Friday, December 19, 2014
  Home
RSS Feed
Facebook
Twitter
Search:
Media Analyses
Journalists
Middle East Issues
Christian Issues
Names In The News
CAMERA Authors
Headlines & Photos
Errors & Corrections
Film Reviews
CAMERA Publications
Film Suggestions
Be An Activist
Adopt A Library
History of CAMERA
About CAMERA
Join/Contribute
Contact CAMERA
Contact The Media
Links
Privacy Policy
 
Media Analyses





C-SPAN May – June 2012


June 25, 2012 – 7:05 AM

Host: LIBBY CASEY (lcasey@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org).

Topic: AP/GFK poll: One fourth of voters are undecided in presidential race. Undecided voters are invited to call Washington Journal in this segment.

Caller: Maryann from Dayton, Ohio (click here to listen).

Typically indulged by C-SPAN and often permitted to violate the network's ostensible one-call-per-30-days rule as on June 24 and 25, "Maryann," also calling herself "Kathleen," "Mary," "Rebecca," "Patricia," "Jackie," "Ann," "Kay," and "Kate" nearly always condemns Israel and American foreign policy in each of her calls. Recent calls: Kathleen (click here to listen) June 24, 2012; Ann (click here to listen) May 22, 2012 with this same host Libby Casey; Kathleen (click here to listen) March 1, 2012; Mary (click here to listen) Feb. 24, 2012; Rebecca (click here to listen) Jan. 15, 2012;  Kathleen (click here to listen) Jan. 13, 2012; Jackie (click here to listen) Jan. 9, 2012; and Ann, Jan.8, 2012.

Caller: “Hi. Hey, I had watched then Senator Obama very closely in the Senate for those several years. Look, I was not thrilled with him. I thought he was a fence sitter at that point but I had to go with the program because there is no way I could vote for Hillary Clinton because of her Iraq war resolution vote. So, I got behind him and worked literally hundreds of hours. I know he has done a lot this time around and I know he has had road blocks from the Republicans, but I still have very serious questions with regards to lack of accountability for the Wall Street folks who committed crimes in regard to the sub-prime loans. And so, the lack of accountability -- there is a big issue for me. On that issue, he had Republicans, Democrats, and independent voters behind him for accountability. And so I questioned him on that.”
 
"Also on Iran, I will be watching Romney and President Obama because we certainly don't want to make any more moves based on unsubstantiated claims that are being repeated about Iran in our mainstream media. So, I will watch that issue again – Wall Street, lack of accountability, the situation we're headed with Iran. And then also, on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. There is a great Website for folks called [names a propagandistic site, carefully spelling out the name, dedicated to defaming the nation of Israel] and also another Web site called [names another anti-Israel site which has been shown by CAMERA to put forth a bogus anti-Israel claim in connection with fund raising for itself]."

CASEY: “When you think back, are these issues which are so important to you -- are they part of what will make you choose which candidate to vote for or will they determine whether you go to the polls at all or would you just stay home?”

Caller: “I'll definitely go to the polls but whether I will work for either candidate is a big question as to whether I'll put in my time. I know with Obama, I ran a get-out-the-vote campaign. There were Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians and independents alike. So, if Romney were to take a stronger stand in regard to foreign policy in regard to being more diplomatic and focused on negotiations. And on other issues, I don't know if there's going to be a big huge difference between Obama and Romney. So, I will be voting but whether I will be putting any time is a huge question at this point.”
 
NOTE: Host Casey had indulged this same caller as recently as May 22, 2012 ("Ann from Dayton, Ohio"). The scripts were similar, even being essentially identical at the outset. On May 22: "I watched then Senator Obama rather closely in the Senate for those couple of years." June 25: "I had watched then Senator Obama very closely in the Senate for those several years." Typically for callers with anti-Israel and other compulsions, the Ohio phoner is allowed to promote fringe Web sites. Whether it's the failure of the call screener or the host, Washington Journal remains mostly passive or collaborative when it comes to repeat callers using nearly identical propaganda scripts but different names.
 
According to C-SPAN's Web site, more than 28 million viewers tune in each week – making it an information source of potential significance. Among its most popular programs is Washington Journal, despite its persistent failure to adhere to journalistic standards including challenging extremist claims, requiring substantiation for sweeping and/or peculiar allegations and not tolerating or rewarding with air-time obvious bigots and racists, such as often happens with anti-Israeli, anti-Jewish conspiracy theorists.

The 3-hour daily public affairs and call-in show has been given a free pass for too many years from its major patrons. These include Comcast, the largest cable television provider in the country. Neil_Smit@cable.comcast.com is the e-mail address of Neil Smit, President of Comcast Cable and most prominent member of C-SPAN's five-member Board of Directors executive committee. Another prominent member of this five-member group is Glenn Britt, Chairman and CEO of Time Warner Cable, who can be reached at glenn.britt@timewarnercable.com. Courteous, concise e-mails should urge Comcast and Time Warner Cable to make clear to C-SPAN executives that Washington Journal must not continue providing a platform to antisemites and anti-Zionists. A few seconds tape-delay, like those used by most call-in radio shows, should be sufficient. C-SPAN chief executives are at sswain@c-span.org, rkennedy@c-span.org.

June 24, 2012 – 7:38 AM

Host: STEVE SCULLY (sscully@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org).

Topic: Is money corrupting American politics?

Caller: Kathleen from Riverside, Ohio (click here to listen).
 
Typically indulged by C-SPAN, repeat caller "Kathleen," also calling herself "Mary," "Rebecca," "Patricia," "Jackie," "Ann," "Kay," "Kate," nearly always condemns Israel and American foreign policy in each of her calls. She often is allowed by C-SPAN hosts to violate the network's ostensible "one-call-per-30-days" rule in doing so. Recent calls: Kathleen (click here to listen) March 1, 2012; Mary (click here to listen) Feb. 24, 2012; Rebecca (click here to listen) Jan. 15, 2012;  Kathleen (click here to listen) Jan. 13, 2012; Jackie (click here to listen) Jan. 9, 2012; and Ann, Jan.8, 2012.

Caller: “Hey, good morning and thank you for C-SPAN. The first absurd thing is that Karl Rove is still polluting our politics. There's others as well. It's so absurd with him. This guy belongs in prison in an orange jump suit and behind bars for his participation in the outing of undercover CIA agent Valerie Plame. It's absurd that this criminal is out there polluting our elections. But I want to say that Senator McCain – he's honest enough to come out and say this – should lead the way for a constitutional amendment to take money out. You know, it is going to take a constitutional amendment. A lot of the experts are saying that. So, I hope Senator McCain leads the way and I want to encourage the viewers. You know, it's great that we all call C-SPAN but we all need to pressure our reps to do a constitutional amendment, which in some ways they would be fighting against their own campaigns because they get money for them…”

Host: “Thanks for the call.”
 
