It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


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

page: 5
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in


posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 09:41 PM
reply to post by ProfEmeritus

I agree and I was trying to point this out in a heated thread the other day on this issue.

On occassion I find someone in my personal/professional life becoming advesarial to the point where we are fast being enemies and confrontational.

At that point I take it upon myself to open a dialogue and define mutual interests and in what real ways we can help one another with our mutual interests where expectations are realistic based on logistics that are realistic.

It doesn't matter per say if we 'like' one another, what matters is our interactions are productive and mutually benificial.

They are better off because of what I can help them with, I am better off based on what they can help me with, focused on mutual interest and not personaility.

We aren't all alike, and we aren't all really going to like each other, but that is no excuse to not all cooperate with one another, in a shared environment and reality we must all coexist in one way or another.

We might as well look at mutual interest in making it as good as it can get all the way around.

We are being divided, and we are all are employing slightly different methods to reach for the carrot on the stick of the resources that are horded and controlled by a few for the purpose of control through dividing us.

That is one of the things that is wrong, and most of the argument is over methodology in acquiring a sustainable share of those horded resources.

Our shared interest is in fact the resources, that the people above the divided nations actually control.

Most of what is going on is simply an intense competition for resources, that are in fact plentiful and abundant but used as leverage by the few, to divide and control the masses.

We are in fact always looking at symptoms and never the real problem.

Thank you my wise and learned friend.

posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 09:45 PM

Originally posted by curious2
Wow, what a relief to find a site where members agree to debate the issue not make personal attacks.

I'm a newbie to this site, I've heard about it before and checked it out a couple of times before but never 'joined' in, my husband say's it's because I'm paranoid, I think with good reason.

I've been reading posts from other sites til my head hurt because it was so devisive, mean or they were just making silly comments about people not issues. Then by chance I stumbled on a video link that lead me to this place filled with inteligent, thoughtful people having discussions about the real issues.

So is the Gulf disaster just a distraction so we don't pay attention to what they are really doing to us AGAIN? or am I just reading too much between the lines?

Just curious

Welcome to ATS, and thanks for taking the time to read the thread and post to it.

We strive for civility here!

In my humble opinion the Gulf disaster is them actually doing something to us again, and these other things are in fact distractions from it.

Millions of people stand to become unemployed and whole portions of eco system damaged for decades to come.

To me it's a little bit more like, if they don't get you with one thing, they will get you with another, if they don't get you coming, they will get you going.

Thanks for posting.

posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 09:53 PM
reply to post by Stormdancer777

So what's the answer?

What do you propose ?

What is the solution?

What is the answer to WHAT?
I am truly confused by your questions. PT is talking about a methodology or approach, not a specific incident or disagreement.

Let me give you an example of the issue that seemed to cause the recent behavior that PT is talking about, namely the Israel/blockade issue.

The Flotilla Position: break the blockade
Israeli position: enforce the blockade

The two positions are irreconcilable

However, let's look at the interests:

Flotilla Interest: bring relief supplies to Gaza
Israeli Interest: to make sure weapons and arms are not delivered to Gaza

Those interests, if they are indeed the true interests, are reconcilable.
There are many ways that a solution can be developed that satisfy both interests. I leave it to you, as a homework assignment, to suggest one.

posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 09:55 PM
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler

No argument here and well stated.
When our futures are at stake is no time to stop communicating.

As much as I hate to say this however, I don't think reason will hold for long when hatred such as we are seeing is in play. The simple concept that both sides of an issue may be wrong gets lost when deep seeded hatred takes over.

Still, good post PT!

posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 09:55 PM
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler

There is such a fine line between confront and confrontation one might say that line is as fine as frogs hair. Ever seen a frogs hair? Me neither!

Confront is a necessary method of communication and defining what is right, and what is wrong. Confront is not about blame, as blame is quite wholly irrelevant. Confront is simply what one does when they dare to look at the truth of a matter, or at the very least attempt to discover the truth. The greatest problem with confront is that it all too often can dissolve into confrontation. Once confrontation takes over, that is the end of any confront for that moment.

