Thread: And As Soon As We Do Something Good on the PR Front...

Got an email about that very topic yesterday:

'We've Gone Mad,' Says Leading Pundit

Maariv's Ben-Dror Yemini says the press cooperated with anarchists in
attacking Lt. Col. Eisner.
by Gil Ronen

"We've Gone Mad" * that was the caption over an op-ed piece by Maariv's Ben-Dror Yemini, a leading opinion-shaper, Tuesday morning. The op-ed describes the way Israel's press has cooperated with pro-Hamas European anarchists in defaming Lt. Col. Shalom Eisner, because of a single act of violence against a Danish anarchist.

The five-second-long video segment in which Eisner can be seen pushing the magazine of his gun into the Dane's face has been shown in Israeli media over and over again, in "loops," hundreds of times in the past few days.

"It's been a long time since we had an event that made it possible to portray Israel as a monster," Yemini wrote sarcastically. "No 'Cast Lead,' no massacre in Jenin, not even a mini-intifada. The promises of a 'million man march' toward Israel's border melted into nothingness, the flotillas stopped coming, even the mass flytilla turned out to be bogus. Nada… And then it happened. It may have seemed for a moment that Israel was successful in hiding the fact that it is a monster * but then the plot was exposed. The ultimate proof was given in a seconds-long segment showing IDF officer Lt. Col. Shalom Eisner striking a Danish 'cyclist' with his gun."

"At last. The most brutal army on earth was displayed for all to see."

Yemini notes that Eisner had been injured in the incident, which lasted one or two hours * and that the five-second clip was preceded by anarchists' provocations and violence. And yet, the legal analyst for the publicly-funded Israel Broadcasting Authority went on the air to say that the matter seems to be "exceedingly grave," and that Eisner should be put on criminal trial. "It is only a matter of time before the acclaimed jurist recommends a petition to the International Court in Hague alleging a crime against humanity, and the UN's Human Rights Council convenes a special session to put Richard Goldstone back to work."

"Dear readers * we have gone mad. We have simply gone mad."

Yemini notes that the "cyclists" are in facts anarchists, mostly European, who support Hamas and the Islamic Jihad. "They are part of the red-green alliance between Islamists and the radical Left." The International Solidarity Movement, to which the Danish anarchist belongs, openly supports terror against Israel.

"Israel is apparently the only country in the world that grants freedom of action to those who openly seek to destroy it, in the name of human rights, of course."

Despite Israel's long experience with the antics of "Pallywood," he writes, "the media tribunal went into action as a court against war crimes."

The colonel is Shalom Eisner and he has been suspended from duties and the press is saying he is about to be expelled altogether from the army. But he should instead be given a medal. Please take a moment and send the Prime Minister a message, at this web site, calling for the full reinstatement of Colonel Eisner and his being granted a
medal

If you're interested: Prime Minister's Office

Originally Posted by bigross86

Got an email about that very topic yesterday:

If you're interested: Prime Minister's Office

Can't find the quoted article on PM's website.

The article wasn't on his website, the link was if you were interested in sending the PMO a message

If it were my army, Col Eisner would be at least looking towards retirement if not being tossed out.

Originally Posted by 1980s

To be fair, the Danish dude was pretty stupid. I mean, if you watch closely the Danish guy looks like he started it by trying to eyeball/stare-down the Lt Col. Im not defending the actions of the Lt Col though, what he did was abhorrent.

That's all about knowing the flow of body language. If you are completely aware you are frankly a level above the eye balling game. It all gets back to what the Col said.

The five-second-long video segment in which Eisner can be seen pushing the magazine of his gun into the Dane's face has been shown in Israeli media over and over again, in "loops," hundreds of times in the past few days.

Yep, perceptions surely have gone mad. Ok, stuff the one liners....

Definition of Hit.

1.
a. To come into contact with forcefully; strike: The car hit the guardrail.
b. To reach with or as if with a blow: The bullet hit the police officer in the shoulder.

2.
a. To cause to come into contact: She hit her hand against the wall.
b. To deal a blow to.
c. To strike with a missile: fired and hit the target.

This is frustrating Ben. Lack of a clear understanding of the English Language by the journalist/op-ed writer or whatever comes down to sub standard education or poor teaching, which leads to poor elocution by the writer who wishes to pass of an intent upon the reader of the article. I could just be downright nasty and say it's the typical hair splitting that has come to characterise the grubby partisanry of so called 'insightful' op-ed's but can and is viewed by so many as otherwise as fail journalism. Spade is a spade is a spade.

