Saturday, September 23, 2017
  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
Privacy Policy
 
Media Analyses





C-SPAN January – April 2017


 
 
Send your comments about C-SPAN's platform for the defamation of Israel and Jews to CAMERA:  c-span-watch@camera.org
 

April 20, 2017 – 7:10 a.m.

Host: PEDRO ECHEVARRIA [pechevarria@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org, @PLEchevarria, @cspanwj, facebook.com/cspan ].

Topic: Should U.S. pull out of Iran nuclear deal?

Caller: Alan from East Chicago, Indiana (click here to view).

Note: Caller, an apologist for terrorists, blames U.S. and Israel for the problems. Host fails to challenge the defamation.

Caller: "I'm totally in favor of staying in on the deal. I think it was – at least we were able to talk with the Iranians. Not having too much discussion with North Korea – what they want to do. I also -- we call them state sponsor of terrorism. But one person's terrorism is another person's freedom fighters. We do have a history of interfering in other countries' business. The Iranians are not children. We can't tell them how to run themselves. That's us being imperialists. As far as terrorism, they haven't been supporting ISIS. Hamas, Hezbollah, these are the people who are Palestinians just trying to get their country back. It's not a difficult situation at all. My opinion is – it is not Israel, it's occupied Palestine. China has North Korea. Russia has Syria. We have Israel. All of them are trouble spots and that's the realism."

[Host has no comment.]

NOTE: Anti-Israel caller falsely claims all of Israel is "occupied Palestine" and lumps terrorist Hamas [Sunni Palestinian Islamists] with terrorist Hezbollah [Shia Islamist Lebanese] as the same people. Host fails to comment.

April 20, 2017 – 7:20 a.m.

Host: PEDRO ECHEVARRIA [pechevarria@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org, @PLEchevarria, @cspanwj, facebook.com/cspan ].

Topic: Should U.S. pull out of Iran nuclear deal?

Caller: Katie from Oregon (click here to view).

Caller: "I find it really interesting right after 9/11, soon after Sharon and Israel said the United States should take out Iraq, and then take out Iran, and Syria because when a physician goes in to take out cancer they don't – I guess we have already been to Iraq. They'd take it off. And here we attack Syria. Now we're going to attack Iran. I can't believe these people calling in so casual about war. It should be something we consider very carefully. War is ugly. War can destroy this whole planet."

Host: "Well, just to be clear. There is no statement about attack. This is just about consideration of the deal."

Caller: "Ah-huh, and how has everybody been talking who called in?"

Host: "That's their opinion a long with yours. As far as the deal itself, what do you think specifically we should do?"

Caller: "I think we should work with Iran. I do. I think pulling out of the deal is bad. I don't think we should have sanctions on Iran. Iran helped us after 9/11. I don't know why we demonize them so much and don't work with them. That is my comment. Thank you."

NOTE: Caller preposterously claims that Israel shaped U.S. policy against Iraq and Iran. And claims "Iran helped us after 9/11." A responsible host would have as least asked for substantiation.

April 20, 2017 – 7:20 a.m.

Host: PEDRO ECHEVARRIA [pechevarria@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org, @PLEchevarria, @cspanwj, facebook.com/cspan ].

Topic: Should U.S. pull out of Iran nuclear deal?

Host: Juanita from Cincinnati, Ohio (click here to view).

Caller: "First of all, I find it strange that the Administration would even talk about reconsidering anything when they can't even get the carrier to go in the right direction, something's going towards Australia when it's supposed to go to Korea. I have a real problem with that. Number one. Number two, at least we're talking to Iran. They can't get [North Korean dictator] fat boy in North Korea to talk about anything. Number three, as far as I have read, none of the considerations of the agreement have been broken. And fourth and finally, as an aunt of four nephews, I have no intention and will fight any intention of this country going to war to satisfy a situation that will satisfy Israel because of Iran. I won't do it. You all have a good day."

Host: "Viewer mentions the topic of aircraft carriers and their presence in the North Korean peninsula in response to announcements by the U.S..."

NOTE: Caller absurdly claims that Israel controls U.S. policy toward Iran. Typically, a Washington Journal host fails to challenge. It's always open season on Israel at Journal.

April 20, 2017 – 7:43 a.m.

Host: PEDRO ECHEVARRIA [pechevarria@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org, @PLEchevarria, @cspanwj, facebook.com/cspan ].

Topic: Should U.S. pull out of Iran nuclear deal?

Caller: James from Washington state (click here to view).

Note: Caller foolishly claims Israel's supposed nuclear weaponry is as much a problem as Iran's nuclear weaponry. Host fails to challenge.

Caller: "I support the Iranian deal that Barack Obama held. But I think we should hold this [U.S.] terrorist country up to the public view to show just how much of a terrorist country the United States has become. We're invaded every country in the world almost. We invade Vietnam. We invaded Iraq. The terrorist country in the world is the United States of America. I'm sorry to say that. But this is true. This is what's happening now."

Host: "James, when it comes to the Iran deal, what do you think it does as far as benefitting the U.S.?"

Caller: "I think it keeps them in check for a few years. Israel already has nuclear weapons. Why don't we get rid of Israel's nuclear weapons and then we can have room to say we need to get rid of Iranian's nuclear weapons. They don't have any yet. Why can't we get rid of the Israeli nuclear weapons and then just make sure that Iran doesn't get nuclear weapons and we'll be 100 percent better off. The other thing – going in and trying to start a war with Iran, which is what they are trying to do so they can get all the oil destroyed in the Middle East so they can go to Russia and drill under the North Sea, which they say that field up there is like a hundred times bigger than the one in Saudi Arabia."

Host: "Okay. That's James in Washington."

NOTE: Whenever Israel is assailed about nuclear weaponry, C-SPAN viewers are rarely if ever reminded that there is little reason to fear Israel's presumed nuclear capability since Israel does not threaten other countries with destruction and is perceived as highly unlikely to share any nuclear weaponry knowledge with any other country as, for example, Iran which has threatened to destroy Israel. Israel's purported nuclear weapons role, for deterrence in the volatile Middle East, is analogous to the role of America's nuclear weapons role in keeping the Cold War with the Soviet Union from turning hot. Israel, a close ally, consults with the United States on defense matters, including concerning threats from Iran, Hezbullah or Hamas. Israel has not participated in the proliferation of nuclear weapons technology to other countries as have Pakistan, China, North Korea and, reportedly, Iran.

April 13, 2017 – 7:22 a.m.

Host: PEDRO ECHEVARRIA [pechevarria@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org, @PLEchevarria, @cspanwj, facebook.com/cspan ].

Topic: Is the news media's treatment of President Trump fair?

Caller: Mark from Winamac, Indiana (click here to view).
 
Note: Timely cutoff by host of caller, "Mark" who voices antisemitic canard about Jews controlling the media and a falsehood accusing Jews of demonizing "white Christians in this nation."
 
Caller: "Yes, good morning, Pedro. Glad to have me. You know, it's not only President Trump, but it's also all white Christians in this nation demonized by the Jewish media. There's only six .."

Host: "Let's go to ... in New Jersey, who says coverage is fair..."

NOTE: Host Echevarria made a timely cutoff avoiding a probable anti-Jewish tirade. It would have been kudos for host if he had also added something like, "This is not a sounding board for antisemitic remarks," which, in fact, is so often the case on C-SPAN's Washington Journal.

April 11, 2017 – 8:56 a.m.

Host: JOHN MCARDLE [jmcardle@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org, @cspanMcArdle, @cspanwj, facebook.com/cspan ].

Guest: Philip H. Gordon, former White House coordinator for Middle East, North Africa, and the Gulf Region (Obama Administration).

Guest: John Hannah, former National Security Adviser for Office of the Vice President Cheney.

Topic: Next steps in Syria.

Caller: Patrick from Southampton, Pennsylvania (click here to view).

Note: This repeat, obsessively anti-Israel caller deceives regarding the “Israeli lobby.”

Caller: “I understand that the Foundation for the Defense of Democracy, the organization is actually a spinoff of AIPAC, the Israeli lobby? President Kennedy wanted to require them to register as an agent of a foreign government and wasn't successful in that venture before he was assassinated. I think Syria is probably the most diverse country in the world. Half of the minorities are the Christians, Shia Muslims, the Kurds, Druze, Armenians and the Greeks. And they all support the Assad. They are terrified of the jihadists. We have been delivering military lethal weapons to the Sunni Muslims, to the rebels, and many of these weapons have gotten to Nusra Front, even al Qaeda and have resulted in the deaths of many innocent people. And we were delivering these weapons through Saudi Arabia. UAE were Turkey are involved. All of the Sunni countries.”

Note: The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) is a lobbying group that advocates pro-Israel policies to the Congress and Executive Branch of the United States. Its stated mission “is to strengthen, protect and promote the U.S.-Israel relationship in ways that enhance the security of Israel and the United States.” It is not an arm of the government of Israel or any Israeli organizations.

Guest Hannah: “Let me clarify that the caller was wrong about everything he said about the Foundation for Defense of Democracy and its various connections. Otherwise, I have great respect for AIPAC, there is such excellent spinoff from AIPAC. I think the caller makes some good points. Syria is an incredibly complex mosaic demographically which is why the civil war has become so difficult. There are real problems in terms of the degree to which some small segment of the population welcomes the approach of ISIS.

But it didn't occur in a vacuum. It occurred in a context of awful, repressive governments. And those places like Iraq and Syria, where you have minority or Shiite related governments completely marginalizing large parts of the Sunni population, I don't think we ought to be arming radical jihadists in Syria. At the same time, there is a fundamental problem if you want to get any kind of handle on these conflicts in Syria and Iraq. You have tens of millions disenfranchised Sunnis that you have to figure out what to do with these people. How do you get a better degree of governments to bring them into the process and really begin to take the ground out from under groups of ISIS and al Qaeda.”

Guest Gordon: “The caller makes an important point about the change and the consequences of funding and arming opposition to overthrow the government. Sometimes people don't like to admit it but there are many Syrians who do still support President Assad, even some Sunnis who are afraid of the opposition. And the truth is that we have been supporting a strategy for six years of hoping the opposition would get strong enough to get to the point he would negotiate his own party are but I think that is highly unlikely because he is backed by Russia and Iran and a bunch of Syrians. And I think to perpetuate it would mean more refugees and damage to our position.”

NOTE: Caller mendaciously implies here that supporters of Israel might have assassinated President Kennedy. Caller's C-SPAN priors include Oct, 17, 2016 (7:56 a.m.) when he repeated his preposterous, baseless charge that Israel manipulates U.S. elections through control of the voting machines.

CAMERA has monitored and documented in C-SPAN Watch these previous Washington Journal calls from this phoner: On the Jan.1, 2014 broadcast, phoner (at 8:28 a.m) he was indulged as he mendaciously bashed Israel and insulted the guest, Marc Ginsberg, a distinguished Jewish American former U.S. ambassador and advisor to President Clinton, "I have to tell you Mr. Ginsberg, your deceit is monumental..." On Dec. 26, 2013 (7:11 a.m.), this phoner claimed essentially that Israel controls the United States. Likewise, on Sept. 24, 2013, host Echevarria indulged at length and even encouraged this phoner in his conspiracy mongering. Similar calls from the phoner occurred on Nov. 22, 2012; April 5, 2012 and April 1, 2012.

April 10, 2017 – 7:42 a.m.

Host: JOHN MCARDLE [jmcardle@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org, @cspanMcArdle, @cspanwj, facebook.com/cspan ].

Topic: What is Congress' role as the U.S. undertakes military action in Syria?

Caller: Gilbert from Tulsa, Oklahoma (click here to view).

Note: Washington Journal caller Gilbert equates Syria's President Bashar al-Assad to Western leaders and defames Israel.

Caller: “I am thoroughly confused. Assad [Syrian president] is at home. Europeans should stay at home. Look what they have done to this continent, the Australian continent, the African continent. Look at South America. They have destroyed and stolen. Assad is at home. If only the Europeans would leave those people alone. They were doing just fine until another draft dodger came along -- Mr. President Trump who dodged the draft eight times and now he wants to send your boys and girls to war. Why is it that only the rich can send people to war but the poor are the only ones who are killed? Look what we did in Vietnam. There's nothing Assad has done that we did not do in Vietnam. We killed more than 4.5 million people and they are still dying from Agent Orange.”

[it's estimated that as many as two million people are suffering from cancer or other illness caused by Agent Orange.]

Host: “The President said the images of the chemical attack affected him and his decision. Did they impact you?”

Caller: “Yes. You cannot believe what napalm can do to a living human body. There is nothing Assad has done that this country hasn't already done. The last thing I would like to say is this. Don't' forget Europeans have been involved in that country for over a thousand years. Look it up. All of those people the Europeans have killed all across this planet and we are talking about one person. I don't believe he did the thing. I think Israel is the one that put the gas over there. Thank you.”

Host: “What evidence do you have of that, Gilbert?”

Host: “We lost him.”

NOTE: There is not a scintilla of evidence that Israel has ever used poison gas as a weapon. Defamers of Israel often claim that Israeli forces used phosphorus poison gas in a conflict in the Gaza Strip. The problem with this is that phosphorus is not a poison gas. It is phosphine (chemical symbol is PH3) that is a poisonous gas. Israel used phosphorus (symbol is P) as did the U.S. and Coalition forces in Afghanistan, for smoke camouflage and marking. Phosphorus has been commonly used for illumination such as on the face of wrist watches.

April 9, 2017 – 7:20 a.m.

