Answering back

One of the things that has infuriated me for years in the roiling battle between Israel and her neighbors is Israel’s utter ineptitude at courting the media.  For decades, after ever single “event,” the Palestinians offered dozens of sympathetic people up for interviews with the MSM, while the Israelis offered terse, uninformative commentaries from tight lipped “military spokesmen.”  It allowed the Palestinians to gain complete control over the dialog.  No matter what was going on on the ground, Israel was steadily losing in the war of ideas.

I’m not the only one, of course, who has noticed this.  Michael Phillips has come up with an idea:  a simple chart that examines, not the facts of every event, but simply the number of times Hamas and its ilk have been caught in lies.  I’m not the only one, by the way, who likes this idea.  Michael got over 3,000 extra daily hits from people interested in the concept.  It might actually impress the Arabs too:  as many have been impressed by Israel’s willingness to go after a corrupt Prime Minister.  It can be very useful to separate facts from ideology.

Be Sociable, Share!

    1.Silence…the better part of valor.

    2.Too busy investigating politicians, issuing denials, general b.s.

    3.They won’t dignify the question with an answer.

    4. The MSM would continue to badger Israel no matter what.

    5. ALL of the above.

    Bottom Line: The ‘al duri’ affair received no coverage once the Israelis were vindicated in a French court. Facts rarely get coverage, ideology and propaganda do. Sad but true.

  • Ymarsakar

    That is why every faction that is Good needs a counter-propaganda capability. Not having a counter-propaganda agency to counter enemy propaganda, is like not having missile defenses or nuclear deterences against enemy thermonukes.


    Point well made, but…….

    If a tree falls in the woods and there’s no one there to hear it, does it still make a sound.

    Even if there was a counter-propaganda agency would the press hear it – report it?

    Certainly, within the Israeli media investigations and the outcomes are reported. The looming question is whether or not the results, rebuffs, counter measures would be covered by AP, UPI, BBC, etc.

    I had to read EJP (European Jewish Press) to follow the ‘press’ coverage in the French courts over several months.

  • Ymarsakar

    Even if there was a counter-propaganda agency would the press hear it – report it?

    A proper counter-propaganda agency would already have manipulated, infiltrated, and subverted the “press”. That is what competency in the cloak and dagger world is all about. Converting enemy resources to your own. Counter-insurgency=converting Al Anbar enemy tribes to allied tribes.

    Competent leaders produce such results. Incompetent leaders get led around the nose by the MSM, who are themselves led around the nose by Islamic Jihadists and anti-American activists.

    I had to read EJP (European Jewish Press) to follow the ‘press’ coverage in the French courts over several months.

    Neo-Neocon did a good job covering those trials, especially since she went to Paris about the same time this thing was starting.

  • Ymarsakar

    The reason why you need competent leaders to complete manipulation operations against such agencies as the MSM is because of several factors. One is legality or what is known as your weak spot. If the enemy observes you have a weak spot which can be cavitated in with legal challenges, then you will be forced on the defensive and the only thing you’ll be countering is litigation lawsuits.

    Look at what they did and are doing to Bush when he fired those prosecutors.

    The point is, you have to use the enemy’s OODA cycle, get inside that cycle, and then wreck damage in such a way that the enemy will never be able to react and get his balance back.

    There are many methods to do this, but only a select few work depending on what situation it is.

    Nixon tried to conduct surveillaince on the media and got caught covering it up. That kind of action was both passive as well as fraught with obvious weaknesses that enemies will exploit once they see it. And exploit it the media did.

    The media, like the jihadists, are not demi-gods and aren’t invulnerable. This means that they have human foibles and they can be deceived and manipulated using their beliefs the same as the Islamic Jihadists can be.

    That is not the difficulty. The difficulty is that the “Good guys” have become so used to having the “overwhelming air and land superiority”, that they have forgotten and thus have scorned the use of deception operations. The big guy with muscles will almost never favor deception as opposed to brute force, for why should those with more brute force than anyone else have to lower themselves to trickery?

    In this sense, their morality is wrong. For one can never achieve the acme of battle knowledge or skill, as Sun Tzu described it, if one refuses to use deception in warfare and not only that, but refuse to train and get better at deception.

    How do you think people or the West will get better at deception when they refuse to deceive the media? How will American citizens get better at deception when the citizens and their political leaders refuse to counter the deception of the media?