NOTE: Unusually, host Scully mentioned only one Sunday newspaper source in this, the first Washington Journal segment. This occurred at 7:32 AM when Scully referred to a New York Times editorial, "What Sheldon Adelson Wants," about an American businessman whom the Times lambasted for generous financial support to pro-Israel American political candidates. Scully's reference increased the likelihood of a call from any of C-SPAN's frequent anti-Israel, conspiracy-mongering phoners such as "Kathleen" the Ohio repeat caller who did call in shortly after Scully's Times reference. Ironically, in an exception for "Kathleen," she failed this time to defame Israel, instead venting much of her bile on Karl Rove, political commentator and former senior aide to President George W. Bush.
 
June 11, 2012 – 8:11 AM

Host: JOHN McCARDLE (jmccardle@c-span.org,c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org).

Guest: Lieutenant Colonel JOHN NAGL (Ret.), Center for a New American Security.

Topic: Winding down the war in Afghanistan.

Caller: Edward from Asheville, North Carolina (click here to listen).

Caller: "Good morning. Glad to talk to you, colonel. As a Vietnam era vet, I'd like to speak in a little more civil tone [than previous caller] and address a couple of these issues that the previous caller was trying to get across. I'll do it with a little less emotion.
 
I would like to point out the fact that there seems to be a lot of reporting that does not quite make the mainstream here in America in a lot of reporting. There is photographic evidence that there are allied troops and American troops that are doing nothing but protecting poppy fields in Afghanistan. It's been known for years that the war in Afghanistan has been poorly managed, that Israel was chasing the gas pipeline revenues through there, India needed a base for operations to train guerrillas to attack Pakistan. It is true that it's all just money-making rackets for contractors. There are things going on in our world that we are not being told the truth about. The Pat Tillman story alone tells the truth about Afghanistan."
 
Guest: "Edward' s concerns about contractors has some validity. I think that we have, partly as a result of keeping our military very small on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan, getting a lot done with contractors. A lot of those contractors are very patriotic Americans doing tough jobs under very difficult circumstances. A number of them have lost their lives both in Iraq and Afghanistan. We need to have more of a national discussion about the role of contractors in America's wars. I have actually written on that subject."
 
NOTE: The conspiracy-mongering caller – his invocation of the "there are things in our world we're not being told the truth about" formula should have been a red flag – deserved to be challenged by the host if not the guest. What photographs of American or allied forces guardian Afghan poppy fields? "Israel chasing gas pipeline revenues" there? Israel is busy developing newly-discovered natural gas fields off its Mediterranean coast and the idea of Kabul cooperating with Jerusalem on central Asian pipelines is ludicrous. India is involved in the Afghan war to secure training sites for anti-Pakistan guerrillas? Where's the evidence? C-SPAN's host should have demanded the source of his fantasies.

At 8:23 AM in this segment, another caller was asked by host McCardle, "Caller, where did you get the facts on the drone strikes?" to which the caller responded, "On the Internet." Guest Nagl then questioned the accuracy of the caller's facts. Questioning a caller's information source on Washington Journal is rarely done, regardless of the fringe nature of many conspiracy theories put forth, and essentially never when anti-Israel, antisemitic charges are leveled.

Moreover, except for the rare guest on Washington Journal who questions any of the numerous anti-Israel or antisemitic charges leveled by callers, these invariably false charges are tacitly accepted. Why does C-SPAN repeatedly permit bigotry and misinformation targeting Jews and the Jewish state? No other ethnic or religious group or nation is repeatedly vilified on these broadcasts.
 
According to C-SPAN's Web site, more than 28 million viewers tune in each week – making it an information source of potential significance. Among its most popular programs is the Washington Journal despite its persistent failure to adhere to journalistic standards. The 3-hour daily public affairs and call-in show has been given a free pass for too many years from its major patrons such as Comcast, the largest cable television provider in the country. Neil_Smit@cable.comcast.com is the e-mail address of Neil Smit, President of Comcast Cable and most prominent member of C-SPAN's five-member Board of Directors executive committee. Courteous, concise e-mails should urge Comcast to make clear to C-SPAN executives that Washington Journal must not continue providing an open platform to anti-Jewish, anti-Israeli bigots. A few seconds tape-delay, like those used by most call-in radio shows, should be sufficient. C-SPAN chief executives are at sswain@c-span.org, rkennedy@c-span.org.
 
June 9, 2012 – 8:16 AM

Host: ROBB HARLESTON (rharleston@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org).

Guest: DAVID LIMBAUGH, New York Times bestselling author whose most recent book is The Great Destroyer: Barack Obama's War on the Republic.

Topic: The guest's most recent book.

Caller: Rachel from Reseda, California (click here to listen).

“Rachel” a longtime anti-Israel caller to Washington Journal made 36 calls between Dec. 2008 and Sept. 2010 in which her distinctive voice has been heard repeatedly blaming American foreign policy, Israel and its American supporters for all of America's problems. Her "blame the Jews for everything" reflex recalls the slogan in Nazi Germany that "the Jews are our misfortune." “Rachel” has used 25 different names in these calls, most often “Rachel from Reseda.”

Host: “Next call is From Reseda, California. Rachel is on our line for Republicans. Good morning, Rachel.”

Caller: “Hi. Good morning. First of all if it wasn't for leaks, no one would know how criminal our government is. And that's a good thing, I think. Yeah, Obama's a traitor and a war criminal, so is Bush and beyond that. But let me tell you, all our money and the deficit will never be solved if we (indistinct) to AIPAC and unless we stop giving …”

Host: “Rachel, let me stop you right there and go back to a your comment you made earlier about the president being a war criminal. Give me an example of what he's done to make him a war criminal.”

Caller: “Well, he took us into Iraq, into Afghanistan. Now with Israel, they're trying to go against Syria. All these wars we're fighting for Israel…“

Host: “We're going to leave it there.”

Guest: “And she's a Republican? Can they give these people a quiz, a litmus test? I don't think she could pass a test. That sounds more like – I won't say anymore about what I think. That's so ridiculous I can't even respond to that.”
 
NOTE: Guest David Limbaugh aptly characterizes the chronic antisemitic C-SPAN caller's message as "ridiculous." Previously, in a rare moment for a C-SPAN host dealing with a repeat anti-Jewish, anti-Israel caller, Peter Slen, on C-SPAN's May 9, 2010 Book TV program, observed about this "Rachel": "This is a caller who calls in nearly every day with the same [anti-Israel, anti-Jewish] message."

