Anti-Jihad ad preaching 'love not terror' goes viral in the middle east

[Singularity]

http://www.newsweek.com/anti-jihadi-...le-east-617082


WORLD
ANTI-JIHAD RAMADAN ADVERT PREACHING 'LOVE NOT TERROR' GOES VIRAL IN MIDDLE EAST
BY JACK MOORE ON 5/29/17 AT 12:38 PM

A commercial promoting a message of “love not terror” for the holy Islamic month of Ramadan has gone viral in the Middle East just days into the religious holiday.

Kuwaiti telecommunications company Zain, which has a presence across the Middle East, may have made the three-minute video as a marketing tool—but its message has resonated with Muslims around the world, amassing more than 2 million views just three days into the holy month when Muslims fast from dawn to dusk.

A suicide bomber boards a bus before he is greeted by a child dressed as Omar Daqneesh, the bloodied boy pictured in an ambulance following an airstrike in Aleppo in August 2016. The video then shows different Muslim figures persuading the suicide bomber not to carry out an attack.
An appearance is reserved for Ibrahim Abdulsalam, who was injured in the Kuwait City mosque blast in June 2015. The Islamic State militant group (ISIS) claimed the attack that killed 27. It also depicts images of ISIS’s deadliest ever attack, its suicide bombing in Baghdad’s Karrada district on July 3, 2016 that killed more than 300 people.



The video appears to take aim at ISIS, which has launched attacks on its fellow Muslims during the holiday, including a suicide bomb assault on one of the religion’s holiest shrines, Medina, in July 2016. It also mentions Al-Qaeda and its bombing of a wedding in the Jordanian capital, Amman, in November 2005.

On the same day Zain posted the advert, ISIS called for an “all-out war” on the West during the holy month. In an audio message circulated on encrypted messaging app Telegram on Friday, an ISIS member directs the latest propaganda message to the group’s “soldiers.”

It goes on to demand attacks on Western “homes, their markets, their roads and their forums.” It said the “targeting of civilians is beloved to us and the most effective...may you get great reward in Ramadan.”

Read more: ISIS Calls for 'All-Out War' on West During Ramadan

In general, members of different faiths have welcomed the video. One user wrote: “I am Christian but I believe this video portrays what islam truly is. the love of God and the love for one another.”

But some criticized it for focusing too much on one purveyor of terror against Muslims. One user commented: “Bashar [al-Assad] killed and terrorized more than Daesh...but, yes, I am against terrorism in all its forms,” using an Arabic acronym for ISIS, and referring to the Syrian president accused of using chemical weapons against Sunni Muslim rebels and civilians. (Estimates suggest more than 400,000 people have died since the beginning of Syria’s civil war in 2011.)

The advert ends with the suicide bomber dropping to his knees, with signs saying “persuade others with leniency, not force,” and a figure saying “let’s bomb hatred with love.” The video ends with a happy scene: smiles and laughter at a wedding.

[Abz2000]

The propagandistic and insincere nature of the ad is obvious to any who would care to disect it.
The whole video has warped and twisted context, the messages are not Islamic other than the chants, the Muslim is accused via implication for crimes and bombings commited by the secularists, and actually the makers have no right to show a woman in sexually appealing underclothes under the guise of a "marriage scene" something which would be considered unacceptable by Muslims and especially rejected in ramadan - the fact that ramadan is chosen indicates to me that zain is losing heavily on data revenue through video streaming.

These appear to be very old tactics with more polished and sophisticated mind hacks.

The US-funded al-Hurra TV news channel..... Al-Hurra has shown lengthy interviews with US politicians, including George Bush, but has run into problems with locally hired journalists. On one occasion it broadcast a call to arms against Israel by Hezbollah, which was not the plan when the channel was launched across the Middle East in 2004 after the Iraq invasion.

Diplomats said they believed the allure of actors such as Eva Longoria, Jennifer Aniston and David Schwimmer meant commercial TV had a far greater impact than al-Hurra which, according to one report, has cost US taxpayers up to $500m (£316m).

