Re: [Salon] Republicans Compare Jewish Protesters Calling for Gaza Cease-fire to January 6 Insurrectionists - U.S. News - Haaretz.com



Todd,

As one who always favors restraint and diplomacy over war I have found everything published by Quincy Institute to be quite sensible. You continually lump them with the bad guys. Please explain why. 

Warren Coats
1211 S Eads St. #2101
Arlington VA 22202
Mobile 703 608-2975
http://wcoats.blog/  http://works.bepress.com/warren_coats/ https://twitter.com/wcoats2



On Oct 20, 2023, at 12:21 PM, Todd Pierce via Salon <salon@listserve.com> wrote:

In the interest of increasing awareness of one element in the U.S. most vigorously inciting US war against Palestine, and Iran, when they’re not doing the same against China, and the tactics they use, here in an example below of right-wing fanatic, and close collaborator of Matt Gaetz in that, Marjorie Taylor Greene. Not as “anti-semitism,” as it will be portrayed as, but as a fascist type opposition to dissent, as Netanyahu and his Israeli right-wing government always denounce fellow Israelis of when they dissent from their fascist style Judicial Coup.

The US is obviously at the “Spearhead” of the “Cognitive Warfare Front” being waged by Israeli and US “influencers,” against Palestinians in general. Particularly as seen in the “New Right” of those politicians named and favored as “Non-interventionist Conservatives” by The American Conservative magazine and the Quincy Institute when they sink down to promoting Trumpite Republicans as “Realists;” a misuse of the term if there ever was one! But today, both political parties are aligned with the broad Israeli cognitive warfare narrative, but with rival narratives. Even while in agreement that the U.S. must massively support Israel in their continuing war upon the Palestinians, with their counter-attacks deemed the “beginning” of the war, with “history” blotted out, and any inconvenient facts that would provide “context” as to why the attack, deemed inadmissible, the two US parties differ on their respective narratives.  

With the only disagreement being Biden beseeching Netanyahu to refrain from the most massive and visible war crimes, and the Republicans demanding “Let Netanyahu be Netanyahu.” With his well-known history of using military operations as a pretext and camouflage for ethnic cleansing. Though severely marred by the omission of how the Republicans wage “cognitive warfare on Capitol Hill,” and massively waged cognitive warfare in getting Trump elected in the first place in 2016, this article is relevant to how domestic cognitive war is waged, but by both parties to be correct, contrary to its “propaganda by omission” message on behalf of the Republicans: https://consortiumnews.com/2023/10/01/impeachment-cognitive-warfare-on-capitol-hill/

With the paradigmatic example of that the “campaign” directed in a conspiracy by the most hard-core right-wing advocate for war on China and Iran (first, then Russia), and unlimited support for Israel’s ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians, Steve Bannon. And assorted friends of his and the so-called “Right-wing Peacenik” Matt Gaetz. Like Sebastian Gorka, the Mercers of Cambridge Analytica fame, Peter Thiel, of course, Josh Hawley, The American Conservative editors and commentators like Curt Mills in particular, and their allied Israeli “private” intell firms specializing in “influence operations” and election interference. A more complete list can be compiled from the right-wing politicians celebrated by Responsible Statecraft as “Realists,” they being those who historically were most vehement in defending U.S. torture, as can be seen in the articles below: 

https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1083&context=njihr ("In 2006, the Heritage Foundation held a forum entitled “24 and America’s Image in Fighting Terrorism: Fact, Fiction or Does it Matter? . . . Similarly, during a debate between Republican presidential candidates in 2007, several presidential hopefuls tried to out-tough one another on the issue of torture and interrogation, which was raised— predictably—in the context of a ticking bomb scenario.3”)

I’ve been outspokenly opposed to torture from the very beginning post-9/11, when it was all the rage in the Republican Party and especially amongst “conservatives,” like Jeff Sessions. But of both parties, like Alan Dershowitz of the Democrats. But virtually all of the Republican Party, as seen in the Trumpist takeover of the party in part because of the appeal he had for his willingness to restore torture as US policy. As this shows: https://rollcall.com/2016/12/12/reviving-torture-under-trump-would-be-tricky-but-not-impossible/  ("And yet, the political winds could potentially shift enough under Trump to push lawmakers onto the opposite side of the vote column. On top of that, 21 senators — all Republicans — opposed the measure, including five of the eight Republicans on the Senate Intelligence Committee, which oversees the nation’s spy agencies. In retrospect, perhaps the most meaningful “No” vote came from Sen. Jeff Sessions, Trump’s pick for attorney general. The Alabama senator also voted against the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005."