After a hiatus, "Rachel from Reseda" has returned to C-SPAN broadcasts with more anti-Israel conspiracy mongering. There are more than a few such as she among the Washington Journal audience, judging by numerous similar calls. C-SPAN's negligence is apparent in that, unlike in this case, they usually go uninterrupted and unchallenged.

Washington Journal, the 3-hour daily public affairs and call-in show, has been given a free pass for too many years by C-SPAN's major patrons such as Comcast, the largest cable television provider in the country. Neil_Smit@cable.comcast.com is the e-mail address of Neil Smit, President of Comcast Cable and most prominent member of C-SPAN's five-member Board of Directors executive committee. Courteous, concise e-mails should urge Comcast to make clear to C-SPAN executives that Washington Journal must not continue providing an open platform to anti-Jewish, anti-Israeli bigots. A few seconds tape-delay, like those used by most call-in radio shows, should be sufficient. C-SPAN chief executives are at sswain@c-span.org, rkennedy@c-span.org.
 
June 8, 2012 – 7:43 AM

Host: SUSAN SWAIN (sswain@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org).

Topic: Federal Reserve Chair Ben Bernanke's testimony to Congress.

Caller: Thomasene from Tulsa, Oklahoma (click here to listen).

Caller: “I want to say that our government, we spend lots of money overseas, helping different countries, and sending money to Israel – to keep them – when they need help or want somebody to come see after them. If we don't pay them money, they might not work with America. Everybody works hand in hand. Britain – all of those – England, Russia.
 
I think it's a shame when you can have all those countries go to war, kill off our innocent children and boys and we cannot get – people – the big guys to see that if we have a house and don't plug a hole in it, the father of that house will take his own money and the bills might get cut off. The foundation is rotting and they don't care. We have a hole on our roof and they send us rotten meals and they do not care. Their children and futures are paid for off the backs and the sweat and blood of our people. They are not considering that the closing of schools, the closing of jobs and losing your 401k plan, the government regionally, nationally, district have failed. … They are failures. They don't want to follow leadership. Everybody wants to be a big chief.”
 
NOTE: C-SPAN host, President and Co-CEO, Susan Swain, allows the lengthy (2-minute), almost completely unspecific and largely incoherent rant to extend long beyond what would be a reasonable cut-off time.

Swain, typically for Washington Journal hosts in general and herself in particular, is either disinterested or unwilling to inform viewers and fails to challenge the caller as to why she thinks of Israel, America's only reliable ally in the Middle East, first as a recipient of U.S. aid, and what she means by "all those countries [that] go to war" and her complaint that "we spend lots of money overseas." Swain is silent on U.S. spending on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, which has dwarfed aid to Israel. When it comes to clarification of the allegations that someone is "kill[ing] off our innocent children and boys" and "they send us rotten meals and they don't care," Swain does not inquire.

Once again, another C-SPAN Washington Journal host (no matter if she is C-SPAN president and co-CEO) appears too disengaged to actually moderate the program. Once again, a caller includes Israel in a conspiracy-minded ramble on unidentified "big guys" living off "the sweat and blood of our people" and a Journal host lets it all pass.

June 1, 2012 – 8:31 AM

Host: SUSAN SWAIN (sswain@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org).

Guest: Congressman STEVE CHABOT (R-Ohio), member of House Foreign Affairs Committee.

Topic: U.S. response to Syrian massacres.

Caller: Joe from Troy, New York (click here to listen).

Caller: “Yes. I hope you bear with me just a little bit here. I very seldom get through. I don't think we should be involved with Syria or any of those countries at all. It's like we haven't learned a single thing from way back to the Korean War. All we do, when our soldiers get involved, is wind up with our soldiers getting hurt, crippled, maimed, coming home with mental problems. That's more of a burden on the United States. I can't see why we should get involved with Syria. I do not agree with Hillary Clinton standing up saying Gaddafi should be killed. We're not making any friends around the world with that kind of stuff, and I think we got enough problems right here at home. Just let the United Nations handle it. If everyone backed the United Nations, then they could do their job. It's like a lot of times, when I listen to the United States or Israel, they don't back the United Nations at all.
 
Another thing – I'm kind of curious – what is the total reason why the United States is always backing Israel? I mean, why do we always have to kiss Israel's behind? I just do not understand this. I hope you excuse my language.”
 
Guest: “Well, Israel is clearly our closest ally in that important part of the world. And I agree that we should be concentrating on domestic problems. God knows we've got a very tough economy here, unemployment far too high, and we understand the numbers are going to be coming out on that here shortly. So that is something to focus attention on.
 
But there's no question that historically the United States has exercised a leadership role around the world. And one might think, well, why does Syria really matter? It's on the other side of the world, why should we really care about that? You have 13,000 people that have been killed already, but how is that our problem? Now you can make a humanitarian argument, and the United States traditionally has been a very strong humanitarian country with a few exceptions. You know, if you look at what happened , you know, in a couple of places in Africa some years ago, for example, where we didn't act and hundreds of thousands of people lost their lives, but in Syria, you have to look at the fact that Syria is a very close ally of Iran. Iran is on the verge of having nuclear weapons. Iran is the largest supporter of terrorist organizations around the globe. So, they operate through Syria, and if this regime falls in Syria, it clearly is a blow to Iran.

As to what's in the best interest of the United States, and as to the principal focus, humanitarian reasons – important – but the national security, the strategic interests of the United States ought to be number one. And these factors are present in Syria.”

NOTE: Congressman Chabot, the guest, in response to the caller's crude challenge, points out the obvious: Israel is the United States' closet ally in the Middle East. The caller, in the small minority of Americans (according to opinion polls) who view Israel and close U.S.-Israel relations negatively, is, however, among the large number of Washington Journal callers who find the program a platform for their animus toward the Jewish state.

The guest rebutted the caller on Israel. But Journal host and C-SPAN co-chief executive officer Susan Swain let both his vulgar language and unsubstantiated support of the United Nations pass in silence. In fact, a large number or even the majority of member nations are often antagonistic toward United States and Israel and do not share the values of the West. The 22-member Arab League and 57-country Organization of the Islamic Conference are reflexively hostile to Israel. For decades, small and large nations alike have used the U.N. to obstruct U.S. policies and interests, from the days of the Soviet bloc and "non-aligned movement" to the present. In recent years alone, U.N. dysfunction has contributed to humanitarian disasters from Bosnia and Rwanda to Darfur and Syria. The caller's "if everyone backed the United Nations, then they could do their job" is weightless. Rather than point that out, in the interest of public affairs broadcasting that Washington Journal is supposed to provide, Swain says nothing.

