Beyond the Cusp

September 6, 2017

Defining Hate in the United States

 

When looking into this subject, there were a number of interesting findings which might cause one to pause and wonder about the why, who, and impetus behind things going on here. One of the first items was that there appear to be far more left leaning groups pointing fingers than right leaning groups. On the other side of that coin and unsurprising was that there appear to be more right leaning groups identified as hate groups than left leaning groups. The one item which everybody agreed upon was that the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) appears to be the self-appointed hate group identifier. There was also an amount of disagreement about whether this was a balanced and appropriate group to be trusted. The left leaning groups all unanimously applauded the SPLC efforts and findings having virtually no problems with almost anything stated by them while most right leaning groups gave the SPLC credit for doing a difficult job but insisted on pointing out that they had missed a number of definitions, especially on their “Hate Map” (see below). All the varied commentary on the “Hate Map” from any direction all had some glaring omissions which we, of course, took exception to and will now list. The hate groups missing consist of almost all anti-Israel, anti-Zionist groups and but very few anti-Semitic groups. Glaringly absent were BDS (Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions on Israel and Israeli products), BLM (Black Lives Matter who have been rabidly guilty of all three forms of anti-Semitism), Nation of Islam, Free Gaza (who organize the flotillas to attempt to break the legal arms blockade of Hamas and Islamic Jihad), Act Now to Stop War and End Racism (ANSWER who protest almost everything Israel and Zionist), Al-Awda (the largest Palestinian-American grassroots organization based in California), Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), Friends of Sabeel-North America (anti-Israel, anti-Zionist and anti-Semitic group demanding the eradication of Israel denying the Jews are entitled to a homeland and supporting replacement theology), International Solidarity Movement (ISM who support and aid Hamas and the PLO and have been caught using United Nations ambulances to ferry terrorists and munitions in Gaza), Jewish Voice for Peace (decidedly anti-Israel and largely anti-Netanyahu actively supporting the leftist parties in Israel to the point of interfering in Israeli election campaigning against the sitting government in the media between elections in attempts to weaken the Likud and Jewish Home parties as well as any Zionist or religious parties), Muslim American Society (MAS who are extremely active on American campuses pushing the Palestinian claims to all of Israel from the River to the Sea Palestine must be free is one of their rallying cries), Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP are actually an arm of MAS and was founded by a former MAS member) and finally, if the 2012 Democrat Party Convention (see video below) is any indicator, a fairly significant segment of the Democrat Party could also make the list and we suspect parts of the Republican Party as well. Unfortunately for Israel and the American-Israeli alliance which has been strong since a relatively rocky start where one could point to 1969 as the turning point where the United States began full support of Israel and the two nations have shared technological defense discoveries but that appears to be weakening after a long run. It was said by Henry Temple, 3rd Viscount Palmerston, as part of the Treaty of Adrianople, “I say that it is a narrow policy to suppose that this country or that is to be marked out as the eternal ally or the perpetual enemy of England. We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow.” Perhaps the wise man has a point, no permanence between nations except as serve the immediate needs of each nation.

 

Southern Poverty Law Center Hate Map

Southern Poverty Law Center Hate Map

 

 

Hate is a difficult subject at any time and even more sensitive in the United States at the moment as charges of institutional hate are being brought against conservatives in general and the Republican Party and associated groups in particular. The media and some entertainment individuals have harped on this subject refusing to allow anything to calm after the horrendous display in Charlottesville a number of weeks back. The coverage of the violence there has been one sided in the mainstream media with an opposing view of a different tone coming from conservative talk personalities. There has been one area of agreement from both sides, namely that the Nazis, KKK and white supremacists are all unjustifiable hate groups who have no legitimate place at the table in American society. Where the left and right differ is the level and amount of support these fringe groups presumably have. According to the right leaning talk and opinion hosts and editorialists, these groups are marginalized by the conservatives and are a fringe area which has no power and very few followers and are given no quarter by conservatives and are a disgrace to all Americans. According to the left mainstream media, these groups are pervasive throughout the society and rule the conservative movements and dictate policy to the Republican Party and have a very strong showing at all right leaning events and are within all the right leaning groups almost without exception. Obviously, both sets of commentary cannot be valid; either they are a marginalized group of outcasts and are small in number or they can be found all throughout the conservative groups and rule the roost. Here we have exactly similar argument as was presented about the SPLC and their objectivity. Where you stand on either issue, we are willing to bet that you either support the conservative or the leftist side of the argument on both. We would be starkly surprised to find people taking opposing sides on these two issues, though we must assume such is possible.