Host: KIMBERLY ATKINS, Boston Herald newspaper chief Washington reporter and columnist [journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org, @cspanwj, facebook.com/cspan].

Topic: Do you have confidence in the Trump foreign policy?

Caller: Cindy from Wisconsin (click here to view).

Host: “What are your thoughts? Do you have confidence in the President's foreign policy and the team of people, including the Secretary of State Tillerson, who he has around him?”

Caller: “I am afraid right now I don't have any positive feeling. Here we go planning a strike on an airbase. He called Russia. Russia called Syria. Syria emptied the airbase. We strike with Tomahawks, very expensive missiles, into an empty air base. Basically, Trump is making himself look good. He calls Russia and says you need to clear out because we will strike. They called Syria because they are behind Syria along with China. It accomplished nothing. Accomplished creating World War III potentially by putting us against the U.N. agreement. Why are we there?

Why isn't Israel involved? Why is America pulled into these foreign wars to correct genocide or their policies over there? In reality, we have genocide going on in our own territories we are not dealing with. I have no trust in Trump or the team he has assigned. I hope people's it together because he is pulling us into a world war if he doesn't. We got to do what we have to do.”

[Host has no comment.]

NOTE: Caller asks, “Why isn't Israel involved [directly in the Syrian crisis]? Host Atkins is silent as to the absence of Israeli troops or weaponry on the U.S. side. Atkins is either unaware or unwilling to inform viewers. It's likely to be the later since Atkins, as Boston Herald newspaper chief Washington reporter and columnist, has written of the Israel-U.S. relationship including Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin “Bibi” Netanyahu. For example, in a Feb. 16, 2017 page 4 Herald column, “Bibi, Trump smile for cameras in sham of support,” Atkins criticized the Trump-Netanyahu relationship, concluding with, “They had one idea in common: That a two-state Mideast peace solution is purely optional — despite the nearly universal view of U.S. foreign policy experts that any peace plan is doomed without it. But what does policy matter between pals? Apparently not much.” Is Atkins uninformed concerning Israel's foreign policy or even impartial towards Israel? Not likely.

The answer to the caller's (probably rhetorical) question is that Arab regimes supporting United States Syrian policy don't want to be seen by their publics working with the Jewish state against an Arab state. This, even though reports of covert intelligence cooperation are not uncommon. The anti-Israel passion widespread among Arab countries both undermines their own strategic interests and reflects a deep-seated prejudice.
 
April 9, 2017 – 7:47 a.m.

Host: KIMBERLY ATKINS, Boston Herald newspaper chief Washington reporter and columnist [journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org, @cspanwj, facebook.com/cspan].

Topic: Confidence in Trump foreign policy?

Caller: Dante from Port Saint Lucie, Florida (click here to view).

Note: Caller is allowed a two-minute uninterrupted, rambling rant that included pointing at Israel as the possible culprit in the poison gas attack, “Israel is right down the block. They are using chemical warfare.” Washington Journal host fails to refute the big lie defaming Israel. The authoritative evidence points at the Syrian regime as the culprit and Israel does not use chemical warfare.

Caller: “Let's go back to the last [Obama] Administration. The Administration before that. How about the Clintons? They bombed our embassy in Nairobi and then Tanzania then Kenya. All unacceptable. They went over there and then came how many people died? They did nothing about it. Then, in the Clinton administration they bombed the World Trade Center. They did not do anything. Then, they bombed the USS Cole. They still do not do anything. A clear act of war. Look at the Administration now. The last administration. Clinton and her private server. You don't think we know that Snowden hacked the server and went to Russia? Russia knows everything about what we are doing in the Middle East. That is why they stepped in next to Syria because they knew they were going to do nothing. Now, Donald is president. People keep thinking, why bother Syria? They are not going to bother us. Wake up.

Israel is right down the block. they are using chemical warfare. Remember weapons of mass destruction? Could not find them? We never belonged in Iraq. He kept shipping them away. They used ammonia gas. They used a mustard gas. We were missing the Sarin gas. How do you know that it is not the same Sarin gas that Iraq had and he got rid of it to Syria? Maybe they are testing it to see if it is still good. People have to wake up. This last Administration put us in a bad position with Russia sitting right in the Middle East. Never would have happened under a Republican reign. Now that they are there, let's see what Trump will do. They are testing us. You have to stand up and stand back. You have to do what you have to do.”

NOTE: Host Atkins has no comment. Again, Atkins fails to inform viewers. There is not a scintilla of evidence that Israel has ever used poison gas as a weapon. Defamers of Israel often claim that Israeli forces used phosphorus poison gas in a conflict in the Gaza Strip. The problem with this is that phosphorus is not a poison gas. It is phosphine (chemical symbol is PH3) that is a poisonous gas. Israel used (white) phosphorus (symbol is P) as did the U.S. and Coalition forces in Afghanistan, for smoke camouflage and marking. White phosphorus has been commonly used for illumination such as on the face of wrist watches.

April 8, 2017 – 7:22 a.m.

Host: GEOFF BENNETT, political reporter for the Washington, D.C. bureau of Time Warner Cable News [geoffb.tv@gmail.com, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org, @cspanwj, facebook.com/cspan].

Topic: U.S. missile strike in Syria.

Caller: Cliff from Tulsa, Oklahoma (click here to view).

Caller: “I don't believe it's in the U.S. national interest. I believe it's in the interest of the region like for Israel. When I heard the missiles were launched, thinking of the Cuban missile crisis, how easy it could happen again with an incident like this. I agree with other callers, The enemy is ISIS. It's not the Russians. It's not the Syrians. We just need to come up with a way to figure out how to take as many Syrians or ISIS members there but there's got to be somewhat of a requirement to get rid of them. There's got to be an interest in the area. Rand Paul is correct. I'm not sure this is a legal action by the President.”

Host: “Cliff, what have you seen by the Trump administration on this? Then candidate Trump ran as an isolationist and appears to now be somewhat of an interventionist. What do you think about that?”

Caller: “Well, you know, he has interests in the area. He has Jewish family. I have Jewish family. We all have interest in the area and I kind of see his point in that he has to do something after seeing the picture of the chemical attacks. There's not much, I don't know as President, if I could sit and see the picture and not do something. I kind of agree with what he's done, but I think there's another way of doing it, you know, through diplomatic ways and you should go through Congress to do something like this. He shouldn't just do it independently of the Democrats.”

[Host has no comment.]

NOTE: Conspiracy mongering caller alleges a Jewish connection to the U.S. retaliatory attack on the Syrian airfield from which the poison gas attack on Syrian civilians originated. Indulging and encouraging the caller, host continues the Washington Journal journalistic malpractice tradition pertaining particularly to Israel.

April 8, 2017 – 9:46 a.m.

Host: GEOFF BENNETT, political reporter for the Washington, D.C. bureau of Time Warner Cable News [geoffb.tv@gmail.com, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org, @cspanwj, facebook.com/cspan].

Topic: President Trump's response to the Syrian chemical attack.

Caller: Ed from Connecticut (click here to view).

Caller: “Listen, I have a real problem with this attack in Syria. Why are we rushing? There is no proof that the chemicals came from Assad. We know the rebels have chemicals. And that's really disturbing. And the other thing is -- I have to make this point. When Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi and ISIS are cheering on Trump for hurting Assad who is taking out ISIS, there's something wrong with this. Two weeks ago when Israel was rebuffed when their plane was shot at, he went to Moscow, Netanyahu; Israel likes to fly in and shoot and not expect retaliation. Soon after, we have this event. I say it's a false flag [operation]. We should not be in Syria. Take care of ISIS and get out. Thank you.”

[Host has no comment.]

NOTE: Conspiracy theorist connects Israel to the U.S. retaliatory attack on the Syrian airfield from which the poison gas attack on Syrian civilians originated. Caller implies that the event was a payback for Syria shooting at Israeli aircraft. When caller falsely claims, “There is no proof that the chemicals came from Assad,” host does a disservice by failing to challenge. C-SPAN characteristically indulges such callers.

April 7, 2017 – 7:48 a.m.

Host: PEDRO ECHEVARRIA [pechevarria@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org, @PLEchevarria, @cspanwj, facebook.com/cspan ].

Topic: U.S. launches missile strikes on Syria.

Caller: Anthony from Minnesota (click here to view).

Caller: “I'm basically sure that they should not have done it because like they said someone said earlier they're cherry picking on who they bomb. But the United States didn't have any problem with Israel killing 3,000 people in Gaza. I mean, we have also to look at our own government where we're poisoning our own people in Michigan. I mean, we've got all kinds of things going on and we're sitting up and I really don't believe that Syria did it. I could see Trump doing something like this. I mean, like so many other callers have expressed, it is about money. America if you look back on these major wars we haven't had a big war but to make a lot of money for corporations. But we need to start looking at that Trump regime is racist. They constantly pick at nonwhite countries and threaten them constantly.”

Host: “Alright, go back to your statement that you think Syria didn't do it. What convinces you of that?”

Caller: “The thing about it is -- I just feel like our government is interfering with a lot of countries around the world. We've done the same thing so far as elections too but now we are having this big uproar about it …”

[Host has no comment.]

NOTE: Caller, who sees everything through a racism lens, defames Israel accusing it of “killing 3,000 people in Gaza.” Characteristically C-SPAN tacitly accepts the big lie. This is typical of Washington Journal. Caller's falsification apparently refers to Israel's 2014 self-defense war against Hamas, terrorist rulers of Gaza Strip. As for Palestinian deaths in Gaza in 2014, Israeli analyses of figures from Palestinian sources, tracking each casualty by name, age, sex, place of death, affiliation when applicable with terrorist organizations showed approximately half either were affiliated with terrorist organizations or males of prime combat age. In fact, the number of children and adult women among the fatalities was disproportionately low compared to their presence in the general population, which Gaza's Hamas rulers often used as coerced "human shields."

Journal never informs viewers that the leaders of Israel's neighboring Islamic Arab countries and Palestinian Arabs have constantly fomented anger, grievance, aggression and blame against Israel resulting in carnage. Gen. Martin Dempsey, former chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, told Congress that Israel had gone out of its way to avoid civilian casualties. "No army in the world acts with as much discretion and great care as the IDF in order to minimize damage. The U.S. and the U.K. are careful, but not as much as Israel." Colonel Richard Kemp, a former commander of British forces in Afghanistan, testified on Sept. 4, 2014 about Operation Protective Edge, and basically reiterated his testimony about a previous similar operation before the U.N. Human Rights Council in October 2009: "During Operation Cast Lead, the Israeli Defense Forces did more to safeguard the rights of civilians in a combat zone than any other army in the history of war."

April 7, 2017 – 8:35 a.m.

Host: PEDRO ECHEVARRIA [pechevarria@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org, @PLEchevarria, @cspanwj, facebook.com/cspan ].

Topic: U.S. launches missile strikes on Syria.

Caller: Jim from Florida (click here to view).

Caller: “I think you have to really look at the bigger picture here, everybody. We're talking geography. If you look who's in the middle of Iraq and who's on the other side of Afghanistan, I'm a wartime veteran of 25 years, since Iran… Everybody has wanted to take Iran out over the years. You have Israel as the constant in the Middle East that we keep investing all our time and money into this country. We have spent over $ six trillion already. Every time it comes up, it's Israel. Jared Kushner is there. Netanyahu the other day said, “I've known him for a long time.' I'm all for Trump because of a strong military but everything is about religion over there and I don't think we should be entangled over there. I would rather see peace dividends for our money. It's not going to work.”

[Host has no comment.]

NOTE: Caller's rant is basically a blame-Israel message condemning the U.S.-Israel relationship. What are the caller's information sources? Typically, the C-SPAN host fails to ask. What of caller's claim of “$6 trillion” to Israel? He may have it confused with America's expenditure of $5 Trillion on Wars Since 9/11. The majority of that war funding was spent in Iraq  These are the facts about the current military aid agreement with Israel: It provides for $3.3 billion annually for weapons, including jet fighter aircraft, with $500 million for missile defense. That's 38 billion over the next decade and the arrangement requires that all of the money is to be spent in the United States.

Is the America-Israel relationship a mutually beneficial one? Several points are relevant. First, financial (it is military only) aid to Israel continues to constitute only a tiny portion of the federal budget (less than 0.1 percent). Further, the aid dollars must be used to purchase military materials in the United States which helps create or sustain thousands of American jobs. Third, cooperative arrangements with Israel provide technology benefits to America related to unmanned aircraft, anti-missile defenses, battlefield medical techniques – and intelligence on anti-U.S. as well as anti-Israel Arab and Islamic radicals. It's not surprising that former Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Admiral Mike Mullen called the relationship with Israel “absolutely critical” to U.S. national security. Additionally, Israel, with less than nine million people, is America's 20th largest customer (larger than Russia or Spain). Consider votes in the United Nations over the last several years that coincided with U.S. votes – Israel sided with the United States 90 percent of the time, all other recipients of U.S. support stood at less than 20 percent – Pakistan, Jordan, Egypt, Iraq, Afghanistan, Philippines and others.

Moreover, an extensive real-cost study published February 2017 explodes the myth that Israel is the largest beneficiary of U.S. military aid money by showing that Israel ranks below Japan, Germany, South Korea and Italy.

Furthermore, realistic cost analysis would show that while America has spent trillions of dollars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the blood of U.S. troops – Israel does not require U.S. troops while it battles the same enemy – the West Bank, Gaza Strip and Lebanon components of the world wide Islamist militancy.

April 7, 2017 – 9:18 a.m.