May 31, 2012 – 8:13 AM

Host: PEDRO ECHEVARRIA (pechevarria@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org).

Guest: Congressman MIKE CONAWAY (R-Texas), member of House Committee on Armed Services, and Subcommittee on Terrorism, Unconventional Threats and Capabilities.

Topic: Domestic and international security threats to the U.S.

Caller: Mike from Wilmington, Vermont (click here to listen).

Caller: “I would like to suggest that the root problem in the Middle East is the continual unending war between Israel and her neighbors. There should be a solution to that. Unfortunately America continues to defend Israel to oppose a solution. That solution has to be mandated. Those two opposing forces will never agree. And Russia and China, France and England, have to be involved in this.
 
Talking about both parties [Republicans, Democrats], they get a lot of political contributions from agencies that you create, which you fund, and you say you do not like the situation where you have to continually run for office.”
Guest: “Let me push back a little bit. I do not know of any government agency that gives any member of Congress or the President any money. That is not how the system works. I'll push back a little on that.
 
Israel – I am pretty straightforward on that. I read the Old Testament and the Old Testament says, God says in the Old Testament, more than once, ‘I will bless those who bless Israel, I'll curse those who curse Israel.' So I take God at his word. So, I'm going to back Israel. We are not in a position to mandate to a sovereign people something like that. We do not have the moral authority to dictate to Israel what they would do. We should work with them so they do in fact work with the Palestinians to create that two-state solution that they all want. But by the same token, the other side has to come to the table as well and I don't see them coming to the table to meet the Israelis where the Israelis want to try to solve it.
 
I can assure you that the folks living in Israel, waking up every morning with the threats they are living with, they would dearly love to not wake up with the threats. You and I have no way of understanding that because every single day somebody can drop a rocket or a mortar on your house [in Israel]. We don't face that in the United States; we don't have that issue. But the folks in Israel are not intentionally keeping this fight going because they enjoy the circumstances. We have to work with both sides, but mandating anything is not going to be something we should do.”
 
NOTE: Yet another C-SPAN caller focuses disproportionately on the Palestinian-Israeli impasse. He asserts, “… the root problem in the Middle East is the continual unending war between Israel and her neighbors” and “the United States supports Israeli opposition to a solution.” But his premise, that the Arab-Israel situation is the root problem in the Middle East, is ludicrous. Israel had little or nothing to do with the upheavals of the "Arab spring" in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Yemen and Syria, likewise Iran's suppression of anti-regime demonstrations in 2009, let alone the Sunni-versus-Shi'ite slaughter in Iraq. Washington Journal seems to indulge, and therefore attract, anti-Israel obsessives. Rep. Conway points out what the caller, and C-SPAN hosts, often ignore: the Palestinian side has to come to the table.
 
May 29, 2012 – 7:44 AM
 
Host: LIBBY CASEY (lcasey@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org).
 
Topic: Secret kill list: President Obama on counterterrorism.

Caller: Robin from Louisville, Kentucky (click here to listen).

Caller: “I am definitely against the kill list. Our intelligence on weapons of mass destruction was bad. It doesn't make sense so I don't think we will make appropriate strikes without making a mess. We are already seen as too cozy with Israel by many in the Muslim world and around the world. I'm afraid this whole anti-Islamist scare that's going on in this country will provoke some more irreparable damage and to start killing American citizens because of associations that may have nothing to do with anything threatening could hatch a new generation of homegrown terrorists. God knows we don't need that.”
 
NOTE: The Washington Journal host does not mention the obvious errors in the caller's statement. For example, U.S. intelligence about Islamic extremists on the government's "kill list" for drone strikes in Pakistan, Yemen and Afghanistan is more detailed and of a "real time" nature than information about Iraq's presumed weapons of mass destruction programs in 2003.

Close U.S.-Israel relations have not prevented American intervention on behalf of Muslims in Kosovo, aid to Indonesian tsunami victims, or assistance to help oust Libyan dictator Muammar Qaddafi, for example. But the United States often receives little recognition for helpful actions in the Islamic world.

And there is no "anti-Islamist scare going on in this country"; FBI statistics continue to show many more bias crimes against Jews and blacks than against Muslims. Instead of contributing to public knowledge, C-SPAN, through the silence of its host and indulgence of another ill-informed, anti-Israel caller, detracts.

May 28, 2012 – 7:23 AM

Host: JOHN McCARDLE (jmccardle@c-span.org,journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org).

Topic: America's role in the world.

Caller: Jeremy from New York, New York (click here to listen).

Caller: “Good morning, how you doing? I was here September 11 [2001], I lived in downtown Manhattan. I watched 3,000 people die in front of me. It was a terrible, terrible day. But after that I traveled a lot around the world. I thought – why would people hate us so much as to do this? I would meet people abroad and a lot of times tell them I'm Canadian. You would be amazed what kind of unbiased views you get when you tell people you're Canadian as opposed to American. Anyways, a lot of people don't understand that the big picture. If we were to stick up for the Palestinians in Israel, that adds fuel to the fire like Hitler incorporated the Germans after World War II. You can't even mention this because you're considered antisemitic. I think we have a very, very big problem. If we would step in and solve the problem in Israel, we would – I don't know, the world would be a better place. Pretty much that's all I've got to say.”

Host: “Jeremy from New York, New York on his thoughts on what America should be doing in the coming years. A lot of stories today on veterans issues …”

NOTE: Caller poses an anguished question, “[W]hy would people hate us so much as to do this [Jihadist attack on Sept. 11, 2001]?” Caller responds to his own question with the implication that Israel is to blame for the worldwide Islamic Jihadist frenzy by asserting that “If we were to stick up for the Palestinians in Israel… and solve the problem in Israel… the world would be a better place.” Thus, the caller's solution to America's problems in the world is apparently to force Israel into a potentially dangerous accommodation. Israel has asked the Palestinians to come to the peace table but is repeatedly rebuffed by Palestinians on the settlements issue while the Palestinian leadership refuses to consider recognition of Israel as the only Jewish state in a world containing 22 Arab Islamic states.

There are several possible pertinent questions the host could ask of the caller, particularly “What are your news sources for informing your opinion about the Middle East?” But Host McCardle does not ask. McCardle, like other C-SPAN hosts, often interjects questions during calls and often provides follow-up comments. But for McCardle and his fellow Journal hosts, this never or rarely happens when Israel or Jews are lambasted and defamed.

At C-SPAN, it's always open season on defaming Israel and Jews.

May 28, 2012 – 7:31 AM

Host: JOHN McCARDLE (jmccardle@c-span.org,journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org).

Topic: America's role in the world.

Caller: Joy from Memphis, Tennessee (click here to listen).