Confront does not mean one has to point to all that is wrong with something, and certainly not someone. Discovering commonalities is a form of confront, listing all we don't have in common is confrontational. Finding a problem and looking for answers in how to correct that problem, or at the very least, solutions, is a form of confront. Finding a problem and looking for someone to blame for that problem is confrontational.

Confront is an essential tool in discovering or revealing truth, but it is a complex tool that is useless in the hands of an unskilled technician. A chainsaw can be used to cut materials to build with, or it can be used to brutally murder someone. The skilled technician uses a chainsaw to build, the unskilled technician uses the chainsaw to destroy. The same goes for confront, but unlike a chainsaw, or hammer, confront is so complex on so many levels that without proper training and guidance, it will always become a useless tool of confrontation. Even the most skilled technicians will often find themselves wondering how an effort at revealing or discovering truth wound up becoming just another confrontational moment.

All skill comes from practice, practice, practice...and then more practice. How do you get to Carnegie Hall?

posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 10:05 PM
reply to post by Blaine91555

Thanks for sharing that Blaine, I am trying to remain optimistic all the same.

I do believe you are right the key is communication my friend.

I appreciate you taking the time to communicate.

posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 10:19 PM
reply to post by ProfEmeritus

I understand all that, but nothing ever changes.

I don't have a solution, I have suggestions, but with the middle eastern conflicts, any solution is only temporary.

Always band aids, never healing, only temporary fixes.

Never mind.

posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 10:27 PM
reply to post by Stormdancer777

I don't have a solution, I have suggestions, but with the middle eastern conflicts, any solution is only temporary.

That is true. I think part of the reason is that there are HIDDEN interests that are REALLY what drives the conflict. That is why when I gave the example that I gave, I said "IF those are the REAL interests". I believe that HATRED of each other by the parties has forced the POSITIONS to be HARDENED into the INTERESTS, namely that some parties have an an interest to KILL the other side. Negotiations only work when both sides truly want to negotiate. I believe, unfortunately, that in the case of the Middle East, no one TRULY wants to Negotiate. All sides seem to want a WIN/LOSE scenario. Under those circumstances, no mutually agreeable solution is possible.

posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 10:35 PM
reply to post by ProfEmeritus

I wonder why we think man is capable of changing, I simply don't see it happening, I am just being realistic and looking from a historical stand point.

peace out,

posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 10:55 PM
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux

All skill comes from practice, practice, practice...and then more practice. How do you get to Carnegie Hall?

I usually take a taxi my friend. It is though about practicing communication and negotiating skills.

Most of it is learning how to ask high quality descriptive questions that open the doorway for an exchange of real information, and sticking with rephrasing those questions until you really understand the other sides position and are in possession of every thing you really need to know to have common shared ground established.

From there it is all about finding that formula to pursue common interest and part of that is by selling the idea that you can both benefit through working together on those common goals.

For instance Lebanon, and Beruit was once considered the Paris of the Middle East.

How much would it help say Israel to have Gaza as the Paris of the Middle East? Say a shopping, dining and entertainment mecca to draw people to with the added attraction of Israel's holy sites?

A few casinos some night clubs, a sports arena for major boxing events. Duty free shops, beaches world class hotels.

The Gazans are propsering, frankly when I have too much money to spend I know I myself just have no time for planting bombs or shooting rockets. So that solves that problem.

The Israelis are benefiting because the one culture can offer an attraction the other culture can not, but create cross revenue opportunities by drawing in more tourists and customers for what they culturally do have to off in a different or limited capacity.

So there is no use stealing the goose that lays the golden eggs, if you aren't allowed to have a goose, but just eggs.

So then the Israelis are winning too.

It really is very simple, once people want to focus on the possibilities and find common interest and benefit to pursue in a common way.