Host: PEDRO ECHEVARRIA [pechevarria@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org, @PLEchevarria, @cspanwj, facebook.com/cspan ].

Topic: U.S. launches missile strikes on Syria.

Caller: Mariah from New Jersey (click here to view).

Note: Caller's rambling, somewhat incoherent message, condemns United States policy and the U.S-Israel relationship. Host is silent.

Caller: “I definitely oppose it. Other than it being unconstitutional, also, we have to look back in 1945, the United States agreed to take Britain's place in the world and we see the result, the old great game they had before. We have propaganda, we have pretext and go in and they use Israel as cat's paw to go in and now carve up the Middle East between them. I think the only two wars that Americans should be involved in is the [18th century] War of Independence against Britain, and war against Congress, who has betrayed us. Uncle Sam is not a goal and not America, should be a minute man and we shouldn't have to choose between safe borders and our national independence. We colonized, we're bankrupt and also in Judicial Watch, they said in Monterey and [indistinct], there are jihadists waiting to come into the country. Why not bring our troops home and sit on our hills and protect our own here. Thank you, Pedro.”

April 7, 2017 – 9:30 a.m.

Host: PEDRO ECHEVARRIA [pechevarria@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org, @PLEchevarria, @cspanwj, facebook.com/cspan ].

Topic: U.S. launches missile strikes on Syria.

Caller: Ray from Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (click here to view).

Note: Ray is another conspiracy mongering, anti-Israel caller to Washington Journal.

Caller: “First of all, this whole problem is a United Nations problem. That is their job to take care of stuff like that. We are not the policemen of the entire world. We'll end up getting our men and women killed in an area we shouldn't be in the first place. I feel sorry about the little children killed, but I believe other things could have happened, such a thing as talking with people. Another thing, I believe this was done to get the all of the attention off this problem we have with Russia and I feel like we're getting very, very close to finding out what this man [President Trump] is all about. The man never served during Vietnam, he said he had a problem. But all of a sudden, he's the biggest patriot one. I don't think he's a very good man, I don't care what they say about his whole base, to me, it is a -- oh, I call it an act of war toward Syria. And if we don't watch it, we're going to get into another Vietnam, send our troops over there and I believe Assad and his good friend, who is Putin, is working right with him. That is what I feel. I feel this should have never been done and this is only going to hurt the United States. Where is our ally? Where is Israel, we are giving them all this money.”

[Host has no comment.]

NOTE: Caller asks, “Where is Israel, giving them this money?” Indeed. C-SPAN is either incapable or unwilling to respond to such a question. See the NOTE for the 8:35 a.m. entry above. Additionally, the politics and prejudice of the Arab world makes it unwise for the United States to enlist Israel directly in the Syrian conflict.

April 7, 2017 – 9:34 a.m.

Host: PEDRO ECHEVARRIA [pechevarria@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org, @PLEchevarria, @cspanwj, facebook.com/cspan ].

Topic: U.S. launches missile strikes on Syria.

Host: Judy from Florida (click here to view).

Caller: “I'd just like to say, I think all Americans need to get together and quit having so much hatred of ourselves and need to pray for these countries over there. And don't talk about Israel, that is God's people, and God said he will heal our land if we would defend Israel and people better start getting off their rear ends and appreciating what God has done for us, We live in the land of the free, we are so blessed.”

[Host has no comment.]

NOTE: From among today's five callers with non-trivial messages about Israel, only “Judy from Florida” supports Israel. The other four condemn Israel. This is typical of C-SPAN's Washington Journal which always has the welcome mat out for anti-Israel, blame-the-Jews callers.

[Host has no comment.]

April 5, 2017 – 7:12 a.m.

Host: PEDRO ECHEVARRIA [pechevarria@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org, @PLEchevarria, @cspanwj, facebook.com/cspan ].

Topic: How should the U.S. respond to the recent chemical attack in Syria?

Caller: Mark from Franklin, Pennsylvania (click here to view).

Note: Caller complains about U.S. lack of credibility but the caller's credibility is called into question here owing to a false allegation about Israel. Typically, a Washington Journal host fails to ask for substantiation of a caller's anti-Israel claim.
 
Caller: "First of all, I would like to add my voice to the previous caller. I agree entirely. You have to have credibility in order to act. I think we need to ask ourselves, do we have credibility? How about Israel's actions in Gaza? Their reported use of white phosphorus. What is needed is a strong United Nations. We've done so many things over the decades to undermine that. So, I think that is the big question."

[Host fails to comment on caller's assertions.]

NOTE: Israel, unlike Syria, is a Western style democratic state and accordingly there is not a scintilla of evidence that it ever has used poison gas as a weapon. Along with being suspicious about any anti-Israel allegation – since such are routine on this network and all, or nearly all, are false – host should have at least asked for caller to substantiate. But C-SPAN's Washington Journal's journalistic malpractice continues unabated. The bogus "white phosphorus" charge has been aired previously on Journal – and always tacitly accepted.

What are the facts? Israeli forces used white phosphorus in a conflict in the Gaza Strip much like U.S. and Coalition forces have in Afghanistan for smoke camouflage and marking as documented in a CAMERA report. Phosphorus has been commonly used for illumination such as on the face of wrist watches.

April 5, 2017 – 7:13 a.m.

Host: PEDRO ECHEVARRIA [pechevarria@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org, @PLEchevarria, @cspanwj, facebook.com/cspan ].

Topic: How should the U.S. respond to the recent chemical attack in Syria?

Caller: Keith from Virginia (click here to view).

Caller: "There should absolutely not be a response to this from the United States. The United States has been hypocritical, being responsible for much of the destabilization in the region in the first place. It's pretty much the same rhetoric of years ago ramping up the invasion of Iraq and the deposing of Saddam Hussein. They are trying to turn [Syrian President] Assad into another Saddam Hussein with the chemical weapons thing. Like the previous caller said, The United States is the number one supporter of state terrorism from Israel and other colonial states."

Host: "So, when the President highlights the inaction he sees from the previous administration, would you agree with him or not?"

Caller: "No, because he says one thing and then his entire cabinet says something different. I don't believe he has made his points in any serious manner."

[Host fails to comment on caller's assertions.]

NOTE: Another anti-United States, anti-Israel caller to C-SPAN freely defames. This is commonplace on Washington Journal

March 14, 2017 – 7:50 a.m.

Host: JOHN MCARDLE [jmcardle@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org, @cspanMcArdle, @cspanwj, facebook.com/cspan ].

Topic: CBO estimates that the replacement healthcare bill would increase the number of people without health insurance by 24 million within a decade.

Caller: Anthony from Hyattsville, Maryland (click here to view).

Note: When the preposterous but pernicious assertion about Israel is made by the caller, it's elicits the customary C-SPAN tacit acceptance. A previous such call occurred on March 8 (7:05 a.m., see entry below) with the customary acceptance.

Caller: “My point is pretty much the same as everyone else. The Republican guy called and says he thought this was a country of choice. It is and most people make the choice to go to the emergency room when they have no insurance and that still gets passed on. It is not written off. That is way it was before there was Obamacare or Hillarycare. Rates were still going up. People would go to the emergency room, and those who did have insurance, the rates went up the cost was passed off to you -- the rates was passed on to you. Cause somebody is still going to have to pay that bill. The CBO says there was a savings of $900 million over 10 years. We can still save that amount of money. We send money over to Israel to blow up things. We should save that money for healthcare. If you don't want health care, then don't show up at the emergency room to put that burden on the rest of the taxpayers. So, don't show up. If you don't want health care, you have a choice. Thank you.”

Host: “That's Anthony.”

NOTE: Caller conflates U.S. aid to Israel (it's entirely a military cooperative arrangement) with funds available for health care. There's no connection but characteristically a C-SPAN Washington Journal host tacitly accepts the assertion. On Journal, Israel is the only country routinely singled out by callers without challenge by C-SPAN from among numerous recipient countries of U.S. financial aid. This military aid to Israel continues to constitute only a tiny portion of the federal budget (less than 0.1 percent). Further, all the aid dollars must be used to purchase military materials in the United States which helps create or sustain thousands of American jobs. Third, cooperative arrangements with Israel provide technology benefits to America related to unmanned aircraft, anti-missile defenses, battlefield medical techniques – and intelligence on anti-U.S. as well as anti-Israel Arab and Islamic radicals.

March 8, 2017 – 7:05 a.m.

Host: JOHN MCARDLE [jmcardle@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org, @cspanMcArdle, @cspanwj, facebook.com/cspan ].

Topic: House Republican bill to replace the Affordable Care Act.

Caller: Eric from Seattle, Washington (click here to view),

Note: Caller's racist anti-white, anti-Israel rant – including "... Israel and all these violent countries" – is typically indulged until caller seems to advocate taking up arms against the U.S. government.

Caller: "I would first like to say that the Democrats have to fight against these Republicans and everything they do. They cannot work with Trump on nothing. It's a cesspool. What I would like to say is this: The Republicans were against Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security – all of programs, but they got money. They don't have the money for us for Social Security to raise our pay or nothing, but they have money to give to Israel and all these violent countries. Billions and billions of dollars. What's going to happen is – this is the Second Amendment remedy. To come against Trump and his corrupt. We need to see his taxes. You will let him off the hook simply because he is a white man. Everything Obama did, you put it under the microscope. But the Second Amendment remedy – that's what it's going to take to get these racists out..."

Host: "What do you mean by the Second Amendment remedy?"

Caller: "That is what the Republicans say. When the government turns to tyranny, that is when the Second Amendment is for. People like Donald Trump, that is what I'm saying. When your government takes over the people and not heeding to the Constitution and these different type of things – this is what the Republicans talk about all the time."

Host: "Eric, are you are planning on taking up arms against the government?"

Caller: "I didn't say nothing about arms or anything. I said the Second Amendment. This is what the Republicans talk about."

Host: "Okay."

NOTE: Caller conflates U.S. aid to Israel (it's entirely a military cooperative arrangement) with funds available for health care and entitlements. There's no connection but characteristically a C-SPAN Washington Journal host tacitly accepts the assertion. On Journal, Israel is the only country routinely singled out by callers without challenge by C-SPAN from among numerous recipient countries of U.S. financial aid. The current military aid agreement provides for $3.3 billion annually for weapons, including jet fighter aircraft, with $500 million for missile defense. That's $38 billion over the next decade.

Is the America-Israel relationship a mutually beneficial one? Several points are relevant. First, financial (it is military only) aid to Israel continues to constitute only a tiny portion of the federal budget (less than 0.1 percent). Further, all the aid dollars must be used to purchase military materials in the United States which helps create or sustain thousands of American jobs. Third, cooperative arrangements with Israel provide technology benefits to America related to unmanned aircraft, anti-missile defenses, battlefield medical techniques – and intelligence on anti-U.S. as well as anti-Israel Arab and Islamic radicals.

It's not surprising that former Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Admiral Mike Mullen called the relationship with Israel "absolutely critical" to U.S. national security. Additionally, Israel, with less than nine million people, is America's 20th largest customer (larger than Russia or Spain). Consider votes in the United Nations over the last several years that coincided with U.S. votes – Israel sided with the United States 90 percent of the time, all other recipients of U.S. support stood at less than 20 percent – Pakistan, Jordan, Egypt, Iraq, Afghanistan, Philippines and others.

Moreover, an extensive real-cost study published February 2017 explodes the myth that Israel is the largest beneficiary of U.S. military aid money by showing that Israel ranks below Japan, Germany, South Korea and Italy. Furthermore, a realistic analysis would show that while America has spent trillions of dollars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the blood of U.S. troops – Israel does not require U.S. troops while it battles the same enemy – the West Bank, Gaza Strip and Lebanon components of the world wide Islamist militancy, the deadly enemy of the West.

Obviously, Israel is the best bargain the American taxpayer has in terms of U.S. aid to any nation.

Furthermore, additional funding for health care and entitlements can be found from other than foreign aid packages – wasted expenditures of local and federal government. If one, say, Googles, "where Michigan wastes millions" or "where federal government wastes millions and billions," hundreds, if not thousands, of items turn up that could yield millions or billions of dollars in recouped funds.

March 3, 2017 – 9:14 a.m.

Host: GRETA BRAWNER [gbrawner@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org, Twitter: @gretabrawner (https://twitter.com/gretabrawner), @cspanwj, facebook.com/cspan].

Guest: JONATHAN GREENBLATT, National Director and CEO of Anti-Defamation League (ADL).

Topic: Threats against Jewish sites in U.S.

Caller: James from Texas (click here to view).

Caller: “I'm a 71-year-old white male with advanced degrees in human behavior. I am strongly opposed to Israeli policy towards Palestinians. Why is it I am constantly labeled as anti-Semitic? I've been part of the civil rights movement since I was in high school.”

Guest: “I don't know who is labeling you anti-Semitic or not. There are people who might disagree with policies of the Israeli government. There are plenty of people in the Jewish community, even among my organization there are also people who disagree with the policies of the American government. When Jews are demonized or delegitimized, when the state of Israel is held to a different standard – one thing we've seen on college campuses. We are for the two state solution at the ADL. Pro-Israel students are being singled out, being threatened because of their ideas. When you target people because of their faith, that is a problem. When you hold people to a different standard because of their religion, that is a problem. That is the activity that crosses the line.”