Here are two other ConsortiumNews article without the partisan bias, which explain CW quite well:  
https://consortiumnews.com/2021/10/13/natos-plans-to-hack-your-brain/

So with the Gaza War, “moral clarity” (a phrase of Leo Strauss’s, meaning favorability toward fascist solutions and war) has been provided, particularly between the Republicans/Trumpists, and the “mainstream Democrats” allied with them, and those people calling for a ceasefire, as seen below. I’m with the latter, and against the hard-core right wing fanatics I’ve been listening to on right-wing TV, and reading of.  A roster of which can be compiled from the “Non-interventionist Conservatives,” Trumpites and DeSantisites, so celebrated by right-wing promoters/propagandists. So the three attached files might be of interest to anyone interested in the Cognitive War Front, what Israel (and the US) always deem the most vital campaign of any war, the “Battle for Consciousness.” As it is taking place right in front of our eyes, in real time. And to see the most aggressive form of that (though not by much), read and see what Traditional Conservative Ron DeSantis and Donald Trump are saying, speaking as if "from Netanyahu’s lips, to their ears (and mouths). As Greene, and partners like Matt Gaetz, exemplifies, putting themselves at the “tip of the spear” against Palestinians, and Americans like the Jewish protesters below, and me. (See bottom of this for applicable excerpts of how the “Non-interventionists” wage cognitive operations for wars, as against Iran, China, and any allies they have, while talking duplicitously a “non-interventionist line.” But that “mask is off now” and they sound exactly as if they’re “Agents of Influence”  of the Israeli Ministry of Strategic Affairs, or IDF PsyOp units, as occurred here: https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/security-aviation/2023-03-22/ty-article-magazine/.premium/israeli-army-conducted-online-psy-op-against-israeli-public-during-gaza-war/00000186-f972-df90-a19e-f9fff22a0000


        

Attachment: Cognitive Campaign Operation-2021.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document

    

Attachment: Cognitive Campaign Operation-2021.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document

Attachment: Cognitive Campaign - Israel.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document

Attachment: 4. LANGUAGE AS A MECHANISM OF CONTROL .pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document


Go to bottom to see a short excerpt from “Language as a Method of Control,” which was the hallmark of “Right-wing Peaceniks” like Gaetz, Hawley, Trump, DeSantis, et al., but here is the essence of that: 
"These will allow us to spell out how a claim can communicate an implicit message that runs counter to the ideals its explicit content seems to embody. The concepts we will need are some-what technical. But this should not distract from the fact that the phenomena they are used to describe are very familiar. The notion of a linguistic context is central in contemporary formal semantics and pragmatics. What a sentence of a natural language says depends upon the linguistic context in which it is uttered."

Republicans Compare Jewish Protesters Calling for Gaza Cease-fire to January 6 Insurrectionists - U.S. News - Haaretz.com

WASHINGTON – Republicans deeply embroiled in the January 6 insurrection are comparing Wednesday’s protest by American-Jewish activists calling for a cease-fire in the Israel-Gaza war to the storming of the U.S. Capitol in 2021.

GOP lawmakers and media figures are calling for the hundreds of Jewish activists detained by Capitol Police to be charged with committing an insurrection, as well as Democratic Rep. Rashida Tlaib for fomenting the sit-in inside a congressional office building.

In what organizers described as “the largest Jewish protest in solidarity with Palestinians in U.S. history,” somewhere between 300 and 500 activists were detained in the Cannon House Office Building’s rotunda.

Capitol Police confirmed that three were charged with assault on a police officer, after officers ripped banners reading “Cease-fire now.” Wearing matching shirts reading “Not in our name – Jews say cease-fire now,” protesters blew shofars and chanted Hebrew prayers.

Tlaib and Rep. Cori Bush, who co-sponsored a resolution demanding a cease-fire, addressed a rally on the National Mall prior to the sit-in along with author Naomi Klein. 

“Since we were children, so many of us have told ourselves that we would not stand by if we were ever witnesses to genocidal violence. We told ourselves that we would raise our voices. We told ourselves we would put our bodies on the line. We pledged that such horrors would never again happen on our watch,” said Klein. “The ‘never again’ of our lifetimes is underway in Gaza right now. And we refuse to stand by and watch.”