Thanks for posting my friend.

posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 12:11 AM
reply to post by Stormdancer777

Personnaly I think man is changing, atleast the common man.

Now we just have to get TPTB to change too, or kick them out..

posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 07:04 AM
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler

I completely agree ProtoplasmicTraveler. Last week I wrote this about the divide and conquer tactics employed in the wash-up of the flotilla situation by pro zionists on the board.

Originally posted by InfaRedMan


That's a great story ETD. There is a very big difference between Israel foreign policy and everyday people of Jewish faith. This fact is not lost on many people at this forum who are speaking out against Israel in the latest Flotilla incident.

There is a big difference between speaking out against a regime and speaking out against everyday people (like you & me) or specifically speaking out against a faith. A BIG difference!

This is why it offends and angers me (and many others) when propagandist try to paint any dissenting voice as one of anti-semetism or that of a 'hater'. The irony is that Palestinians are also semites, so what is it that the propagandists are really saying or trying to achieve?

Do they really believe that condemnation of a government translates into hatred of a faith, of a people or language? Maybe in some cases, but for the better part of them, I doubt it.

What they really want is for people to recoil from the idea of being labeled an ugly racist. They want to link racism with descent in the minds of people in the hopes that those who question the actions of a government will recoil and go away. They want to link descent for a government with the Nazi persecution and victimization of the Jews.

They are not defending Judaism because it is not Judaism that is being questioned. They are protecting an ideology. Zionism. Plain and simple.

Unfortunately, I believe it is also the case that many Jews (and Christians) that come to the forum to debate in favor of the Israeli governments actions have also had their opinions swayed and manipulated by the Zionist agenda to perceive the dissenting voices as an attack on the Jewish people.

The Zionists are playing both sides off against one another. People need to wake up to this. We are all pawns in a game. People fight people in wars for the sake of governments and their agendas. If it wasn't for governments, we wouldn't go to war because the truth is that we all have more in common than the governments would like us to believe. This is something they don't want us to realize.

The only way power remains in the hands of so few is through the old adage "Divide and Conquer". It's time everyone woke up!



People need to be aware of the tactics employed on the site and wake up to themselves instead of being mindless glove puppets for elitist agendas.


posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 09:00 AM
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler

I've been screaming about this and no one seems to notice.

I put up a post concerning the players involved in this latest round of festivities....No one bothered.

I dont think Israel is a bunch of angels.

I dont think ANY government is a bunch of angels.

This ISM bunch is someone to keep an eye on. I've heard they are about to/ are getting active on the southern border.

We'll be the next "butchers" before its all over.

Great post as always.


posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 09:07 AM
reply to post by InfaRedMan

There is no denying that a lot of peer pressure is used in getting people to identify blindly with state.

It's pretty strange so many people far for it, since our states are not really a reflection of us, any more so than our sporting teams are.

That is too often the problem is that most people appoach politics both nationally and internationally the same way they do team sports.

Might makes right, which then becomes all about who is right based on might, and not always, and in fact seldom what is actually right.

When ever we hear the word 'anti' applied we know it is in fact a peer pressure tactic, because the opposite of 'anti' is pro.

People often described as being against something are in fact pro something else.

For instance dessert, I am pro-Ice Cream Sundies though the Chocolate Brownie makers of the world might wish to describe me as being anti-chocilate brownie!

This is their choice to make my possitive dessert experience all about them, and what they percieve is then harmful to them, because I favor something else, by trying to describe my pro actions, as being a negative anti action to provoke notions of shame and guilt over my desire to avoid the heartburn of a brownie.

It is not just peer pressure its also the victim dictum, the brownie makers of the world are suffering, they deserve just as many if not more opportunities to sell brownies as the Ice Cream Sunday maker. The Ice Cream Sunday maker is fat and arrogant and bloated from the profit of the all the Ice Cream Sundays that they sell, and probably could only sell so many of them by slandering and misrepresenting brownies, and brownie makers, and this is unfair to the brownies and brownie makers of the world.

