Divide and Conquer: Israel and the Internet War for Hearts and Minds

You have to speak out on issues that are blatantly wrong. Those where laws, or international laws are broken and conventions are flouted, and humans and their rights are denigrated. this is always inflicted by powerful organizations...sometimes called governments, and it happens all the time. Most of the time, these organizations get away with it, (the seven day wonder rule) That's only because ordinary people have not been vigilant, or rather not enough people have been vigilant in the past. Things are changing slowly. If something is wrong, it matters not who is responsible, we should speak out against it, at the very least!

reply to post by tothetenthpower


I agree with you 100% tothetenthpower, we are in fact that power source that drives it all. Yes there are engines of politics, engines of war, engines of banking and commerce, but we are the fuel that willing goes into them and primes them, and makes them run.

Engines don't run without fuel.

Likewise it's a privelege to know you to my friend.

Thanks for sharing your awesome insights.

reply to post by smurfy


I agree we should speak to what is right and wrong, but we should try to formulate ways to do it, that leave person enough room and face to change something wrong, instead of feeling that they have to ride something wrong down in flames, trying to promote it as right the whole way.

I think what I and some other posters truly want to believe is governments loose their ability and oraganizations loose their ability to divide us, if we can speak to what is right and wrong, simply as people, instead of members of some larger collective who feel a shared identity that is going to be punished or condemned for being wrong.

We are rapidly loosing our individual ability to speak about what is wrong with our own governments and organizations, and that even more deeply entrenches us into notions of who is right and wrong, and collectively who is right and wrong, instead of what is right and wrong.

It really is just about what is right and wrong, and trying to get people to agree to uniform applications for it.

If it's right for Israel to act in a certain way, how then can it be wrong for Iran to do the same action?

That's what I mean by dual standards.

The reality is most of us can agree on what is right and wrong, until the politics of who, and who we imagine we owe an allegience and debt to comes into play.

Thanks for posting my friend.

I just want to clear something up. I'm not anti-semitic, anti-Jew or anti-Israeli. Those that really know the issue know that those are 3 different groups. I am anti-Knesset. The insane gov't that the Israeli's have no chance of escaping because of their political system. You think there's no good in Israel all you have to do is Google Machsom Watch. That's the people, not the nuts in the Knesset.

Originally posted by intrepid
I just want to clear something up. I'm not anti-semitic, anti-Jew or anti-Israeli. Those that really know the issue know that those are 3 different groups. I am anti-Knesset. The insane gov't that the Israeli's have no chance of escaping because of their political system. You think there's no good in Israel all you have to do is Google Machsom Watch. That's the people, not the nuts in the Knesset.

Oh I know that my friend, you are one of the most incredibly unbiased and fair minded individuals and posters I have ever run across in my life, and believe me when I say, I get around!

The problem is that we can't speak to issues of wrong and right, in some circumstances like with Israel, without being placed into a camp, as a result.

All I have ever seen in your posts, is apply the same standards to all parties, and you patiently questioning people if they are applying the same standards to all parties, and how various parties have done similiar things, but they are viewed by some as being very different occurences of right and wrong, based simply on the party that did it.

I was shocked to see someone like you who is that unbiased, and that fair minded, fair minded enough to point out wrong regardless of the party, then being lumped into a camp, and a label, for the sake of the politics of who is right and wrong, instead of what is right and wrong.

I know you were posting as a member and not a moderator, but as bad as it is when people resort to that type of tactic against fellow members, its beyond brazen when they take that approach with the moderators, who while they all have opinions of their own, tend to be the most unbiased of all members.

We need a check up from the neck up as a community in my humble opinion, so we can all continue to respect the people and the functionaries that make our community work and the best on the Internet.

when we start labelling the moderators to make our agruments, well we are in danger of ripping that which holds our community apart.

I have nothing but respect and admiration for you and all the mods...

You all rock.

Thanks for the great work you all do.

Although the Israeli topics are always to the fore when individuals become entrenched in the "Im right, your wrong" mindset, this happens in many other diverse threads as well.

I believe when some have allowed their button to be pushed by a specific member the "duel" often continues no matter the subject or thread they are posting in.

On another point, I feel there is a growing feeling of helplessness at the plight of the underdogs of this world. Be that in Gaza or anywhere else.
This helplessness can lead to a lack of civility and an increase in agression between posters, usually when one side or other refuses to empathise with the others ideals or humane approach to a subject.

