× Register Login What's New! Contact us
Results 1 to 9 of 9 visibility 2195

Iman vs Propaganda

  1. #1
    T L's Avatar Full Member
    brightness_1
    Full Member
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Gender
    Female
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    133
    Threads
    11
    Rep Power
    51
    Rep Ratio
    97
    Likes Ratio
    133

    Iman vs Propaganda

    Report bad ads?

    Salaam

    Interesting Khutbah by Nouman Ali Khan. He explores the many lessons from the story of Musa (as) and the Pharaoh (May Allah's curse be upon him, Ameen).


    Subhan'Allah how the lessons in the Qur'an are ever relevant.

    ~TL
    | Likes RizwanAli, Abz2000 liked this post
    Iman vs Propaganda


    We
    rise in the dying.

    ~ Asfurat al Jannah ~

    chat Quote

  2. Report bad ads?
  3. #2
    Abz2000's Avatar Full Member
    brightness_1
    Abz Iz Back!!!
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Around the bend from Venus - Just before Mars
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    5,357
    Threads
    150
    Rep Power
    108
    Rep Ratio
    86
    Likes Ratio
    55

    Re: Iman vs Propaganda

    I was just watching it again and thought I'd look up some propaganda techniques being used against Islam since I mentioned it on another thread, it fits here better:



    - - - Updated - - -

    Israeli students to get $2,000 to spread state propaganda on Facebook
    Ali Abunimah
    4 January 2012
    The National Union of Israeli Students (NUIS) has become a full-time partner in the Israeli government’s efforts to spread its propaganda online and on college campuses around the world.

    NUIS has launched a program to pay Israeli university students $2,000 to spread pro-Israel propaganda online for 5 hours per week from the “comfort of home.”

    The union is also partnering with Israel’s Jewish Agency to send Israeli students as missionaries to spread propaganda in other countries, for which they will also receive a stipend.

    This active recruitment of Israeli students is part of Israel’s orchestrated effort to suppress the Palestinian solidarity movement under the guise of combating “delegitimization” of Israel and anti-Semitism.

    The involvement of the official Israeli student union as well as Haifa University, Tel Aviv University, Ben-Gurion University and Sapir College in these state propaganda programs will likely bolster Palestinian calls for the international boycott of Israeli academic institutions.

    Paying students to spread Israeli propaganda online
    This is our opportunity, as Israeli students, to provide hasbara [state propaganda] that is correct and balanced, to help in the struggle against the delegitimization of the State of Israel and against hatred of Jews in the world.

    That is one of the exhortations in a Hebrew document issued by NUIS, and translated by The Electronic Intifada, inviting Israeli students to apply for a program to help spread Israel’s message.

    The project seeks to take advantage of the fact that “Many students in Israel master the Internet and are proficient at using the Internet and social networking and various sites and are required to write and express themselves in English.”

    The paid scholarship will allow them to get training and then work from home for five hours per week for a year to “refute” what it calls “misinformation” about Israel on social networking sites.

    Among the stated goals of the scholarships is “to deepen and expand hasbara activities of students in the State of Israel.” The document explains:

    The Internet allows uncontrolled access to content from marginal groups and therefore can influence many audiences who are exposed to such information, particularly young people who are more easily influenced.

    The Internet, then, is used as a major tool for the dissemination of anti-Semitism, hatred of Israel and of Jews and thus the Internet is also the place to battle against such sites, pull the ground from under them and to provide reliable and balanced information.

    Work from the “comfort of home”

    The NUIS program document explains:

    After training, the student will begin his activities. The student will do the activities in the comfort of his home, where every week he will be obligated to about 5 hours of activities for a period of one calendar year (not academic year). Students will be paid a total of NIS 7,500 [$2,000] to perform the tasks of the project, at least 5 hours weekly for a total of 240 hours of activities under the project umbrella.

    What is completely missing from the program is any indication that criticism of Israel could be valid. Rather the National Union of Israeli Students apparently seeks to indoctrinate Israeli students that every criticism of Israel is “hate” and “anti-Semitism” and that the Internet should be seen as a battlefield on which they are foot soldiers.

    Using e-learning tools for government propaganda

    An interesting aspect of the NUIS program is that it uses the common open source virtual learning environment Moodle as its interface with program participants. This interface can be found at students.digitalchange.co.il.

    Whereas Moodle was designed for education – to spread mind-opening learning beyond the constraints of geography – the Israeli innovation here is to use it for mind-narrowing propaganda: getting students to be uncritical, to not think for themselves, but rather to spread Israel’s state-sponsored propaganda.

    See the world, spread more propaganda
    NUIS has also partnered with the Jewish Agency, the Israeli state body that encourages Jews from around the world to settle on stolen Palestinian land, to spread propaganda on college campuses around the world.

    The Jewish Agency website announces, as translated from Hebrew by Dena Shunra for The Electronic Intifada:

    For the first time in Israel – a unique, world-encompassing scholarship, in cooperation between the Student Union and the Jewish Agency.

    Every year the Jewish Agency of Israel sends approximately 150 emissaries to various places around the world - North America, England, South Africa, Australia, Germany, Italy and South America, who engage in Jewish education and hasbara in three main streams - Hillel emissaries (to campuses around North America), community emissaries and youth movement emissaries.

    Training for these overseas missions for successful applicants will take place at Haifa University, Tel Aviv University, Ben-Gurion University and Sapir College, after which the would-be missionaries “will set off for a one-year mission in the various Jewish communities around the world, and will also receive a scholarship of up to NIS 5,000 [$1300].”

    Applications are open to Israeli citizens who have lived in the country for three years, those who have completed service in the Israeli army, and those who speak foreign languages, among other criteria.

    A student union in the service of the state
    In most countries student unions often find themselves at odds with state authorities, fighting for the rights of students. But it would appear that Israel’s “student union” does not so much represent students and fight for their rights, but represents the state in the state’s efforts to recruit students to do its political bidding.

