Netanyahu: 9/11 attacks good for Israel

16 Apr 2008

While Hillary and Obama argue about who is more pro-Israel, only Hillary seems to have adopted Israel's view that its greatest problem is terrorism and that it is terrorism that impedes peace in the Middle East, Hamas, of course, being the scapegoat. Hillary refuses to mention a Palestinian state, the military occupation that is the source of the problem, or Israel's continuing ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from the West Bank.

How did terrorism come to dominate talk about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict?

The Israeli newspaper Ma'ariv (and Haaretz) on Wednesday reported that Likud leader Benjamin Netanyahu told an audience at Bar Ilan University that the September 11, 2001 terror attacks had been beneficial for Israel.

"We are benefiting from one thing, and that is the attack on the Twin Towers and Pentagon, and the American struggle in Iraq," Ma'ariv quoted the former prime minister as saying. He reportedly added that these events "swung American public opinion in our favor."

To read more about Netanyahu's talk, including some remarks by the nutty president of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and Israel's fear mongering about the Iranians, click here.

The truth is that Netanyahu is correct, but not in the way most people would think. 9/11 was really a boon to Israel's propaganda effort to hide its ongoing colonialism of the Palestinian West Bank, because it permitted Israel to recast the Israeli-Palestinian conflict into "terrorist-victim" terms, to turn Israel into the victim of terrorism rather than the illegal military occupier/colonialist it really is.

This transformation is one theme of the documentary, Peace, Propaganda, & The Promised Land, and it is recommended for anyone who wishes a post-9/11 understanding of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the origins of the terrorist meme as now applied to Palestinians.

This excerpt is from Robert Jensen, Professor of Journalism, University of Texas-Austin, speaking in the context of the second Intifada:

"In contrast to the international press, in American media, there is a reversal of cause and effect in that the occupation is framed as a response to the suicide bombings. All of the Palestinian actions are attacks and Israel actions retaliation, is meaningful. Retaliation suggests a defensive stance against violence initiated by someone else. It places a responsibility for the violence on the party provoking the retaliation. In other words, Palestinian violence like suicide bombings is seen as cause and the origin of the conflict. Since the September 11 attack on the US, Israel's PR strategy has been to frame all Palestinian actions, violent or not, as terrorism. To the extent that they can do that they have repackaged the illegal occupation as part of the war on terrorism."

News headlines of the day also reflected how the press helped create the myth of the Palestinian terrorist:

"This is Israel's war on terrorism.""F16s hit a Palestinian in the Gaza Strip this morning....""The case the Israelis are trying to make: this is no different than what the US is doing in Afganistan (air attacks in the West Bank)...""Prime Minister Ariel Sharon declared on television tonight, that he was determined to root out what he called `the terrorist infrastructure.'"

Most of these headlines tended to leave out the fact that the Palestinians were fighting a long and incessant military occupation by Israel that the UN has called illegal.

Click here for Part I of Peace, Propaganda, & The Promised Land:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eCL6WdnuN p4

Click here for Part II:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mo2HW4T7w K4

Thanks for Haitham Sabbah for drawing my attention to the news articles.

Tags: 9/11, Israel, Netanyahu, Palestine, terrorism (all tags)

Comments

5 Comments

Oh boy.

Here we go again.

by MBNYC 2008-04-17 05:31AM | 0 recs
Re: Oh boy.

I can only recommend that people who decide to comment with the intent of disturbing the discussion just refrain from doing so.

Israel-Palestine is a core issue in our foreign policy as much as Iraq, Iran, and Pakistan-Afganistan, and its resolution is part of the election as much as any of the others. Attempt to encourage censorship, apart from being contrary to America's respect for freedom of speech, is incompatible to left wing politics.

Now you may wish to censor such discussions on your own site, Gotham, and that is your choice. But to encourage it here and elsewhere just because you may prefer to silence the voices of human rights, is just not something I can agree with, and I hope others disagree with it as well.

by shergald 2008-04-17 05:47AM | 0 recs
I don't even know

what you're talking about.

by MBNYC 2008-04-17 05:51AM | 0 recs
Re: Netanyahu: 9/11 attacks good for Israel

You know...if you weren't being so blind-sided, you would realize that we are fighting a war against global terrorism.  It's a threat that I take very seriously which is why I am going to vote for someone that will take a strong stance against Iran.

But posting anti-Zionist things here do not help you and they don't help the Democrats either...especially those of us who do not like this rising anti-Zionism within the party which is turning more and more Jews towards the GOP.

Israel is America's strongest ally within the Middle East and it's more of a democracy than Iraq will ever be.

Don't just buy into what Jimmy Carter says (he's a terrorist-loving person these days and should lose his SD status and be detained when he comes back to the states) as his views are not welcome here.

by kydem 2008-04-17 06:06AM | 0 recs
Re: Netanyahu: 9/11 attacks good for Israel

"turning more and more Jews towards the GOP."

This is obvious fear mongering that Jews will flee the Democratic party if the Democratic party continues to support human rights. Claimed time and time again on Daily Kos. Polls show the opposite happening. Scare someone else, therefore.

The rest of you post is an implicit agreement with the right wing Likud Zionist program that says it is okay to kill, injure, and oppress Palestinians.

Jimmy Carter, a Nobel Peace Prize winner, and Jeff Halper, a Nobel Peace Prize nominee, would not agree with your nonsensical claim that they are antiIsrael. They are against racism, apartheid, military occupation, and colonialism by the Israeli government, which nullifies the ability of the Palestinian people to live in their ancestral lands. Yes, the lands which were stolen in 1948, and continue to be stolen after 1967 in the West Bank and Gaza.

If there are Zionists who are not for human rights, who are not for the freedom and self-determination of the Palestinians in a country of their own, who are not for left wing post 1964 civil and human rights, then to hell with them, I say.

by shergald 2008-04-17 08:53AM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads