Hacker News Reader

Comment by nerdjon | Hacker News Reader

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?

View on HN

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.

It's crazy that AIPAC is not registered as a foreign agent. They funnel orders directly from Netanyahu to our politicians.

The trick is to have influence over the laws that define "foreign agent"

There was one president that wanted to change that. But then something happened

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."

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.

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

> 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.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/06/world/middleeast/israel-g...

That is currently the NYT headline - How can you call it Israeli propaganda is beyond me.

What if I told you modern forms of propaganda are more sophisticated than the mere blunt force repetition of a single obvious and consistent message? When is the NYT willing to stretch truth and credulity, and when is it not? What is the likely net effect of a world-weary, cynical (and false) both-sidesism as applied to the Israel/Palestine war?

Ah yes, a public company is somehow conducting a super sophisticated and secretive propaganda campaign.

I guess you're not a fan of Occam's razor? The simplest explanation here seems pretty straightforward, and no, it doesn't involve some NYT conspiratorial behavior.

> 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.

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.

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_...

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.

> 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.

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.

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

> 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?

Imagine if it were Russia or China

Well it can’t be China because China don’t kill their muslim popula… oooh…

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.

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.

What the actual fuck

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.

Wait until you read up on NUMEC and Rafael Eitan.

> 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.

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...

> 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."

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?

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.

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.

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.

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?

To add some context in case people aren't aware: https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20181218-texas-teacher-fir...

“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.

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.

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

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://texasattorneygeneral.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.

It's a law designed to stop and prevent the individual political speech of US citizens, call it what you will.

My point was that there is a foreign country that has successfully written laws (using a 'model act', i.e. copy-paste) for 38 US states that is not intended to serve the interest of US citizens, but that of the foreign country. I'm not aware of any other examples of that amount of reach by other countries or foreign interests. Maybe petrochemical/energy?

Like the kind of free speech you get when Israel's lobby drafts and helps pass laws that making boycotts of Israel illegal?

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.

Boycotting Israel is illegal for any company that works with state agencies.

It's way more restrictive, yes. It's still surreal to me.

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?

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.

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.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com