    In this sense, the NUIS functions in a very similar way to Israel’s “trade union” the Histadrut.

    Who funds NUIS and what role do they play in government propaganda efforts?
    See: Israel’s “pretty face”: How National Union of Israeli Students does government’s propaganda dirty work


    https://electronicintifada.net/blogs...ganda-facebook



    Last edited by Abz2000; 07-24-2017 at 11:10 AM.
    Iman vs Propaganda




    2dvls74 1 - Iman vs Propaganda


    2vw9341 1 - Iman vs Propaganda




    chat Quote

  4. #3
    Abz2000's Avatar Full Member
    brightness_1
    Abz Iz Back!!!
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Around the bend from Venus - Just before Mars
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    5,357
    Threads
    150
    Rep Power
    108
    Rep Ratio
    86
    Likes Ratio
    55

    Re: Iman vs Propaganda

    This is a screenshot I took back in 2011 /2012 during the open attempt to gain public opinion by secularists for the bombing of Syria after the Golan heights and libya issues:

    http://imageshack.com/a/img924/2295/j2zjPF.jpg

    https://imageshack.com/i/poDuP8bTj

    Appears to be a purposeful attempt to show genuine commenters with english as a non primary language.
    Last edited by Abz2000; 07-24-2017 at 11:47 AM.
    Iman vs Propaganda




    2dvls74 1 - Iman vs Propaganda


    2vw9341 1 - Iman vs Propaganda




    chat Quote

  5. #4
    Abz2000's Avatar Full Member
    brightness_1
    Abz Iz Back!!!
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Around the bend from Venus - Just before Mars
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    5,357
    Threads
    150
    Rep Power
    108
    Rep Ratio
    86
    Likes Ratio
    55

    Re: Iman vs Propaganda

    You have to mix it up a bit, though,” said my trainer.“Otherwise it gets too obvious. Learn to use a thesaurus.”



    Ex-Zionist shill describes how deception centers are run:

    An Ex- Shill

    I am writing here to come out of the closet as a paid shill. For a little over six months, I was paid to spread disinformation and argue political points on the Internet. This site, @&?#, was NOT one that I was assigned to post on, although other people in the same organization were paid to be here, and I assume they still walk among you. But more on this later.

    I quit this job in the latter part of 2011, because I became disgusted with it, and with myself. I realized I couldn’t look myself in the mirror anymore. If this confession triggers some kind of retribution against me, so be it. Part of being a real man in this world is having real values that you stand up for, no matter what the consequences.

    My story begins in early 2011. I had been out of work for almost a year after losing my last job in tech support. Increasingly desperate and despondent, I jumped at the chance when a former co-worker called me up and said she had a possible lead for me.

    “It is an unusual job, and one that requires secrecy. But the pay is good. And I know you are a good writer, so its something you are suited for.” (Writing has always been a hobby for me). She gave me only a phone-number and an address, in one of the seedier parts of San Francisco, where I live.

    Intrigued, I asked her for the company’s URL and some more info. She laughed. “They don’t have a website. Or even a name. You’ll see. Just tell them I referred you.” Yes, it sounded suspicious, but long-term joblessness breeds desperation, and desperation has a funny way of overlooking the suspicious when it comes to putting food on the table.

    The next day, I arrived at the address – the third floor in a crumbling building. The appearance of the place did not inspire confidence. After walking down a long, filthy linoleum-covered corridor lit by dimly-flickering halogen, I came to the entrance of the office itself: a crudely battered metal door with a sign that said “United Amalgamated Industries, Inc.,” (sounds like “Urban Movers”).

    I later learned that this “company” changed its name almost monthly, always using bland names like that which gave no strong impression of what the company actually does. Not too hopeful, I went inside.

    The interior was equally shabby. There were a few long tables with folding chairs, at which about a dozen people were tapping away on old, beat-up computers.

    There were no decorations or ornaments of any type: not even the standard-issue office fica trees or plastic ferns. What a dump. Well, beggars can’t be choosers.

    The manager, a balding man in his late forties, rose from the only stand-alone desk in the room and came forward with an easy smile. “You must be Chris. Yvette [my ex-co-worker] told me you’d be coming.” [Not our real names]. “Welcome. Let me tell you a little about what we do.”

    No interview, nothing. I later learned they took people based solely on referral, and that the people making the referrals, like my ex-colleague Yvette, were trained to pick out candidates based on several factors including ability to keep one’s mouth shut, basic writing skills, and desperation for work.

    We sat down at his desk and he began by asking me a few questions about myself and my background, including my political views (which were basically non-existent). Then he began to explain the job.

    “We work on influencing people’s opinions here,” is how he described it. The company’s clients paid them to post on Internet message boards and popular chartrooms, as well as in gaming forums and social networks like Facebook and MySpace. Who were these clients? “Oh, various people,” he said vaguely. “Sometimes private companies, sometimes political groups.”

    Satisfied that my political views were not strong, he said I would be assigned to political work. “The best people for this type of job are people like you, without strong views,” he said with a laugh. “It might seem counterintuitive, but actually we’ve found that to be the case.”


    Well, OK. Fine. As long as itcomes with a steady paycheck, I’d believe whatever they wanted me to believe, as the guy in Ghostbusters said. After discussing pay (which was much better than I’d hoped) and a few other details, he then went over the need for absolute privacy and secrecy.

    “You can’t tell anyone what we do here. Not your wife, not your dog.” (I have neither, as it happens.) “We’ll give you a cover story and even a phone number and a fake website you can use. You will have to tell people you are a consultant. Since your background is in tech support, that will be your cover job. Is this going to be a problem for you?”



    I assured him it would not. “Well, OK. Shall we get started?”
    “Right now?” I asked, a bit taken aback.
    “No time like the present!” he said with a hearty laugh.

