was the appropriate thing to do... But, do you have any specific instances of Bin Laden using terrorism against the Soviets in Afghanistan??

Let me help you out...

This is the definition of terrorism...

"Terrorism is defined as ongoing and systematic attacks of violence specifically targeted against innocent civilian persons or property for the purpose of furthering a political, economical or ideological agenda."

Now, being OBJECTIVE, apply any act you think might be terrorism to this definition.

If it fits, it's terrorism. If it doesn't fit, it's not...

Let me know what you come up with..

Michale.....
12:13 PM on 01/11/2009
I have a strong feeling they are still together , otherwise they would have done something in Tel AViv or anything against israeli Businesses elsewhere in the world . (shops in Jumeira in Dubai are owned by a American zionist who contributed to Illegal settlments . )
12:32 PM on 01/11/2009
Terrorism is, indeed, black and white, but it amounts to the same thing-murder of innocents, to create "terror" and achieve a political agenda.
The definition of "terrorist" is not a matter of who has the smaller or the bigger instrument-Hamas is paper and comb terror compared to the Israeli government's philharmonic, state of the art orchestrated terror. They both seek to create terror and mayhem. The difference is that Hamas creates less mayhem than a Mexican drug cartel, and Israel is committing genocide.
What the world is now witnessing is state terrorism, designed not to "destroy Hamas" but to ratchet up the misery and terror of the Palestinians to the point where they will accept either perpetual subservience to their Israeli overlords (which will not happen) or eventually flee the Gaza strip, East Jerusalem and the West Bank.
04:49 PM on 01/06/2009
@chamberslee

}}}}}}
Would you be indifferent if your family members were killed for no reason at all--ALL of them, dead? Would you cite your justification if you had just lost your ENTIRE family, burned beyond recognition? If you went to the one place you were supposedly safe and IT was bombed--twice--killing innocent people who tired to get out of harms way?
}}}}}

Probably not, but introducing one's family into the equation brings emotional hysteria to a situation that already has too much...

}}}}
I just don't understand how one could be so insensitive to human suffering.
{{{{

Two and a half decades in field and I am still not "insensitive" to it.. But I DO look at things objectively because that is the best manner to operate to get things done.

And, objectively speaking, it's clear that HAMAS is at fault here...

Michale.....
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
chamberslee
05:28 PM on 01/06/2009
Israel is bringing families in to the equation, because it is killing women, children, police officers--anyone it wants to kill. The U.S., as always, is giving the green light. They are committing crimes that were once committed against them. That is what is crazy about this picture.
05:30 PM on 01/06/2009
Hamas is placing military equipment in crowded civilian areas...

This makes all the collateral damage the fault and the responsibility of Hamas.

Michale.....
04:38 PM on 01/06/2009
@ chamberslee

}}}}}
What Israel is doing, killing children in their beds, as they walk home from school, fits the definition of terrorism.
{{{{{

Sorry, this is not correct..

}}}}}
They seem willing to kill women and children and innocent males in order to kill one terrorist. They drop 1000lb bombs in the most densely populated place on the planet and, then, accuse Hamas for the civilian deaths. We are not stupid, please.
{{{{{

Again, you are wrong. Gaza is the SIXTH most densely populated area in the world, not the first. Secondly

"Terrorist organizations that hide behind civilians bear the primary responsibility for civilian casualties.
Should civilian casualties ensue from an attempt to shield combatants or a military objective, the ultimate responsibility lies with the belligerent placing innocent civilians at risk."

Dinstein,'Conduct of Hostilities under the Law of International Armed Conflict'

}}}}
The attack is disproportionate; that is the problem, not Israel definding itself.
{{{{

Proportionate is defined by the International Criminal Court (ROME Statute) as the amount of force necessary to eliminate the threat. Since missiles are still being fired, Israel has the right to continue AND escalate the use of force...

}}}}
I don't know who the terrorists are at this point. I do know something is terribly wrong when children and entire families are killed in the name of justice. And the media respond with indifference.
{{{{

As I have proven, those deaths are solely the responsibility of HAMAS...

Michale.....
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
chamberslee
04:48 PM on 01/06/2009
It is not correct, becuase you say it is not correct? Please. That is Israel's ploy: do not allow media that is not favorable to its position into Gaza, then, deny any unfavorable reports coming out of Gaza. Good try. Some of us still have a brain.
05:05 PM on 01/06/2009
No, it is not correct, because it is not correct..

It's like you saying that the sky is magenta hot pink... It's not correct and you saying it is correct, doesn't make it correct.

Terrorism has a set, definitive and objective definition. It is also applied objectively..

You can't simply make up your own definition of terrorism and then randomly and hysterically apply it to something or someone, simply because you don't like them or it...

Michale......
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
chamberslee
05:10 PM on 01/06/2009
"The amount of force necessary," I don't think you understand the law you are citing. In the U.S., for instance, which is similar to the international law, one has the legal right to defend oneself using only the amount of force necessary to do so (paraphase). For example, If you hit me in the face with your hand--as a result, I fear for my well-being--I have a right to defend myself. The amount of force I use, however, can only be equal to the assault against me. Therefore, I could wrestle you to the ground and call for help, letting the police take over. If I pull out a gun and shot you, I have committed a crime. Better yet, If you threw rocks at my house, which is nothing more than a nuance, and I grew tired and decided to go to your house and throw a bomb through the window, that is disproportionate force, and you will be charged with murder.