Originally Posted by USSWisconsin

I had a discussion with an anti-Israeli liberal (a woman) a while ago and they explained that it was the imbalence of power in this conflict that made them feel the way they do (please keep in mind this is their explaination - not mine). In their mind, Israel is more powerful than the Palastinians and Israel is oppressing the underdog. This mindset in the press has Israel labeled as guilty- period, never mind reality or facts - they will edit footage like a movie maker to get the scenes they desire built - in the most effective way to tell their story, which is to make the Israelis look bad. They will leave anything that doesn't help to tell their story on the cutting room floor. It isn't fair, it isn't honest or accurate - its just their story - created to sell their brand, never mind the truth, that has nothing to do with it.

i almost never heard of israel as guilty in anything from msm, almost all coverage of israel\palestine conflict, that i see on my tv is pro israel. sometimes news would show al jasera or other arabic news segments, that pretty much is the only place i can see anti israel propaganda.

Originally Posted by omon

i almost never heard of israel as guilty in anything from msm, almost all coverage of israel\palestine conflict, that i see on my tv is pro israel. sometimes news would show al jasera or other arabic news segments, that pretty much is the only place i can see anti israel propaganda.

Then how do you explain the switch of perception and rising numbers of westerners criticizing Israel openly - from Waters to this Dane dude?

Even Ben agrees Israel is loosing PR battle.

Originally Posted by omon

i almost never heard of israel as guilty in anything from msm, almost all coverage of israel\palestine conflict, that i see on my tv is pro israel. sometimes news would show al jasera or other arabic news segments, that pretty much is the only place i can see anti israel propaganda.

I believe we're getting different messages but we're also using different ways to recieve them. I get most of my news from the net, and almost never watch TV unless something local is going on - even that I look at online. I read blogs and discussion forums and follow links, and use BBC a lot. I see pro-Israeli stuff too, but plenty of negative coverage. Also, one negative story often has as much impact on public perceptions as many positive ones.

There's a difference between :a.the US and Euro media and b.between what the lefties and righties consume.There's also the issue of Israel not being relevant in itself,but as dead horse to beat in internal euro ideological matches.As for the Americans,let's say there is the land of AIPAC and the land where a Jewish PR effort was more than successful.

Originally Posted by bigross86

Having a mission that falls within the jurisdiction of both the police and national security does not imply that the IDF trains for police missions. Protests are the purview of the police. The IDF has training, but focuses on their true and real missions, whether it be infantry, armor, artillery, etc...

The primary missions is not in the discussion, but the mission at hand- law enforcement is.

Better to adhere to the whispered warning of lethal attacks coming from Jericho and see nothing happen thanks to being on guard as well as arresting suspects near Jericho and having the Palestinian police arrest suspects within Jericho than to ignore it, no?

So are you admitting to the use of extra-legal arrests based on rumor? Or is bowing towards Mecca or praying to Christ (2 main religions of the Palestinians) evidence of a terrorist plot? Here in the US we have little things called evidence and burden of proof. But I guess you are conceding that the Jericho area has far more protests than terror activity.

I had to know the situation, know the RoE by heart, know how to do the mission the CO gave me with the forces available No, we train our soldiers to look around, and wherever they look, the gun follows. How you could infer this:

So you train your troops to look at the feet of the enemy?

from this:

Nope. The way we train is that wherever a soldier looks, his rifle should be pointed in the same location,

is beyond me. [/quote]

You said, " I had to know the situation, know the RoE by heart, know how to do the mission the CO gave me with the forces available." So you trained to shoot protestors in the legs below the knees...

I don't know when's the last time you stared down a mob of angry protesters with slingshots, but an aimed gun will calm them down pretty quickly once you're close enough.

never faced sling shots, but I've faced armed bangers.

And I've had AT-13 and AT-14's fired at me. I've had MG fire aimed at my head and been peppered with ricochets from AK fire while trying to arrest someone. Sometimes we shot back, sometimes we didn't. I don't understand what the purpose of this part of the post is. Are you trying to one up me?

Nope, you just keep making references to your experience, was just showing your not the only one whose had to think and react under life endangering pressure.

Tell ya what, you swing the same way the Lt. Col. did with the same force and we got a deal if you're willing to sign the same waiver.