    The rest of the day was taken up with training. Another staff member, a no-nonsense woman in her thirties, was to be my trainer, and training would only last two days. “You seem like a bright guy, you’ll get the hang of it pretty fast, I think,” she said. And indeed, the job was easier than I’d imagined.

    My task was simple: I would be assigned to four different websites, with the goal of entering certain discussions and promoting a certain view.

    I learned later that some of the personnel were assigned to internet message boards (like me), while others worked on Facebook or chatrooms. It seems these three types of media each have different strategy for shilling, and each shill concentrates on one of the three in particular.

    My task? “To support Israel and counter anti-Israeli, anti-Semitic posters.” Fine with me. I had no opinions one way or another about Israel, and who likes anti-Semites and Nazis? Not me, anyway. But I didn’t know too much about the topic.


    “That’s OK,” she said. “You’ll pick it up as you go along. For the most part, at first, you will be doing what we call “meme-patrol.” This is pretty easy. Later if you show promise, we’ll train you for more complex arguments, where more in-depth knowledge is necessary.”

    She handed me two binders with sheets enclosed in limp plastic. The first was labeled simply “Israel” in magic-marker on the cover, and it had two sections .

    The first section contained basic background info on the topic. I would have to read and memorize some of this, as time went on. It had internet links for further reading, essays and talking points, and excerpts from some history books.

    The second, and larger, section was called“Strat” (short for “strategy”) with long lists of “dialogue pairs.” These were specific responses to specific postings. If a poster wrote something close to “X,” we were supposed to respond with something close to “Y.”

    “You have to mix it up a bit, though,” said my trainer.“Otherwise it gets too obvious. Learn to use a thesaurus.”


    This section also contained a number of hints for de-railing conversations that went too far away from what we were attempting.

    These strategies included various forms of personal attacks, complaining to the forum moderators, smearing the characters of our opponents, using images and icons effectively, and even dragging the tone of the conversation down with sexual innuendo, links to pornography, or other such things.


    “Sometimes we have to fight dirty,” or trainer told us. “Our opponents don’t hesitate to, so we can’t either.”

    The second binder was smaller, and it contained information specific to the web sites I would be assigned to. The sites I would work were: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, and a handful of smaller sites that rotated depending on need. As stated, I was NOT assigned to work xxx (although others in my group were), which is part of the reason I am posting this here, rather than elsewhere.


    I wanted to post this on Godlike Productions at first, but they have banned me from even viewing that site for some reason (perhaps they are onto me?). But if somebody connected with this site can get the message to them, I think they should know about it, because that was the site I spent a good 70% of my time working on.

    The site-specific info in the second binder included a brief history each site, including recent flame-wars, as well as info on what to avoid on each site so as not to get banned.

    It also had quite detailed info on the moderators and the most popular regged posters on each site: location (if known), personality type, topics of interest, background sketch, and even some notes on how to “push the psychological buttons” of different posters. Although I didn’t work for xxx, I did see they had a lot of info on your so-called “WATS” posters here (the ones with gold borders around their edges). “Focus on the popular posters,” my trainer told me.

    “These are the influential ones. Each of these is worth 50 to 100 of the lesser known names.” Each popular poster was classified as “hostile,” “friendly,” or “indifferent” to my goal. We were supposed to cultivate friendship with the friendly posters as well as the mods (basically, by brownnosing and sucking up), and there were even notes on strategies for dealing with specific hostile posters. The info was pretty detailed, but not perfect in every case.

    “If you can convert one of the hostile posters from the enemy side to our side, you get a nice bonus. But this doesn’t happen too often, sadly. So mostly you’ll be attacking them and trying to smear them.”

    At first, like I said, my job was “meme-patrol.” This was pretty simple and repetitive; it involved countering memes and introducing new memes, and didn’t demand much in-depth knowledge of the subject. Mostly just repetitive posting based on the dialogue pairs in the “Strat” section of the first binder.

    A lot of my job was de-railing and spamming threads that didn’t go our way, or making accusations of racism and anti-Semitism. Sometimes I had to simply lie and claim a poster said something or did something “in another thread” they really hadn’t said or done

    I felt bad about this…but in the end I felt worse about the possibility of losing the first job I’d been able to get since losing my “real” job.



    The funny thing was, although I started the job with no strong opinions or political views, after a few weeks of this I became very emotionally wedded to the pro-Israel ideas I was pushing.

    There must be some psychological factor at work…a good salesman learns to honestly love the products he’s selling, I guess.

    It wasn’t long before my responses became fiery and passionate, and I began to learn more about the topic on my own. “This is a good sign,” my trainer told me. “It means you are ready for the next step: complex debate.”

    The “complex debate” part of the job involved a fair amount of additional training, including memorizing more specific information about the specific posters (friendly and hostile) I’d be sparring with. Here, too, there were scripts and suggested lines of argument, but we were given more freedom.

    There were a lot of details to this more advanced stage of the job – everything from how to select the right avatar to how to use“demotivationals” (humorous images with black borders that one finds floating around the web). Even the proper use of images of cats was discussed.

    Sometimes we used faked or photo-shopped images or doctored news reports (something else that bothered me).

    I was also given the job of tying to find new recruits, people “like me” who had the personality type, ability to keep a secret, basic writing/thinking skills, and desperation necessary to sign on a shill. I was less successful at this part of the job, though, and I couldn’t find another in the time I was there.

    After a while of doing this, I started to feel bad. Not because of the views I was pushing (as I said, I was first apolitical, then pro-Israel), but because of the dishonesty involved. If my arguments were so correct, I wondered, why did we have to do this in the first place? Shouldn’t truth propagate itself naturally, rather than through, well…propaganda?

    And who was behind this whole operation, anyway? Who was signing my paychecks? The stress of lying to my parents and friends about being a “consultant” was also getting to me. Finally, I said enough was enough.

    quit in September 2011. Since then I’ve been working a series of unglamorous temp office jobs for lower pay. But at least I’m not making my living lying and heckling people who come online to express their views and exercise freedom of speech.