Firing rockets, which did not kill anyone, into Israel is wrong, but killing hundreds and wounding thousands more is disproportionate--as International that you are citing makes clear.
06:33 PM on 01/06/2009
"Our thumb is on the scale in favour of the defender", such that the magnitude of the response may exceed the degree of danger created by the initial attack"

" the personal interests of the aggressor are significantly diminished due to the aggressor"s culpability in launching the attack."

International Criminal Court, ROME STATUTE

This is the law..

}}}}}
Firing rockets, which did not kill anyone, into Israel is wrong, but killing hundreds and wounding thousands more is disproportionate--as International that you are citing makes clear.
{{{{

Cite????

Michale.....
03:58 PM on 01/06/2009
"Terrorist organizations that hide behind civilians bear the primary responsibility for civilian casualties.
Should civilian casualties ensue from an attempt to shield combatants or a military objective, the ultimate responsibility lies with the belligerent placing innocent civilians at risk."

Dinstein,'Conduct of Hostilities under the Law of International Armed Conflict'

A military target remains a legitimate military target, even if it is located in a civilian area.
"Civilians do not enjoy absolute immunity. Their presence will not render military objects immune from attack for the mere reason that it is impossible to bombard them without causing injury to the non-combatants."

Oppenheim's 'International Law'

The use of civilians as shields to try to prevent attacks on military targets is prohibited.
"The presence of a protected person may not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations."

Fourth Geneva Convention, Article 28

Israel - IDF Operational Planning and Orders:
In cases where there is doubt as to whether a civilian object has turned into a military objective... one is to assume that is not a military objective unless proven otherwise.

Michale.....
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
chamberslee
04:36 PM on 01/06/2009
Would you be indifferent if your family members were killed for no reason at all--ALL of them, dead? Would you cite your justification if you had just lost your ENTIRE family, burned beyond recognition? If you went to the one place you were supposedly safe and IT was bombed--twice--killing innocent people who tired to get out of harms way? I just don't understand how one could be so insensitive to human suffering.
05:52 PM on 01/06/2009
Insensitive or empowered? Seems to me that Israel attended the "How to be a Secure Sovereign State" conference and had an epiphany while listening to the lecture "I Have a Duty to My People to Eliminate Terrorist Threats". Here's quick summary:

The Old Way or "How to Let a Bully Walk All Over You" by H.A. Mas

Step 1: Allow your neighbor to indiscriminately bomb civilian targets in your country.
Step 2: Refrain from military response since your neighbor purposely hides its munitions near women and children.
Step 3: Issue strongly worded pronouncements condemning your neighbor's actions.
Step 4: Take comfort in the knowledge that you have the sympathy of the rest of the world.
Step 5: Repeat steps 1 through 4.

The New Way or "How to Put an End to the Madness" by Dee Cisive Action

Step 1: Warn your neighbor that indiscriminate bombing of civilians will no longer be tolerated.
Step 2: When your neighbor invariably ignores your warning, respond by deploying your own much bigger bombs.
Step 3: Listen to a chorus of pronouncements from other countries condemning civilian casualties.
Step 4: Discover that life is better without the constant threat of terrorist attacks.
Step 5: Give the air raid siren operator his first night off in 60+ years.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
barbarianatthegate
03:23 PM on 01/06/2009
"Is the barbarism of Israel greater than that which exists throughout the Muslim world?"

You're setting the bar pretty low, aren't you?
02:56 PM on 01/06/2009
I don't think this is about the pundits, I think it's about the new access (read: internet) to other sources than the official (read: Jerusalem Post and the like). It's harder to look away from a bleeding face when you've read the first hand story behind the picture, and the blogosphere allows you to do that. We can read the stories of the Average Joe of Gaza, same way we can read the story of the Average Joe of any Israeli settlement. Internet ties the world together and humanizes the people behind the stories. The fact that international press is refused entry to Gaza by Israeli government underlines the importance of local bloggers.

That's one of the reasons people start questioning the official story. The second is that the force of Israel is so obvious and the lack of proportion to the attacks so clear, one can't help questioning the Israeli attacks. The last ten days, four Israeli settlers have been killed by Hamas rockets. The last death toll on the Gazan side shows more than 530 dead, a large part of them civilians. We aren't talking about an eye for an eye. We're talking about 125 eyes for an eye. And that kind of numbers speaks volumes. Wilfully targeting civilians is a breach to international treaties like the Geneva Convention. It's a breach against human rights and international law. A war crime, simply put. One can't kill five little girls in their beds and pretend they were terrorists.
02:43 PM on 01/06/2009
Our leadership treats us like we're children and that's the problem. I was watching a movie last night called "Downfall," about Hitler's last days in his bunkers. In it, onne of his generals, when asked if they cared about the fate of the civilians replied, "they gave us the mandate, so I don't care what happens to them." I've never been in any high position of power, but I wondered if that truly is the mindset of an indvidual after they've securee a position of power. As with this Israel/Palestinian situation, the powers that be shown total disregard for the concerns of the people.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
metropixie
"Near normal" is close enough...
03:35 PM on 01/06/2009
Your interest in history is commendable, but your memory is short. Bush claimed to have a mandate and he proved he didn't give a copulation what happened to the civilians he represented, nor for that matter of those whose countries he invaded...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
barbarianatthegate
02:27 PM on 01/06/2009
"Two sides are fighting, one armed with bottle rockets and the other an (illegal) nuclear power, with tanks, 1000lb bombs and missiles - who is the real danger to world peace?"

To that, I can only say amen.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
metropixie
"Near normal" is close enough...
03:36 PM on 01/06/2009
Are you saying we are a real danger to world peace?
07:41 PM on 01/06/2009
Short answer..YES