Caller: “The role of America in the world is destabilizing. I agree with so many of the other previous callers, especially the one that said you can't say the word Jew or you get cut off [caller laughs]. The rich and powerful want all of the money and power in the world for themselves alone. That's causing decision satisfaction abroad and at home. So much killing is causing an atmosphere of despair here, so the children are killing themselves; children, seven years old, because of bullying. Children who are bullying are following the examples of what they see people around them doing who have seen that might is right and nothing else matters if you win. There is a ripple effect for every action. There is an equal and opposite reaction. America can change laws of this country and of other countries to benefit the rich and the powerful, but America cannot change the laws of nature, and if America does not start to obey the laws of nature, America will be destroyed by the laws of nature.”

Host: “Joy from Memphis, Tennessee, calling in this morning on the independent line. We'll also go to Middletown, Connecticut …”
 
NOTE: Caller offers analysis of what's wrong with America (including a bizarre explanation for why “children are killing themselves”), seeming mostly to read from a prepared script, but interjects, referencing the 7:23 AM caller, “[Y]ou can't say the word Jew or you get cut off [on C-SPAN].” Host McCardle characteristically fails to challenge the patently false claim.
 
May 27, 2012 – 9:01 AM

Host: STEVE SCULLY (sscully@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org).

Guest: SHIBLEY TELHAMI, Peace and Development Professor at University of Maryland (Telhami is a Palestinian-born commentator who usually argues the Palestinian vantage point).

Topic: Egyptian presidential election.

Caller: Doug from Worthington, Florida (click here to listen).

Caller: “With 80 percent of the anti-American sentiment, this is a direct consequence of the unadulterated and blind hatred of Muslims and Arabs that are on top of the already what Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld did with Iraq. That coupled with the rhetoric and in particular the Republican presidential candidates and the Republican Congress there, blind hatred of Muslims and Arabs and 24/7 Fox News propaganda. And even the hatred for President Obama because he may be an Arab so affects the sentiment towards the United States and this is not brought up enough by any of the news organizations and it has a big effect. They don't realize how it sounds to – from people in other parts of the world that are listening to this hatred so their people and for their religions.”

TELHAMI: “The polarization that happened in the relations between the United States and Muslim countries broadly after the tragedy of 9/11 is clear. I mean, you had people here focused a lot on the Islamic threat and they are seeing American foreign policy as specifically targeting Muslims. We've seen that over the whole decade in the polling. I've been doing polls in the – over the decade, we also have Pew, we have Gallup, we have a lot of other pollsters who have been measuring this over the past decade.

But I have to tell you something about the Egyptian attitude toward the U.S. There is no question in my mind given what I've been studying over the decade that the core angle of the U.S. – I wouldn't say hatred – hatred is not the right word. The core anger with American foreign policy in general is over the Israel-Palestine question. We have seen exactly how that went up and down. Even their attitudes towards Obama. I mean, I know Obama is seen here to be sort of sympathetic to the Middle East. Actually in the Middle East, he's seen to be unsympathetic. Initially they were optimistic with him in 2009. Beginning in 2010, we began seeing things going the other way. I recall appearing on an Egyptian television show, popular Egyptian television show quoting from a Washington Post article which was emphasizing President Obama's Christian religiosity, that he was a quiet religious person to project his religiosity, here people were wondering if he was a closet evangelical. What people were accusing him of being – of having Muslim roots. So, you know, their judgment is primarily based on policies.

And the policy that matters most now is the Israel-Palestine policy. Over the decade, it has been primarily the Iraq war plus the Israel-Palestine question.”

Host: “We should point out that our guest posted a piece "What Do the Egyptians Want" available on line at politico.Com and also this from one of our viewers. Do economic problems play a large role in these Egyptian elections?”

TELHAMI: “Yes, they do. We see that. The chant in Tahrir Square is three fold. It's bread, putting food on the table. Freedom, justice, dignity. Those are the things that people chant all the time. When we ask them in the polls, what drove their behavior in the parliamentary elections and what is driving the behavior towards the presidential election, we find that the economy, you know, is up there as one of the top three issues. The other two in the parliamentary election was first party affiliation interestingly. That's why the [Muslim] Brotherhood did particularly well.

But followed by the economy and the presidential election, personal trust but again, the economy and unemployment is pretty high up there. Yes, they are major factors. Tied to that is the sense of part of the economic uncertainty is tied to security uncertainty. The absence of security is a factor. Shafiq, the number two candidate who is going to face off with the Muslim Brotherhood candidate most likely, but remember, these elections have not been officially announced. Shafiq made the security issue as a paramount issue and as as a kind of a necessary condition for economic development particularly tourism and he seems to have a lot of people who supported him specifically on that issue.”

NOTE: Without citing any particular opinion polling in the Arab world, pollster Telhami claims that “The core anger with American foreign policy in general is over the Israel-Palestine question” and “the policy that matters most now is the Israel-Palestine policy.” These claims are misleading in that they ignore the impact of American foreign policy upon the Arab revolts and the violent schism in the Islamic world between Sunnis and Shiites.

May 27, 2012 – 9:15 AM

Host: STEVE SCULLY (sscully@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org).

Guest: SHIBLEY TELHAMI, Peace and Development Professor at University of Maryland (Telhami is a Palestinian-born commentator who usually argues the Palestinian vantage point).

Topic: Egyptian presidential election.

Caller: Brad from Cleveland, Ohio (click here to listen).

Caller: “Thank you, C-SPAN. I have a question. The Egyptian presidential election is important to the Egyptian people. I was wondering, do you or your speaker think the natives of America, if they had natives within their own government across America, do you think that would be important to them?”

TELHAMI: “As I said, I think the primary thing for the elections is really American policy in the Middle East, particularly for the Palestine question. Most interestingly, our own public has started to see Egypt now a little bit differently. I call it the beginning of a change of the 9/11 prism that was a very painful prism and negative prism for the whole region but the Tahrir Square model incited a lot of people and it is generally in terms of – I've done public opinion polls in the U.S. that show that most of the American public now sees the revolution in Egypt to be primarily driven by public – by people who want to improve their lives and actually, they have more positive views. Seventy-seven percent of Americans have a positive view of Egyptian people which is interesting. That is, I think, the Tahrir Square prism has begun to replace the 9/11 prism.”