<GOP Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene speaking to a pro-Palestinian demonstrator during the protest inside the Cannon House Office Building on Wednesday., Credit: Amanda Andrade-Rhoades/AP>
GOP Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene speaking to a pro-Palestinian demonstrator during the protest inside the Cannon House Office Building on Wednesday.Credit: Amanda Andrade-Rhoades/AP

The demonstration mirrored similar events at the White House earlier this week, where dozens were arrested after blocking all entries to the White House complex. 

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, one of former U.S. President Donald Trump’s most steadfast supporters who has attempted to both downplay and justify the events of January 6, posted images of protesters’ private text messages, accusing the events of being “an Arabic rebellion and uprising!!!”

Greene also wrote the chief of Capitol Police in an official capacity, requesting that the Capitol Police preserve all video surveillance footage, photographic evidence, police reports and arrest records relating to Wednesday’s events.

In her letter, Greene highlighted protest organizer Jewish Voice for Peace, citing the Anti-Defamation League in describing the organization as a “pro-Islamic antisemitic group that seeks the destruction of the State of Israel.”

The ADL under CEO Jonathan Greenblatt has drawn the wrath of some progressives, who claim he has conflated criticism of Israel with antisemitism, putting a disproportionate focus on antisemitism from the left compared to far-right extremism and white supremacy.

“It appears Greenblatt has become so consumed with his anti-Palestinian agenda that he can no longer distinguish between antisemitic white supremacists and anti-war rabbis. He’s lost credibility to speak forcefully about real antisemitism,” said Simone Zimmerman, communications director of the newly formed Diaspora Alliance – a group dedicated to fighting antisemitism and its politicization.

Greene accused Tlaib, the only Palestinian-American lawmaker in Congress, of “[organizing] an insurrection today that broke federal law. She coordinated with Global Intifada and anti-Israel JVP. They all must be held in the DC gulag and Tlaib must be held accountable.”

Greene also called Tlaib a “terrorist sympathizer” who “followed Hezbollah’s orders for a ‘day of unprecedented anger.’”

In the years since January 6, Greene and her allies have attempted to depict those who rioted on the Capitol following Trump’s “Stop the Steal” rally as victims and political prisoners, visiting several charged and convicted rioters in prison.

She was not the only member of Congress or Trumpist influencer who sought to draw equivalencies between Wednesday’s anti-war protesters and the January 6 riots.

<U.S. Capitol Police officers detaining demonstrators protesting inside the Cannon House Office Building on Wednesday., Credit: Mariam Zuhaib/AP>
U.S. Capitol Police officers detaining demonstrators protesting inside the Cannon House Office Building on Wednesday.Credit: Mariam Zuhaib/AP

“INSURRECTIONISTS are storming the Capitol in support of Hamas. They are interrupting official government proceedings. Will there be federal charges? Solitary confinement? Will FBI raid their homes? WHO PAID for their buses, signs & T-shirts? I’ll join [Greene] to get answers,” wrote GOP Rep. Mary Miller (Illinois). Rep. Andy Ogles (Tennessee), meanwhile, accused “Hamas insurrectionists” of taking over the rotunda.

Kevin Sorbo, the actor and pro-Trump activist who previously accused the January 6 rioters of being paid leftist actors, said: “What happened today was an actual insurrection. Where’s the media coverage?”

Orthodox Jewish anti-LGBTQ influencer Chaya Raichik and her Libs of TikTok account said “a group of pro-Palestinian insurrectionists stormed the Capitol today. Have any of them been arrested, hunted down, or thrown in gulags yet? Will any of them get 17-22-year prison sentences? Shaking.”

She added: “Rashida Tlaib lied to a crowd of protesters. They then stormed the Capitol in an act of violence. It’s looking like she incited the insurrection today. When will she be investigated by Jack Smith,” she added, referring to the Department of Justice special counsel who indicted Trump.

Benny Johnson, chief creative officer for conservative group Turning Point USA, said: “When pro-Palestine protesters storm the Capitol, they are victims of police brutality. When Trump supporters protest at the Capitol, they are domestic terrorists who get shot and killed or locked in solitary confinement for years without trial.”

<Demonstrators outside the Capitol rallying to support people protesting inside the Cannon House Office Building on Wednesday., Credit: Amanda Andrade-Rhoades/AP>
Demonstrators outside the Capitol rallying to support people protesting inside the Cannon House Office Building on Wednesday.Credit: Amanda Andrade-Rhoades/AP

Sebastian Gorka, the far-right political commentator and former Trump assistant, also called the demonstrators “pro-Hamas insurrectionists.”