 

Hate comes in different packages within any society and it will never be eradicated. Some hatreds are actually valid, though such strong feelings are rare. We can assume that cancer is universally hated, as are most diseases and illnesses. But these obvious items are also not areas of contention within our societies. Where hatred becomes a problem is when one group within the society holds such feelings for another group within the society. Often such feelings are mutually felt as if a group hates your group; it is human nature to hate that group in return. It takes a rare breed of people to resist such a reaction when targeted by hatred. These are the kinds of hatred which if we were to be a better people we could find resolutions to such feelings. Some of these hatreds go back hundreds if not thousands of years and are passed on from parent to child almost in their mother’s milk. Anti-Semitism is just such hatred as it has a history which reaches back before written history. Anti-Semitism has such a pernicious nature that we recognize it in the story of our liberation from bondage in Egypt when towards the end of the Seder dinner service we state, “In each and every generation they rise up against us to destroy us. And the Holy One, blessed be He, rescues us from their hands.” The validity of that ominous prediction is absolutely bone chilling terrifying. If one were to follow the entirety of the history of the Jews, they would be capable of identifying some atrocity perpetrated against the Jewish People either within Europe or the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) going back to before Islam and Christianity took turns persecuting or expelling Jews. Even the history of the United States has its examples which include but are not limited to the Order Number 11 issued by Major General Ulysses S. Grant on December 17, 1862, during the American Civil War which ordered the expulsion of all Jews in his military district, comprising areas of Tennessee, Mississippi, and Kentucky. The order was subsequently reversed by President Lincoln but not before much of the Jewish population had been dispossessed of their lands and property. Also there was the refusal by President Franklin Delano Roosevelt who in 1939 refused to permit any of the refugees to enter the United States from the ocean liner the M.S. St. Louis which was carrying over nine-hundred Jews fleeing Nazi Germany forcing the ship to return to Germany where the Jews were sent to concentration camps. Neither episode would make any rational person’s list of memorable events about which to be proud. And that is where we can get to a definition of hate which both groups could probably live with. Hate is any action which in general a population would rally against and refuse to grant it their support. With this definition, it requires that the population as a whole to concur that something is contributing to hatred before making that judgement. After all, would not being able to identify and define hate be preferable to allowing each group to get together and decide who they wish to call outcasts of society with an accusation of being part of a hate group. If any small group could decide who are parts of a hate group, then we would all soon find ourselves accused of hate. To accuse a group of being a hate group should be something taken carefully and with a general consensus. And not to worry, Nazis, the KKK, and White Supremacists would all easily qualify as hate groups despite the accusation that the conservatives are all members of such groups because that accusation is pure politicizing hate, and that is one thing which must be avoided at all costs unless your aim is to tear the fabric of American society asunder and turn brother against brother once more.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

August 21, 2014

Media Surrenders in Information War

Filed under: 24/7 News Reporting,Absolutism,Abu Mazzen,Act of War,Administration,AFP,Agency France Press,Al-Aksa Martyrs Brigade,Al-Jazeera,Aliyah,Amalekites,Anti-Israel,Anti-Semitism,Anti-Zionist,AP,Appease Islamic Interests,Appeasement,Arab Appeasement,Arab World,Associated Press,BBC,Blood Libel,Cairo,Civilization,CNN,Dhimmi,Disengagement,Divestment,Egypt,EMP Attack,Europe,European Media,European Pressure,European Union,Executive Order,Fatah,Fatah Charter,Fox,France 24,France Channel 2,Gaza,Gaza Blockade,Government,Government Controlled Media,Haaretz,Hamas,Haniyeh of Hamas,Hate,History,Hudna,International Politics,ISIS,Islam,Islam,Islamic Jihad,Islamic Pressure,Israel,Israeli Capital City,Israeli Media,Jerusalem,Jihad,Judea,Judean Hills,Kidnap Soldier,Kidnapped Israeli,Legal Blockade,Mainstream Media,Media,Media Bias,Media Censorship,Media Intimidation,Medina,Mediterranean Sea,Misreporting,Muslim World,NATO,New Media,New York Times,Omission,One State Solution,Oslo Accords,Palestinian,Palestinian Authority,Palestinian Media,Palestinian Pressures,Palestinian Security Force,Pogroms,Political Talk Shows,Politicized Findings,Promised Land,R2P Right to Protect,Reuters,Samantha Power,Sinai,Sinai Peninsula,Six Day War,Snipers,Statehood,Talking Heads,Taqiyya,Television News,Third Intifada,United Nations,United Nations Presures,United States Pressure,Western World,World Media,World Opinion,World Pressures,Zionism,Zionist — qwertster @ 2:34 AM
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