"It's still all about the war of ideas here, and the American programming on MBC and Rotana [a channel part-owned by Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation] is winning over ordinary Saudis in a way that al-Hurra and other US propaganda never could," two Saudi media executives told a US official in a meeting at a Jeddah branch of Starbucks. ...

.....
The diplomats told Washington that certain themes in American movies seemed to appeal to the Saudi audience: heroic honesty in the face of corruption (George Clooney in Michael Clayton), supportive behaviour in relationships (an unspecified drama that was repeated during an Eid holiday featuring an American husband dealing with a drunk wife who smashed cars and crockery when she wasn't assaulting him and their child), and respect for the law over self-interest (Al Pacino and Robin Williams in Insomnia).

In further evidence of the advance of US media in Saudi Arabia, the same cable revealed that one of Rupert Murdoch's sons held talks with the board of al-Eqtisadiah, a Saudi Arabian daily newspaper, about a deal to publish an Arabic version of the Wall Street Journal. The meeting was said to have been called at the behest of Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, a billionaire businessman and shareholder in News Corporation. The 35% Bin Talal-owned SRMG media group, which owns al-Eqtisadiah, was also trying to win a contract to publish the International Herald Tribune uncensored in Saudi Arabia, the cable reveals.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...usewives-saudi


That channel, which was launched in 2004 after the Iraq invasion, has attempted to win over viewers with such programming
Daily mail


Alhurra

Type Satellite television network
Country United States (external consumption only)
Availability 22 countries and territories across the Middle East and North Africa (includes: Algeria, Bahrain, Djibouti, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Mauritania, Morocco, Oman, Palestinian Territories, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates and Yemen)
Owner Middle East Broadcasting Networks
(Funded by the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG), which oversees all U.S. government-funded foreign broadcasts)
Launch date
14 February 2004


The fact that Alhurra is funded by the U.S. Congress through the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) has led some critics to claim that the channel is "state propaganda" and presents its news with a pro-American bias.[30] Alhurra has openly tried to distinguish itself from the perceived anti-American tone of its competition. Executives in the channel's early days instructed broadcasters to avoid the use of "loaded" terms (such as "martyr," "resistance fighters," or "occupation forces") used frequently on networks such as al-Jazeera in reporting about the U.S. military operation in Iraq, opting for terms like "armed groups" and "U.S. and coalition forces."[6]




Alhurra is observed by Arab journalists as complying too scrupulously with embargoes on military information when Western media outlets frequently disregard these same requests. Steve Tatham, a British Royal Navy officer, recorded an instance in which a British officer briefed Arab and Western media that a humanitarian aid ship was being held back pending operations against Iraqi insurgents in the area. According to Tatham's account, when the officer asked the media to delay reporting this information for security reasons, Fox News disregarded the request whereas Alhurra complied.[31]




Mouafac Harb, Alhurra's first news director who resigned from the organization in 2006, claimed that he left in part because he "sensed the Broadcasting Board of Governors wanted Alhurra to promote U.S. foreign policy instead of just reporting the news." Harb claimed that at Alhurra there had been a "tendency to please Washington and not the [Arab] audience."[12]

Its stated mission is to provide "objective, accurate and relevant news and information" to its audience while seeking to "support democratic values" and "expand the spectrum of ideas, opinions, and perspectives" available in the region's media.[1] The network has also tried to distinguish itself from its numerous regional competitors by providing access to more in-depth coverage of U.S. issues and policies and coverage of a broader range of opinions and perspectives than normally heard on other Arab television networks.[1]

Alhurra began broadcasting on 14 February 2004 to 22 countries across the Middle East and North Africa. It has established itself as the third highest-rated pan-Arab news channel, surpassing viewership ratings for the BBC (English and Arabic), France 24 Arabic, RTV Arabic, CCTV, CNNi, and Sky Arabia.[citation needed]

In April 2004, an additional channel called Alhurra-Iraq was launched, featuring most of the Alhurra content, with additional programming specifically directed at the Iraqi audience. It is also broadcast on satellite and is available on terrestrial antennas throughout Iraq, including in Basra, and Baghdad. Alhurra-Iraq consistently achieves higher ratings in Iraq than both Al Jazeera and Al Arabiya.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alhurra





Kingdom Holding Co, controlled by Saudi billionaire Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, offered to acquire Mobile Telecommunications Co’s 25 percent stake in Zain Saudi Arabia, which is worth about SR2.6bn ($690m) at the current share price.

