The MidEast PR Machine: From Assad to the Palestinians
February 9, 2012 12:50 by Simon Plosker
Yasser Arafat perfected the technique of telling a Western audience one thing in English while saying the precise opposite to the Palestinian people. So a Western media unprepared to see Palestinians as anything other than victims of Israeli “occupation” were only too happy to promote a narrative of peace-loving Palestinians driven to desperate measures to force out Israelis from the Palestinian homeland.
This continues to the present day as Palestinians feed Western journalists with the sound bites they want to hear. Palestinian terrorists become “activists” or “militants”; Israeli self-defence is portrayed as aggression, and PalestinianQassams become “homemade rockets”. The list goes on. And all as incitement in mosques and on television screens goes unreported.
Not everyone in the Middle East, however, is a PR guru. If you thought Israel has trouble selling itself to a Western audience, consider Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. While he won’t be missed when he steps down from the presidency, there are sure to be many involved in Israeli advocacy who will quietly shed a tear.
After all, who can keep a straight face when Ahmadinejad claims, before Columbia University students, that there are no gays in Iran? Looks like someone should have borrowed Assad’s media advisor. And when it comes to Israel, unlike the Palestinians, Ahmadinejad makes it perfectly clear where he stands – advocating for the destruction of the “Zionist regime”, much like the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei who only days ago announced that Iran would support any nation or group that attacks the “cancerous tumor” of Israel.
Emil Cohen
5:03 pm
Feb 09, 2012
Amazingly no one mentions the mega war looming, between the Sunnis & the Shia…
Paint the middle east in green for Sunnis influence (or control) and yellow for Shia… An interesting picture emerges.
Lebanon is now rapidly loosing it’s Christian population, they are migrating to the west.
thus leaving the ground war to be decided between Shia & Sunnis.
Syria, lead by 5% minority “Alawis” READ “SHIAS”. The 95% remaining are Sunnis.
The injection of 1200 mosques into the US by Saudi Arabia, is nothing more that gaining a foothold on public opinion (for now).
The Jews, are the common enemy, since Palestinians gathered support from both Shias & Sunnis.
If the Palestinian problem “goes away”, than you can rest assured that the “temporary” bond will dissolve. A war of epic proportions, will have to decide this hatred among the two rivals, once and for all.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
24 
1
Benjamin Margalit
5:57 pm
Feb 09, 2012
No wonder Israel’s enemies are riding the high wave. Whilst they talk in slogans, Israel’s defenders go in depth. The world prefers sloganism. A scholar can make unlimited PHD’s on “Nazism” “Apartheid” and such without any repetition. But to the man in the street, one word is enough. Shame that we’ve reached thus far. But unfortunately we have to carry on.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
16 
0
Jack Alfred
9:55 pm
Feb 12, 2012
How does this slogan grab you? “A World Without the United States and Zionism”?
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/30/weekinreview/30iran.html?pagewanted=1&_r=2&ei=5070&en=26f07fc5b7543417&ex=1161230400&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1277326717-5XgvysEpZHXd3qzrLDfPng
Here is it in full: “Many who are disappointed in the struggle between the Islamic world and the infidels have tried to spread the blame. They say it is not possible to have a world without the United States and Zionism. But you know that this is a possible goal and slogan.”
Ahmadinejad liked this slogan and the “possibility” of its becoming a reality as early as 2005 when he gave this speech on how important it is for Islam to reverse the tide of its military losses to the Infidel West.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
Anna de Greeff
11:27 pm
Feb 12, 2012
Ha Shem has the last say and HE is for you !!!!
Agree or Disagree:
1 
0
Gary Katz
8:20 pm
Feb 09, 2012
The answer to the last few questions is the same as the answer to this question: “Why weren’t the “Palestinians” demanding their own country when they were ruled by Jordan and Egypt?” The answer is, “Because they hate the idea of Jewish hegemony.”
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
17 
0
Jack Alfred
9:50 pm
Feb 12, 2012
Yes, and no. Sure they hate the idea of Jewish hegemony, but it is essential to understand (through a reading of the Hamas Charter of 1988, unabridged, and the Qu’ran and the speeches of Palestinian leadership and Iranian leadership) that their goal is, and has always been, to overtake the Infidel.