The brownie makers not only want 'parity' with the Ice Cream Sunday makers, but want to be the voice of 'reason' that lets us know when it really is alright to indulge in a Ice Cream Sunday, all of which they are doing not for themselves mind you, or their own profit, but to save us from a 'negative' ice cream experience and addiction, because Ice Cream is bad, which is why they are pro-brownie!

Anti is simply making something all about someone or something, that can't abide or respect that you are positively pro something they do not espouse offer or represent.

As far as the nations go. We aren't democracies, whether you are in Isreal, England, the United States or Germany, you get to select from a limited pre-selected slate of candidates and make that one decision, as to who gets to make every other decision for you.

That's not democracy that is getting to choose your boss and master.

Democracy as defined by the Greeks who invented it is everyone weighing in and sharing an oppinion and a vote on every issue, and in the age of the Internet we truly have the technology to overcome the logistics of time and distance for us to do just that.

The policies and actions our elected representatives pass and force on us, are in fact not reflective of us at all, but reflective of them and the special, corporate and foreign interests that they serve once in office.

We don't need to be pro or deffensive for actions of our state that are not a reflection of our own morallity and standards because in reality these policies and decisions are not a reflection on us, or of us, as we had no say in them.

A big part of the problem here is politics as a might makes right team sport that then makes everything about the who is mighty enough to impose their will as right, and who foolishly takes pride in that 'sides' ability to do that, even when what they are imposing through might is morally wrong, and is wrong.

Thanks for posting my friend.

posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 09:20 AM
reply to post by felonius

Thanks my friend, and as I mentioned in my opening post, it's very hard to get people to notice when crisis sets in, and emotions run high and we get caught up in the drama and spectacle of it all.

People should make no mistake in that much of the drama and spectacle is manufactured and fed to us, for the precise purpose of creating an emotional reaction, because people thinking emotionally instead of intellectually are much easier to manipulate and prompt to do something rash that is poorly thought out and born of emotion.

So no matter what side of the who is right and wrong divide that has been created, the hype is all designed to inflame your passions either way.

Most of it is aimed at either prompting anger or fear, the two most damaging emotions to think with, as they trigger our blind fight or flight mechanism, usually then dictating we either lash back blindly and with little thought or retreat and run away blindly with any little thought.

As a result the real underlying issues are never delved into, but just the surface issues, and typically only in ways that speak to emotion and emotional reactions and not intellectual ones.

People love to get caught up in the drama and spectacle of that, and once they are, and totally consumed by the emotions that conjures up, trying to reason with such people, and discuss with them logically the real underlying issues becomes impossible.

That is why progress is never made.

What is a shame is that many of us on ATS have a real capacity to think progressively, out of the box, and annalyse complex situation when their is no emotional crisis of circumstance involved, but once one sets in, too many of us in my humble opinion abandon reason and intellect to start venting emotional reactions in ways that prevent us from rational intellectual discussion and debate.

All the hype and drama and spectacle is meant to do that, so we spend eternity fighting one another and compounding our mutual problems, instead of cooperating with one another to promote and achieve our mutual interests.

The elites who stage all the hype and drama and dividing us do attain their shared interests through this strategy and obtain the lifestyle and self security and prosperity they mutually desire, while robbing us of doing the same, because it is our confrontations that they tax us so heavily for, the weapons, the loans for the weapons, the contracts for rebuilding smashed infrastructure, all the while we are not challenging them at hording the resources and creating laws that while legal are often not right, and don't make the world a safer or more just place, but a more dangerous and unjust one for the sake of their own control and protection.

We need to break that endless cycle, thanks for posting my friend.

posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 09:33 AM
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler

Hi Protoplasic Traveler,

Are you a Jew??

posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 09:39 AM
I do not see any divide and conquer going on here, personally.

Israel operates with impunity and I see people here on ATS and other sites calling them on their behavior.

Then pro-Israeli trolls go online, call people racists, provide links to biased news reports and start flame wars.