The sale of the Saudi unit would ease the purchase of a majority stake in Mobile Telecommunications, or Zain as Kuwait’s biggest phone company is known, by Emirates Telecommunications Corp., known as Etisalat. Based on the 1.4 billion outstanding Zain Saudi shares and a current share price of 7.35 riyals, the 25 percent stake is valued at about 2.6 billion riyals. Kingdom Holding’s expression of interest is valid until 5 p.m. in Riyadh on Feb. 6, the company said in a statement to the Saudi bourse.

http://m.arabianbusiness.com/kingdom...ke-377504.html



RIYADH, Saudi Arabia (AP) — Mobile phone service provider Zain Saudi says it has signed a nonbinding term sheet for the sale of a $950 million, 25 percent stake, in the company to Bahrain's Batelco Group and the investment firm headed by Saudi billionaire Prince Alwaleed bin Talal.

http://m.newsok.com/article/feed/277870

[muslim brother]

https://dewsburyahmedpatel.blogspot....acktivism.html

the importance of correct terminology

there is a need for a much more specific and appropriate use of terminology,as opposed to lazy groupspeak..
terms like ...
islamism,radical,extremist,moderate,conservative ,jihadist etc. are all too simplistic and subjective.
im bringing in the term muslim idealogue or muslim zealot into the discussion to replace islamism.
personally i find the terms islamist and jihadist problematic.
a terrorist is not a jihadist.
anyway
there is also a need to avoid sweeping generalisations,sensationalism and blanket statements...the term islamism being one of them.
to call a terrorist a jihadist is actually counterproductive as ironically the warped terrorist mind would love to be called a jihadi.

[Abz2000]

^ I don't normally respond to obvious trolling when there's no need to prove it as trolling. Trying to be RAND type think tanks at that. The words speak for themselves.
We live in an international and global age, and when those guilty of the most horrific crimes and atrocities on the planet on the largest scale whilst piling up multiple billions of dollars worth of weaponry to kill and mame millions - actually attempt to vilify the victims of such abuse and pretend to be calming the situation via suggestive and direct propaganda, we can be assured that mankind's intelligence is being insulted and that the criminals are cozy in their assumption that they have deceived the masses, yet it only takes a few minutes of critical thinking on the part of the masses for the matrix of deception to melt as salt dissolves in water.
The current political situation in which Muslims have been massacred on a massive scale, abused, looted, tortured, and then vilified as culprits is worse than that of a decent woman being raped by corrupt criminal thugs and being vilified as a sl#g, and then being accused of violence and other acts of which she is not guilty, just for trying to scratch the perpetrators with her fingernails, then in order to add insult to injury, she's made to think of her husband or father soothing her and telling her to enjoy it, in case she's seen as an aggressor.








A group called the Zealots is the key. They wrote the Dead Sea Scrolls, and were Judean freedom fighters in Baigent's view. Jesus grew up among them, and at least two of his disciples were Zealots, Simon Zelotes and Judas Iscariot. It is this political aspect that is excluded from the New Testament, "a sanitized, censored, and often inverted view of the time." It was a view which steadily removed Jesus from his Jewish context and ultimately led theologians and artists to depict him as a blond, blue-eyed European.

Baigent notes that documents continue to be discovered and sold. The recent "Judas Gospel" is a prime example and would seem to lend a slight air of credence to Baigent's proposition. Ultimately, Baigent writes, "All history is a myth, a story created to make some sense out of the few events we can know. The past is a hypothesis erected to explain and justify the present." History is what gets documented by the victors and does not always represent what really happened so we must read and interpret many different accounts of a particular event in order to arrive near the "Truth."