When asked about the comparisons, Jewish activists who spearheaded the demonstrations painted the efforts as patently not serious.

“Comparing hundreds of peaceful protesters, led in song by rabbis, advocating for treating all human life as equally sacred, to the violent white nationalist coup that Greene herself backed on January 6 is a joke,” said IfNotNow Political Director Eva Borgwardt.

'Radically different'

Beth Miller, the political director of Jewish Voice for Peace Action, said: “As President [Joe] Biden is pledging unwavering support for the Israeli government, a government that is actively and openly committing war crimes against Palestinians, thousands and thousands of American Jews showed up at the Capitol to say: enough. And yet, hateful extremist members of Congress view an antiwar group of multigenerational Jews calling for a cease-fire as the enemy. It’s time for this to stop. We demand our elected officials call for a cease-fire now.”

Democratic Rep. Jamie Raskin, who served on the House January 6 panel and was a lead impeachment manager against Trump for his conduct, told Haaretz: “Whether you agree or disagree with the purpose of their protest or the content of their speech, the nonviolent protesters submitting to arrest in the Cannon Office Building cannot be seriously likened to the violent insurrectionists who overran the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021. Without respect to their political viewpoints, the actions of these two groups were radically different.” 

<U.S. Capitol Police officers detaining demonstrators protesting inside the Cannon House Office Building on Wednesday., Credit: Mariam Zuhaib/AP>
U.S. Capitol Police officers detaining demonstrators protesting inside the Cannon House Office Building on Wednesday.Credit: Mariam Zuhaib/AP

He continued: “Wednesday’s protesters never stormed the U.S. Capitol. They carried no weapons and never violently or unlawfully entered the House or Senate chambers. They never disrupted any of today’s congressional proceedings. They never violently attacked Capitol or Metropolitan police officers and they never hospitalized any of them. Nor did they ever threaten to nullify a lawful presidential election or otherwise thwart our basic constitutional processes. They simply did not attack our constitutional order.”

Raskin called the comparison between January 6 insurrectionists and nonviolent protesters “completely obtuse and absurd. It’s not even apples and oranges; it’s more like bananas and pineapples. This false equation is undertaken for transparently political reasons and can be debunked by any reasonable and informed person.”


Quote from attached Propaganda chapter above:
Our discussion to this point suggests that there should be expressions apt for use in a debate that function to exclude the perspective of certain groups in the population. Since demagoguery, like undermining propaganda generally, is masked as embodying the ideals with which it ultimately clashes, we should expect these expressions to operate indirectly. That is, there should be systematic ways of genuinely or apparently contributing to debate, which simultaneously frame the debate in such a way as to exclude the perspective of a targeted group. The function of these expressions is to mask the demagogic nature of the contribution, by creating flawed ideological be-liefs to the effect that the perspectives of a designated group are not worthy of reasonable consideration. 
. . . .
We will need some concepts in our analysis of particular cases of propaganda. The first set of concepts is from the branches of linguistics most relevant for our purposes, namely, semantics and pragmatics. We will also need the concept of social meaning, such as from the works of the legal theorist Dan Kahan. These will allow us to spell out how a claim can communicate an implicit message that runs counter to the ideals its explicit content seems to embody. The concepts we will need are some-what technical. But this should not distract from the fact that the phenomena they are used to describe are very familiar. The notion of a linguistic context is central in contemporary formal semantics and pragmatics. What a sentence of a natural language says depends upon the linguistic context in which it is uttered.
. . . 
The contribution could express a perfectly ordinary at- issue content, but cause a decrease in empathy or respect directly, as part of its not- at- issue function. The idea here is not, as on the content model of propaganda, that there is a not- at- issue content, acceptance of which decreases empathy for a group. It is rather that words have direct not- at- issue emotional effects. Let us call this the expressive model of propaganda. According to the expressive model, one kind of paradigmatic propaganda in a liberal democracy would have a normal at- issue content that seems reasonable, and would also have a not- at- issue effect that would decrease empathy for a group. Since decreasing empathy for a group runs counter to reasonability, its not- at- issue effects would be unreasonable. 




-- 
Salon mailing list
Salon@listserve.com
https://mlm2.listserve.net/mailman/listinfo/salon



This archive was generated by a fusion of Pipermail (Mailman edition) and MHonArc.