    This puts the initiative and attack plan straight with the Main Sewer Media and their allies, not us. They will be the ones that are going to decide what the story is going to be and what stories will or will not be covered.

    This is a monopoly on deception operations that must be broken.

    As for the “how” of it, one method would be to conduct disinformation campaigns against the media. Force the media or manipulate them, ala Dan Rather, to report false information that is then used as an attack against us or the war. Discredit the media by using the media’s own attack plans against them.

    The reason why the “NO WMDs” blood libel by the media works so well is because Bush himself chose to use WMDs as the prime media justification because it was the only justification that could work to convince the members of the United Nations to back Bush. And Bush only went to the UN because he needed Britain’s support (Chirac’s support too).

    The media will report every anti-American propaganda event and anything that sheds a negative light on America. People may see that as a problem, but I see that as our salvation. For that makes the media predictable and when an enemy becomes predictable, he also becomes dead against competent foes.

    Currently the media is discredited not just because conservatives view them as biased and unreliable, but because Leftists and activist Democrats themselves view the Main Stream Media as biased: biased in favor of their parent corporations and what not.

    You have to shatter this perception, otherwise people can justify ignoring Fox News or good news about Iraq as “Haliburton trying to make more profit off the caskets of American soldiers”.

  • Ymarsakar

    I forgot to mention that when you put forth energy and time into building something up, it becomes rather easy for another to knock it all down. Bush spent much time and energy in the UN. How easy was it for Chirac and the MSM to wreck it during and after the fact? Very easy.

    But look at Dan Rather. How much time and effort did he put in for RatherGate? A jack load of effort, that’s what. Which is why breaking him over our knees was so easy. Because he was forced to defend himself and we could just kill him with a thousand cuts. Rather could not evade us, because then he would have to leave the MemoGate and abandon it. He wasn’t willing to do that. A man trying to grab an object with his hands could afford the mallet crushing his hands, if he withdraws his hand from the object. But if Rather refuses to do that, then we can pulp his hands with our mallet all we want. The same is true of Bush on WMDs.

    It is much easier to destroy than it is to create. Israel creates life and greenhouses and the Palestinians spend 1/100th of the time destroying them.

    AMerica was built on centuries of dedication, sacrifice, and hard work. The Main Sewer Media only requires 1/1000th of the time to destroy the work of America’s ancestors. However, the media themselves must conduct “work” and build up foundations to carry their operations out. Unlike the popular myth, guerilla or revolutionary movements do, in fact, require logistical supply lines and bases. They do not just hide amongst the population and strike out like phantoms. This means that guerrilla forces and insurgent operations like the mSM can be destroyed by destroying their logics. If you can find their logistics and if you can attack it before they know of your attack.

    The media is very good at getting advanced warning of attacks from their bureaucratic leakers inside government. Deep Throat was an FBI agent, was he not? That is simply another facet to the war against enemy deception.

  • Ymarsakar,descCd-buy.html

    Look up Admiral Kimmel’s auto biography for a real example of “subversion of justice”.

  • Deana

    I love this idea – so simple and so effective.

    Israel has been much like the Bush administration – they simply do not fight back. I don’t get it – there have been so many times when they have had the upper ground, the facts, the reasoning, and lots of people capable of pulling all of that together and presenting it in one devastating blow to these ridiculous false charges and they do nothing.

    I don’t know whether it’s because they are tired or they feel it is a waste of their time (and I wouldn’t fault them on either of those, but still) . . . it’s often made me want to tell them to let some of the public do the arguing for them – just give us the microphone!


  • suek

    >>… he would have to leave the MemoGate and abandon it. He wasn’t willing to do that…>>

    “Freedom’s just another name for nothing left to lose” !!


    I don’t know what your ‘day job’ is and since you seem to have a firm understanding of what needs to be done, have you considered conveying your approach to a website where it would ‘catch’ the eye of a reader that could implement your ideas.

    I know there has been some counter attempts on university level to dispel the lies from the facts with little success. Most probably due to the fact that the concept started late and without the guidance of Y.

  • Ymarsakar

    Dick Morris has a much more solid set of credentials than me when it comes to political subterfuge and media knowledge. HIs disaffection with Clinton policies and character assassins would also make him more useful as an inside contractor to Bush.

    The point is, my ideas are not in a vacuum and there are many people that can and would do the same, if Bush had hired them as his advisers instead of Tenet, Powell, and so forth.