    A few days ago I happened to be in the same neighborhood and on a whim thought I’d check out the old office. It turns out the operation is gone, having moved on.

    This, too, I understood, is part of their strategy: Don’t stay in the same place for too long, don’t keep the same name too long, move on after half a year or so.

    Keeping a low profile, finding new employees through word of mouth: All this is part of the shill way of life. But it is a deceptive way of life, and no matter how noble the goals (I remain pro-Israel, by the way), these sleazy means cannot be justified by the end.

    This is my confession. I haven’t made up my mind yet about whether I want to talk more about this, so if I don’t respond to this thread, don’t be angry.

    But I think you should know: Shills exist. They are real. They walk among you, and they pay special attention to your popular gold-bordered WATS posters. You should be aware of this. What you choose to do with this awareness is up to you.

    http://www.veteranstodayarchives.com...israeli-shill/
    [/b]
    Last edited by Abz2000; 07-25-2017 at 12:14 AM.
    Iman vs Propaganda




    2dvls74 1 - Iman vs Propaganda


    2vw9341 1 - Iman vs Propaganda




    chat Quote

  6. Report bad ads?
  7. #5
    Abz2000's Avatar Full Member
    brightness_1
    Abz Iz Back!!!
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Around the bend from Venus - Just before Mars
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    5,357
    Threads
    150
    Rep Power
    108
    Rep Ratio
    86
    Likes Ratio
    55

    Re: Iman vs Propaganda

    More on hasbara trolling and shilling:









    Last edited by Abz2000; 07-26-2017 at 12:01 AM.
    Iman vs Propaganda




    2dvls74 1 - Iman vs Propaganda


    2vw9341 1 - Iman vs Propaganda




    chat Quote

  8. #6
    Abz2000's Avatar Full Member
    brightness_1
    Abz Iz Back!!!
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Around the bend from Venus - Just before Mars
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    5,357
    Threads
    150
    Rep Power
    108
    Rep Ratio
    86
    Likes Ratio
    55

    Re: Iman vs Propaganda

    I just found rhe hasbara manual, it's not the ark of the covenant, but it appears to be the art of whitewashing covenant breaking and treachery, here are some details on it:

    Hasbara (2009 manual)
    Hasbara (2009 manual)
    Type manual
    Author(s) Unknown
    The 2009 Global Language Dictionary [1] is a 116 page document intended for distribution amongst opinion-forming Zionists.
    It is a project of the pro-Israel lobby group known as "The Israel Project" or TIP and is based on work done for them by well-known pollster and master of focus groups, Frank Luntz. The aim of the project was to determine the best convincing language with which to project a positive view of Israel, in particular, language that would tend to justify the settlements. Or, in the words of TIP's founder, to "formulate communications strategy".
    When it was leaked, critics of Israel dubbed it the "Hasbara Manual" and assumed it to be evidence that Zionist public relations is very professional and very well funded.
    Contents [hide]


    1 Genesis and exposure
    2 Contents
    2.1 Settlements
    2.2 Show empathy
    2.3 WORDS THAT WORK
    2.4 WORDS THAT DON'T WORK
    3 References


    Genesis and exposure
    The results of the study and the publication of the "dictionary" were intended to be secret, and the manual produced was marked "Not for distribution or publication". However, this did not save it from being leaked to the great amusement of critics. Perhaps as a result of copyright concerns, the text is no longer widely available on the web (as at Sept 2011).
    It is believed that justifying the settlements is the primary purpose of this relatively expensive project. The study states that "public opinion is hostile to the settlements - even among supporters of Israel" so instead of dwelling on settlements one should always talk positively and focus on past peace achievement.
    The Manual was released soon after "Operation Cast Lead" (or the "Gaza War" as some supporters of Israel prefer to call it) and comes with some passages apparently written to justify that bombing.
    Contents

    Settlements
    TIP's founder and president, Jennifer Laszlo-Mizrahi told Newsweek that setting people straight about settlements is particularly important: "The idea that some have in Washington that unilaterally putting pressure on Israel to make concessions on settlements is going to lead to peace is unfortunately shortsighted."[2]
    The finished manual advises framing the issue as being about peace not settlements, but also proposes that propagandists go on the offensive, claiming that attacks on the settlements are anti-Semitic and amount to "ethnic cleansing".
    Critics such as J Street describe the advice as "If you get a question about settlements, change the subject. If pressed, say stopping settlements is "a kind of ethnic cleansing". J Street sent a mailing to their organization asking their members to send letters to TIP asking them to "remove pro-settlement fear-mongering talking points from The Israel Project's materials".[3]


    Show empathy
    The manual recommends being positive and to show empathy with the Palestinians. The discussion should be "framed"


    WORDS THAT WORK
    Throughout the "dictionary" (hasbara manual) are sections entitled "WORDS THAT WORK" and "WORDS THAT DON'T WORK". While much that appears is opinion, there are unsupported facts asserted and in some cases, the claims made would appear to be unsupportable.