No, the question isn't if a punch is pulled, but if a rifle butt can be used to kill someone- it can. Hitting someone with a club, shooting them with a gun or stabbing them with a knife always result in the same charges- murder, attempted murder or assault with a deadly weapon. This is because using a killing weapon on someone is a manifest disregard of the other persons life. Sometimes this is sanctioned (as in war), but it is still a lethal attack.

I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say that telescoping asps or batons are much smaller, lighter and easier to carry than assault rifles? Call me crazy, I wouldn't arm police with nothing but assault rifles unless that was their main mission, like SWAT, and I wouldn't arm soldiers with nothing but batons unless they were specifically going on a riot control mission, and even then I'd have them pack batons along with the assault rifles, because a soldier first mission is to be a soldier, not a cop.

How much they weigh or don't way doesn't matter- clubs aka bats can be used to kill. You admit you'd shoot and kill a man wielding a bat that is functionally no different than the batons carried by cops and riot troops.

By the way, the least you could do is show me some respect as a long standing member of this board if not as a Staff Sergeant (Res.) in the IDF. Therefore I'm going to have to insist that you either call me Mr. Sparky or Sergeant Sparky. I'll leave it up to you. Sarge will also do in a pinch

When you show me respect and retract your veiled claims of antisemitism and admit I freely acknowledge Israel's rights to legal, peaceful secure borders.

Originally Posted by Mihais

There's a difference between :a.the US and Euro media and b.between what the lefties and righties consume.There's also the issue of Israel not being relevant in itself,but as dead horse to beat in internal euro ideological matches.As for the Americans,let's say there is the land of AIPAC and the land where a Jewish PR effort was more than successful.

You're mixing up politics with public opinion. AIPAC is primarily an outreach to official Washington. We scrubs in the hinterlands generally like Israel because she's a democracy and an underdog that wins. We wouldn't like our government to do some of the things Israel does, but then we aren't surrounded by wolves ready to pounce the minute we let our guard down. Sometimes Israel's hardheadedness on settlements and negotiations with the Palestinians frustrate us normal folks, but the truth of it is, well more than half of us have no idea what the Israelis are doing on any given day. It's not until some photo of an officer whacking a hostile protestor makes the rounds that the uninformed take notice, and it's a safe bet they think the protestor had it coming.

The big wigs in Israel have to condemn the act, because, as Ben draws attention to, PR is important for Israel's survival. It can't be seen as brutal to 'peaceful' protestors in those countries on which it depends on for support. And, yes, OoE is right, the officer should be put out to pasture, because it "fixes" the negative image a bit, and it sends a message to other IDF officers that such actions are not helpful in light of Israel's public diplomacy policies. Moral: beware cameras.

All in all, US msm is fairly balanced toward Israel. Of course, we have extremes. Also, for the record many evangelical groups here are gaga about Israel and defend it openly.

Originally Posted by Mihais

There's a difference between :a.the US and Euro media and b.between what the lefties and righties consume.

Oh I say I'd much rather keep to myself. I can forgive myself, for my career I do not need an exceptional pass & mastery of the English language. I'm allowed to edit a post as a result of that short coming. A journalist however does not get such granted leeway in comment where traditionally it would be moderately sanitised of crap on 3 different levels, not counting the writer itself.

Maybe it's just the outcome of the Journalistic world - sitting in a different reality than that needed of a business owner providing a service where the want & end product is clearly understood for the benefit of both. If I saw some one 'pushing' one of my optics the way that baboon 'pushed his magazine', I'd 'push my boot' up their ass and fire them on the spot. If someone came and told me that someone 'pushed the optics' and I saw that, I'd fire both of them.

Standards you see.

I used to consume vast quantities, then an ever busier life evolved. Now, when I read something, I expect it to uphold some sort of standards. Picking up a dictionary would be on the top of the journalistic pile. I can't be bothered consuming any particular editorial house. I know that's slack, but I don't gain a wage, or all those beneficiary conditions....

Originally Posted by JAD_333

And, yes, OoE is right, the officer should be put out to pasture, because it "fixes" the negative image a bit, and it sends a message to other IDF officers that such actions are not helpful in light of Israel's public diplomacy policies. Moral: beware cameras.

Unfortunately that is the message they will get.

Its a shame that they won't get the message that brutality and unprofessional behavior isn't in keeping with the ethos of a Professional IDF.