    The President’s power comes directly from the people and that is only magnified by the Electoral College. He represents every American just as he represents every State in the Union. THe people in the Executive or Legislative branch gets their power and status from him, the President, not the other way around. Yet President Bush has allowed things to be that these bureaucrats and petty public officials are the ones that determine the tone and theme of the relationship of the President with the nation and its people and institutions.

    Historically, when Emperors have wanted to break the corrupt and stagnant power of the aristocrats, meaning the bureaucracy, they have always went directly to the people. Emperor Krushru the Just of Iran and non-Iran in the times of Belisarius, the greatest Roman General in history, bypassed the nobility and the various aristocratic houses when those aristocrats refused to support the Emperor and did much to overthrow and destabilize things. Did you know that the Great Houses of Persia were the ones that, in the end, decided who would be Emperor? Krushru decided to change that balance of powers and he did so with the minor nobility or rather the small time land owners. He gave them Imperial territory and authority and they in turn directly served the Emperor. He created a new power base that he could call on for support against the internal enemies of Iran should they ever develop a spine to challenge him.

    This, in modern times, is translated as political capital and political interest. Capital is what you have when you start out and interest is the increasing payments you get from your capital. The greater your capital and the less often you use it, the greater your interest and rate of increase in capital will be.

    Bush has often allowed people like Tenet or the other people he appointed or kept on to decide the spending of Bush’s political capital with the people of the USA. This has bankrupted Bush in terms of popular support for such endeavours as Iraq.

    Take Katrina for example. Bush, instead of nationalizing the National Guard and throwing the Mayor and Governor of New Orleans and Louisiana under the bus for gross incompetence and criminal negligence (cue congressional hearings), instead chose to allow Blanco and Nagin to put the blame on Bush and to fetter away the political capital of the President of the US by creating a disaster zone within a disaster zone. Bush gave three days to those two to kill lives and ruin those that have survived. That is not what the leader of a nation who cares for its people should be doing.

    I also recall that the “blame Bush” thing didn’t occur until after Nagin and Blanco had taken care of their own personal political fallouts with retarded public comments. There was plenty of time for Bush to take the initiative and destroy the character and public career of those two, but he didn’t and thus Bush’s record on Katrina was the one that got destroyed.

    In this kind of war, there is no surrender and there is no compromise. It is either destroy or be destroyed. Do not count on the Democrats to return your “mercy” with compassionate and fair treatment just because you treated them fairly and Constitutionally.

    But of course, you don’t have to take my word for it. Just read this post by Cassandra.


    Once upon a time there was a serpent who was badly injured in a fight with another animal. It managed to slither away to safety but would have surely died if a benevolent man had not seen it suffering by the side of the road. The goodly man carefully wrapped the snake up and took it to his house, where he bestowed the kindest and gentlest care on the snake until it was healed and could return to the wild. Just as the man was releasing the serpent back into the grass, the ungrateful snake turned and bit him on the hand.

    “What did you do that for?” cried the man, who knew that the bite of this particular snake was usually fatal. “Didn’t I take care of you when no one else would?”

    The snake shrugged (no small feat for a snake!) and replied to the benevolent–and now doomed– man, “What did you expect? You knew I was a snake when you picked me up.”

    – CWCID: Dr. Sanity

  • suek

    Re: the snake story – same one (effectively) as the frog and the scorpion. Regardless, very pertinent. You can always trust people to be what they are. If they betray your trust, you didn’t know them well enough. It’s foolish to ascribe your own expectations to someone who has different ideals, motives, or goals. Actions speak louder than words…all that stuff!

    Sadie: Ymar blogs at

    I don’t visit his blog much – keep running into him other places!

  • suek

    Also: “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me” In other words, people don’t usually change, no matter what they promise. Charlie, Lucy, football. Repeating the same trust mistake just because someone says “this time it’ll be different” is just stupid. Forgive and forget doesn’t mean you have to wipe out the memory of someone’s treachery entirely. To do that is to be stupid.

    If you have a chance to pick it up, “Shadow Warriors” by Timmerman will make your blood boil. Entirely substantiates what Y is saying. While I agree with Bush’s decision on Iraq, he really has not been an effective president in other ways. Iraq and sticking to it no matter what his opposition has thrown at him is his only real claim to fame, imo.

  • soccerdad

    Last week Israel caught flak for denying some Fulbright scholars permission to leave via Israel, so the State Dept. went straight to the media to show how arbitrary and unfair Israel’s policy was. (Even the NYT article about the situation last Friday suggested that the government would have likely approved if it had been informed.)