NOTE: Does caller oppose any policies or actions of the Palestinian Arabs toward Israelis? Typically for C-SPAN, the question is not asked. As an expert in “human behavior,” does the caller find acceptable the pervasiveness and psychological impact of Jew-hatred being inculcated in the Palestinian public via Palestinian media, mosques, schools and officials? Palestinian religious and political leaders explicitly urge followers to “form stabbing squads,” “attack in threes and fours,” and “attack with axes and butcher knives.” They ask, “Why not run over this Zionist?” and “Why not throw stones and Molotov cocktails at him? Why not stab him in his heart?” None of these aspects of Palestinian dominant culture behavior apparently concern the caller who presents himself as concerned about “human behavior” but only voices opposition to “Israeli policy.” Does the caller find it acceptable that the Palestinian dominant culture denies – despite overwhelming DNA, archeological, and historical evidence to the contrary – that the Jewish people have any connection to the Holy Land? Could it be a case of obsessive hate and/or self-loathing on the part of the Palestinians?

Why are points like these essentially never posed on C-SPAN's Washington Journal when Jews or Israel are concerned?

March 3, 2017 – 9:26 a.m.

Host: GRETA BRAWNER [gbrawner@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org, Twitter: @gretabrawner (https://twitter.com/gretabrawner), @cspanwj, facebook.com/cspan].

Guest: JONATHAN GREENBLATT, National Director and CEO of Anti-Defamation League (ADL).

Topic: Threats against Jewish sites in U.S.

Caller: Anna from Texas (click here to view).

Caller: “Glad to see you back, Greta. As a 68-year-old black woman living in the south, the Jewish people, Muslim people, Mexican people are facing what we have faced every day of my 68 years in America. What you have to do is learn to deal with it. You have to learn to talk about it. This is America. We don't want to come out and talk about it. I have my little group over here, you have your little group. Nobody comes together to talk about it. My nephew died in Iraq in 2005. Every day, I'm like, I'm never, ever going to hate anyone. He told us how the kids in Iraq would come out with bullets flying and tell them that there is something over there that they don't want to come in contact with. When I hear people talk about religion, all of us are supposed to be Americans.

President Obama left Israel with $38 million – or billion, I don't know which – for defense. We could have used that over here. I understand he felt like that was the thing to do for Israel. [Israel's Prime Minister] Benjamin Netanyahu hated President Obama. I don't think it was because of him being President. It was because of his color. That is one thing we have to deal with. I don't think Donald Trump hates blacks. But when you surround yourself with people who do that -- that says something about you.”

Guest: “I'm sorry for the loss of her nephew. It is a terrible thing. I appreciate your perspective as an African American woman. America is a great place because of our diversity and the richness of our country's experience. A heritage that includes African Americans and Latinos and Asians and people of different faiths. I don't think any of us should think of prejudice is something we should just deal with. We have to fight for the rights that we have and we have to work harder to maintain this rich, diverse society. The Jewish people for thousands of years have suffered and have been marginalized in many of the countries they have lived.

I cannot comment on whether or not the Prime Minister hated President Obama. I really don't know about that. The goal for all of us as people of good faith is to find ways to work together. I'm proud of the fact that on MLK day this year, I had an op-ed in the Washington Post. We are working on joint programs together. I'm proud of the work we are doing with the Muslim community and Latinos. All of us are in this together.”

NOTE: Where does caller Anna get her news from? Is it possible that she has been misled? Typically, the questions are not asked. The caller's charge cannot be substantiated. It is a purely baseless, slanderous charge that “Benjamin Netanyahu hated President Obama… because of his color.”

While it's possible, or perhaps even likely, that the two leaders have disliked each other for personal or political reasons, there are no grounds for claiming it's a matter of racial prejudice on the part of the Israeli leader or for that matter, the Israeli culture (as can be inferred from the charge). Unfortunately, this is not touched upon by either host (not surprising) or by guest (surprising and puzzling).

Consider the presence in Israel of thousands of dark-skinned fully assimilated Israeli Jewish citizens from Ethiopia, Yemen and India. As the late New York Times columnist William Safire memorably wrote on Jan. 7, 1985 after “Operation Moses,” the rescue of Ethiopian black Jews, was revealed, “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.” Prime Minister Netanyahu has appointed Israeli Ethiopian blacks to important positions.

The self-identified caller might be interested in knowing that there are highly successful, prominent black American citizens who strongly support Israel under the leadership of Netanyahu. For example, U.S. Senator Tim Scott, South Carolina and nationally known radio talk-show host and TV personality, Larry Elder
 
Additionally, caller's implication that financial aid to Israel was due mainly or entirely to the largess or generosity of President Obama is incorrect. U.S. aid and cooperation with Israel, a long-standing U.S. policy, has been due at least as much as to Congress as to American Presidents. This in turn, has been related to continuing majority support among the American people for Israel especially among the sizable community of Christian Zionists.

The $38 billion financial aid (military only) package, over a ten year period, requires that 100 percent of it has to be spent in the United States to purchase military materials which helps create or sustain thousands of American jobs. Cooperative arrangements with Israel provide technology benefits to America related to unmanned aircraft, anti-missile defenses, battlefield medical techniques – and intelligence on anti-U.S. as well as anti-Israel Arab and Islamic radicals. C-SPAN Watch entry below for Feb. 28, 2017 (7:54 a.m.) contains key facts about the America-Israel relationship showing that Israel is the best bargain the American taxpayer has in terms of U.S. aid to any nation.

February 28, 2017 – 7:54 a.m.

Host: PEDRO ECHEVARRIA [pechevarria@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org, @PLEchevarria, @cspanwj, facebook.com/cspan ].

Topic: Trump budget boosts military, cuts some domestic programs.

Caller: Victor from Florida (click here to view).

Note: Caller conflates aid to Israel (it's entirely a military cooperative arrangement) with the cost of health care in the United States. There's no connection but characteristically the C-SPAN Washington Journal host tacitly accepts the assertion. On Journal, Israel is the only country routinely singled out from among numerous recipient countries of U.S. financial aid. And the biased remarks tend to echo anti-Jewish canards.

Caller: "I agree with the last caller. Nothing is being done for the poor or working class in this country. Congress has a 20 percent approval rating. We are in debt $19.8 trillion with no long-term plan to reduce the debt. They are working 111 days all of the year and coming in to work and getting large campaign contributions from corporations who come from the one percent and they are doing their bidding. It's just trickle-down economics. We have the highest cost health care in the world right now. Since we are giving $38 billion to Israel, we ought to have the same health plan as Israel and we wouldn't have to worry about a half-way plan that will just – all it will do is kick more people off of the health-care system. Less benefits and you will have to pay more out of pocket. Republicans have never done much for health care. They did pass a [Medicare] prescription Part D [plan]. But that was about it. They've never been supportive of people at the bottom of society or the working class in this country."

Host: “9:00 tonight is when the Presidential address takes place.”

NOTE: The $38 billion is over a ten year period – a small per year increase over the current arrangement with the key change being that 100 percent of it has to be spent in the United States whereas previously 26 percent was available for Israel to beef up its armaments industry. The facts are these: The current military aid agreement provides for $3.3 billion annually for weapons, including jet fighter aircraft, with $500 million for missile defense.That's $38 billion over the next decade.

Is the America-Israel relationship a mutually beneficial one? Several points are relevant. First, financial (it is military only) aid to Israel continues to constitute only a tiny portion of the federal budget (less than 0.1 percent). Further, the aid dollars must be used to purchase military materials in the United States which helps create or sustain thousands of American jobs. Third, cooperative arrangements with Israel provide technology benefits to America related to unmanned aircraft, anti-missile defenses, battlefield medical techniques – and intelligence on anti-U.S. as well as anti-Israel Arab and Islamic radicals.

It's not surprising that former Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Admiral Mike Mullen called the relationship with Israel "absolutely critical" to U.S. national security. Additionally, Israel, with less than nine million people, is America's 20th largest customer (larger than Russia or Spain). Consider votes in the United Nations over the last several years that coincided with U.S. votes – Israel sided with the United States 90 percent of the time, all other recipients of U.S. support stood at less than 20 percent – Pakistan, Jordan, Egypt, Iraq, Afghanistan, Philippines and others.

Moreover, an extensive real-cost study published February 2017 explodes the myth that Israel is the largest beneficiary of U.S. military aid money by showing that Israel ranks below Japan, Germany, South Korea and Italy. Furthermore, a realistic analysis would show that while America has spent trillions of dollars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the blood of U.S. troops – Israel does not require U.S. troops while it battles the same enemy – the West Bank, Gaza Strip and Lebanon components of the world wide Islamist militancy, a deadly enemy of the West.

Obviously, Israel is the best bargain the American taxpayer has in terms of U.S. aid to any nation.
 
Furthermore, additional money for needs, such as health care, can be found from other than foreign aid packages – wasted expenditures of local and federal government. If one googles say, “where Michigan wastes millions” or “where federal government wastes millions and billions,” hundreds, if not thousands, of items turn up that could yield millions or billions of dollars.
 
February 21, 2017 – 7:47 a.m.

Host: PEDRO ECHEVARRIA [pechevarria@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org, @PLEchevarria, @cspanwj, facebook.com/cspan ].

Topic: Are there limits to free speech?

Note: Of course there are limits to free speech. C-SPAN fails to note at the outset of the segment that the following activities are not protected by the Constitution's First Amendment (free speech): Incitement to violence, incitement to panic (e.g. groundlessly yelling fire in a crowded theater), knowingly defaming (slander or libel) individual(s) intentionally to cause harm. There's no indication that host Echevarria is aware of any of this. 
 
Caller: Jerry (or Gerry) from Tennessee (click here to view).

Note: It's no wonder that phoner praises C-SPAN's Washington Journal as playing an "important" part "in the national dialogue." Where else is such an antisemitic, conspiracy mongering caller going to be provided with an unfettered national platform to spew uncontradicted anti-Jewish, anti-Israel lunacy to potentially millions of viewers?

Caller: "I'm following up from Joe [previous caller]. We realize the important part that C-SPAN plays in the national dialogue. Washington Journal should be put on at night. This time of day, people that are working and paying the taxes are at work, so they don't get to watch Washington Journal. We have been preconditioned in this country by the national dialogue through political correctness and through certain things. Let me give you an example. I will give you two examples, if you allow me. Al Qaeda or ISIS machine gunning people down in the Middle East, I can bring up the point of the Jews in Israel machine gunning down boys at the beach [this is a hateful lie that cannot be substantiated] and you cut me off. You had [Supreme Court] justice Ginsburg on there if you minutes ago and she's talking about she can talk derogatorily about somebody like [U.S.] Senator Joe McCarthy [from the 1950s] who was pointing out and envisioning that we had by this same group of people, the communist Jews coming out of Russia to take over this country. She can get by with all that. All that bad stuff I just got through saying, I appreciate the effort you guys put in. I really do."
 
NOTE: As part of the venomous call, phoner complains that C-SPAN would cut him off for (falsely) asserting that "Jews in Israel machine gun boys at the beach." On the contrary, C-SPAN is highly unlikely to cut him off for attacking Jews or Israel as CAMERA's C-SPAN Watch online feature has shown. Here, typically for Washington Journal, the baseless charge is accepted without scrutiny. Host Echevarria follows up by merely transitioning to the next caller, "Democrats line, Michelle, good morning."

February 21, 2017 – 9:06 a.m.

Host: PEDRO ECHEVARRIA [pechevarria@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org, @PLEchevarria, @cspanwj, facebook.com/cspan ].

Topic: Topic: Are there limits to free speech?

Caller: Jeremy from Kansas.

Note: Caller seems to read from a script – a three-minute uninterrupted, non-stop diatribe attacking the government for allegedly thwarting the First Amendment to the Constitution. It includes a nonsensical swipe at the America-Israel "relationship" insinuating that the government is attacking free speech criticism of it and that this relationship is the basis for much of the allegedly bogus war on terror,

Caller: "Good morning Pedro. Thank you for C-SPAN. I think that first of all we should reconsider what the First Amendment is really about. Free speech, yes, it includes saying insightful things or the core of it. That's not the reason for it. The reason for it is so that we can converse and deliberate as a people and educate each other and create our future through actually describing the principles and policies and ideas that we have about where we're going to get from the past through the present to the future. So the First amendment is first because it's most important. That includes press; press is not about quickness. It's about the distribution of the most important things in the society. Assembly, yes, it's about marches and signs and stuff like that, but it's most importantly about assembly. Real assembly where we deliberate in our own communities about our future. And then religion is not about going to some Bible nonprofit organization, corporation that says what you can and can't say during elections, it's about what you, your direct relationship with your god and your principles and heart. Meanwhile free speech is already under attack in this country. In my own circles, I'm currently under indictment with the library in Kansas City having been grabbed and arrested while at the microphone at a public event because of unpopular speech. My friend and colleague, Professor Anthony Hall in Canada, University of West Bridge, got torn out of his classroom as a long term tenured professor because of his thought and inquiry. This is already happening around the country. It remains a hot button issue where it appears free speech is under assault by the government which is what the First Amendment protects free speech from is the war on terror and specifically the relationship with the United States to Israel in terms of the fraudulent nature of homeland security, the war on terror. Many of these terrorist events are actually state sponsored. Even looking back at Berkeley, last point, is we know that elements such as where they have masks on, we have already seen where this type of thing can be sponsor the by police in order to disrupt a peaceful riot. I'm not saying all the blacks are police agents, but it's easy for them to be organized and utilized by elements of the state so the Executive Branch can crack down with the National Guard on free [indiscernible] speech."

NOTE: After indulging the phoner for three minutes, host's only response to the lengthy rant is, "That's Jeremy in Kansas." Ho-hum, just another typical day at Washington Journal where certain kinds of callers have unlimited free speech to harangue viewers on the supposed "public service" network.