The Infidel, or unbeliever, is not just the Jewish state, but also every single Western state. Their goal, as expressed in the Hamas Charter, is clearly stated as the retaking of every state they once won through military conquest. That includes not only Spain and Portugal, but France, Italy, Hungary, and many other nations. see Hamas Charter of 1988, Unabridged, Article XI.
Iran supports the Palestinians in their fight against Israel not becuase of the land. Ahmadinejad says very clearly that their goal in Palestine is only–and he emphasizes ONLY–to win there because that is the easiest place for Islam to win against the Infidel. And he says that Islam needs this victory because it needs to reverse its losses to the Infidel over the last 300 years.
Islam needs to invigorate its troops for the big fight against the Infidel anywhere it finds the Infidel in the world. This is not my opinion: read Ahmadinejad say it, in his own language to his own people, as translated by the New York Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/30/weekinreview/30iran.html?pagewanted=1&_r=2&ei=5070&en=26f07fc5b7543417&ex=1161230400&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1277326717-5XgvysEpZHXd3qzrLDfPng
Who IS the Infidel? Unless you are Muslim, the Infidel is YOU.
Agree or Disagree:
2 
0
Gary Katz
7:41 pm
Feb 13, 2012
Good points, Jack! Of course, Israel, being in the Muslim back yard, and location of Muslim holy places, accentuates their resentment. I guess Israel is the canary in the coal mine, regarding Islamic terrorism and desires for a worldwide caliphate. The Americans mostly realize the importance of defending Israel, as do many Canadians, Australians and citizens of some other countries. Eventually, more people need to realize that, as Israel goes, so, eventually will they.
Agree or Disagree:
3 
0
Jack
6:15 pm
Nov 02, 2012
Not too many people may have caught it, but even Obama recently said that Iran is a danger to America and to Israel, and he said it in that order–the very order used by Ahmadinajad when he said a possible goal for Iran was a world without the US, a world without Zionism. He can’t have the latter without the former.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
Frank Adam
2:29 pm
Feb 10, 2012
Time to revive the term “clerical fascists” and use it repeatedly to describe the Arab governments and Iranians if not the Pakistanis etc. They would have been called “clerical fascists” throughout the 20′s to the 50′s – and before 1914 they would have been called (anti democratic) clericalists and “counter revolutionaries” – referring to the religious and monarchical opposition to the American and French Revolutions for Liberty Equality and a more democratic world than kings and priestcraft.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
7 
0
Joseph
10:57 pm
Feb 10, 2012
Where is the new UN Goldstone Report on what is happening in Syria? Where are the loud voices of the international media, the BBC, Gurdian, Reuters etc. asking the same question? Where is Turkey? Any flotilla planned for humanitarian aid the the people of Homs? I don’t think so. Nor from the UK press, Guardian of free hate speach.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
13 
0
Gary Katz
11:13 pm
Feb 10, 2012
Joseph, good point! We must understand that it’s far trendier to bash Israel.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
6 
0
Brent Pudsey
3:54 pm
Feb 11, 2012
There is a need for the international community to act with consitency in its dealings. The moral outcry against Israel for every act that can be considered aggressive and the ignoring of acts of violence ,aggression and injustice in its neighboring state of Syria is appalling.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
6 
0
Jack Alfred
9:36 pm
Feb 12, 2012
The author states: “And when it comes to Israel, unlike the Palestinians, Ahmadinejad makes it perfectly clear where he stands – advocating for the destruction of the “Zionist regime”, …”
This is a classic error, oft repeated by pro-Israel interests. In fact, Ahmadinejad advocates for the destruction of both the United States and the Zionist regime–in that order. The slogan he suggested for Iran as far back as 2005, when speaking in Persian to students in Tehran was this: “A world without the United States, a world without Zionism”. Note which comes first.
And he added that this is a distinct possiblity, which suggests to me that he knew nuclear weapons were on Iran’s horizon as long ago as that.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/30/weekinreview/30iran.html?pagewanted=1&_r=2&ei=5070&en=26f07fc5b7543417&ex=1161230400&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1277326717-5XgvysEpZHXd3qzrLDfPng
The reason this omission is a crucial error is that far more people in the US are interested in the safety of the US than are interested in the safety of Israel. They have the right to be made aware of the danger from Iran TO THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, as described repeatedly by its leader, himself.
Agree or Disagree:
2 
0
Lon W.
10:29 pm
Feb 28, 2012
Folks? There is no g+ button on your article. What is up with that?
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0