--------

Who does anyone with the ability to critically think Jesus sided with when it came to taking sides? The unjust pagan roman occupiers? The hypocritical sockpuppet Jewish leadership given charge of the mosque of Sulaiman pbuh by the Roman occupiers? The ones persecuted by the Romans and vilified by the hypocryte sockpuppet high priests as zelotes? The common man who was wilfully ignorant of the facts? (It was obvious that he had pity on them just as he expected pity for himself), but they didn't comprise the "faithful" whom he liked to see as his lot as long as the ignorant continued to choose to be ignorant.
Looking at the scriptures carefully despite the heavy editing which appears to have been done in order to absolve Rome of the blame, should easily paint a clearer picture.
What were they really afraid of? Was it the possibility that the people might wake up and accept the authority of Allah over the authority of the Roman occupation? How would the people do so if not via waking up and defending themselves within Allah's way when necessary?


-----'''
.......45Therefore many of the Jews who had come to visit Mary, and had seen what Jesus did, believed in him. 46But some of them went to the Pharisees and told them what Jesus had done. 47Then the chief priests and the Pharisees called a meeting of the Sanhedrin.

“What are we accomplishing?” they asked. “Here is this man performing many signs. 48If we let him go on like this, everyone will believe in him, and then the Romans will come and take away both our temple and our nation.”

49Then one of them, named Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, spoke up, “You know nothing at all! 50You do not realize that it is better for you that one man die for the people than that the whole nation perish.”

51He did not say this on his own, but as high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus would die for the Jewish nation, 52and not only for that nation but also for the scattered children of God, to bring them together and make them one. 53So from that day on they plotted to take his life.

54Therefore Jesus no longer moved about publicly among the people of Judea. Instead he withdrew to a region near the wilderness, to a village called Ephraim, where he stayed with his disciples.





zeal
zēl/
noun
noun: zeal
great energy or enthusiasm in pursuit of a cause or an objective.
"his zeal for privatization"
synonyms: passion, ardor, love, fervor, fire, avidity, devotion, enthusiasm, eagerness, keenness, appetite, relish, gusto, vigor, energy, intensity; fanaticism
"Ross's zeal for football"

antonyms: apathy, indifference

It is apparent that both Simon and Judas were zealots - but it also becomes apparent that there were more than one type of zealot, Simon was the one who chops off the roman soldier's ear when they came to arrest Jesus, whereas Judas the zionist alCIAda appears to be the sell out false flag proxy mercenary of the Romans. And history repeats.

The prophets weren't busy straining at people with zeal for God, rather they were busy making the word of Allah highest and establishing Allah's authority, and were fighting with their tongues, persons, and properties against those who rejected the authority of God, against the people who were the enemies of the zealots.
To back this statement up, weigh the scriptures on a balance and you'll find that woe to the infidels, woe to the hypocrites, woe to the defrauders and cheats exist, but never woe to the zealots who strive in Allah's cause within Allah's limits.

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

[Abz2000]

Here is an example of how people are lulled into a state of being off guard via familiarity and authoritative backup:

THE POWER OF SUGGESTIVE COMMUNICATION

......I would also add that a key component to sales is relationship building, especially in our space – financial services. Generally, engaging a prospective client with language that is suggestive and communicates clearly is far more effective than asking open ended questions.
By being more effusive, it allows the client to become more comfortable and also communicates the salesperson’s desire to service the prospect, thus allowing for a mutual trust and understanding to be built.

Chris’ answer is bang on. I can think of a number of occasions where good sales people have closed me using this technique. At the time I am not sure I even noticed that I was being closed. It just kinda happened, almost reflexively.

I tried to think of some other examples of these communications techniques applied properly to seal the deal:

“Are you interested in eating healthier and knowing where your food comes from?”
could be
“Organic, responsibly produced food is going to make your children feel better and give you the added assurance of knowing who produces your food.”

“Do you want to outsource event production and raise large sums of money?”
could be
“By using our expertise you will be able to get more from your existing in house assets and generate significant monies for groundbreaking research at your hospital.”

The takeaway from this discussion is simple: the way phrases are structured matters. Too often (and I am WAAAY guilty of this) we understand the goal and concept but f@#k up the details of phraseology. PR, marketing and sales execs (and myriad folks from other functional areas) are well advised to periodically remind their people of the key communications snafus to avoid in their industry (whether those keys relate to how not to pitch a journo, how not to respond to a Twitter complaint etc). Better yet, mock up exercises and role playing scenarios are excellent ways to breed continued success and ensure skills stay sharp.