    Yeah the Israeli policy is arbitrary.

    Oh, but did I mention that over the month of May – every single day saw at least one Qassam launch at Israel? Well you didn’t read about it in the NYT, but Elder of Ziyon would have informed you.

    There is a fundamental dishonesty in the media that consistently underplays the threats to Israel and overplays the righteous indignation of its enemies.

  • Ymarsakar

    I know there has been some counter attempts on university level to dispel the lies from the facts with little success. Most probably due to the fact that the concept started late and without the guidance of Y.

    Much of the strategic or psychological considerations I am using to analyze such events originated from other innovators and people, such as Tim Larkin, Colonel Boyd, and so forth.

    That link, and one which you should read if you haven’t already, proves that no matter how perfect your defense is, winning a war against such treacherous enemies requires more than a solid defense.

    A lot of counter attempts on universities fail or achieve lackluster results because people expect the other team to obey the same rules that they are obeying. The rules of free speech, respect for law and liberty, and so forth. Unfortunately for us, university status quo holders do not respect you, the Constitution, or your “free speech’ rights. Thus if you act like they do, you’re going to get dismembered.

    It is also a matter of lawyers, meaning fighting fire with fire. People who naturally want to resolve issues rather than to wage war, will often refuse to use lawyers as offensive tools. They use them instead, like FIRE, as defensive tools. There is nothing wrong with that, but the OODA cycle remains the same. When defending, you are always the one reacting to enemy attacks because it is the attacker that decides when and how he will hit you.

    If this is the kind of life people are forced to live in universities and what not, forever being vigilant against Democrat persecution and prosecution and oppression, then it is a pretty sad life all in all.

    It is not my guidance, as I see it, that prevents people from living the life that they should live here in America. It is rather, the fact that they either don’t have the resources, meaning man power and skill sets, or they have the resources but aren’t willing to use them because that would be “against the rules of society or common decency”.

    Common decency went out when Principals could order parents to drug their children or face prosecution or Child Social Services taking your child away for child abuse if you do not force your children to take mind altering and behavioral altering substances.

    Most people when they face criminals, pretend and assume that the criminal operates under the same moral code as you do. Or when you fight a criminal, you somehow assume that you have to protect yourself first.

    All of this stuff is not so much a lack of resources or of guidance, as it is a lack of comprehension of the reality of what your enemy is.

    A criminal is entirely outside the social protections and expectations that a normal citizen usually lives under. This means that he does not give a care in the world for trying to protect himself. He did not target you because he thought you could do him some damage that he must then protect himself against. This is not a war or a duel, but a simple ambush and assassination. To deal with criminals on an equal basis, you must accept their perspective and views and adopt them as your own. If you are thinking about returning safe and unharmed to your wife and children and the criminal is thinking about murdering you and inflicting as much damage as he can on your family, you will react and think slower than him, thus giving him the advantage. For it is easier to kill than to create, and it is much simpler to do damage than to think about protecting against damage. Simpler means faster reactions and thoughts. Faster OODA cycles. More chance of winning.

    Most criminals, being human, still have some social graces or laws they abide, but not much and you should not bet your life on them being merciful. Serial killers and what not, of course, obey no social standards or laws. He can turn off being a “good citizen” like a flashlight.

    What holds many people who fight against injustice back here in America is precisely that they give the benefit of the doubt to their opponents, whether prosecutors or Democrats or Congressfolks.

    Not having enough legal resources to challenge an unjust persecution is one thing. Having the legal resources but refusing to use them with 100% efficiency because you are interested in being free from legal problems while the prosecutor is interested in destroying your life, character, and finances, is not going to end well sooner or later.

    These are the laws of the jungle and the more identity politics and socialism breaks down the societal trust in America, the more people abdicate fairness and justice in favor of the Law of the Jungle.

    Our legal system was created precisely in order to give people a reason to allow the courts to settle things rather than settling things yourself with gun, bomb, or poison. And yet, it is that same legal system that is being used to destroy people’s liberties. Thus we are in a paradox.

    So far the courts can still be used to further justice. That is its redeeming value and why people continue to invest faith in it, especially when they are being prosecuted unjustly.

    My methods mostly consist of Total War principles and thus assume that diplomatic and peaceful means to resolve problems are off the table. I would prefer that things not come to that result, however.