You can be against the policies of the Israeli Government and not be against the Jewish people. People are no longer afraid to speak out against what they see is wrong when it involves Israel.

I personally see this whole thread as another way to take attention from the crimes of Israel by trying to put an intellectual/conspriracy theorist spin on it.

This thread itself is trying to divide and conquer the opinion of Israel on this message board. Now that is the Hegelian Principle in fine form.

posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 09:43 AM

Originally posted by saabacura
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler

Hi Protoplasic Traveler,

Are you a Jew??

ProtoplasmicTravler is a human being, a homo saphien strain, born on the planet earth.

Any other destinction or label is purely imposed by corporate and soveriegn entities for their own gain and manipulative purposes and are not a reflection of my true status as a human being born on the planet earth.

No corporate or sovereign entity should be able to impose status or label upon me, because as a human being I am sovereign entity.

For me to create a shared identity with any state, corporation, or God would be an abdication of my sovereignty and my own volunteer slavery to said entities, and forsaking my own responsibilities as a human being of the planet earth.

Thanks for asking.

[edit on 8/6/10 by ProtoplasmicTraveler]

posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 09:58 AM
reply to post by sdocpublishing

I am sorry you feel that way. First you might want to read my posting history to get a better understanding of my motivations.

For now we will just accept your perception is your reality.

So you have already been divided and conquered by it.

Now here is the rub in divide and conquer which confuses these issues in regards to who is right and wrong.

Everything ultimately gets divided into a polarized two sided coin.

"Rome offers you War or peace, it matters not which to Rome you decide"

This is a very old saying, and what does it really mean. It means what ever choice you make favors Rome, because Rome is the one that gave you the choices to make.

You can choose A, you can choose B, there is no C, D, E, or F answer in that proposition.

Most of the particular agrument you are talking about, ultimately boils down in most people's eyes to you are either pro-Israeli or pro-Palestine, you are either anti-Israeli, or anti-Palestine, you are either pro-Jewish or pro-Muslim, or are anti-Semitic or anti-Muslim.

These are the distinctions being made in most arguments, they all revolve around who they all revolve around two choices.

I am going to ask you though, and think carefully if you will, is it possible to just be fair in relation to both sides without having to adopt a label for or against either side.

In other words can I speak to what is right about Palestine and what is wrong about Palestine, and what is right about Israel and what is wrong about Israel, without being placed in a pro or anti camp, by one side or the other.

Currently that is impossible to do, and often it is laid as a trap, that once you are entrenched in the pro-Israel camp by your own design or theirs you can no longer speak to anything wrong about Isreal.

If you are placed in a pro-Palestine camp you can no longer speak about anything wrong about Palestine.

So yes they become absolutes in most cases where you loose your distinction as an impartial unbiased observer because if you say anthing negative about Israel by observing it did something wrong, you are anti-Israel, if you say anything negative about Palestine by observing it did something wrong, you are anti-Palestine.

Labels are attached and then people expected to go all down the line with that side and that is a huge part of the problem.

No one, and no nation is perfect, so it's absurd to think either side does not do things that are wrong, but it is nearly impossible to speak to the wrong of actions, without being then labelled and afilliated with a who.

Once again this thread is not about who is right and wrong in this issue, it's about methodology and procedure on how we can productively speak to what is right and wrong, without being labelled into camps.

You might want to reread the opening piece and some of my extensive posting history before rushing to such conclusions as all you have just tried to do is divide and conquer me, by insisting I too must be in one camp or another, or have an agenda for one camp or another.

That's called divide and conquer, and I will only speak personally to the actions of right and wrong, not who is right and wrong.

I don't judge people, I judge actions, and then ask people to take responsibility for those actions.


[edit on 8/6/10 by ProtoplasmicTraveler]

posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 10:20 AM
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler

Hi Protoplasmic Traveler,
Based on your long description of the simple question that I asked "are you are jew?".... I can conclude that you come from the Jewish point of view...

top topics

<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in