een analyse uit 1920 ...

[ministe van agitatie]

In mijn speurtocht naar kennis en informatie over de kwestie Palestina, kwam ik een uitzonderlijk interessante tekst tegen. Hij is geschreven door een Brit, Anstruther Mackay, in 1920 die tijdens WOI militair gouverneur was in de regio.

De man beschikt over een analytisch vermogen waar ik vandaag versteld van sta en in zijn schets van de toekomst, steekt hij Nostradamus naar de kroon...

Dit stukje vind ik qua conclusie het interessantst:

The theory that the Jews are to come into Palestine and oust the Moslem cultivators by 'equitable purchase' or other means is in violation of principles of sound policy, and would, if accepted, arouse violent outbreaks against the Jewish minority. It would, moreover, arouse fierce Moslem hostility and fanaticism against the Western powers that permitted it. The effect of this hostility would be felt all through the Middle East, and would cause trouble in Syria, Mesopotamia, Egypt, and India. To this might be ascribed by future historians the outbreak of a great war between the white and the brown races, a war into which America would without doubt be drawn.

Hij schets echter ook de omstandigheden, de situatie ter plaatse en de verhouding tussen moslims, christenen en joden die er al woonden:

To-day it is the Zionist portion of this remnant of Judah, which, on the statement that for three or four centuries its ancestors owned the land from which nearly two thousand years ago they were driven, claims the whole of Southern Syria, the province of Palestine. These people even go so far, on what grounds is not clear, as to claim that their boundaries run from the town of Tyre on the north to the Egyptian village of El Arish in the Desert of Sinai on the south, and also, east of the Jordan, from the plain of Ammon to the Syrian desert, formerly the country of the Moabites.

Now if this interesting remnant was claiming an uninhabited country, or one in which the law of property did not exist, it might be an interesting though hazardous experiment to let them have it, and watch the result. Any practical experiment toward the attainment of a contented Jewish people would be welcome. At present, large communities of Jews never live in perfect amity with Gentile neighbors; and it would be instructive to see whether, in a self-contained Jewish state, they could live in amity with one another. It would also give them a chance to show whether they possess the attributes of a ruling people -- a question to which the answer is, at present, largely uncertain.

But the Syrian province of Palestine, about one hundred and fifty miles long and fifty miles broad, largely mountainous and sterile, contains at present a population of more than 650,000, divided as follows: Mohammedan Arabs, 515,000; Jews, 63,000; Christian Arabs, 62,000; nomadic Bedouins, 50,000; unclassified, 5000. Of these the Mohammedans and Christians are to a man bitterly opposed to any Zionist claims, whether made by would-be rulers or by settlers. It may not be generally known, but a goodly number of the Jewish dwellers in the land are not anxious to see a large immigration into the country.

The whole population will resist the Zionist Commission's plan of wholesale immigration of Jews into Palestine at the rate of one hundred thousand a year, until a total of three millions has been reached, which number they claim the country can support if cultivated to its utmost.

The existing Jewish colonists would protest at such an experiment; but the Mohammedan and Christian Arabs would do more than protest. They would, if able, prevent by force the wholesale flooding of their country by Jewish settlers whom they consider strangers and Europeans. (The Jew in Palestine is always called by the Arabs 'Khawaya' -- Anglice, stranger.)

Any attempt at the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine, unless under the bayonets of one of the powers of the League of Nations, would undoubtedly end in a 'pogrom,' to escape from which in Europe is the Jew's main idea in coming to Syria. This hostility to the Jews is a bond of union between the Arab Moslems and the Christians, and nowhere in the East do these two denominations live in greater harmony

It will be seen that, to fulfill their aspirations, the Zionists must obtain the armed assistance of one of the European powers, presumably Great Britain, or of the United States of America. To keep the peace in such a scattered and mountainous country the garrison would have to be a large one. Is the League of Nations, or any of the Western powers, willing to undertake such a task? But without such armed protection, the scheme of a Jewish state, or settlement, is bound to end in failure and disaster.

De volledige tekst staat hier

[Bertie]

Dayam, 't is een duizendklappertje.