February 15, 2017 – 9:52 a.m.

Host: PEDRO ECHEVARRIA [pechevarria@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org, @PLEchevarria, @cspanwj, facebook.com/cspan ].

Guest: MICHAEL WILNER, Jerusalem Post Washington bureau chief and White House correspondent.

Caller: Mario (or Marwa) from Murphysville, Tennessee (click here to view).

Note: Evidently driven by ignorance and/or animosity, Arab-accented caller's message is one that is detached-from-reality. Guest only gently refutes part of the mendacious, incendiary message.

Caller: “Yes. Good morning to everybody. I've been in this country for the last 40 years and for the last 40 years I've been telling everybody that the Israelis do not want two-state solution. They want to steal land from the Palestinians [indiscernible]. Now [indiscernible] there's no way that anybody can protect Israel without having our military forces there to defend it but until you have two Palestinian states where somebody live on one side and the other guy live on the other side and when somebody crosses the border, you can take action. You are never going to have a peace over there. The Israelis do not want two Palestinian states for they want to keep taking land away from the Palestinians and have a huge Israeli state. They don't want the people who got kicked out of the area to come back. But they get everybody from Russia and Poland and everybody else to live over there.”

Host: “Got you Mario. Thank you.”

Guest: “Mario, there are two points there. One, you mentioned the Americans picking up their rifles and defending Israel. Israel argues that one of the reasons that American military aid is so important is that they know that Americans and no other forces will ever actually send boots and their own blood to defend Israel. Israelis will always have to defend themselves. And you raise the point that the Israelis simply want to continue taking Palestinian land. I would characterize it this way: there are two camps in Israel at the moment. There's one that does want to settle Judea and Samaria, as they call it, historic West Bank territory. And they do believe that they have a right to the land but it's ultimately in Israel's interests [from a security consideration] to be in the land. That's a continuing conversation in Israel.

And it's foreign to the American [indiscernible] for that actually to be a serious discussion but it's not the majority. I would say that the majority that is looking at this conflict does still want a two-state solution. The Israelis who don't want to settle Palestinian land but also don't want to pull out of the West Bank argue that it has very little to do with the Palestinians or the settlements. It has to do with security from decades of experience [with hostile Arab neighbors] – bombing and knifing intifadas. The idea of pulling out security forces and having that sense of security. That's what scares the majority of Israelis. It's not about settling that land but you're right about that, that camp exists.”

NOTE: Caller should have been asked where he got the strange idea that Israel needs “our military forces there to defend it” since Israel, alone of America's besieged allies after World War II, has neither received nor requested American troops to assist it in the several existential wars with enemies bent on destroying the Jewish state. Likewise, as to caller's other assertions, CAMERA has repeatedly refuted such falsifications and distortions uttered by those that never let facts get in the way of their biased beliefs. Such callers correctly perceive that they are welcomed at C-SPAN's Washington Journal.

February 12, 2017 – 8:48 a.m.

Host: STEVE SCULLY is C-SPAN's political editor and senior executive producer [sscully@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org, @SteveScully, @cspanwj, facebook.com/cspan ].

Guest: KAREN JACOBSEN, Tufts University (Boston area) professor of global migration.

Topic: Screening process For refugees entering the U.S.

Caller: Allen from East Chicago, Indiana (click here to view).

Note: Caller's anti-Jewish, anti-Israel propaganda spiel is affirmed by guest's response and host's non-response. Another typical example of Washington Journal's journalistic malpractice that pertains mainly, if not only, to Jews and Israel.

Caller: “Thank you for having me on and thank you for C-SPAN. I didn't want to put the young lady [guest Jacobsen] on the spot so much but I did have a question that I don't know the answer to. The United States has been pretty magnanimous over the decades toward certain refugees but correct me if I'm wrong, but after World War II didn't the United States prevent thousands of European Jews from entering the United States? Wasn't it President Truman who did not let Jews come in and we ended up dropping them in Palestine and they occupied it and we are wholly subsidizing the occupation of Palestine.”

Host: “We will get a response from the guest. Allen, thank you for the call.”

Guest: “Yes indeed, Allen. That was a very sad chapter when we turned away European Jews who had been displaced in Europe and murdered in Europe. And these incidents in countries countries' history do happen. I think that the U.S. has recognized this and has atoned for it in part by its generous refugee policies. But you are right and we should examine our history and look more carefully at incidents we regret and try to understand them and recognize that there's not much we can do about them historically but there are ways we can think carefully about these and what happens when we push people away. Pushing people away is illegal in terms of international law. We cannot reject people at our borders and we should not do that. And in fact the U.S. doesn't push people away from its borders. It allows people to apply for asylum here which is part of U.S. law and part of international law. So, I appreciate your point because it sis worth understanding how American immigration and refugee policy has changed and I would say on the whole it has moved in a positive direction.”

NOTE: Caller's rant is right out of the playbook of Palestinian propaganda that falsely claims that Palestinian Arabs are paying the price of Jewish suffering caused by Europeans and the United States (and implicitly the Jews themselves). Astonishingly, Professor Jacobsen implicitly affirms caller's polemic (including the false claim about President Truman) while spouting innocuous platitudes and generalities. It is true that the United States, like most other Western countries, virtually barred Jewish asylum seekers during World War II, as the famous case of the S.S. St. Louis exemplified. But that was not during Truman's presidency. Meanwhile, as could be expected, host collaborates.

So, there's no refutation of caller's false, malevolent portrayal of reality which is left to fester in the minds of viewers, “…we ended up dropping them [Jewish refugees] in Palestine and they occupied it and we are wholly subsidizing the occupation of Palestine.”

First, the reality is that Jews have always lived in their ancestral home in the Holy Land. For example, from the 1860s until 1948 (when Jews were forcefully evicted by Arab forces), Jews constituted the majority of the population of Jerusalem. In 1948, the re-establishment of the Jewish nation of Israel, with the capacity of caring for Jewish refugees, was supported by the United Nations. Israel sought to accommodate the Arabs but was immediately rebuffed by Arab Armies that attempted to annihilate the Jewish state. And thereafter Arab forces attacked, or gathered to attack, Israel several times in order to destroy it. Jews cannot be deemed to occupy their own rightful country including the West Bank (historically called Judea and Samaria), the heartland of ancient Israel.

Meanwhile the Israelis try to accommodate Palestinian Arabs but to no avail. Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu awaits a meaningful response regarding negotiations from the Palestinian side while his counterpart, Palestinian Authority (PA) President Mahmoud Abbas, has repeatedly and explicitly rejected the idea of two states for two peoples. Palestinian leaders rejected U.S. and Israeli offers of two-state solutions in 2000, 2001, 2008 and spurned renewed talks on such an agreement proposed by Secretary of State John Kerry in 2014. The PA insists on various conditions unlikely to be accepted by any Israeli government before peace negotiations can take place, including: Israel must abide by Palestinian refusal to recognize Israel as a Jewish state (evidently 22 Arab Muslim states is fine but one Jewish state is one too many) and Israel must accept a "right of return" (that does not exist in international law) for millions of Arabs (nearly all of whom have never lived in Israel) which would inevitably result in the Jewish state becoming unviable.

February 10, 2017 – 7:24 a.m.

Host: GRETA BRAWNER [gbrawner@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org, Twitter: @gretabrawner (https://twitter.com/gretabrawner), @cspanwj, facebook.com/cspan].

Topic: Federal court rules against reinstating President Trump's travel ban from seven Muslim-majority countries.

Caller: Alberto from New York City (click here to view).
 
Note: Caller Alberto spins conspiracy theory that Israel's Prime Minister Netanyahu is behind this travel ban just as, according to Alberto, he was behind the Sept. 11, 2001 destruction of the World Trade Center [known to have been perpetrated by Arab Islamists mainly from Saudi Arabia]. Unsurprisingly (typically for a C-SPAN Washington Journal host), Brawner is “Okay” with this view.

Host: “Alberto, you are opposing this executive order. Tell us why.”

Caller: “Yeah. I just want to say just like President Bush lied to us about Iraq having weapons of mass destruction. President trump is also lying to us about, you know, the fear of Muslims, because, you know, this whole thing is about, you know, planned long before President Bush came into – his administration into power. The one that was behind all this was the Prime Minister of Israel, Netanyahu. He wants to have power over those seven Muslim countries in that region. He's putting fear in the United States. With the help of the United States he's putting fear into Americans and it started with the destruction of the two Towers in New York City of the World Trade Center.”

Host: “Okay, Alberto. That's Alberto's opinion in New York. The Prime Minister of Israel visiting the President next week in Washington…”

NOTE: A minor problem with this conspiracy theory is that in September 2001, Netanyahu was not prime minister, his term having ended in 1999. His 2nd term didn't begin until 2009. But accuracy is the least of C-SPAN's problem regarding Israel and Jews.

The record, clearly shown by video clips and transcripts at CAMERA's online feature, C-SPAN Watch, proves that Washington Journal routinely accepts callers' anti-Jewish racism and anti-Israel defamation including blaming Jews for problems throughout the world. No other ethnic or religious group has been subjected to such continuous and virulent defamation on the network. Israel is the only country defamed on a regular basis by a cadre of determined, indulged callers who are rarely challenged by hosts or guests.

One of the most troublesome aspects of this chronic problem is C-SPAN management's complete indifference to it – a refusal to respond to complaints or acknowledge it in any way. C-SPAN is long overdue, whether due to ignorance or design, to correct Journal's journalistic malpractice of allowing inflammatory, antisemitic fallacies to be disseminated to potentially millions of viewers. Cable television viewers should e-mail, call or write TV providers (cable or satellite) and urge them to call for an end to this chronic problem. Keep in mind that a portion of your cable/satellite fees supports C-SPAN.

February 7, 2017 – 9:09 a.m.

Host: JOHN MCARDLE [jmcardle@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org, @cspanMcArdle, @cspanwj, facebook.com/cspan ].

Guest: BRENDAN BOYLE, U.S. Representative in Congress [D] Pennsylvania.

Topic: U.S. travel ban on travel from seven Muslim-majority nations.

Caller: Thomas from Cleveland, Ohio (click here to view).

Caller: “I think the mastery of what Donald Trump is doing is that he is going to win anyway. If it's overturned, he can always say I told you so. If it's not overturned, then he can say to people that truly support him that what he's doing in the first hundred days is what he said he would. But With his policies, we are going to get hit. There's no doubt we are going to get hit especially when he move the embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. It will not just be about the Palestinians, he will be inflaming practically every Muslim in the world. The people that are against us will be using it. They will be using it against us.”

Guest: “The caller makes a point similar to one Senator McCain has made. That is the whole travel ban is just a gift to ISIS. It does nothing to make us safer. It makes us less safer because of the fact that it's a great recruitment tool. The whole approach that he has taken. It is so different from not just President Obama but also President Bush. President Bush went to great pains in the week after September 11 [2001] to make clear that we in the Western world are not at war with Islam. We are not at war with Muslims. We are at war with that vast minority of Muslims who engage in terrorism and jihadism and have a warped view of their own religion. They are a vast minority and we do not indict a billion people around the world because of the actions of a violent crazy few. Here we have Donald Trump who seems to be on the path of wanting us to be at war with an entire religion. That just plays into the hands of ISIS and our enemies.”

[Host moves on to next caller.]

NOTE: Given the characteristic lack of professionalism of C-SPAN hosts, it should not be surprising that no counter point is provided to either the caller's disputable claim about Muslims and the moving of the American embassy or the partisan guest's not unexpected opposition to President Trump's policies. The act of moving the U.S. embassy to Israel's capital of Jerusalem “will be inflaming practically every Muslim in the world” claims the caller without challenge by either host or guest. But how could this be true at a time when Muslims are slaughtering Muslims by the hundreds of thousands. If true, this would suggest that “practically every Muslim in the world” is irrational. Is this not Islamophobic rhetoric?

February 6, 2017 – 8:40 a.m.

Host: PAUL ORGEL [porgel@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org, @PaulLOrgel, @cspanwj, facebook.com/cspan ].

Guest: SAM BATKINS, American Action Forum, director of regulatory policy.

Topic: Trump Administration and Regulations.

Caller: Robert from New York City (click here to view).

Note: Off-topic caller freely without challenge defames Israel. This is the norm for C-SPAN's Washington Journal that claims to operate in the “public interest.”

Caller: “You are talking about Canada and foreign countries, but the United States gave $40 billion to Israel's government and it continues to use our technology to spy and other services. What are you doing to curtail Israel from continuing to steal technology and use it against foreign countries?”

Guest: “It is not an issue we cover directly. This is an issue that is regulated by the Department of Defense and the Department of Treasury. In terms of how that manifests itself in the regulatory world, it is not something we deal with on a daily basis.”

[Host moves on to next caller.]

NOTE: The caller's dollars claim is questionable. What period of time is being referenced? Moreover, where is the evidence that Israel “steals technology” from the United States? Characteristically, the question is not asked. The facts are that cooperative arrangements with Israel, one of the world's most advanced technological countries, provide technology benefits to America related to unmanned aircraft, anti-missile defenses, battlefield medical techniques – and intelligence on anti-U.S. as well as anti-Israel Arab and Islamic radicals.

February 5, 2017 – 7:21 a.m.

Host: STEVE SCULLY is C-SPAN's political editor and senior executive producer [sscully@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org, @SteveScully, @cspanwj, facebook.com/cspan ].

Topic: What does religious liberty mean to you?

Caller: Betty from Medina, New York (click here to view).

Note: Another C-SPAN caller who nonsensically claims that today's Jews are not the real Jews. Another stellar performance from the call screener.