NOTE: Telhami ignores the caller's question (host Scully characteristically obliging). Instead he uses the opportunity to repeat one of his favorite themes, “As I said, I think the primary thing for the elections is really American policy in the Middle East, particularly for the Palestine question.” Telhami's disproportionate emphasis on the Arab-Israel conflict is nothing new for him. The C-SPAN Watch Note for a previous C-SPAN Washington Journal Telhami appearance, June 5, 2011 (9:05 AM), with the same host Scully, is applicable: “While Mr. Telhami comments at length on the potential danger to Israel of failing to complete a peace treaty with the Palestinian Arabs, he ignores the caller's main point regarding a risk to non-Muslim nations of making peace treaties with Muslim entities as is indicated by Koranic teachings. Specifically cited by the late Palestine Liberation Organization leader Yasser Arafat and by Hamas leaders in the Gaza Strip, among others, has been the prophet Muhammad's Quraysh/Hudna model. Muhammad had struck a hudna (truce) with the non-Muslim Quraysh tribe that controlled Mecca in the seventh century but as soon as his followers were strong enough they broke the treaty and attacked and defeated the non-Muslim tribe. Host Scully fails to return the discussion to the central question.”

May 26, 2012 – 9:39 AM

Host: LIBBY CASEY (lcasey@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org ).

Guest: MONA CHAREN, syndicated columnist.

Topic: Education policy.

Caller: Ted from Manistee, Michigan (click here to listen).

"Ted Arens" of Manistee, Michigan, according to an Internet search, is an anti-Israel advocate in the Manistee area. He is also a repeat off-topic, anti-Israel phoner to Washington Journal having called at least on July 3, 2011 (7:31 AM) when he ranted, as he did here, about Rachel Corrie (a college student who attempted to obstruct Israeli counter-terrorism operations in the Gaza Strip) and the USS Liberty incident (determined by the U.S. government in six separate inquiries to have been a "fog of war" mistake). These incidents are staples of anti-Israel propaganda.
 
Immediately following Mona Charen's response refuting the caller's charges, host Casey curiously brought up Ms. Charen's “Jewish faith.” The likely effect of Casey's remark upon many viewers is to cast doubt on the validity of Charen's refutation. This would be yet another instance of C-SPAN's Israel/Jewish problem documented extensively by CAMERA articles and Web site feature, C-SPAN Watch.

Caller: “Thank you for C-SPAN. I think the only thing that stands between the free and democratic society is a free and independent press. And today our government takes away more and more freedoms. The press is controlled by special interests. Let me give you an example. I give many speeches on the USS Liberty and about the cover up that exists on that. Before I start to speak, I ask about the three hikers jailed in Iran a few years ago. Everybody just about knows about that story and then you ask the story about Rachel Corrie. Here's a girl that was bulldozed to death by Israel. She was demonstrating peacefully and then they run her over by bulldozer and there is absolutely no comments from the press. You don't hear anything of the story. Today the parents of Rachel Corrie are still suing the Israeli government and you hear nothing.”

CHAREN: “This caller obviously has a bee in his bonnet. You can tell this by the things that he chose. The USS Liberty is a case that has long been adjudicated and Israel apologized. There was a mistake during the ‘67 War. It's kind of ancient history, but in any event, the Israelis accidentally fired on a U.S. ship and so on. It's such ancient history. The Rachel Corrie case, again, a very left-wing activist who went to this territory to help the Palestinians and to demonstrate against Israel. She was – I don't remember all the details of the story – but I gather she was told to move [away from the bulldozer] and whatever. In any case, this is the sort of thing where somebody who wants to show that the U.S. should not be friends with Israel, brings up a couple of examples of things where, you know, that this should undermine our entire relationship. You can give chapter and verse of examples of Israelis being shot at, blown up, having 10,000 missiles fired at them from Gaza into civilian neighborhoods on a daily basis. And so if you want to have tit for tat about things that are human rights abuses and so on regarding vis-a-vis Israel and the Palestinians, I don't think the Palestinians come out better on that scale.”

CASEY: “You write regularly about your Jewish faith and incorporate that into your columns…”

CHAREN: “Not that regularly.”

CASEY: “Okay; sometimes. How do you make choices about taking in personal elements versus depersonalizing your columns and going for more of a political angle?”

CHAREN: “I do think that people are very interested in the personal. And so a certain amount of it is fine. I think that many columnists overdo it because the personal should be added if it adds a dimension to the story that you are trying to make that you're telling, that has a larger point about our society in general…”

May 23, 2012 – 10:20 AM
 
Host: PEDRO ECHEVARRIA (pechevarria@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org).
 
Topic: CBO warns of U.S. falling off fiscal cliff.
 
Caller: Wayne from Baltimore, Maryland.

Repeat caller “Wayne from Baltimore” is yet another of the numerous C-SPAN phoners whose skewed world view blaming Israel for many, if not most, problems is unchallenged by Washington Journal. This phoner is identical to “Don from Baltimore” whose call on March 4, 2012 (9:24 AM) dealt mainly with his preposterous charge that America's support of Israel is the main cause for United States problems with Iran.

Caller: "I'd like to say – what we need to do is eliminate the Bush tax era across the board for everybody, we're in bad shape, so, (indistinct) let's eliminate tax cuts for everybody, eliminate oil subsidies to the oil companies because they certainly don't need the money. They are making money hand over fist. Eliminate aid to rich countries such as Israel, because Israel gets billions of dollars from us and they have national health care for all their citizens (indistinct) who are Jewish and here we are ..."

ECHEVARRIA (interrupting): "Would you cut social programs like Medicare and Medicaid – those kind of things as well?"

Caller: "Absolutely not, because those are the very things that keep our elderly alive when they retire or become ill before retirement and everything. Those are needed because the people – the citizens of the United States, the taxpayers of the United States, need that. That is a social safety net that is necessary to keep these people alive."

NOTE: Yet again, a Washington Journal caller singles Israel out from among the many nations aided by the United States, for elimination of financial aid, this time as a way presumably to improve the U.S. economic situation, "Eliminate aid to rich countries such as Israel, because Israel gets billions of dollars from us and they have national health care for all their citizens (indistinct) who are Jewish..."

Yet again a Journal host is either incapable of or unwilling to inform the audience of the context of American foreign aid in general and aid to Israel in particular. First, the aid to Israel is entirely military – none of it has anything to do with Israel's health care for its citizens. Secondly, most of the military aid to Israel of about $3 billion per year comes back into the American economy as payment for defense materials. Thirdly, there is an important benefit to the United States in that there is a valuable return from Israel to the United States in the form of technology for improved unmanned aircraft, anti-missile defenses, battlefield medical techniques and intelligence on anti-U.S. as well as anti-Israeli Arab and Islamic radicals. Fourthly, the aid to Israel amounts to less than 0.1 percent of government spending in terms of the country's $3.6 trillion federal budget. Furthermore, only Israel, of all U.S. allies, is under continual siege and it is the only Western-style democracy in the Middle East.