De man beschikt over een analytisch vermogen waar ik vandaag versteld van sta en in zijn schets van de toekomst, steekt hij Nostradamus naar de kroon...

Zijn naam heeft ie ook mee (Anstruther Mackay)


Ik zie overigens dat de zionisten nog niet gereageerd hebben. Misschien hebben ze wat hulp nodig >>

Defending Israel and Zionism - WorId Union of Jewish Students (WUJS)

The Hasbara Handbook

Seven Basic Propaganda Devices

1. Name Calling
Through the careful choice of words, the name calling technique links a person or an idea to a negative symbol. Creating negative connotations by name calling is done to try and get the audience to reject a person or idea on the basis of negative associations, without allowing a real examination of that person or idea. The most obvious example is name calling - "they are a neo-Nazi group" tends to sound pretty negative to most people. More subtly, name calling works by selecting words with subtle negative meanings for some listeners. For example, describing demonstrators as "youths" creates a different impression from calling them "children"...

Name calling is hard to counter. Don't allow opponents the opportunity to engage in point scoring. Whenever 'name calling' is used, think about referring to the same thing but with a neutral connotation.



2. Glittering Generality
Simply put, the glittering generality is name calling in reverse. Instead of trying to attach negative meanings to ideas or people, glittering generalities use positive phrases which the audience are attached to in order to lend a positive image to things. Words such 'freedom', 'civilization', 'motherhood', 'liberty', 'equality', 'science', and 'democracy' have these positive associations for most people. These words mean different things to different people, but are used to gain the approval of an audience, even when they aren't used in their standard ways. Consider the use of the term 'freedom fighter', which is supposed to gain approval for terrorism by using the word 'freedom'. Or, consider why it is so beneficial to bring home the point that Israel is a democracy...

Combating the use of 'glittering generalities' requires undermining the use of a positive term. For example, if a Palestinian speaker claimed that Palestinian terror is only carried out to gain freedom, it might be worth asking if "freedom means killing young children and leaving their parents to bury them?" In this new context, 'freedom' is exposed as an inappropriate term to associate with terrorism.



3. Transfer
Transfer involves taking some of the prestige and authority of one concept and applying it to another. For example, a speaker might decide to speak in front of a United Nations flag, in an attempt to gain legitimacy for himself or his idea. Some of the symbols that might be used in discussing Israel might include the Israeli flag, or Star of David; Islamic symbols, which might lend a militant speaker the apparent support of Islam, even when what they are saying goes against mainstream Islamic beliefs; non-denominational prayer, which gives a sense of religiosity to a speaker even when his message is not 'religious'; and the national symbols of a speakers' own country - such as the American flag - which create the impression that the speaker is presenting 'American values'....

Likewise, terms that normally symbolize positive causes: freedom, liberal values, liberation, self-determination, progressivism, peace, nonviolence, human rights, are often enlisted for inappropriate causes. Palestinian supporters can associate the fight of the Hamas, Islamic Jihad or Hizbulla with "human rights" and "liberation" even though these organizations advocate genocide, race-hatred, enslavement of women and persecution of gays. Gandhi was a symbol of non-violence. Associating his name with terrorist causes because he was opposed (before World War II) to a Jewish state seems bizarre, but people do it and it works. Professions of liberalism appear in Web sites that feature Adolph Hitler's Mein Kampf.



4. Testimonial
Testimonial means enlisting the support of somebody admired or famous to endorse an ideal or campaign. Testimonial can be used reasonably - it makes sense for a footballer to endorse football boots - or manipulated, such as when a footballer is used to support a political campaign they have only a limited understanding of. While everybody is entitled to an opinion, testimonial can lend weight to an argument that it doesn't deserve: if U2's Bono condemned Israel for something that it didn't do, thousands would believe him, even though he was wrong.



5. Plain Folks
The plain folks technique attempts to convince the listener that the speaker is a 'regular guy', who is trust-worthy because they are just like 'you or me'. Often politicians present themselves as being from outside the standard 'political cliques' and above political bickering, and then call for tax cuts to help the 'regular guy'. More often than not these politicians are multi-millionaires financed by large corporations, but the plain folks technique allows them to obscure that fact by presenting their 'common' characteristics...