There are articles, editorials and debates mostly under the title of “Israel Losing the Information War.” Their erudite discussions use numerous examples of Israeli politicians, ambassadors and spokespersons making statements and usually picking a particularly bland statements and claim that they are losing because their presentations do not resonate well. They claim that Israel has not made proper use of social media. They continue with a litany of nitpicking hypercritical arguments. What they refuse to cover is the real center of the problem, the media itself.

 

One needs to sit in a less comfortable chair and really listen to the coverage of the continuing conflict between the Arab world and Israel to detect the slant being utilized to present the Arab side as superior and preferential to that of the Israelis. The most pernicious effrontery is the choice of wording which effects the listeners’ opinion and acceptance of information being conveyed. When listing commentary concerning the Arab side, recently the Hamas side, the choice of wording is active while when talking about the Israeli side the wording is usually passive. The easiest example is when giving casualty reports. When listing Palestinian casualties they will invoke words such as murdered or killed yet while reporting Israeli casualties they will tend to simply report them as deaths or have died. Which is more emotionally charged, someone who was killed or someone who died? Another problem which has to do with casualty reporting has been the virtual exclusive utilization of the Hamas provided numbers despite historic proof that such numbers are unreliable and often exaggerated. In the current conflict the verified reports of fatalities in Gaza places the percentages of combatant casualties to civilian casualties has been closest to 1:1 yet the reports consistently claim that 90% of the casualties have been civilians. The former ratio was released by a Red Cross official who had been granted access to IDF reports and lists of names of those terrorists killed during Operation Protective Edge while the vast majority of news reports use the Hamas released numbers despite, as one commenter stated in a moment of brutal clarity when reporting, I wish I had recorded that news report as I have not been able to find any record of it, that the numbers being reported are probably exaggerated as news reporters have understood since the start of the conflict. Perhaps I should join Facebook.

 

The best and most well-known example of inflated and simply false beyond belief numbers and the perfidy of media coverage was the so-called Jenin Massacre. When during the Israeli retaking of control over a large swath of the Judea and Samaria (West Bank) there was a particularly fierce firefight between Fatah aligned terrorist fighters and the IDF. When the media covered the fighting then in the aftermath they insisted on using the reported numbers given by the Fatah spokespersons who claimed to have direct numbers from the actual area. The numbers kept increasing even after the fighting had concluded. Numbers which originally were just a few hundred soon cleared a thousand and soon climbed into multiple thousands with the final claims pushing over ten-thousand murdered Palestinians of which over 90% were presumably civilians. The IDF attempted to refute the numbers listing their and Fatah terrorists fatalities combined to be around one-hundred dead at the most with the IDF having lost twenty-three and fifty-two wounded and the various numbers of Palestinian deaths was between fifty-two and fifty-five with Human Rights Watch claiming a near even numbers of combatants and civilians while the IDF numbers showed only five confirmed civilian deaths and the remainder as active combatants. Fortunately for the Palestinians of Judea and Samaria Fatah had not used human shields in an intentional attempt to maximize civilian casualties while minimizing the loss of Fatah combatants and other military equipment and arms, something Hamas has made maximum use of in the current conflict which is the main reason for the higher than usual numbers of civilian casualties as compared to the majority of previous IDF wars.