Caller: “I just want to speak to the lady who called several minutes ago. She was talking about African-Americans. I want her to know that we are not African-Americans. We are the original Jews of the Bible. Tell her to read it. It's all over it. And then she can stop referring to us as African-Americans.”

Host: “Explain what you mean by that.”

Caller: “If you are really reading the Bible you will find out who the real Jews are of the Bible.”

Host: “And they are?”

Caller: “They are from Jacob. You can find it in the Bible. It's not hidden.”

[Host moves on to next caller.]

NOTE: Caller's false narrative concerning the Jewish people is right out of the racist playbook of Rev. Louis Farrakhan and his Nation of Islam. Caller's misinformation is easily refuted by the facts. There is a continuous Jewish diaspora history from the Roman expulsions to the rebirth of Israel as a Jewish state, and modern DNA testing that strongly indicates both Jewish genealogical continuity and Middle Eastern origins of the vast majority of Jews including the current Israeli and American Jewish populations.

February 4, 2017 – 8:08 a.m.

Host: KIMBERLY ATKINS, Boston Herald newspaper chief Washington reporter and columnist [journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org, @cspanwj, facebook.com/cspan].

Guest: Behnam Ben Taleblu, Foundation for Defense of Democracies, senior analyst specializing in Iran.

Topic: Trump administration's new Iran sanctions.

Caller: Doug from Brookline, Massachusetts (click here to view).

Note: Revisionist history spinner and anti-Israel repeat caller Doug (with a distinctive British accent) is typically indulged by C-SPAN.

Caller: “Just a couple of brief observations and a mention of American duplicity in the area and the question: most Iranians know what most Americans do not that in 1953, a popular and democratically elected government in Iran was overthrown by the United States at behest of British interests and the Shah was installed. In 2015, Egypt proposed United Nations Security Council resolution that would make the Middle East a nuclear weapons free zone. Iran was in favor of that and it was vetoed by the United States, it was vetoed by Canada, and vetoed by Britain because it would have exposed the Israeli nuclear weapons program. That would have triggered the signing to the Symington amendment to the National Assistance Act and I'm sure your guest knows all about that and what the impact to Israel would be. Finally, the Foundation for Defense of Democracies [indiscernible] the Israeli lobbying [indiscernible] and the question I have is, Jared Kushner, who is was one of trump's advisers, I would like to know the status of his citizenship and the reason I ask this is is because he supports illegal settler activity on the West Bank and he also sends money to the Israeli defense forces. I will hang up and listen to your response. Thanks.”

Note: Doug is wrong about the overthrow of Iran's leader in 1953, wrong about the reasoning behind the mentioned vetoes and wrong about the Symington amendment again as he has been in the past (see NOTE below).

Guest: “Sure. It is a nonpartisan nonprofit think tank like many other think tanks in Washington. And it was founded shortly after 9/11, committed to studying the issues and ideas that create terrorism and … democratic factors to support one another and pushback on terrorism worldwide. With respect to the caller's question and the larger point you brought up, I cannot speak to the citizenship of certain people. Jared Kushner in particular, I do not know his citizenship. When it comes 1953, it is really fascinating to actually look into the historical records, particularly the Persian language material because Iran's clerics actually hated Western forces this is something like the [indistinct] record, Iran's clerics saw the prime minister, Mossadegh, who the caller mentioned was ousted as a force of nationalism, liberalism and Westernization, and all the alien traditions that they tried to stop. It is ironic that the clerics today who hate U.S. imperialism, quote, unquote, actually aided the passing of this political figure. With respect to the nuclear free zone, this has become a political football in the Middle East going back to the late 1970s. There are two issues at stake, which are U.S. foreign policy over proliferation and concerns over disarmament. So, as long as that would be the case with Iran [indiscernible] do not have a nuclear program, we will not move toward looking toward disarmament.”

[Host goes to next caller.]

NOTE: In blaming the United States for the overthrow in Iran, caller, as he has in the past, echoes the unreliable popular narrative about the supposed CIA overthrow of the nationalist Mossadegh Iranian regime in August 1953. But in 2013, Ray Takeyh (expert on the subject) a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, wrote that the CIA was a bit player at best: “The events of 1953 have been routinely depicted as a nefarious U.S. conspiracy that overthrew a nationalist politician who enjoyed enormous popular support. This narrative, assiduously cultivated by the Islamic Republic, was so readily endorsed by the American intellectual class that presidents and secretaries of state are now expected to commence any discussion of Iran by apologizing for the behavior of their malevolent predecessors. At this stage, the account has even seeped into American popular culture, featuring most recently in Ben Affleck's Oscar-winning blockbuster Argo. The only problem with this mythologized history is that the CIA's role in Mossadegh's demise was largely inconsequential. In the end, the 1953 coup was very much an Iranian affair… Great Britain played a larger role than the United States in ousting Mossadegh – who both London and Washington suspected, perhaps correctly, of being both unstable and open to Soviet influence. Iran's Islamic revolutionary clergy now maintain a convenient silence on the fact that their predecessors often opposed Mossadegh, considering him too secular and perhaps prone to reduce their government subsidies.”

The Symington amendment stipulated that the President terminate development loans and PL–480 assistance to any country that made military expenditures to a degree which materially interferes with its development. (81 Stat. 459). The Arms Control Association says about the Symington amendment that it "Prohibits most U.S. assistance to any country found trafficking in nuclear enrichment equipment or technology outside of international safeguards. President Jimmy Carter found Pakistan in violation of the Symington amendment in 1979 because of Islamabad's clandestine construction of a uranium enrichment plant. U.S. aid to Islamabad was possible between 1982 and 1990 only through the use of presidential waivers." Clearly, there is no legitimate basis for assailing Israel here.

Thanks to the inept response to repeat caller Doug, he succeeds again here in planting an anti-Israel seed. Doug's previous call-ins include Aug. 14, 2016 – 9:01 a.m. (click here to view) in which he spouted his usual propagandistic spiel disparaging Israel and U.S. foreign policy; June 12, 2016 – 8:46 a.m. (“Why should Israel have a nuclear monopoly in the area?”) (click here to view); Jan, 25, 2015 – 9:20 a.m. ("... the power of these [Israeli lobbyists] and their ability to affect United States outcomes.") (Click here to view); In Doug's anti-Israel tirade on Nov. 8, 2015 ( 8:56 a.m.). – he insulted the guest, former ambassador Marc Ginsberg (click here to view).

Doug's blame-Israel messages (routinely unchallenged by C-SPAN) include Aug. 23, 2015 (8:50 a.m.); Oct. 20, 2013 (9:55 a.m.); Sept. 15, 2013 (9:54 a.m.); March 20, 2013 (9:52 AM); Feb. 3, 2013 (8:21 AM); Oct 19, 2012 (8:15 AM); May 4, 2012 (9:14 AM); March 4, 2012 (9:18 AM); 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).

February 4, 2017 – 8:15 a.m.

Host: KIMBERLY ATKINS, Boston Herald newspaper chief Washington reporter and columnist [journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org, @cspanwj, facebook.com/cspan].

Guest: Behnam Ben Taleblu, Foundation for Defense of Democracies, senior analyst specializing in Iran.

Topic: Trump administration's new Iran sanctions.

Caller: Joe from North Carolina (click here to view).

Caller: “I know this that your guest is using the word WMD. Haven't we had enough of this phony idea? If Iran has no nuclear weapons and the only nonnuclear power is Israel with multiple, maybe hundreds of nuclear war heads, which they stole from our technology, if that is the case, then I we going to try to use WMDs? After all, Iran is shooting the technologically and take the soap that cannot reach the United States and we know it cannot get to the defenses in Israel, so what are we bitching about?”

Guest: “You did mention how it is antique or old, but the national intelligence that I cited from February 2016, said Iran has the largest ballistic missile inventory, I believe is the word to use, so while the systems may be old, some of the legacy systems were procured from Libya, North Korea, it does not have an ICBM ability to date and they are watching up at best never taken the possibility of an ICBM in the future. With respect to WMD, I don't see that anyone is looking to incite a war but enforce the deal in place now. Iran does have chemical weapons stockpiles, that was one of the reactions to the iran-Iraq war from 1980 to 1988. It was that conflict that led to Iran's interest to continue the nuclear program and develop this robust ballistic missile force that seems to plague us today.”

[Host goes to next caller.]

NOTE: Where is the evidence that Israel “stole from our [U.S.] technology”? Characteristically, the question is not asked. The facts are that cooperative arrangements with Israel, one of the world's most advanced technological countries, provide technology benefits to America related to unmanned aircraft, anti-missile defenses, battlefield medical techniques – and intelligence on anti-U.S. as well as anti-Israel Arab and Islamic radicals.

February 2, 2017 – 8:29 a.m.

Host: GRETA BRAWNER [gbrawner@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org, Twitter: @gretabrawner (https://twitter.com/gretabrawner), @cspanwj, facebook.com/cspan].

Guest: Hannah Smith, senior counsel for Becket Fund for Religious Liberty.

Topic: Nomination of Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court.

Caller: Joe in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma (click here to listen).

Note: Polemical, mendacious caller is antithetical to Christianity and Judaism.
 
Caller: “I think we are really on a very important line here. We start talking about religious liberty and running a government and the separation of church and state. If we went back to the Old Testament, it basically said I could sell my daughter into slavery. Well, I don't think your religious freedom and your support of the guy killing small animals in his home is going to be the right kind of road for humanity. If you look at Hitler, he had a Bible in his hand when he was executing the Jews. Mormons want multiple wives but people have a problem with that. We've got to keep the invisible man, whether it is the Muslim, Christian, the small animal sacrifices, we've got to keep those people out of government. Thank you.”

Guest: “So, there are a lot of problems with the comments just made and that is, first of all, the founding fathers specifically created protections for religious exercise in our constitution. They believe that religious exercise should be protected in the Bill of Rights and they put it first, which means they had a high regard for the role religion plays in our society and our altar. There are a couple of misstatements. Mormons do not believe that they should have multiple lives. It was repudiated by the church many years ago. That is not accurate. I would say, generally, the point of religious liberty is to protect the personal space for people to follow their conscience and we want to provide enough room for the diverse number of American religions that are out there, to be able to allow their individuals to practice their faith. This is something that has always been protected by our country from the beginning.”

NOTE: Caller's comments contained hardly a scintilla of truth. The comments about the Bible are animus-filled and mendacious.

January 30, 2017 – 7:23 a.m.

Host: JOHN MCARDLE [jmcardle@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org, @cspanMcArdle, @cspanwj, facebook.com/cspan ].

Topic: Travel ban imposed by United States on immigrants from certain Muslim majority countries – does it make the U.S. more/less safe?

Caller: May from Germantown, Maryland (click here to view).
 
Note: Host indulges a self-identified American Muslim's lengthy apologetic. If it's true as claimed that (all) “Muslims know that ISIS is not Islam,” how is it that Muslim protest marches against ISIS [Islamic State terrorist entity] and other such violent Muslim jihad groups are not taking place?

Caller: “I'm an American Muslim. I can tell all of you people out there that this is not going to make us Americans any safer. Because ISIS, they do not represent Islam. They are thugs, and Muslims know that ISIS is not Islam. And now that [President] Trump has separated us versus them, the people [Muslims] can be swayed now, who are on the fence. Anyone can be picked up and brainwashed by ISIS. So thank you very much, Mr. Trump, and all the people who believe in Mr. Trump. I'm telling you right now we are not safer. You have to believe that Muslim Americans are Americans. In [indiscernible] … If she's white, your European ancestors should have stayed put and not come here to America and become Americans. You have no right to say that to the Somali gentlemen who called in. Refugees are fleeing wars, which the U.S. helped make these wars, so they're coming here to flee the violence and the terror, and we are shutting the doors. Just like we did to the Jews, and then the Holocaust came. You have no heart. You are not American if you shut your doors. You don't believe in the Statue of Liberty, the words that are on there. What kind of human are you if you do this? Muslims are not your enemy. Go meet a Muslim, go get to know a Muslim. Then you will feel at ease. This fear mongering going on by Trump and his cabinet. It is totally disgusting and very un-American. And one more thing, Americans who came to America and wanted to be Americans, they love and cherish the Constitution… Because they are fleeing dictators. That is what they love, as the Bill of Rights, is the flag. They probably cherish it more than the Americans were born here. They love that Constitution. Thank you.”

[Host goes to next caller.]

NOTE: Typically for a C-SPAN Washington Journal host, McArdle, entertains a lengthy (two to three minutes) apologetic without interruption or comment. The Muslim caller characterizes Muslims: “Muslims know that ISIS [fanatic Islamic State] is not Islam… Muslims are not your enemy. Go meet a Muslim. Go get to know a Muslim then you will feel at ease.” However, while it's true that only a tiny percentage of Muslims utilize violence in the name of Islam, the risk is great as has been shown by the high volume of atrocities being perpetrated by Muslims against other Muslims and non-Muslims alike.

Opinion polling in 2015 by The Center for Security Policy found that 38 percent of Muslim Americans assert that ISIS beliefs are Islamic or correct. Likewise, the polling found that 33 percent of Muslim Americans say that Sharia law should be supreme to the U.S. Constitution (Sharia has rules for virtually everything in a person's life – for example – how to dress, who your friends should be). Similar polling found that 25 percent of the American Muslims polled supported the use of violence to punish those who offend Islam.
 
These percentages, if anywhere near to being accurate, mean that hundreds of thousands of Muslim Americans (and millions of Muslims throughout the world) are potentially extremely dangerous to Americans as well as others.
 