How does suggestive communication play in your industry? What communications missteps do you specifically need to avoid to win?
ONE COMMENT
Lindsay D. says:
January 27, 2010 at 9:14 am
Very interesting & especially true. I really liked your idea of mock up & roll playing exercises to strengthen this skill set.

http://properpropaganda.net/the-powe...communication/


In the above advert, we notice that the backdrop audio is in tune with the mentality at ramadan and also authoritative - a little like the old cigarette adverts used in america with captions such as: as your dentist - I recommend lucky strikes to protect your teeth......

Persuasion attempts to win "the heart and mind" of the target. Thus persuasion must induce attitude change, which entails affective (emotion-based) change. Although persuasion is more difficult to induce, its effects last longer because the target actually accepts and internalizes the advocacy.

There are many persuasion tactics, one of which utilizes the Socratic Effect, studied by the famous influence researcher, William McGuire. It states that by merely directing thoughts to attitudes and beliefs with logical implications for one another, those attitudes and beliefs become more consistent.

A more simplistic method - "things".
"They hate things; we love things.
They act out of hatred; we don't seek revenge, we seek justice out of love."
--George W. Bush, August 29, 2002
Source: The War in Quotes, by G.B. Trudeau, p. 20 Oct 1, 2008



يَسْأَلُونَكَ عَنِ الشَّهْرِ الْحَرَامِ قِتَالٍ فِيهِ قُلْ قِتَالٌ فِيهِ كَبِيرٌ وَصَدٌّ عَن سَبِيلِ اللّهِ وَكُفْرٌ بِهِ وَالْمَسْجِدِ الْحَرَامِ وَإِخْرَاجُ أَهْلِهِ مِنْهُ أَكْبَرُ عِندَ اللّهِ وَالْفِتْنَةُ أَكْبَرُ مِنَ الْقَتْلِ وَلاَ يَزَالُونَ يُقَاتِلُونَكُمْ حَتَّىَ يَرُدُّوكُمْ عَن دِينِكُمْ إِنِ اسْتَطَاعُواْ وَمَن يَرْتَدِدْ مِنكُمْ عَن دِينِهِ فَيَمُتْ وَهُوَ كَافِرٌ فَأُوْلَـئِكَ حَبِطَتْ أَعْمَالُهُمْ فِي الدُّنْيَا وَالآخِرَةِ وَأُوْلَـئِكَ أَصْحَابُ النَّارِ هُمْ فِيهَا خَالِدُونَ {217

2:217
:
They ask you concerning fighting in the Sacred Months (i.e. 1st, 7th, 11th and 12th months of the Islamic calendar). Say, "Fighting therein is a great (transgression) but a greater (transgression) with Allah is to prevent mankind from following the Way of Allah, to disbelieve in Him, to prevent access to Al-Masjid-al-Haram (at Makkah), and to drive out its inhabitants, and Al-Fitnah is worse than killing. And they will never cease fighting you until they turn you back from your deen (Islamic Monotheism) if they can. And whosoever of you turns back from his deen and dies as a disbeliever, then his deeds will be lost in this life and in the Hereafter, and they will be the dwellers of the Fire. They will abide therein forever.


يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ لاَ تَتَّخِذُواْ بِطَانَةً مِّن دُونِكُمْ لاَ يَأْلُونَكُمْ خَبَالاً وَدُّواْ مَا عَنِتُّمْ قَدْ بَدَتِ الْبَغْضَاء مِنْ أَفْوَاهِهِمْ وَمَا تُخْفِي صُدُورُهُمْ أَكْبَرُ قَدْ بَيَّنَّا لَكُمُ الآيَاتِ إِن كُنتُمْ تَعْقِلُونَ {118

3:118
:
O you who believe! Take not as (your) Bitanah (advisors, consultants, protectors, helpers, friends, etc.) those outside your own lot (true Muslim believers) since they will not fail to do their best to corrupt you.
They desire to harm you severely.
Hatred has already appeared from their mouths, but what their breasts conceal is far worse. Indeed We have made plain to you the Ayat (proofs, evidences, verses) if you understand."