    "... day after day, Palestinian leadership pushes a culture of hate that encourages even small children to become suicide bombers. Iran-backed Hamas’s public television in Gaza uses Sesame Street-type programming to glorify suicide bombers." p.5
    "Clearly differentiate between the Palestinian people and Hamas. There is an immediate and clear distinction between the empathy Americans feel for the Palestinians and the scorn they direct at Palestinian leadership. Hamas is a terrorist organization - Americans get that already. But if it sounds like you are attacking the Palestinian people (even though they elected Hamas) rather than their leadership, you will lose public support. Right now, many Americans sympathize with the plight of the Palestinians, and that sympathy will increase if you fail to differentiate the people from their leaders." p.5
    "Use humility. "I know that in trying to defend its children and citizens from terrorists that Israel has accidentally hurt innocent people. I know it, and I’m sorry for it. But what can Israel do to defend itself? If America had given up land for peace - and that land had been used for launching rockets at America, what would America do? Israel was attacked with thousands of rockets from Iran-backed Palestinian terrorists in Gaza. What should Israel have done to protect her children?" p.7
    "even though Americans agree that Hamas’ control of Gaza makes Israel less secure, they still expect Israel to act with regard for the Palestinian people. Achieving this balance is the key ... Israeli parents understand the fears Palestinian parents have for their children - because they have gone through the exact same thing. That’s the textbook definition of empathy. You simply must frame this whole issue in terms of mutuality of empathy. ... And we mean frame it. You have to start this argument the right way in order to maintain the credibility you need to finish it off. If you lay right into "rockets, rockets, rockets" you’ll lose the entire left and more than half of the middle. But if you start with something unexpected and genuine, they’ll hear you out for the rest of what you have to say." p.46
    "Israel should not be bombing Gaza. I will repeat that. Israel should not be forced into a situation where they have to bomb Gaza. Likewise, Hamas should not be deliberately firing rockets into civilian areas of Israel. If the rockets stop, we can achieve that peace where Palestinian and Israeli children live in safety." p.47

    "... here is the five-step approach to talking about civilian casualties in Gaza:

    -- STEP 1 - Empathy: "All human life is precious. We understand that the loss of one innocent Palestinian life is every bit as tragic as the loss of an Israeli life."
    -- STEP 2 - Admission: "We admit that Israel isn’t always successful at preventing civilian casualties..."
    -- STEP 3 - Effort: "We remain committed to doing everything in our power to preventing civilian casualties."
    -- STEP 4 - Examples: "Let me tell you how our armed forces are trained, tasked, and operate to ensure that Palestinian civilians remain safe."
    -- STEP 5 - Turn Tables: "It is a great tragedy that Iran-backed Hamas shoots rockets at our civilians while hiding in their own. This causes tragic deaths on BOTH sides. What would you do if you were in this situation?"
    We need to call specific attention to Step 2. Don’t pretend that Israel is without mistakes or fault. It’s not true and no one believes it. It will only make your listeners question the veracity of everything else you say. People do not expect Israel to be 100 percent successful in all their efforts to stop "terrorism". Admitting that Israel has and continues to make mistakes does not undermine the overall justice of Israel’s goals: peace and security and a better quality of life for everyone. Because Israel is seen as the more powerful party, you must use humility." p.50
    "3 mosques in Gaza used as weapons, ammunition and explosives depots that were struck by the Israel Defense Forces during the operation in Gaza. [21] The strikes occurred only at night and never during prayer times, to avoid civilian casualties." Appendix III p.109


    WORDS THAT DON'T WORK
    The document also lists arguments that don't work, in particular noting that religious, ownership and "scapegoat" arguments failed to sway the listeners in focus groups.

    https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Hasbara_(2009_manual)


    This hasbara handbook for clowns is a must read for everyone who's been targeted by trolls:

    http://www.middle-east-info.org/take/wujshasbara.pdf


    And this is the "global language dictionary" you'll need it to recognize wording:

    https://www.transcend.org/tms/wp-con...dictionary.pdf

    - - - Updated - - -

    A Hasbara manual for students to use on US univesity campuses is now available online[2]. A summary of the techniques is provided from page 31 onwards:

    Propaganda is used by those who want to communicate in ways that engage the emotions and downplay rationality, in an attempt to promote a certain message.
    The manual goes on to describe seven propaganda techniques:

    Name calling: through the careful use of words, then name calling technique links a person or an idea to a negative symbol.

    Glittering generality: Simply put, 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 positive image to things. Words such as "freedom", "civilization",…

    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.

    Testimonial: Testimonial means enlisting the support of somebody admired or famous to endorse and ideal or campaign.

    Plain folks: The plain folks technique attempts to convince the listener that the speaker is a 'regular guy', who is trust-worthy because the are like 'you or me'.

    Fear: Stressing that ignoring the message will likely lead to war, terrorism[3]

    Bandwagon: Suggest that the stated position is mainstream and use polls to suggest this. [4]




    Other hasbara efforts

    Nation Branding
    The Israeli government has contracted with several international PR companies to improve its image in the US, Europe and Canada. In the UK, Acanchi was hired to work on Israel's nation branding[5]. Saatchi and Saatchi acknowledged that it works with the Israelis free of charge on the re-branding effort.[6] Haaretz also revealed that it attempted to hire a Norwegian PR company for the same purposes.

    Cultural Event exposure
    Part of the efforts to improve Israel's image abroad is to increase the number of cultural events at which Israeli artists are present. Israeli writers, film makers, dance groups, etc., are subsidized by the Israeli government so that these groups can go on tour. Artists receiving funds to represent Israel abroad are paid, and they are also required to sign a contract requiring them to comment positively about Israel.[7] The Batsheva Dance Company tours Europe and North America as the "cultural ambassadors for Israel".[8] The company is mostly funded by the Israeli government and the Rothschild family.