 

Another reason behind slanted news has been the ease of completely accepting any press releases from Hamas and their spokespeople and the reliance on commentary from solely those sympathetic with the Palestinian side or hostile to the Israeli side. The newscasters when holding interviews with Israeli politicians or IDF spokespeople take on an adversarial and belligerent role challenging and belittling their every comment calling their veracity into question at every opportunity and then impugning their entire presentation in summary after closing the interview usually by sniping that that was a representative from the IDF or the Israeli parliament the Knesset as if such makes their information of dubious origins. There have been a fair number of such interviews where the interviewing reporter ended the exchange without thanking the Israeli representative for their time as if they resented having to hold the interview. On the other side these reporters universally thank the representatives who support Hamas such as CAIR, MSA and other Islamic supportive groups for their time and make comments after such interviews stating that we have just heard a refreshing take on the conflict going on between Hamas and Israel. Then there are the ways that information provided by both sides are reported and commented upon. The Hamas press releases and social media statements are read as straight facts without any conditional comments that might raise doubts to their validity while when quoting Israeli press releases they often make commentary calling into question the veracity of those statements often presenting them as such was the report according to IDF spokespersons. Such an accounting leaves any report as being probably a biased and lacking factual weight leaving the watcher in doubt as to if the facts presented are believable.

 

Add the media’s relentless presentation of the casualty numbers as if having more casualties makes one side the more honorable side more deserving of sympathy and somehow makes their grievances and positions more valid than the other side. Had such been the style of reporting during World War II then the Russian efforts would have carried the most weight followed by the Japanese and then the Germans with the French efforts being the most dubious followed by the United States and then Britain. Since when did suffering the higher numbers of casualties come to infer a more valid viewpoint and argument. Further, since when must one side take precautions not to cause more casualties on their enemies during a conflict than their enemy has caused amongst their side. Is not the entire effort of war to impart more casualties on the other side than your side suffers? Israelis are not being killed in similar numbers because Israel expends large amounts of resources and financial commitments to protect their people than Hamas has in Gaza. Take a little challenge here and remember as you make these calculations that Hamas has a multi-billion dollar construction of underground tunnels and command and control headquarters and storage areas which could also double as a bomb shelter with the capacity of holding close to the entire population of Gaza but only permits their Hamas combatants and leadership to take refuge underground while forcing their civilians to remain in areas where Israel has warned they intend to attack by dropping leaflets over the area. The challenge is to count by twenty-thousands where each announced interception of a Hamas rocket sent into Israel equals twenty-thousand dollars. This challenge discounts the hundreds of millions of dollars the development of the Iron Dome system cost and will only take into consideration the cost to produce the individual intercepting missile and also discounts the percentage, small as it may be, of missiles which did not intercept a rocket. That will give one a running total of the Israeli investment to protect their civilians as these Hamas rockets are not being aimed at the IDF, they are aimed at Israeli communities including her major cities. They are aimed at Jews, Christians, Muslims and those of other religions who all live with freedom to worship as they please in Israel. It is aimed at European, Arab, Asian and African Jews (there are Jews in Israel from every continent including the Ethiopian Jews rescued over the past decade, the Bnei Menashe Tribe from India, the 850,000 Jewish refugees from the Arab and Muslim worlds and their descendants which now make up half of the Israeli population, a large number of Russian Jews who were received at great effort and expense from the former Soviet Union, and currently there are increasing numbers coming from the Ukraine and France as well as numerous other places where Jews are feeling more and more threatened every day. Israel is a collection of Jews from over the entirety of the planet Earth and of every nationality imaginable. They live together with a large population of Christian and Muslim Arabs as well as other minorities including sizeable Kurdish and Baha’i communities all of whom share the bounties of Israel and have equal rights to vote, live, work, own land and businesses and are equal in every way. These are the peoples who make up the communities of Israel and are all facing the rockets from Hamas. Unbelievably, but true, at the very beginning of the current conflict both the wife of Mahmoud Abbas and the mother-in-law of Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh were receiving treatment in Israeli hospitals. Both are well and recovering nicely. I am willing to bet those two little facts were pretty much ignored by the mainstream media, I wonder why? Perhaps they painted too sympathetic a picture of Israeli society and the realities that are actually true? Could not be, the media is always completely honest, right?

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

Blog at WordPress.com.