The results of other opinion polling of Muslims (including Palestinians) is troubling: Pew Forum polling in 2013 shows strong support for Sharia law to be applied to all. Likewise, Pew polling of Muslims on support of suicide bombings in the name of Islam is troubling. 2015 Gallup polling showed that a growing number of Palestinians (they are mainly Muslims) believe in ‘armed struggle' against Israel.
 
Furthermore, it is not valid to equate Muslim refugees to 20th century Jewish refugees ("Just like we did to the Jews"). Such an analogy or comparison completely fails. The most obvious difference is that there was no international conspiracy of European Jews carrying out frequent attacks on civilians on several continents in magazine offices, concert halls, Christmas parties and so-on as done by Muslims in the name of Islam. There was no Jewish entity establishing sovereignty over tens of thousands of square miles of territory, and publicly slaughtering anyone who opposed its advance. But in the Islamic world there is – ISIS (and to a lesser degree, Al-Qaeda). Numerous Muslims hate and wish to kill the infidels (non-Muslims and even different Muslims). Nothing of the kind existed anywhere in Jewish society. Jews have never sought to impose a Jewish world view on other societies and so-on. The equating done here is false and misleading.

January 29, 2017 – 7:30 a.m.

Host: STEVE SCULLY is C-SPAN's political editor and senior executive producer [sscully@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org, @SteveScully, @cspanwj, facebook.com/cspan ].

Topic: President Trump's executive action on immigration.

Caller: Elizabeth from Savannah, Georgia (click here to view).

Note: Host Scully unsurprisingly fails to refute caller's woeful error, “As many people have died in Syria as in the Jewish Holocaust.”

Caller: “First thing I would like to say is that [U.S. Senator] Elizabeth Warren needs to take that self-righteous megaphone of hers and start telling people about a $1.3 million line of credit she has on her mansion. Where was she when all of these victims in San Bernardino, Boston, Orlando, and now Fort Lauderdale -- where was she when these victims were crying out? You did not hear her voice then. I support what President Trump is doing. His number one job is to keep us safe. This is a temporary ban. All we ask is who these people are. We asked the countries they are from to validate who they are… We need to start taking care of our people, our refugees and our veterans before we start taking in other people that refuse, will not tell us who they are, cannot validate who they are. I am in total support of this.

I am tired of turning on the TV, and this is what President Trump said, these people are cutting heads off on TV. They are doing things we have not seen since medieval times. As many people have died in Syria as in the Jewish Holocaust. We need to stop and take a real good look in the mirror and face reality. These people have an ideology. They have been fighting and killing one another in civil wars for thousands of years. Until they can show us they have a love for our country, for our Constitution, and they are willing to come in and contribute, I say keep them out. Prove who you are.”

Host: “We will stop you there. Thank you for the call. The Washington Post has a different point of view …”

NOTE: The historical record shows that six million European Jews were murdered in the Holocaust perpetrated by Hitler, his military and Nazi followers as the first step in an effort to wipe out the world's Jewish people. This is probably the best known fact pertaining to the World War II era. Authoritative estimates are under 500,000 for the number of Syrians killed in Syria's civil war. The caller's false assertion that "As many people have died in Syria as in the Jewish Holocaust" required correction since it tends to trivialize the Holocaust, the most unique horrific event of its type in world history. Furthermore, at least 10 times as many people died in the Holocaust than have in the Syrian civil war.

Scully's failure to correct the caller is consistent with his abysmal record of failing to correct callers' falsehoods or erroneous assertions pertaining to Jews and Israel. Note that Scully is C-SPAN's political editor and senior executive producer – and senior host of Washington Journal. Journal's chronic journalistic malpractice (particularly pertaining to the Jewish people and Israel) continues apace as has been documented continually for nearly a decade by CAMERA's C-SPAN Watch online feature.

January 28, 2017 – 7:04 a.m.

Host: BILL SCANLAN [bscanlan@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org, @bscanlanCSPAN, @cspanwj, facebook.com/cspan ].

Topic: Should U.S. limit refugees based on religion?

Caller: Eric from Seattle Washington (click here to listen).

Note: Host indulges caller who slanders President Trump and Israelis. How does this constitute providing a “public service” as C-SPAN claims for itself?

Caller: “President Trump is married to women from Czechoslovakia and Transylvania. Their parents were considered communist. How can they come into the country and what will he do about limiting these countries with these visas, Europeans coming in such as the IRA and the right wing groups. An Israeli killing and stabbing blacks in Cleveland and throughout the United States. This is crazy, most people from 9/11 were from Saudi Arabia. The reason they are not going to allow Saudi Arabia to do this is because he has dealings with people and businesses with certain Islamic countries and he will not put the people on the list. Donald Trump is crazy and a walking impeachment. Thank you.”

NOTE: In an another of the plentiful examples of C-SPAN's chronic journalistic malpractice pertaining to mendacious accusations against Israelis and Jews, host Scanlan fails to question the baseless claim, “An Israeli killing and stabbing blacks in Cleveland and throughout the United States.” Scanlan should have at least asked for the caller's source in the matter thus exposing him.

January 26, 2017 – 8:39 a.m.

Host: GRETA BRAWNER [gbrawner@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org, Twitter: @gretabrawner (https://twitter.com/gretabrawner), @cspanwj, facebook.com/cspan].

Topic: viewers' comments on news of the day.

Caller: Kenny from Piedmont, South Carolina (click here to listen).

Note: Caller confusingly juxtaposes the matters of proposed funding cutoff to sanctuary cities with refusing foreign aid dollars to countries practicing government supported abortion of human fetuses. Typically for C-SPAN, Israel is targeted by such a caller and host, who challenged other callers on other issues on this day (including the very next caller), fails to challenge.

Caller: "My question is with this Mexico/city rule that comes with federal funding that goes to other countries – are we going to stand by that when we give federal funds to Israel because they had abortion before we did. It was legal for them, and all of their money goes to the same place. Their hospital system is funded by our federal government. Are we going to play by the same rules of the other place?"

Host: "Alright. Kenny in Piedmont, South Carolina."

NOTE: Typically, when a Washington Journal caller singles out Israel in a derogatory sense, the host fails to question or comment on it. As to abortions in Israel, Israel's government medical system provides funding for abortions under limitations similar to those in U.S. law. U.S. aid dollars cannot be applied for these procedures.

Invariably, when the subject comes up, C-SPAN fails to inform viewers of the mutual benefits of aid to Israel. First, financial (it is military only) aid to Israel constitutes only a tiny portion of the federal budget (less than 0.1 percent). Second, Israel is required by U.S. law to spend 74 percent (soon to be 100 percent) of the U.S. aid in the United States for the purchase of military materials which helps create or sustain thousands of American jobs.

Third, cooperative arrangements with Israel provide technology benefits to America related to unmanned aircraft, anti-missile defenses, battlefield medical techniques. For example, Israeli-developed technologies include unmanned aerial vehicles, decoys to confuse enemy radars, tank armor to repel fire and armored tiles to protect from improvised explosive devices (IEDs)—all of which save U.S. lives.

A U.S. Secretary of State, Al Haig, once said, "Israel is the largest American aircraft carrier in the world that cannot be sunk, does not carry even one American soldier and is located in a critical region for American national security." Former Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Admiral Mike Mullen called the relationship with Israel "absolutely critical" to U.S. national security. Additionally, Israel, with less than nine million people, is America's 20th largest customer (larger than Russia or Spain). Consider votes in the United Nations over the last several years that coincided with U.S. votes – Israel is 90 percent, all other recipients of U.S. support are under 20 percent – Pakistan, Jordan, Egypt, Iraq, Afghanistan, Philippines and so-on. It should be obvious, except to the most biased individuals, that Israel is an exceptionally valuable American ally.

January 10, 2017 – 9:22 a.m.

Host: JOHN MCARDLE [jmcardle@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org, @cspanMcArdle, @cspanwj, facebook.com/cspan ].

Guest: Brad Sherman, U.S. Representative [D] California.

Topic: News review with Rep. Sherman (click here to view).

Host: "I want to ask you – last week, the House voted to pass a resolution denouncing the Obama administration's abstention from the UN Security Council vote that condemned Israeli settlements [Jewish communities]. It was a 342 to 80 vote. Did you join Republicans and many Democrats in that?"

Note: At the United Nations, typically, member nations are in a tumult about the supposed evil deeds of Israel. This time it's about internal growth of Jewish communities in Jewish owned land located in an area that is not now part of any sovereign nation (the Judea/Samaria (West Bank) part of ancient Israel). Motivation? The nations represented (Israel is perpetually excluded due to bias against the Jewish state) on the Security Council in the current term, including European ones, act in a low cost way to appease internal potentially troublesome – often large minority – constituencies opposed to Israel. Until recent Resolution 2334 condemning Israel, the United States, alone among the nations, had stood up for Israel.

Guest: "I joined the majority of Democrats in voting for the resolution and almost every Democrat who did not vote for the resolution co-sponsored David Price's resolution which is very similar. The difference is those – and there were about 75 Democrats who voted against the resolution – they almost all co-sponsored the resolution which lays out standards and says veto resolutions that do not achieve these standards in the future but does not comment about the past. Republicans about the floor something that had the same standards in but also says we should have vetoed the resolution last month that did not meet those standards. So, there is this effort for this huge partisan divide when in fact our policy is the same. We want a two-state solution and do not want U.N. to be dictating terms to the parties because that will not work"

Host: "What do you think will be the future relations for U.S. and Israel with a Trump administration."

Guest: "It's hard to know. Initially, Trump said he would be evenhanded, which means that Israel wouldn't have a single friend in the world. One referee for Israel, and the rest of the world tends to be somewhat hostile. He is now appointing this David Friedman to be our ambassador. I agree with Friedman that we ought to have the U.S. embassy in Jerusalem. The embassy should be in the capital. The site that has been reserved, which I visited, for the U.S. embassy in Jerusalem is in the part of Jerusalem that the Arab League assigns to be part of Israel in a final peace settlement. It has been part of Israel since 1948 [May 1948 the restored nation of Israel came into being]. I'm sure there will be big to-do at the time but it is the common sense thing to do. We need to create a better communications relationship between the two countries. But at the same time, Friedman's opposition to a two-state solution is a huge mistake for Israel and the world. I hope that it does not signal to certain elements in the Israeli government that somehow a one-state solution makes sense because ultimately as John Kerry says, ‘Israel cannot be democratic and a Jewish state unless it is part of a two-state solution."

NOTE: The claim that "Israel cannot be democratic and a Jewish state unless it is part of a two-state solution" is opinion not settled fact.

January 10, 2017 – 9:24 a.m

Host: JOHN MCARDLE [jmcardle@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org, @cspanMcArdle, @cspanwj, facebook.com/cspan ].

Guest: Brad Sherman, U.S. Representative [D] California.

Topic: News review with Rep. Sherman.

Caller: Linda from Tennessee (click here to view).

Note: "Linda" is the exceedingly rare Washington Journal caller who is not antagonistic toward Israel when mentioning the Jewish nation.

Caller: "Thank you for taking my call. I was going to talk about something else, but talking about Israel, I think if they need to take and change and not give any money whatsoever to the U.N. Everybody who voted against Israel needs to be put out, and we the people will see that they get put out. That is the reason Obama lost. The people gathered and put themselves forward. I used to be a Democrat. Obama, all of his rules and regulations and everything else, you should know – if it does not work, people don't want it. Thank you for taking my call."

Host: "Congressman."

Guest: "I think you can criticize the U.N. but I wouldn't argue that the U.S. should not be part of the U.N. Because if you disagree with it now, imagine what it would be without the United States. That would be a 80 percent as powerful and relevant. It would have 80 percent as much money. It would be 100 percent more objectionable. The United Nations just denounced in clear terms the attacks on Israeli soldiers in Jerusalem, the terrorist attack. So, the U.N. can be right some of the times, even on the Middle East and so many other issues the U.N. is very helpful. I like to see them do more about South Sudan and other issues around the world. The choice is not should we have a U.N. or not – the question is do you want to have one without the United States in it or not?"

January 10, 2017 – 9:27 a.m.

Host: JOHN MCARDLE [jmcardle@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org, @cspanMcArdle, @cspanwj, facebook.com/cspan ].

Guest: Brad Sherman, U.S. Representative [D] California.

Topic: News review with Rep. Sherman.
 
Caller: Louise from San Antonio, Texas (click here to view).

Caller: "Good morning. Mr. Sherman. It is odd that I am calling after the woman who just spoke because I have a different view. I think a lot of the American people are really upset. This morning, I listened to people calling in complaining about only getting a $2 raise on their Social Security checks, but we are sending billions of dollars to Israel to a country that basically uses the U.S. so they can be a bully. Every time we do something that they do not approve of, they come back and tell us they need more money from us. Yet, he will get the – the President [sic.] of Israel gets up there and gives speeches about how other countries should not be dictating to Israel. They are their own country. They will run their country the way they see fit. They do not want us giving our opinion to them, but they have no problem with constantly wanting money from us. Also, the way they have disrespected President Obama when he paid for that – I forget how many millions of dollars we paid for them to have that defensive dome [Iron Dome]. Now we will end up paying them another $38 billion. I feel like Israel thinks we are their private ATM machine and yet they do not show us respect that they should."

Host: "Congressman, I want to give you a chance to answer in the minute we have left."