    Production of Propaganda films
    Several films have been produced to either portray Israel in a good light or to portray Palestinians/Muslims in a negative light.[9] Geert Wilders, the right-wing Dutch politician and pro-Israel hawk, has been on tour to present Fitna, his anti-Islam film. The organizers of the events where Wilders spoke and showed the film was Ruder Finn, a leading PR company that has long represented Israel abroad.[10]

    Pink-washing Israel
    PR companies hired by Israel have taken prominent gays on tour to Israel, and also taken prominent Israeli gays on tour to Europe and the United States. These efforts attempt to show that Israel is a tolerant and gay-friendly society.
    Iman vs Propaganda




    2dvls74 1 - Iman vs Propaganda


    2vw9341 1 - Iman vs Propaganda




    chat Quote

  9. #7
    Abz2000's Avatar Full Member
    brightness_1
    Abz Iz Back!!!
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Around the bend from Venus - Just before Mars
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    5,357
    Threads
    150
    Rep Power
    108
    Rep Ratio
    86
    Likes Ratio
    55

    Re: Iman vs Propaganda

    You are here: Home / Mideast Peace / The Israel Project’s Secret Hasbara Handbook Exposed
    The Israel Project’s Secret Hasbara Handbook Exposed

    July 10, 2009 By Richard Silverstein 46 Comments

    Imagine for a moment you’re a general about to embark on a decisive military campaign and your intelligence service secures a copy of your opponent’s entire campaign strategy. You open it and you see his battle plans laid out before you, key forces, weaponry, lines of attack, points of weaknesses, etc. You suddenly understand just how weak his forces are and precisely how to mercilessly attack and eviscerate him. The plan makes you understand that his forces are largely based on artifice and sham. It gives you confidence that you are entirely on the right course and tells you how to stay on that course. Victory is assured, your enemy’s defeat certain.

    Douglas Bloomfield and Newsweek have done pretty close to that against the Israel lobby. Specifically, they’ve exposed a secret hasbara handbook written for The Israel Project by star Republican marketer, Frank Luntz. The oddly-named Global Language Dictionary (pdf) is a veritable goldmine of arguments, strategy, tactics. At 116 pages, it’s not for the faint of heart. But anyone who wants to get inside the head of the Israel lobby must read this document.

    I want to devote at least two or three posts to it so I hope you, dear reader, will bear with me. I know my enthusiasm will mark me as a real wonk, but this is the real deal and worth spending some time parsing and deconstructing.

    The first thing to say is that the entire document is a pathetic piece of propaganda. While it ostensibly is addressed to TIP’s leaders and advises them how to shape a pro-Israel message when they lobby Congress, the media and other critical power brokers, the entire thing reeks of desperation and a lost cause. It goes without saying that the arguments offered are not only devoid of truth, they’re devoid of rigor or credibility. There is literally no substance to the claims offered on Israel’s behalf. It’s an empty exercise in every sense of the word. Reading this makes you realize that the entire Israel lobby edifice is a house of cards.

    Perhaps I’m letting my shock at the shabbiness of the Dictionary get the better of me and overstating the case it reveals against the Lobby. After all, any political network that exists for six decades and achieves as much as this one has doesn’t topple overnight. But I’ll just have to let you be the judge.

    One aspect of this I find extraordinary and entirely dubious is the choice of the Republican campaign pollster Frank Luntz to write this report. This indicates, as I’ve always maintained, that the Lobby is totally tone deaf to the political environment. We have a democratic president and two Houses of Congress under Democratic control for the first time in a few decades. Pragmatic liberalism is ascendant. Neo-conservatism and Bushian Republicanism are in retreat. And who does TIP chose to make the case for Israel? A right-wing Republican spinmeister. Remarkable. But one thing I must say is that this is a good sign for our side. If our opponents are as wooden as they appear, then they will topple themselves without needing much help from us.

    The first chapter, 25 Rules for Effective Communication opens with:

    The first step to winning trust and friends for Israel is showing that you care about peace for BOTH Israelis and Palestinians and, in particular, a better future for every child. Indeed, the sequence of your conversation is critical and you must start with empathy for BOTH sides first. Open your conversation with strong proven messages such as:

    “Israel is committed to a better future for everyone – Israelis and Palestinians alike. Israel wants the pain and suffering to end, and is committed to working with the Palestinians toward a peaceful, diplomatic solution where both sides can have a better future. Let this be a time of hope and opportunity for both the
    Israeli and the Palestinian people.”

    The first thing we learn is that this passage, as with everything else printed in the handbook, is empty meaningless drivel. It’s a perfect example of political three-card monty in which there appears to be a card which isn’t there at all. It’s all a sham. There is no substance. The rhetoric here is even worse than that offered by spokespeople like Mark Regev on behalf of the Israeli government.

    In the following passage, we can see that Luntz has lifted shamelessly lifted arguments from MEMRI and former Mossad officer, Itamar Marcus’ Palestine Media Watch. Others before me have demolished these tawdry arguments, but it’s instructive to read the lies and distortions that TIP instructs its representatives to parrot.

    Throughout, the document drips noblesse oblige and fake concern for Palestinian children:

    “As a matter of principle, we believe that it is a basic right of children to be raised without hate. We ask the Palestinian leadership to end the culture of hate in Palestinian schools, 300 of which are named for suicide bombers. Palestinian leaders should take textbooks out of classrooms that show maps of the Middle East without Israel and that glorify terrorism.”

    As a matter of principle, children should not be raised to want to kill others or themselves. Yet, day after day, Palestinian leadership pushes a culture of hate that encourages even small children to become suicide bombers. Iran-backed Hamas’s public television in Gaza uses Sesame Street–type programming to
    glorify suicide bombers.

    As a matter of principle, no child should be abused in such a way. Palestinian children deserve better.”

    As a matter of principle I believe that no child (Israeli or Palestinian) should be raised in fear that their mother, father, sister, brother, grandmother or grandfather could be killed for no other reason than they happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time and a frightened, trigger hungry 18 year army recruit decides to make an example of them.

    As for maps, before Frank Luntz or Itamar Marcus make their specious claims about Palestinian textbooks, I’d like them to show me a single Israeli textbook that features a map of Palestine. You will certainly find Judea and Samaria. But will you find any acknowledgement of the millions of Palestinians who live in the Territories?

    Further, the arguments are entirely dated. Suicide bombings were a serious phenomenon in years past. But Palestinian militants have largely abandoned this tactic, at least in part due to its unpopularity among average Palestinians. You certainly wouldn’t know this from Frank Luntz’s agitprop. It’s like he’s living in a time warp and its still the first Intifada (circa 2000).