In summing up I would say that the vast majority of ATS contributers are fair minded and focus on the " What is wrong or right", but frustration and a need to do something to fix things is coming to the fore more and more especially in this time of media communication and injustice we live in.

In the case of the aid convoys, Im sure many see their own need to actually do something being fullfilled and they have taken the events of the last 2 weeks to heart. As if they themselves were there. Personally I see nothing wrong with that as it lends voice to the plight of the underdog.

Thanks PT for your thoughts and insite. Appreciated

Respects

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
reply to post by smurfy

 

I agree we should speak to what is right and wrong, but we should try to formulate ways to do it, that leave person enough room and face to change something wrong, instead of feeling that they have to ride something wrong down in flames, trying to promote it as right the whole way.

I think what I and some other posters truly want to believe is governments loose their ability and oraganizations loose their ability to divide us, if we can speak to what is right and wrong, simply as people, instead of members of some larger collective who feel a shared identity that is going to be punished or condemned for being wrong.

We are rapidly loosing our individual ability to speak about what is wrong with our own governments and organizations, and that even more deeply entrenches us into notions of who is right and wrong, and collectively who is right and wrong, instead of what is right and wrong.

It really is just about what is right and wrong, and trying to get people to agree to uniform applications for it.

If it's right for Israel to act in a certain way, how then can it be wrong for Iran to do the same action?

That's what I mean by dual standards.

The reality is most of us can agree on what is right and wrong, until the politics of who, and who we imagine we owe an allegience and debt to comes into play.

Thanks for posting my friend.

I think your reply is almost the same as what I have said. However I hold no allegience to any piece of dirt or flag, people are the most important things to me, since I am one. As for dual standards, people have to read the road, and if it is wrong, legally, morally and environmentally etc, then it is wrong full stop. Now that might sound a little naive, but no less so than those who go to sleep, thinking that there is someone out there cleaning up the human "dirt" on their behalf for the good of all.

reply to post by captiva


You are weclome my friend, and thanks for taking the time to read the thread and share your thoughts too.

Tis much apreciated.

I agree this happens on a lot more topics than Israel.

We see a lot of dueling threads here on ATS like "Gays are what's wrong with the world according to Christians" followed quickly by "Christians are what's wrong with the world according to Gays" and similiar sparring back and forth on such issues. I call them the thread versus the anti-thread, thread wars.

Yet when people drag the site into it. "Is ATS an Anti-Israel Site?" versus "Is ATS a Pro-Israel Site" then it really is being taken to the extreme point of even questioning the objectivity of the site and whether it is right or wrong, by making the site itself appear to be on one side or the other, simply because it allows all sides to have a platform.

While we all hate the propagandas often used, it's scarey when psuedo censorship arguments are made, as really people are imagining in these cases is the site itself anti-this or pro-that in order to make a who is right and who is wrong argument.

I agree a lot of people are frustrated and sadly Israel is not the only thing adding to people's feelings of helplessness and frustration, and all those other emotions, from those other things then get transfered into the passion of who is right and who is wrong.

Worse still like in the left right politics of our own country, who is right and who is wrong is to often being decided by the lesser of two evils, Bush blew up the World Trade Centers, Obama destroyed the Gulf, yeah but the World Trade Centers killed more people, so Bush was a lot worse, so Obama is a lot better! Bush was wrong and bad, Obama is good!

That's the kind of logic a lot of people are employing in dertermining who is wrong and who is right, instead of what is wrong and what is right.

So what we do see a lot of, when confronted with the issue of wrong doing, that retort based on side, of well, the other side did something a lot worse, back in 1111, and therefore not only did they deserve this, today, in 2010, but it wasn't even wrong because of what the other side did in 1111, now that was bad and wrong!

It really is as if when one's own nation, or church or religion or organization has done something clearly wrong, people have to find a way to justify it and defend it and make it right.

Yet the truth is that is just foolish.

What is wrong is wrong, what is right is right.

We for the most part all live in 'democracies' but the truth is all we get to do is choose our representatives, the people of our nations, don't get to vote on policies or actions, so we really don't have to pretend that they are representation of our will or us for national pride.

We ought to be able to look at issues of right and wrong, as stand alone issues of each circumstance, not qualified issues predicated on past or other occurences, meant to excuse or justify doing something wrong.