Guest: "I think Obama has been a strongly pro-Israel President and for good reasons. We have the best cooperation military to military and intelligence. We spend on aid to the Israeli military one half of one percent of what we spent on our national security. There is not a better investment that we can make in our national security. Israel is on the front lines against the terrorists trying to kill as many Americans as possible. I think Israel is right to say they are a foreign country not a department of the U.S. and to assert that. We work closely with them. I would like to see a few changes in their policy and in American policy also."

NOTE: Caller plants seeds of animosity toward Israel. But what are the facts about aid to Israel? Is the America-Israel relationship a mutually beneficial one? Several points are relevant. First, financial (it is military only) aid to Israel continues to constitute only a tiny portion of the federal budget (less than 0.1 percent). Further, all the aid dollars now must be used to purchase military materials in the United States which helps create or sustain thousands of American jobs. Third, cooperative arrangements with Israel provide technology benefits to America related to unmanned aircraft, anti-missile defenses, battlefield medical techniques – and intelligence on anti-U.S. as well as anti-Israel Arab and Islamic radicals.

It's not surprising that former Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Admiral Mike Mullen called the relationship with Israel "absolutely critical" to U.S. national security. Additionally, Israel, with less than nine million people, is America's 20th largest customer (larger than Russia or Spain). Consider votes in the United Nations over the last several years that coincided with U.S. votes – Israel sided with the United States 90 percent of the time, all other recipients of U.S. support stood at less than 20 percent – Pakistan, Jordan, Egypt, Iraq, Afghanistan, Philippines and others.

Except when there is a rare guest like Rep. Brad Sherman who is informed and unbiased about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, basic information rarely if ever turns up when the Jewish state and its supporters are slandered on C-SPAN. Routinely, C-SPAN's Washington Journal is biased by commission, tolerating if not encouraging many antisemitic, anti-Zionist callers, not supplying essential context and granting bigotry a platform.

Finally, if responsibility is to be attributed for the aid to Israel, the reality is that Congress is at least as responsible as the President for such aid.

January 5, 2017 – 9:13 a.m.

Host: BILL SCANLAN [bscanlan@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org, @bscanlanCSPAN, @cspanwj, facebook.com/cspan ].

Topic: Viewer comments on news of the day.

Caller: Oscar from Vienna, Virginia (click here to view).

Note: Caller's lengthy commentary includes disparaging the U.S.-Israel relationship. As usual, a Washington Journal host fails to reply.

Caller: “I'd like to focus on the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee and I'd like to see the Obama administration pivot toward South America. I just traveled away for about three or four weeks in Ecuador -- the Galapagos Islands… Here in America, we have a power grid issue and yet we don't share our knowledge and don't focus on making more profit or helping other countries neighboring America. This is a continent that is hugely ignored. I just hope that the administration, the new Trump administration, can have a decent secretary of state and foreign affairs people. I think we should pivot toward South America, particularly helping Venezuela and, of course, further south, like Brazil which is a huge mineral country. We're worried about the Middle East; they don't care. Obama has given $20 billion to Israel. They're planning to give Israel $38 billion more in the next four years, how crazy is that? We got neighbors down the street, you know, technically speaking, in South America, countries are yearning for help, industrial help and we're not providing it.”

Host: “Let's go to the Independent line next …”

NOTE: Phoner “Oscar” falsely asserts that U.S. aid to Israel (grossly exaggerated by phoner in amount) deprives other western hemisphere countries of aid. Caller plants seeds of animosity toward Israel. But what are the facts about aid to Israel? Is the America-Israel relationship a mutually beneficial one? Several points are relevant. First, financial (it is military only) aid to Israel continues to constitute only a tiny portion of the federal budget (less than 0.1 percent). Further, all the aid dollars must be used to purchase military materials in the United States which helps create or sustain thousands of American jobs. Third, cooperative arrangements with Israel provide technology benefits to America related to unmanned aircraft, anti-missile defenses, battlefield medical techniques – and intelligence on anti-U.S. as well as anti-Israel Arab and Islamic radicals.

January 5, 2017 – 9:43 a.m.

Host: BILL SCANLAN [bscanlan@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org, @bscanlanCSPAN, @cspanwj, facebook.com/cspan ].

Topic: Viewer comments on news of the day.

Caller: Verly from South Plainfield, New Jersey (click here to view).

Note: At the end of a lengthy (three-minute) mainly nonsensical rant including much minutia, indulged caller lashes out at Israel. Host Scanlan here provides a disservice to viewers of the supposed “public service” Washington Journal program.

Caller: “What I would like to say - and in the beginning with the Affordable Care Act, I read the whole thing as an Independent and I did work for the Democrats. And at the time, there were a lot of negotiations with the Republicans and [Senator] Harry Reid. And they negotiated a lot of -- and they did not expect it to pass. But faith was on the side of the American people and it passed. The other thing is this, the Affordable Care Act and I would like to make one comment before I continue. I was watching [television program] Jeopardy the other night and there was a question and one young woman said the Affordable Care Act and Alex [program host] said, no, and the young woman, she pressed in and she said, Obamacare. I was surprised because they are the same thing and a lot of people don't know the difference.”

Host: “Wait a minute, Verly, she got the answer wrong because she said Affordable Care Act – well she phrased it as a question, obviously and said the Affordable Care Act and not Obamacare and it was wrong?”

Caller: “No, no, no. First she said Affordable Care Act and alex said, no, that is wrong. The second one buzzed in and said Obamacare. He said, no, that is wrong.. So, the difference, the two people did not know there was a difference or maybe one knew and the other didn't. My comment is this, the Affordable Care Act, we have 20 million people or so, people who have smiled for the first time without putting their hand over their mouth because they went to the dentist. We have people that read their first magazine in the doctor's office because they went to the doctor. Children are healthier and they have peace of minds. We will take this away because we don't like the President? We are going to sink a ship and kill millions of people because we hate the captain? This is what the Republicans are doing and as Americans, we need to stand up and say, enough is enough. Instead of that, we talk around the water cooler, we are angry, but we're not making a difference because we're not getting out of our houses and going to the state capitol with millions of people to say, leave it alone. And in terms of the insurance a young man spoke about earlier, the cost so much, that is supplemental and the insurance companies control that. It has nothing to do with the Affordable Care Act. We need to start listening to the American people. One more comment I have to make. One, when the NSA lost because of the thing with the guy who went to Russia, they can't do certain things they are supposed to do to protect the American people. We can't have it both ways.

The other thing is the abstention at the United Nations is to prevent the prime minister of Israel from becoming the Hitler of his area. Thank you very much for listening to me.”

Host: “Verly in New Jersey about an earlier caller's comments.”

NOTE: Caller is indulged for three minutes mainly condemning the Republican Party about national health care legislation. Finally, caller makes detached-from-reality slur about Israel's prime minister, elected by the area's only Western style democracy, becoming the “Hitler of his area” in an area that features such players as ISIS (Islamic state) terrorists and Syria's dictator Bashar Assad who has orchestrated the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of his fellow Syrians. Is the caller aware of Assad or ISIS?

Meanwhile at the United Nations, typically, member nations are in a tumult about the supposed evil deeds of tiny Israel. Motivation? The nations represented (Israel is perpetually excluded due to bias against the Jewish state) on the Security Council in the current term, including European ones, act in a low cost way to appease internal potentially troublesome large minority constituencies opposed to Israel. Until recent Resolution 2334 condemning Israel, the United States, alone among the nations, had stood up for Israel. Typically for C-SPAN's Washington Journal, the caller's mendacious opining is not probed by the host.
 
January 4, 2017 – 9:06 a.m.

Host: PEDRO ECHEVARRIA [pechevarria@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org, @PLEchevarria, @cspanwj, facebook.com/cspan ].

Topic: Your priorities for the 115th Congress.

Caller: Raymond from Chico, California (click here to view).

Note: Typically a C-SPAN caller singles out Israel for (unfair) criticism. Generally, only Israel among the nations is repeatedly disparaged by Washington Journal phoners. This is always accepted at Journal.

Caller: “I'd like to stop sending foreign aid to Israel, especially when they have a prime minister over there under investigation people. That billions of dollars could pay for Obamacare. Why do we send money to Israel like it's going out of style?”

Host: “Next caller is …”

NOTE: Something that C-SPAN Washington Journal never informs viewers about are the facts about aid to Israel. Is the America-Israel relationship a mutually beneficial one? Several points are relevant. First, financial (it is military only) aid to Israel continues to constitute only a tiny portion of the federal budget (less than 0.1 percent). Further, all the aid dollars must be used to purchase military materials in the United States which helps create or sustain thousands of American jobs. Third, cooperative arrangements with Israel provide technology benefits to America related to unmanned aircraft, anti-missile defenses, battlefield medical techniques – and intelligence on anti-U.S. as well as anti-Israel Arab and Islamic radicals.

As to “a prime minister under investigation,” Israel is a vibrant, western style democracy unlike all others in its region and unlike many recipients of U.S. aid which do not hold leaders and other officials to the high standard that Israel does. In Israel, any hint of corruption or misbehavior on the part of any government official is generally thoroughly investigated/

January 4, 2017 – 9:34 a.m.

Host: PEDRO ECHEVARRIA [pechevarria@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org, @PLEchevarria, @cspanwj, facebook.com/cspan ].

Topic: Your priorities for the 115th Congress

Caller: Lee from Healdsburg, California (click here to view).

Note: Detached-from-reality caller, while condemning Israel, praises Iran which is led by fanatical, doomsday Islamists who routinely threaten the United States and Israel with annihilation among others. Disinterested host typically accepts rant.

Caller: “Thank you for this opportunity to express myself. I would like to see Congress stop signing pledges to support the foreign government that is Israel. How dare anybody make them sign this or they lose their career. I would like to see them stop being friendly with violent countries like Saudi Arabia and Israel. Iran hasn't attacked anyone in 400 years, yet we hate them. I don't know what is the problem with Russia, I mean North Korea is planning to bomb us, yet we don't hate them. I think priorities are upside down.”

[Host fails to respond to or comment about this call.]

January 4, 2017 – 9:53 a.m.

Host: PEDRO ECHEVARRIA [pechevarria@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org, @PLEchevarria, @cspanwj, facebook.com/cspan ].

Topic: Your priorities for the 115th Congress

Caller: Ray from Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (click here to view).

Caller: “I have a statement to make here. A lot of talk about Social security and Medicare and this program being nothing trouble down the line. First of all, last I heard, Social Security had about 2.5 million or billion or trillion, in the -- I call it the lockbox. All right. Second of all, these programs, they say are in trouble. I think the problem is we're Sending $38 billion to Israel over the next 10 years. I wonder, where was Israel in Iraq? They're supposed to be an ally. Sending money to South Korea and Japan, why don't we use that money and put that money on our own people, here, on the poor, the people living in boxes and under bridges, people that lost unemployment. Why don't they extend benefits again? No, they will give money to the other countries and all that stuff and yet, heck on our own people. We don't need it here. $38 billion dollars. I could have fallen off my seat the other day. $38 billion dollars to Israel for military.”

Host: “That's Ray in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.”

NOTE: Typically, a C-SPAN host is either unwilling or incapable of informing the anti-Israel caller and viewers as to the facts when Israel is defamed. First, Israel's offer to supply troops for the conflict in Iraq was refused since it was anticipated that it would be met with anger and opposition by America's Islamic allies who oppose Israel.

Second, the America-Israel relationship is a mutually beneficial one. Several points are relevant. First, financial (it is military only) aid to Israel continues to constitute only a tiny portion of the federal budget (less than 0.1 percent). Further, all the aid dollars must be used to purchase military materials in the United States which helps create or sustain thousands of American jobs. Third, cooperative arrangements with Israel provide technology benefits to America related to unmanned aircraft, anti-missile defenses, battlefield medical techniques – and intelligence on anti-U.S. as well as anti-Israel Arab and Islamic radicals.

January 4, 2017 – 9:55 a.m.

Host: PEDRO ECHEVARRIA [pechevarria@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org, @PLEchevarria, @cspanwj, facebook.com/cspan ].

Topic: Your priorities for the 115th Congress.

Caller: David from North Carolina (click here to view).

Note: David is a rare C-SPAN caller that in a non-trivial mention of Israel actually speaks positively about the Jewish state.

Caller: “Listening to the guy [previous caller] talking about Israel annoys me. They have wasted $7 trillion over there in Afghanistan and they are worrying about their 38 billion to Israel, our only friends. These people make me laugh. As far as what I think they need to do, I think they need to build a wall. I think they need to get our borders secure if we do that, then we can worry about the people that are already here and keep the terrorists out. Then we'll get our finances together. Until we're secure, people are going to be worried everyday and folks are going to keep calling and whining about Israel. They need to quit worrying about Israel and worry about the terrorists that are going to come over here and kill us.”

Host: “When you hear Donald Trump talk about immigration policy and building a wall, do you take that literally, symbolically, how do you take that?”

Caller: “I take that literally. He wants to secure our borders, we have to, if we don't secure our borders, then we have no control of our country. Once we get our borders secure, we can worry about the illegals already here and can help them when we can, where we can. But until we stop the flow from coming in, terrorists from coming in, until in our Congress is going to work, Democrats are not going to get along with Republicans or vice versa. Everybody is against everybody. We got to get along. Until we secure the borders and people feel more secure, it is going to be like this continuously. Quit worrying about a little money we're sending to Israel, our only ally in the region and worry about $7 trillion we've spent overseas and just thrown it away. It is worse than it ever was. Obama has about destroyed our country. And people worry about Israel. It's crazy.”

Host: “Harvey up next from Wisconsin.”
 
 

Bookmark and Share