Bibi and Barak battle for Israeli public opinion over Iran
All four of Israel's major newspapers featured Iran in their headlines in their weekend editions. In Ha'aretz, Ari Shavit, who has been pro-strike, wrote: "Top Israeli Official: the Iranian Nuclear Threat is bigger than the threat faced by Israel before the Six Day War"
That "top Israeli official" (no extra points for guessing who he may be), told Shavit: "If Iran gets nuclear weapons, no one will be able to stop her when she provokes her neighbours," adding, "what happened in the Rhineland in 1936 will be child's play compared to happens with Iran." The official continued: "If we don't act, Iran will almost certainly go nuclear. If we do act, there is a chance Iran won't go nuclear in the years to come, or might never go nuclear. Assessing the risks to the homeland, the source told Shavit that the number of casualties Israel would suffer in any war with Iran would be less than the number of casualties suffered by the "Harel Brigade"(part of Palmach) in the 1948 war of Independence.
The description in the article left almost no doubt that the "official" in question is Defense Minister Ehud Bark. Wrote Shavit: "This decision maker is a controversial figure. At times, he was seen as a savior, then dismissed as a leper (מצורע), and again a savior, then a leper again. Even his opponents, however, agree that he is very intelligent. Even those who disagree with him point to his unique strategic experience, his half-century spent at the very center of Israeli decision making processes. Not just once or twice has he been at the absolute center. One very late night he opened the door to me…with a grand piano at his back he told me his point of view for two and a half hours."
It is well known around Israel that Ehud Barak plays the piano. Chief of staff in the nineties, then the great white of hope of the left for peace as prime minister in the late nineties, later come back kid as head again of the labor party. Recently, he presided over the splitting of the labor party and the formation of his new 'Independence' party and a bedrock member of Netanyahu's coalition.
In Ma'ariv, meanwhile, the headline read: "37% of Israelis say Iranian possession of nuclear weapons could lead to a second Holocaust." They then produced a series of polls attempting to gauge the public mood before a strike. 41% of Israelis say only military action will stop Iran, "only" (according to Ma'ariv) 22% believe in sanctions, 35% prefer a US strike to an Israeli one, 40% trust Netanyahu and Barak while 27% don't.
Unsurprisingly, Israel Ha'yom has also promoted a pro-strike approach. "Iran intensifies weapon development," screamed the headline, accompanied by a picture of Ahmadinejad flashing his fingers in a victory sign to the Israeli public. The paper quotes the Israeli chief of staff: "we are preparing ourselves for a multi-front confrontation".
This weekend, the only newspaper that has adopted an anti-strike approach is Yediot-Ha'aronot: "Netanyahu and Barak are determined to attack Iran in the fall", ran the headline. "Barak," the story proceeded, "sat top generals down for a meeting in his office, but came across fierce resistance. Later, he again tried to persuade them in a conversation at a Mossad-run location. This didn't help either. All the army professionals expressed opposition to a strike without the backing of the United States, and asked the same question: what happens on the Israeli home front the day after?"
When four of out four newspapers in Israel deal with any single subject one can count on the fact that there is a deliberate effort by some personnel to set the headlines on fire. Netanyahu and Barak are now fighting hard to win over the hearts and minds of the Israeli public to a strike on Iran – and the media blitz is a tool they are using to persuade recalcitrant generals.
Reader comments on this item
|"If it is not me for me" what is? [59 words]||Rom||Aug 10, 2012 17:05|
Comment on this item
by Denis MacEoin
"No religion condones the killing of innocents." — U.S. President Barack Obama, September 10, 2014.
"Islam is a religion of peace." — U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron, September 13, 2014.
"There is a place for violence in Islam. There is a place for jihad in Islam." — U.K. Imam Anjem Choudary, CBN News, April 5, 2010.
Regrettably it is impossible to re-interpret the Qur'an in a "moderate" manner. The most famous modern interpretation by Sayyid Qutb (d. 1966), the Muslim Brotherhood ideologue, leads the reader again and again into political territory, where jihad is at the root of action.
If they deviated from the true faith -- as we are seeing in the Islamic State today -- "backsliders," like pagans, were to be fought until they either accepted Islam or were killed.
In India alone, between 60 and 80 million Hindus may have been put to death by Muslim armies between the years 1000-1525.
by Yaakov Lappin
Hamas's long-term ambitions are indistinguishable from those of Islamic State and al-Qaeda.
Hamas will now focus on its next goal -- trying to strengthen its presence in the West Bank and eventually toppling the Palestinian Authority from power there, just as it did in Gaza. If Israel were to withdraw from the West Bank, Hamas would certainly find such a goal easier to accomplish.
Nothing keeps the flames of jihad alight, and Hamas's popularity secure, like frequent wars.
by Alan M. Dershowitz
by Timon Dias
"Arab leaders are a reflection of their people. Arab leaders don't come from Mars or the sun, they emerged from among the people and share the same beliefs... I challenge any Arab citizen who may become a ruler to do anything beyond what current Arab leaders are doing." — Anwar Malek, Algerian author.
If anyone was trying to commit "genocide" during the Gaza War, it was clearly Hamas.
What the protestors in the Netherlands also revealed is that a killed Palestinian is only worth demonstrating for when the blame can be pinned on Israel.
The normalization and common approval of slogans that actually call for the destruction of the entire Jewish State, Israel, contribute to an atmosphere of hatred, violence and anti-Semitism that now seems as acceptable as it is overt.
by Anne Bayefsky
Why couldn't the UN... sponsor a conference on combating global antisemitism?
In theory the UN Charter demands equality of... nations large and small. In reality the UN mass-produces inequality for Jews and the Jewish nation.
The UN has launched a "legal" pogrom against the Jewish state. A "legal" pogrom is a license to kill.
Modern antisemitism targets Israel's exercise of the right of self-defense because self-defense is the essence of sovereignty.