I don't know if there is a way to move beyond that or solve that, but I am trying to speak to it and address it.

Thanks so much for joining in.

reply to post by smurfy

I think your reply is almost the same as what I have said. However I hold no allegience to any piece of dirt or flag, people are the most important things to me, since I am one. As for dual standards, people have to read the road, and if it is wrong, legally, morally and environmentally etc, then it is wrong full stop. Now that might sound a little naive, but no less so than those who go to sleep, thinking that there is someone out there cleaning up the human "dirt" on their behalf for the good of all.

Today's Tom Sawyer,



Though his mind is not for rent don’t put him down as arrogant!

The aboriginals used to smoke the pipe of peace.
I have become a non smoker, but I remember my first cigarette.
they class nicotine as a sedative for a reason
I was stuck in a chair for twenty minutes or so,
no war making for quite some time.
They also used to throw in all kinds of debilitating goodies
Labrador tea, dog bane, pot etc

Idea being every one was kinda laid out and peaceful
vulnerable, but also disabled, as they came out of the Buzz they would calmly discuss....
The Polynesians used Kava kava, which the missionaries made them stop using, but the violence went ballistic. Then made them start using kava kava again.

A drinking society like the European dominated ones can be very violent and childish urge based actions are all to common.
I tended bar in redneck and rock n roll bars and peeler bars for twenty years without bouncers for the most part, not because I am tough particularly, but because i could see things coming, and deal.

"barring" the instigator being the key tactic for peace.
'Be good or be gone"
was the motto in one very cool "b" bar I worked at for years.
I would "come along" the scrappers out to the lobby where we had two little old ladies who would tune em right in.
mostly the trick was to stop violence before it started becaus it spreads like wild fire.
If you have to duel - outside though opposite doors.

Best system I have ever seen for positive violence reduction in a bar,
Though now people are far more often armed and programmed to be violent and high on much worse drugs, so that system is much more dangerous to use.

This leads to my point
a key problem we have is
sociopathy and psychopathy, inherited or induced...
people with no conscience are damned dangerous

The seritonin re-uptake inhibitor class of anti depressants which most, if not all mass shooters have been on lately, is a good example
1 in twenty guaranteed to commit a violent felony, murder and suicide.
and they are easily programmed by skilled operators.
one third of america is on these drugs.

1 rotten APPLE spoils the bunch, as they say
I think this is the big hurdle...

we have to figure out how to deal with people
who believe they have a RIGHT to be Wrong.

dunno how, but while some do not want peace
we will not have peace.

there was asociety called the senoi
no insanity, no violence, no crime,
They had a very simple system.
The missionaries took only a couple of years to totally decimate them
whats that say?


[edit on 7-6-2010 by Danbones]

reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler


s&f
Great timely thread,
As a member that copped a 36hour ban during that onslaught I agree with you totally.(although I still profess innocence)

I always try to argue the points with facts, not the poster. I infact told members from each side to do that.

I'd like to think (concerning my ban) that ATS made a decision to err on one side. As I found their actions a little inconsistent.

I also had a thread removed where I suggested new members can not start a thread for 7 days, as I saw the influx of new members starting multiple threads within hours of joining..All derailed, mostly by the OP, onto the same topic...

Anyways, I hope most have seen my posts and agree I'm here to debate, not argue and have the interest of ATS at heart...

reply to post by Danbones


I think it says rigid belief structures with a lot of endless codes and stipulation for right and wrong lead to a lot of chaos?

The most effective crowd control tactic I have ever seen was a friend who would have a big party twice a year for Bike Week and Biketoberfest outside of Daytona.

She would invited friends who were Outlaws, Pagans and Hell's Angels and not meant to get along.

She had a big empty oil drum by the front gate and pens and note book paper and a sign, that read:

Write Down your Issues now, drop them in the barrel and leave them at the door.

Never a fight in ten years!

That is what most of this is, people refusing to let go of their issues with one another.

Pretty silly when you get right down to it, and pretty simple too.

Thanks for posting my friend.

reply to post by virgom129


Hey I caught your thread on limiting new members from posting so many threads a day.

I posted a comment to it.

I think this is timely at the moment.

Sometimes timing is everything, and I am sure the past week has been hard on the Moderators, not only are a lot of people skirting and violating terms of service in their debates and arguments, but a lot of people are calling for the waaaaaaaaaa-mbulance to help them when things get ugly.

