Skip to main content

Propaganda Peace Leads to a Terrorist State


Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas is headed to the United Nations this week to request full U.N. membership for the Palestinian people. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will be speaking too. Both are supposed to address the U.N. General Assembly on September 23.

The move by Mr. Abbas is being portrayed as the work of a “frustrated” statesman selflessly trying to care for his people in the face of a powerful colonizer that refuses to give any ground - literally. It is natural to sympathize with a victim and Mr. Abbas is playing directly to this human tendency.

The speech does carry one small risk. The world might find out the truth about the Palestinians’ desire to destroy Israel as a Jewish state. People may start to objectively examine the countless acts of terrorism, historical and recent, that have been carried out by them and “on their behalf.” And then it might make more sense why Israel does things like physically defend its land, its people, and its right to exist. Because as much as people sympathize with a victim, they also understand that no normal country will willingly commit suicide.

In his presentation to the U.N., Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu plans to rely on a fact-based communication strategy. In his words, “To have peace we must have mutual respect - we cannot build peace on a foundation of lies.”

As I interpret it these are the two key facts at work:

· Fact #1: The Palestinians and the Israelis do not currently have mutual respect because while Israel can live side-by-side with a peaceful Palestinian state, the reverse is not true. In the words of Palestinian Authority chairman Mahmoud Abbas, August 28, 2011: Don't order us to recognize a Jewish state. We won't accept it." Palestinian representative Maen Rashid Areikat adds that the new Palestinian state will be Jew-free (Or, in the words of the Nazis, “Judenrein”). How is that two-state solution going to work when the Palestinians don’t recognize Israel, and there will be no Jews in Palestine?

· Fact #2: The Palestinians and their supporters regularly use disinformation to build ideological support for the eventual physical destruction of Israel. Palestinian maps of Israel regularly omit Israel. The lies that are told about Israel are so numerous that entire websites are devoted to this subject. Here is one summary of some of the lies; I am not going to repeat the propaganda itself.

The great lie of the Palestinian cause is that it is about the Palestinians. It is not.

The truth is that the Palestinians are being used as human torpedoes. Their suffering is real, without question. They deserve recognition as a people. They have the right to determine their fate. Just like the Jewish people do. Just like America. Just like every other nation on earth.

But if Palestinian leaders and those who care for them truly wished to achieve all this, it would have been done ages ago. If they believed in the principle of mutual respect for other nations, including the Jewish state and the Jewish people, we would not have an issue right now.

The fact of the matter is, the so-called Palestinian cause is a convenient mask for a completely different cause: Jew-hatred. You can’t say that out loud because it sounds impolite. Plus, it requires a justification to make its extreme ends palatable, desirable, urgent.

The true cause underlying the Palestinian cause slipped out of the Palestinian leader’s mouth this week: The dream of a Jew-free Palestine, Israel, world. “Well, I personally still believe that as a first step we need to be totally separated, and we can contemplate these issues in the future.”

Again, to quote Prime Minister Netanyahu: “Any peace that is built on a foundation of lies ultimately collapses on the rocks of truth.”

The truth is that the so-called peace process has been fictional, for the Palestinians, all along. The Israelis, because they desperately want to survive, keep chasing the dream. Meanwhile, their “peace partners” are fully in the grip of the “Gaza Syndrome,” a “the pathological culture that celebrates brutal, wanton death.

It is the Gaza Syndrome that produced Hakim and Amjad Awad, the teenage killers who stabbed (warning: graphic) much of the Fogel family to death on the eve of the Jewish Sabbath, March 11, 2011. In court, Hakim Awad smiled and gave a “V for Victory” sign as left the courthouse upon his conviction.

Of course he did. Hakim after all had the support of his family and community: “Both men (both killers) are affiliated with the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PLFP) terror group and received significant assistance from family members and friends after the attack.” Oddly to the average Western observer, the response to the attack was quite joyous, with Palestinians happily distributing candy in the streets (see photo).

The official, so-called “moderate” Palestinian leadership didn’t seem all that perturbed either. Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad was quoted as saying that he “clearly and firmly denounces the terror attack, just as I have denounced crimes against Palestinians.”