    Clearly differentiate between the Palestinian people and Hamas. There is an immediate and clear distinction between the empathy Americans feel for the Palestinians and the scorn they direct at Palestinian leadership. Hamas is a terrorist organization – Americans get that already. But if it sounds like you are attacking the Palestinian people (even though they elected Hamas) rather than their leadership, you will lose public support.

    Another characteristic of the Dictionary is the dubious distinctions it draws, as in this example. There is no way to distinguish between the Palestinian people and their leadership. In effect, the passage concedes the illogic of its argument with this phrase: “even though they elected Hamas.” Of course they elected Hamas. That’s precisely the point. They had an election and chose who they wanted to represent them. So for the lobby to say they sympathize with Palestinians, but not with the leaders they chose is an empty statement.

    Yet another example of noblesse oblige (and it’s entirely dubious to claim that these words “work”):

    WORDS THAT WORK

    We know that the Palestinians deserve leaders who will care about the well being of their people, and who do not simply take hundreds of millions of dollars in assistance from America and Europe, put them in Swiss bank accounts, and use them to support terror instead of peace. The Palestinians need books, not bombs. They want roads, not rockets.”

    Clearly passages like this are designed to score debate points but are entirely devoid of accuracy. The claims of embezzlement, of course, go back to the days when Yasir Arafat ran things and tolerated rampant Fatah corruption. But Arafat has been dead for lo these many years. Someone ought to roll over and tell Tchaichovsky and Frank Luntz the news.

    As for Palestinians wanting roads, they do. They’d like some of those wonderful Israeli bypass roads that run directly through former Palestinian farmland and whisk settlers from their settlement homes to their jobs inside Israel proper. The same apartheid roads which are off-limits to Palestinians.

    One thing you’ve got to give Luntz, he’s not above stealing ideas from anyone, even Israeli peace activists (see italics):

    MORE WORDS THAT WORK

    “The obstacles on the road to a peaceful and prosperous Middle East are many. Israel recognizes that peace is made with one’s adversaries, not with one’s friends. But peace can only be made with adversaries who want to make peace with you. Terrorist organizations like Iran-backed Hezbollah, Hamas, and Islamic Jihad are, by definition, opposed to peaceful co-existence, and determined to prevent reconciliation. I ask you, how do you negotiate with those who want you dead?”

    There is an amazing insularity in the arguments presented here, with absolutely no conception that Palestinians feel precisely the same emotions as Israelis. In other words, they too ask how and why they should negotiate with a state of Israel that would just as soon kill them as live with them in peace.

    More obliviousness, with no awareness of the dark irony of this statement:

    “We may disagree about politics…But there is one fundamental principle that all peoples from all parts of the globe will agree on: civilized people do not target innocent women and children for death.”

    Do I hear any concern here for the “innocent women and children” of Gaza who were slaughtered in their hundreds during the Gaza war? No, of course not.

    Of course, there is unintentionally comic discourse:

    Don’t pretend that Israel is without mistakes or fault. It’s not true and no one believes it. Pretending Israel is free from errors does not pass the smell test. It will only make your listeners question the veracity of everything else you say...............

    Full article here:
    https://www.richardsilverstein.com/2...dbook-exposed/


    The manual again:

    http://www.middle-east-info.org/take/wujshasbara.pdf

    Hopefully they won't say it's fake after a few years like they did with the brazen protocols of the elders of zion.
    Iman vs Propaganda




    2dvls74 1 - Iman vs Propaganda


    2vw9341 1 - Iman vs Propaganda




    chat Quote

  10. #8
    Abz2000's Avatar Full Member
    brightness_1
    Abz Iz Back!!!
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Around the bend from Venus - Just before Mars
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    5,357
    Threads
    150
    Rep Power
    108
    Rep Ratio
    86
    Likes Ratio
    55

    Re: Iman vs Propaganda


    A shill, also called a plant or a stooge, is a person who publicly helps or gives credibility to a person or organization without disclosing that they have a close relationship with the person or organization. Shills can carry out their operations in the areas of media, journalism, marketing, confidence games, or other business areas. A shill may also act to discredit opponents or critics of the person or organization in which they have a vested interest through character assassination or other means.

    In most uses, shill refers to someone who purposely gives onlookers, participants or "marks" the impression of an enthusiastic customer independent of the seller, marketer or con artist, for whom they are secretly working. The person or group in league with the shill relies on crowd psychology to encourage other onlookers or audience members to do business with the seller or accept the ideas they are promoting. Shills may be employed by salespeople and professional marketing campaigns. Plant and stooge more commonly refer to a person who is secretly in league with another person or outside organization while pretending to be neutral or a part of the organization in which they are planted, such as a magician's audience, a political party, or an intelligence organization (see double agent).[citation needed]

    Shilling is illegal in many circumstances and in many jurisdictions[1] because of the potential for fraud and damage; however, if a shill does not place uninformed parties at a risk of loss, but merely generates "buzz," the shill's actions may be legal. For example, a person planted in an audience to laugh and applaud when desired (see claque), or to participate in on-stage activities as a "random member of the audience," is a type of legal shill.[citation needed] Shill can also be used pejoratively to describe a critic who appears either all-too-eager to heap glowing praise upon mediocre offerings, or who acts as an apologist for glaring flaws.
    In the beginning.....

    ....I've posted the first directions from the beginning of the document in order for readers to get an understanding of how the troll method is waged so that they can get an idea of what to critically look for and then learn to frame a quick response, hopefully it will increase the appetite to read it and learn the methodology so that the brain of the reader isn't easily hacked and led off course when trolled by a shill:

    .............