Sometimes the staff has to send a message and it can be the luck of the draw, when more people are transgressing than the staffs ability to keep up with it all.

We just all would really benefit from taking a deep breath now and then, streching our legs, clearing out the cobwebs and not letting it all become personal, and I know that is not always easy when others are trying to make it personal and you end up being the target of that.

Hang in there friend, and welcome to ATS!

If we refuse to be swayed by "Divide and Conquer" tactics, what OTHER tactics might be employed?


Would the effects of Those tactics be more or less destructive of the social fabric we hear being torn from under us, growing louder each day?


If we force the PTB to use ever more eggregious methods of persuation, do we not risk even more damage to our society?




"In the quest for Freedom, I can face any hardship, endure any torture...Save for the harming of Innocents in My Name."

reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler


Thanks mate,
Heres a good story....

During all them heated debates I suddenly noticed I had a "foe"
Not liking to be a foe to anyone, I sent a u2u asking why.
They replied saying they didn't like one of my posts.
I replied saying, thats your choice but read more of my previous posts so you can take that particular one in its proper context.

They did! and I received a great reply apologising.
I lost a foe and gained a friend...

Originally posted by Bhadhidar
If we refuse to be swayed by "Divide and Conquer" tactics, what OTHER tactics might be employed?


Would the effects of Those tactics be more or less destructive of the social fabric we hear being torn from under us, growing louder each day?


If we force the PTB to use ever more eggregious methods of persuation, do we not risk even more damage to our society?




"In the quest for Freedom, I can face any hardship, endure any torture...Save for the harming of Innocents in My Name."

There is an old saying, when you are about to fall off a cliff you might as well try learning to fly!

Now might be a really good time to try to learn.

As far as the Powers that Be go, there greatest fear is too many of us wake up for them to control through any means.

They have given us illusions of freedom, chances for riches at one an others expense, and everything they can do, to keep us ignorant to our slavery, and their machinations.

The truth is that there are 6 billion people on this planet, 2,300 of them, and about ten million armed people they can deploy against us.

So no the math does not favor them, intelligence, wisdom, and being able to govern and master their own emotions is what favors them.

They are not divided in their agendas and goals, we are divided in ours.

The minute we are no longer divided is the minute they are tragically out numbered and out of business.

Thanks for posting my friend.

It's very encouraging to see more and more members stepping forward, that they do get the jist of all this.

Well done friend.

Originally posted by virgom129
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler

 

Thanks mate,
Heres a good story....

During all them heated debates I suddenly noticed I had a "foe"
Not liking to be a foe to anyone, I sent a u2u asking why.
They replied saying they didn't like one of my posts.
I replied saying, thats your choice but read more of my previous posts so you can take that particular one in its proper context.

They did! and I received a great reply apologising.
I lost a foe and gained a friend...

In sales they teach you objections are really just requests for more information, so you followed that dictum well and asked for more information, provided more information and overcame the objection!

That is the power of communication, and a real desire not to be divided and conquered, excellent event to share with us all.

Thanks my friend.

books.google.com...:+Attitudes+Toward+the+Jews+in+the+Ancient+World.&source=bl&ots=utibEi Gw0_&sig=OMyUTgosBsSaIWFnkv8Wmoa_UBY&hl=en&ei=QoANTMbXNpGgnwfenb2XAg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=8&ved=0CDAQ6AEwBw#v=onepage&q&f=false

I am reading this right now,
Judeophobia: attitudes toward the Jews in the ancient world


It goes back as far as Egypt, 300 BCE, Egypt. The charge of misanthropy and xenophobia transformed it into a powerful weapon that found its way into western civilization ancient anti antisemitism is still having an affect on modern civilization.

Let us get to the root.

reply to post by Stormdancer777


First thanks for posting and I am glad you have, but the thread is not about anti-semitism.

It's about what is right and what is wrong.

Not who is right and who is wrong.

Anti-semitism is a who is wrong argument.

Anyone deemed to be anti-semetic!

Who deems who is anti-semetic?

Semetics!

So that's just right back to a who is right and wrong, instead of what is right and wrong.

Being critical of wrong actions is anti-wrong actions!

Thanks for posting.

reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler


But it does pertain, I believe.

If we are to fully understand the situation.