Care must be taken when adopting populist positions. There are some ethical boundaries that ought not to be crossed - for example tapping in to general anti-Arab feeling, or Islamophobia. Remember that Israel can be supported without resorting to mass generalizations or racism.



6. Fear
When a speaker warns that the consequences of ignoring his message is likely to be war, conflict, personal suffering, and so forth, they are manipulating fear to advance their message. Listeners have deep-seated fears of violence and disorder which can be tapped into by creating false dichotomies - 'either listen to me, or these terrible things will happen'. Listeners are too preoccupied by the threat of terrible things to think critically about the speaker's message...



7. Bandwagon
Most people, when in doubt, are happy to do what other people are doing. This is the bandwagon effect. People are happy to be part of the crowd, and subtle manipulators can play on this desire by emphasizing the large size of their support. Although it is reasonable that people are given a chance to find out how many other supporters a speaker or movement has, often it is possible to create the impression of extensive support - through gathering all supporters in one place, or through poorly conducted opinion polls - in an attempt to persuade people who are keen to follow the crowd.

Remember that playing with perceptions of numbers supporting a cause can be problematic if this means that genuine supporters become complacent.

Palestinian activists' success at creating the impression that they have enormous support is hard to counter. The most obvious and most effective response is to try and seem even better supported. Otherwise, simply start to deal with the issues, especially using 'plain folks' techniques, to gain support that is committed, and not just jumping on the bandwagon...

bron

[ministe van agitatie]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Bertie

bron

Oòk interessant... Ben hier al een paar van die technieken tegen gekomen.

[RM13]

Dit is een interessant artikel! Zeker zoals uw eerste post al aangeeft; een angstaanjagend vooruitziende blik.

[Bertie]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door ministe van agitatie

Oòk interessant... Ben hier al een paar van die technieken tegen gekomen.

Sterker nog, propaganda punt 1 wordt vrijwel altijd toegepast ("antisemitisme!"... "je bent een antisemiet!" of "zelf-hatende jood!...)

1. Name Calling
Through the careful choice of words, the name calling technique links a person or an idea to a negative symbol. Creating negative connotations by name calling is done to try and get the audience to reject a person or idea on the basis of negative associations, without allowing a real examination of that person or idea. The most obvious example is name calling - "they are a neo-Nazi group" tends to sound pretty negative to most people...

[Bertie]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door RM13

een angstaanjagend vooruitziende blik.

[hasbara]'t is een gefraudeerd werkstuk! Een plagiaat!

PS: Mackay was een typisch Brit: stiff-upper-lip en joden-hatend![/hasbara]

[Francientje]

Ja en rabiate Israelhaters horen volgens mij van het Hebreeuws af te blijven.
Schrijf gewoon 'Ken de Waarheid en de Waarheid zet u vrij.' in het Nederlands.
Maar goed, waarschijnlijk hebt u niet eens door wat uw onderschrift betekent!

[ministe van agitatie]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Francientje

Ja en rabiate Israelhaters horen volgens mij van het Hebreeuws af te blijven.

Je kan je niet voorstellen hoe hard ik hierom moest lachen ...

Bovendien begrijp ik niet helemaal waarom je van de hele kwestie permanent een emotionele zaak tracht te maken. Alsof je de politiek van Israël niet kritisch en rationeel zou kunnen analyseren zonder daarom noodzakelijkerwijze te gaan haten. Alsof je het uitgangspunt van Israël en hun concrete verwezenlijkingen niet zou kunnen beschouwen en er respect voor hebben zonder ze te gaan verafgoden of zonder dat je er daarom moet van houden. Enige nuance is u blijkbaar vreemd.

Het is niet omdat u de hele tijd half neurotisch de emotionele toer op gaat dat anderen daarbij hun cool moeten verliezen.

[Bertie]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Francientje

Ja en rabiate Israelhaters horen volgens mij van het Hebreeuws af te blijven.

Mee eens.

Ze moeten terug-switchen (naar hun echte moedertaal Jiddisch