    Neutralising negativity is about attempting to counter harmful impressions and accusations.
    This is the side of hasbara that is concerned with the defence of Israel.
    "Israel is not bad because…."
    "This action was justified because…"
    This often involves arguing over sequences of events, attempting to reframe debates to focus
    on different issues, and placing events in a wider context, so that the difficulty of Israel's
    situation is understood in a more positive light.
    For more on this point see Communication Styles: Point Scoring and Genuine Debate – p. 8

    4



    The Principles of Israel Advocacy

    Neutralising Negativity is usually reactive and responsive.

    Pushing Positivity attempts to demonstrate the good things about Israel's case. The aim to is
    make people see Israel in a good light and have sympathy with her.
    "Israel is a democracy"
    "Israel wants peace"
    This often involves setting the agenda, focusing on some of the more positive features of
    Israel, and taking the lead in attacking the Palestinian leadership in an effort to allow people
    to view Israel favourably in comparison.

    For more on this point see Being Proactive and Promoting Israel – p. 6

    www.wujs.org.il

    5

    Hasbara Handbook: Promoting Israel on Campus

    BEING PROACTIVE AND PROMOTING ISRAEL
    Much of Israel advocacy concerns being reactive and defending Israel against unfair
    accusations. However it is important that Israel activists are proactive too. Proactivity means
    taking the initiative and setting the agenda. It means being on the "attack", trying to create
    positive impressions of Israel. Audiences who have a favourable general impression of Israel
    are likely to respond favourably when specific issues arise. It is a mistake to only try to
    promote Israel when she is being strongly criticised in the press.

    WHY BE PROACTIVE?
    Agenda Setting

    The person who sets the agenda will usually win the debate.
    Reactivity forces Israel activists
    to be constantly on the defensive ("no, Israel is not all that bad"). However by setting the
    agenda Israel activists get to determine what to talk about, and can therefore discuss the
    things they feel help promote the pro-Israel message. Being proactive keeps the right issues
    in the public eye, and in the way Israel activists want them to be seen.

    It is much easier to get Palestinian activists defending Arafat against charges of being a corrupt terrorist than it is to explain to disinterested students that Ariel Sharon didn't kill anybody at Sabra and Chatilla

    (which of course he didn't). It is much easier to feed students falafel at a party than to explain
    why Zionism isn't racism
    to a student who doesn't even know what national self-determination
    is.
    To understand the value of agenda setting, consider the 6-Day War of 1967. When the war
    was inevitable, Israel decided to seize the initiative through a pre-emptive strike. This allowed
    them to control the war from the beginning. In 1973, the Yom Kippur was fought on the
    defensive. Many lives were lost in trying to turn the situation around. When Israel activists are
    proactive and set the agenda they don't need to waste energy trying to turn things around.
    For more on this point see “How to score points while avoiding debate” in Communication Styles: Point Scoring
    and Genuine Debate – p. 8

    People Believe What they Hear First

    Uncritical audiences believe something if they hear it first and hear it often. People tend to
    believe the first thing they hear about a certain issue, and filter subsequent information they
    hear based on their current beliefs. Once people believe something, it is hard to convince
    them that they were wrong in the first place.


    How To Score Points Whilst Avoiding Debate

    Central to point scoring is the ability to disguise point scoring by giving the impression of
    genuine debate. Audience members can be alienated by undisguised attacks, so all point
    scoring needs to be disguised.

    To disguise point scoring, comments need to seem to be logical, and to follow from what was
    said before. Use phrases that subtly change the agenda or reframe the debate to do this:

    "Well, that's not really the right question…"

    "I don't think we should be focusing on …, the real point is that…"
    "That's an interesting point, but I don't think we can really begin to address it before
    we think about…"
    "You seem to assume that …, an assumption that's impossible to share. Really, we
    need to consider…"
    "It's a shame that the Palestinian leadership have led the Palestinian people down a
    dead-end, where conflict and violence leads to tragic situations. Things would have
    been better if…"
    "I really think that we would all be better served by looking forward instead of back at
    the things that happened over 50 years ago. The past is important to note, but we
    have to move on in an attempt for peace. That's why I think we would be better
    served talking about…"

    The examples above ‘field’ the comments that precede them by giving the appearance of
    addressing what was said. They then go on to reframe the discussion by setting a new
    agenda.

    What Points To Make

    Point scoring needs to be focused. Because the people listening to 'point scoring' are only
    paying partial attention, only two or three points have a chance of 'sticking'.
    For this reason, focus point scoring on a few points supporting Israel,
    and a few points pointing out weaknesses in Palestinian positions.
    These points should be made again and again, in as many forums as possible. If people hear something often enough they come to believe it.
    Last edited by Abz2000; 07-25-2017 at 04:24 PM.
    Iman vs Propaganda




    2dvls74 1 - Iman vs Propaganda


    2vw9341 1 - Iman vs Propaganda




    chat Quote

  11. #9
    Abz2000's Avatar Full Member
    brightness_1
    Abz Iz Back!!!
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Around the bend from Venus - Just before Mars
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    5,357
    Threads
    150
    Rep Power
    108
    Rep Ratio
    86
    Likes Ratio
    55

    Re: Iman vs Propaganda

    An easy solution to counter false propaganda and mistaken opinions:

    Iman vs Propaganda




    2dvls74 1 - Iman vs Propaganda


    2vw9341 1 - Iman vs Propaganda




    chat Quote


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

When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Iman vs Propaganda
Sign Up

Similar Threads

  1. Propaganda
    By glo in forum General
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 10-14-2012, 10:06 PM
  2. This was fast propaganda
    By User29123 in forum General
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-27-2012, 06:34 PM
  3. Young iman (Iman Muda 1)
    By syilla in forum Islamic Multimedia
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 04-22-2011, 03:42 PM
  4. The War You Don't See - Media Propaganda
    By aadil77 in forum World Affairs
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-08-2011, 11:36 AM
  5. 'Nawaqidul Iman' - The negations of Iman
    By hooralayn72 in forum Aqeedah
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-14-2010, 10:10 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
create