In case you didn’t get the full meaning of that statement, Fayyad continues: “We categorically oppose violence and terror, regardless of the identity of the victims or the perpetrators.”

Get it? The strategy is to put Israel – a country defending its right to survive - on the same moral footing as the terrorists – a loosely connected community of killers who want to eradicate Jews, period.

The terrorist group Hamas was more forthright, refusing to condemn the hate crime at all. Spokesperson Sami Abu Zuhri stated: “We in Hamas completely support the resistance against settlers who murder and use crime and terror against the Palestinian people under the auspices of the Israeli occupation soldiers.”

Note how the haters of Israel use code words as propaganda to engender hatred of Israel.

· “Occupation” is supposed to make you think that Israel is holding the Palestinians hostage.

· “Apartheid state” is supposed to bring to mind racial guilt. To make you think that Israel is oppressing the Palestinians and taking all privilege for themselves – akin to South Africa pre-liberation.

· “Right of return” is an appropriation of Israel providing to Jewish people automatic citizenship in the Jewish homeland of Israel. Of course if all Palestinians return to Israel proper, the entire state will be dismantled.

As you watch the news unfold this week, think about the truth of the situation and sift it from the propaganda.

In the words of Palestinian Mosab Hassan Yousef, author of Son of Hamas:

“I was a prisoner of the Israelis when my eyes were opened to the fact that the Palestinian people were as oppressed by their own leaders as they were by Israel.

“It is my greatest hope that, in telling my own story, I will show my own people – Palestinian followers of Islam who have been used by corrupt regimes for hundreds of years – that the truth can set them free.”

“If I, the son of a terrorist organization dedicated to the extinction of Israel, can reach a point where I not only learned to love the Jewish people but risked my life for them, there is a light of hope.”

- Son of Hamas, p. 249, 247


Image source here

Popular posts from this blog

What is the difference between brand equity and brand parity?

Brand equity is a financial calculation. It is the difference between a commodity product or service and a branded one. For example if you sell a plain orange for $.50 but a Sunkist orange for $.75 and the Sunkist orange has brand equity you can calculate it at $.25 per orange.

Brand parity exists when two different brands have a relatively equal value. The reason we call it "parity" is that the basis of their value may be different. For example, one brand may be seen as higher in quality, while the other is perceived as fashionable.

All opinions my own. Originally posted to Quora. Public domain photo by hbieser via Pixabay.

What is the difference between "brand positioning," "brand mantra," and "brand tagline?"

Brand positioning statement: This is a 1–2 sentence description of what makes the brand different from its competitors (or different in its space), and compelling. Typically the positioning combines elements of the conceptual (e.g., “innovative design,” something that would be in your imagination) with the literal and physical (e.g., “the outside of the car is made of the thinnest, strongest metal on earth”). The audience for this statement is internal. It’s intended to get everybody on the same page before going out with any communication products.Brand mantra: This is a very short phrase that is used predominantly by people inside the organization, but also by those outside it, in order to understand the “essence” or the “soul” of the brand and to sell it to employees. An example would be Google’s “Don’t be evil.” You wouldn’t really see it in an ad, but you might see it mentioned or discussed in an article about the company intended to represent it to investors, influencers, etc.Br…

Nitro Cold Brew and the Oncoming Crash of Starbucks

A long time ago (January 7, 2008), the Wall Street Journal ran an article about McDonald's competing against Starbucks.
At the time the issue was that the former planned to pit its own deluxe coffees head to head with the latter.
At the time I wrote that while Starbucks could be confident in its brand-loyal consumers, the company, my personal favorite brand of all time,  "...needs to see this as a major warning signal. As I have said before, it is time to reinvent the brand — now.  "Starbucks should consider killing its own brand and resurrecting it as something even better — the ultimate, uncopyable 'third space' that is suited for the way we live now.  "There is no growth left for Starbucks as it stands anymore — it has saturated the market. It is time to do something daring, different, and better — astounding and delighting the millions (billions?) of dedicated Starbucks fans out there who are rooting for the brand to survive and succeed." Today as …