    In Summary,

    I have the utmost respect for organizations such as FIRE that work diligently to protect people’s human rights. I do not pretend that I have more expertise in the legal matters than they do. I would not presume to tell them what they should be doing in the legal field, for that is not a field I specialize in.

    America is still a country of laws and that is a good thing, otherwise wherefore could we find people like Bookworm? ; )

    The fact that people use laws to strip human rights from their prey means that they cannot do it any other way. They cannot do so via violence, war, or subterfuge. The legal system prevents them from doing so, so they subvert the legal system to do their dirty work, like HIV.

  • Ymarsakar

    Another story about school officials that are both bureaucrats and petty tyrants.

    In a war, they would be the ones given a field court martial and executed on the spot. But we’re a nation that follows the rule of law that does not recognize a state of war as existing between the people of America and the internal enemies of America, so those people are safe and secure while they turn the territory they control into totalitarian fiefdoms.

    The Main Sewer Media, the academics, the Leftist agitators, the agent provocateurs that turn peace demonstrations into riots and killing fests, etc. are all connected by the strand of Revolutionary Marxism which preaches Social Collapse and Annihilation as a way to clear out new territory for Utopia.

    Here is Totten’s account of his visit to Serbia. This should give you a small sense of the MSM’s crimes against humanity.

    “During the bombing here,” Sean said, “how bad was it?”

    “I have very contradictory feelings,” David said. “On one side, I knew, I was sure, that Milosevic wouldn’t resign without bombing. The resignation of Milosevic was a result of the bombing. On the other side, I was with my family here, my boy, my girl, you know, and they were afraid. My son lived 100 meters from Belgrade TV, which was bombed, and I lived 200 meters, and I begged him to stay with me because we knew it would be bombed that night. He said no, that he passed all these buildings that were bombed and he saw that the Americans were very precise.”

    “But it’s still dangerous,” I said.

    “Sometimes they bombed the wrong thing,” he said, “but here in Belgrade they were very precise. It was not the kind of bombing as in the Second World War where they were bombing everything.”

    “We will never do that again,” Sean said.

    “You could see,” David said, “you could predict, they said what they were going to hit before they hit it. But it became very dangerous because they bombed all the official buildings and then they didn’t know what to do next if Milosevic wouldn’t resign. But Milosevic stopped at the right time.”

    The bombed-out Belgrade TV station building wasn’t far from our starting point. It stood out as one of the few remaining demolished buildings from the air campaign. It seems to be left as a showpiece. It’s hard to say, though, if this building was left in its condition to wave the bloody shirt against Americans or against the Milosevic regime.

    TV Belgrade.jpg
    Belgrade TV, bombed by Americans in 1999

    “We predicted it would be bombed because it was a massive propaganda mission,” David said. “And I was very sorry because 16 people who were innocent in that building were killed.”

    “People chose to stay in it?” Sean said.

    Sean and Filip Belgrade.jpg

    “No,” David said. “It was not by choice. The conclusion was that if people were killed, we would have an argument against the West. The man who was the general director at that moment is in prison because of it, because he gave orders to put people there.”

    A memorial to the dead is placed across the street from the vertical rubble. All sixteen names are engraved in the stone. Above the list of names is written one simple question: Why?

    Names of Dead Belgrade.jpg

    But the truth is, everybody knows why. Civilians killed by Americans make for great propaganda. Journalists like Robert Fisk predictably complied and blamed NATO. It didn’t matter at the time that Americans hit the building at 2:00 in the morning when no one should have been in there. It occurred to few that Serbian authorities might want to cynically parade the corpses of their own innocents in front of the cameras, though an old Middle East hand like Fisk should have known it was at least possible.

    General Manager Dragoljub Milanovic was handed a ten year prison sentence in 2002 for forcing these sixteen employees to remain behind and get killed.

    How much blood does the media have on their hands? A thousand innocents? 10,000? A 100,000? One million, perhaps, given Stalin’s quote?

    How many people will have been killed, maimed, and been left without families or loved ones because somebody in the media required just one more anti-American propaganda news story?

    And yet these are the same people free from prosecution, execution, character destruction, career destruction, in addition to being protected by the very nation they have created a sea of blood to discredit.

    That might seem fair or just to people, but it is not to me.

  • Ymarsakar

    I made another reply on my blog, since Book’s blog ate Grim’s link and I needed to post more than Grim’s link.