Moreover, host Echevarria fails to mention the caller's not-so-subtle antisemitic message, "...citizens...who are Jewish," let alone point out that 20 percent of Israel's 7.6 million citizens are non-Jews, mostly Israeli Arabs, who also are covered by Israel's national health plan.
 
The skewed world view of numerous Journal callers – with silver bullet solutions, conspiratorial cause-and-effect, and frequent default to anti-Israeli, anti-Jewish innuendo or assertion – seems not to matter to C-SPAN hosts. The result is less public affairs broadcasting than public pandering to an unseemly fringe mentality.
 
May 22, 2012 – 7:58 AM

Host: LIBBY CASEY

Guest: JAMAL SIMMONS, Democrat strategist.

Topic: Race, politics and campaign 2012.

Caller: Ann from Dayton, Ohio (click here to listen).

Always indulged by C-SPAN, deceptive repeat caller from Ohio,"Ann," who also calls herself "Kathleen," "Mary," "Rebecca," "Patricia," "Jackie," "Kay," "Kate," invariably condemns Israel and rails against American foreign policy in each of her numerous calls, often violating C-SPAN's ostensible one-call-per-30-days rule. Her most recent calls: Kathleen (click here to listen) March 1, 2012; Mary (click here to listen) Feb. 24, 2012; Rebecca (click here to listen) Jan. 15, 2012;  Kathleen (click here to listen) Jan. 13, 2012; Jackie (click here to listen) Jan. 9, 2012; and Ann, Jan. 8, 2012.

Caller: "I watched then Senator Obama rather closely in the Senate for those couple of years. For me personally, he was too much of a fence sitter but I was on his bus anyway because there were no other choices. There was no way I was going to support Hillary Clinton after she voted for the Iraq war.
 
When he selected Eric Holder as the attorney general – we have heard Holder and Obama keep repeating that no one is above the law. Yet, we did not watch the Obama administration – which they didn't promise – to hold anybody accountable for the false pre-war intelligence . We have not witnessed the Obama administration hold anybody accountable for the sub-prime loan disaster or the foreclosure fraud disaster. I will be watching that issue, as well as Romney and President Obama on Iran because we all know that the Israel lobby and Israel has been pushing us towards another disaster based on unsubstantiated claims. So, these are some of the issues I'll be watching President Obama on.
 
And I'd like to request C-SPAN to have Professor William Black in regard to the economy and former Bush administration officials Hillary Mann Leverett and Flynt Leverett [critic of Israeli policies] on your program about Iran. Thank you."
 
Guest: "I think the key question that she was asking was about accountability. The President made a judgment when he first came into office that he would not spend all his political energy in looking backwards and trying to get who did what (indistinct) – instead, trying to go forward and create policies when we' re in the middle of a crisis – and move forward. You can argue with that. There's some justification for wanting people to be held accountable as a deterrent to future abuse. At the same time, when you're in the middle of a fight You don' t necessarily want to be arguing about how the fire got lit, you just want to put the fire out. So, I think they made the choice to do the later and history will judge them accordingly."
 
NOTE: Typical of Washington Journal, neither host nor guest challenge this repeat caller's characteristic distortion of American and Israeli policies – and attack on American supporters of Israel, “I will be watching that issue, as well as Romney and President Obama on Iran because we all know that the Israel lobby and Israel has been pushing us towards another disaster based on unsubstantiated claims.” But this ignores the reality of the world's apprehension about Iran's nuclear program, reinforced by recent reports from the U.N.'s International Atomic Energy Agency, among others, as it is perceived to be nearly at the final point in the development of nuclear weaponry – and the well-documented annihilationist intention of Iran's leaders, including President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, a religious fanatic, toward Israel.
 
May 19, 2012 – 7:38 AM

Host: PEDRO ECHEVARRIA.

Topic: G8/NATO: Do international alliances matter?

Caller: James from Birmingham, Alabama (click here to listen).

Washington Journal hosts, as is the case here, typically tacitly accept obviously absurd anti-Israel allegations.
 
Caller: “I have been a few things to run down. Basically, what NATO is – they are bodyguard for these large corporations. Our tax payer money pays for these bodyguards to protect China, for instance, from going into Afghanistan which is now manufacturing lithium to make these batteries. The United States is a bodyguard for Israel while Israel gives all its business and chemical (indistinct) morphine to Afghanistan. Morphine is used every square inch of the Earth (indistinct). It's on 90 percent of the (indistinct) of Afghanistan. One country is manufacturing (indistinct). One more thing, what you'll notice about this, our taxpayer dollars, we have no voice in this. They say the government does not create jobs. All of these defense contractors and war profiteers, that is our taxpayers money that create their jobs and we also pay them. So, this is the reason why we see certain members of Congress, they have family members to do certain things because they are tied up of businesses that have their family members tied up in these overseas multi-corporation businesses. But it doesn't help the average American. Thank you.”
 
May 5, 2012 – 9:51 AM

Host: ROBB HARLESTON

Guest: MELVIN ALSTON, co-founder of International Civil Rights Center and Museum (Greensboro, North Carolina).

Topic: Race relations and civil rights.

Caller: Jerry from New York, New York (click here to listen).
 
Neither host nor guest refutes the caller's lengthy and vague rambling nor his inflammatory anti-Israel falsehood. C-SPAN here continues to indulge baseless hostility toward Israel and Jews. This is in contradiction to the network's refusal to allow any other ethnic or religious group to be repeatedly vilified on Washington Journal broadcasts.
 
Caller: “I have two comments. I live in New York but I'm originally from the South so I kind of know how things are down there. I don't think a lot of really people do. Anyways, the gentleman a couple of calls ago with commenting about the Civil War was adequate. I think that is a common-sense issue. After the Civil War, we have the Jim Crow laws and the prison workers, which was equal to slavery, I guess.
 
This other caller was commenting about Obama is a communist. To me, that is just that white America is so paranoid about having a black president that they think of things like he is a communist. Human beings by nature need to have rules. If that is why they call him a communist, so be it. If we had more rules on Wall Street, we would not be in this mess right now. Another thing is we need to look at our civil rights overseas and how it affects us here. September 11 [2001] I watched 3000 people die in front of me, and that is directly related to our tax dollars going to Israel to suppress other brown people overseas [emphasis added]. We need to think about helping the people of color in our country and not sending tax dollars overseas to suppress other people.”

HARLESTON: “Your thoughts in Greensboro, North Carolina. Your thoughts, sir.”

ALSTON: “Let me totally agree with the caller, and let me also say I also agree with the person who did the e-mail. If it was not for white America being involved in the civil- rights movement, we probably would never have gotten as far as we have gotten here. Whites have always been involved in civil rights, even with Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. in his struggle for civil rights, and going all the way back to Harriet Tubman as far as the underground railroad. Whites have always been involved in African Americans bringing about freedom, justice, and equality. We have never said we did it all by ourselves and we would never be able to do it all by ourselves. Even this museum, the white community in Greensboro and throughout the state and country has embraced this museum. If it was not for the white community working along with African-American leadership and the African-American community, we would not have this museum. I would be the first to say that white America has been a very intricate part of bringing about freedom, justice, and equality here in America and also in our local community.”
 
NOTE: Reprehensibly, guest Alston "totally agree(s) with the caller." The guest credits whites in the civil rights movement, the caller accuses whites, many of whom voted for Obama, of being paranoid about a black president – a racist generalization – as if non-blacks who oppose him do so only because of color, not policies and host Harleston tacitly accepts the caller's harangue containing obvious falsehoods and bigotry. The host has a responsibility, on a self-described public affairs program, to set record straight regarding the caller's antisemitic "blame-the-Jews" rant, "September 11, [2001] I watched 3000 people die in front of me, and that is directly related to our tax dollars going to Israel to suppress other brown people overseas."

The motivation for al Qaeda's Sept. 11, 2001 destruction of New York City's World Trade Center and strike at the Pentagon in Washington, D.C. was set forth in the American government's official 9/11 Commission report. The report shows that Osama bin Laden's hostility to the United States and West was mainly driven by Islamic extremism, his obsession with ousting "un-Islamic" regimes in Saudi Arabia and elsewhere, desire to re-establish an international Sunni Islamic caliphate, and, in essence, bin Laden's Islamic superiority complex.

U.S. government (military) aid to Israel, amounting to roughly $3 billion in the $3.6 trillion federal budget or less than 0.1 percent of government spending, is used to acquire military materials, most of which are purchased in the United States. Moreover, reciprocal advantages to the United States from aid to Israel include improved technology for unmanned aircraft, anti-missile defenses, battlefield medical techniques and intelligence on anti-U.S. as well as anti-Israeli Arab and Islamic radicals.

The charge that Israel suppresses "brown people overseas" is absurd. What "brown people" are referred to here? The caller is not asked. Could he be referring to Israel's neighbors, Palestinian Arabs in the West Bank and Gaza, who run their own affairs under the leaders they select? Arabs in the Gaza Strip are ruled by a Hamas-led government that attempts to impose stricter Islamic practices; the daily lives of those in the West Bank are administered by the Palestinian Authority. Or could the caller be referring to the more than one million Arab citizens of Israel who enjoy full citizenship rights?

Could the caller be referring to the more than 25,000 Ethiopian Jews now residing as citizens in Israel after being rescued from religious oppression, war, and famine in 1984, 1985 and 1991 in dramatic large-scale, secret Israeli airlifts? He is not asked. As the late New York Times columnist William Safire memorably wrote on Jan. 7, 1985: "For the first time in history, thousands of black people are being brought to a country not in chains but in dignity, not as slaves but as citizens."

Nor does either host nor guest challenge the caller on why he falsely charges Israel with racial oppression when black-against-black violence in Sudan, Somalia, Nigeria, the Central African Republic, Sierra Leone, Congo and elsewhere in recent years has resulted in literally millions of deaths. The caller's focus on Israel sounds hypocritical, but is not questioned.

C-SPAN's ostensible mission to inform the public dialogue succumbs to a bigoted calls and an uncritical host on this Washington Journal broadcast.

May 4, 2012 – 9:14 AM

Host: SUSAN SWAIN

Guest: JANE HARMAN, Director of Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, former ranking member of House Intelligence Committee as congresswoman (Democrat) from California.

Topic: U.S. foreign policy.

Caller: Doug from Boston, Massachusetts (click here to listen).
 
British accented “Doug from Boston” is obsessed with bashing Israel and Jews – this is his aim for each of his numerous calls during which the C-SPAN host normally allows his lengthy monologue containing tendentious claims. Today's call aiming to tendentiously discredit guest Harman is atypically short and mild for Doug. C-SPAN has provided phoner Doug a platform on at least these occasions: March 4, 2012 (9:18 AM) (click here to listen), Jan. 8, 2012 (9:06 AM), Nov. 25, 2011 (9:06 AM), April 24, 2011 (9:32 AM), Feb. 19, 2011 (8:45 AM), Dec. 27, 2010 (7:50 AM), Nov. 24, 2010 (9:10 AM), April 11, 2010 (8:51 AM), Jan.1, 2010 (9:13 AM), Dec 20, 2009 (9:09 AM).

Caller: “Yes. This is about knowing the relevant information that Jane Harman is a (indistinct) supporter of the state of Israel which probably goes a long way to explaining why her concern for human rights does not extend to the Palestinians. The hypocrisy of some members of Congress is frankly suffocating.”

HARMAN: “Thank you. You have every right to that view, but just to push back a little, as a member of Congress I made 25 trips to the Middle East region, including numerous trips to the West Bank. I am a strong supporter of a two-state solution. And I have been pushing hard to get Israel to give more autonomy to the West Bank – even before the two-state solution was agreed upon – because I have visited the Palestinian security forces there and applaud the fact that they are competent and trained and are keeping peace in West Bank cities.”

May 3, 2012 – 7:28 AM

Host: STEVE SCULLY

Topic: What is America's influence in the world?

Caller: Rick from Canton, Ohio (click here to listen).

Host Scully characteristically indulges the off-topic caller after it becomes obvious that this caller is a conspiracy theorist and bigot. After the halfway point of the two-minute tirade, the phoner invokes the anti-Semites' "blame-the-Jews" mantra but for Scully this does not constitute sufficient cause to immediately do a cut-off.

Caller: "Somebody just e-mailed or tweeted you and talked about derivatives and wars. What is interesting is – I can take two states in this country and attach them to derivatives and wars. The first state is Texas. The last four wars have been started by Texans (indistinct), the largest military base in the world is in Texas. I think there's 250 thousand troops in Texas. Exxon is in Texas. The Bush family, Karl Rove, Alberto Gonzales are from Texas. Now when you're talking about derivatives, you go to Wall Street – that's where all the derivatives are – $800 trillion worth of derivatives. Now, what is amazing is at one time oil was the southern Republicans and over in the east coast you have the east coast Democrats. Well, when Clinton deregulated the derivatives to the extent he did, it allowed the east coast, which are the Jews and the banking System, to attach to the southern Republicans. So now you have the east coast Democrats with the derivatives and you have the south with their oil and their war – and also, these regions, the south, Texas, has their own propaganda outlets."

Host: "Rick, I will stop you there and your comment in Canton, Ohio. Back to our Facebook page..."


Bookmark and Share