Monday, December 11, 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 July – September 2014


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

September 29, 2014 – 8:47 AM

Host: JOHN MCARDLE (jmcardle@eenews.net, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org). Guest host McArdle is a reporter for E & E Publishing which is mainly concerned with energy and climate policy.

Guest: SALAM AL-MARAYATI, Muslim Public Affairs Council  [MPAC] president.

Washington Journal topic: Islam, ISIS [Islamic State terror group] and the Middle East.
 
Note: There was a last minute change of the topic name from "U.S. fight against ISIS impact on Muslim Americans."

Al-Marayati, a long-time apologist for Islamists and anti-Israel propagandist, is an obviously inappropriate guest to deal with this topic. For example in this segment, responding to a caller and a Tweeter – one criticizing Muslim communities for tolerating propagandist clerics – the other asking, "What are the common grievances that draw people towards joining radical groups?" – he reflexibly immediately spews anti-Israel propaganda.

Caller: Owen from Bowie, Maryland (click here to view).

Caller: "First of all, I would like to thank the guest for coming on. Thank you for properly identifying Democrats as Democrats and not democratic. I am a Republican and I grew up in a two-religion high school. My mom is Christian and my dad is Muslim. I read the Quran. I wanted to give you a sense that I know what I speak of. You said radicalization is not happening in mosques. That is wrong. It does happen in some mosques. I have been to certain mosques even though I am a Christian. Two, the first gentleman [caller] said you are dancing around words. You are. The idea that all terroristic activity that has occurred over the last 20 years has been done in the name of Islam. That does not mean that the faith of Islam is bad or Islam ... it just happens that everyone that happens to be a terrorist or has performed a major terrorist act happens to be Muslim. Something within the religion or something clerics .... I understand socioeconomic impacts and I understand that you have people that are disenfranchised. People who kill people in droves, and then one religion that has produced most of those people ... is not Islam ... There's something within the teaching of the faith that's allowing the clerics to spread propaganda all the time."

AL-MARAYATI: "I don't want to get into a debate about religion and extremism. I think that we can go to the Israeli settlements and find just as vile and vitriolic rhetoric amongst the settlers there. We also have grievances by Muslims that talk about how they have lost so many lives by Western powers. We do not need to go into that point ... Are there Muslim clerics spreading this [jihadist] ideology? Yes. We need to confront those clerics and confront that ideology. There is no other way to do that then to have Muslims confront them. We, the Muslim community, are part of that solution. We're being asked by the U.S. government to help in the counter narrative against groups like ISIS and Al-Qaeda. The reality is we have to work together rather than blaming religion. When you blame religion what you are actually doing is playing into the hands of Al-Qaeda and ISIS. That is their propaganda. Their propaganda is that America is at war with Islam. For people here to just say well, we have Muslims who are at war against America and are using religion – that is true. Let us not fall into that trap that we are actually going to go to war against a religion to deal with this problem. Some people think that the solution is to suck Islam out of the Muslim world. Good luck if you think that is going to work. We have to engage Muslims in the region. We have to deal with this cult of death with the theology of life, with religion. That is our suggestion. That's our idea. If anybody has a better idea to confront this ideology, we are open to suggestions. The reality is we have to have Muslims fighting this battle of ideas."

NOTE: Responding to the caller's criticism ("There's something within the teaching of the [Muslim] faith that's allowing the clerics to spread propaganda all the time") Al-Marayati's knee-jerk reaction, typically, is to immediately lash out at Israel. He uses a false moral parity – an absurd false equivalence. Al-Marayati, always falsely posing as a moderate, has been exposed by, among others, The Investigative Project on Terrorism which has detailed Al-Marayati's history of defending terrorist groups and acts of terrorism as "legitimate resistance." His hostile view of Israel is evident in a statement made on September 11, 2001 concerning the attacks on the Twin Towers and the Pentagon. He said: "If we're going to look at suspects, we should look to the groups that benefit the most from these kinds of incidents, and I think we should put the state of Israel on the suspect list because I think this diverts attention from what's happening in the Palestinian territories so that they can go on with their aggression and occupation and apartheid policies." Likewise, MPAC has urged that Hamas, the Palestinian "Islamic Resistance Movement," and Hezbollah, the Iranian-backed Lebanese "Party of God" responsible for the 1983 bombing of the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut, be removed from the U.S. government's list of terrorist organizations.

September 29, 2014 – 8:51 AM

Host: JOHN MCARDLE (jmcardle@eenews.net, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org). Guest host McArdle is a reporter for E & E Publishing which is mainly concerned with energy and climate policy.

Guest: SALAM AL-MARAYATI, Muslim Public Affairs Council [MPAC] president.

Topic: Islam, ISIS [Islamic State terror group] and the Middle East (click here to view).

Host: "Thomas Shipman asks on our Twitter page, "What are the common grievances that draw people towards joining radical groups?"

Guest: "The violation of the rights of Palestinians. That is usually on top of the list. How the West has completely turned a blind eye to the suffering of Palestinians. How the West has only sided with tyrants in the Middle East will . Now we have secular tyrants and tyrants that use religion. Some of them are our strongest allies and some of them sponsor this kind of ideology that we find in groups like ISIS. The third complaint would be the double standard. If these groups are allies and then we turn a blind eye to their human rights violations . If they're not allies, we go and bomb the whole region. These are the grievances. What we are saying to our community and what we're saying to policy makers is we need healthy conversations about these issues. Let's have healthy conversations in the mosque. Let it invite more young people to have these conversations. Let us not ostracize these people outside the mosque so they only get information on the Internet. That leads to a higher propensity for being exposed to the Al-Qaeda ideology without someone to talk to them about these kinds of issues. Let us channel the energy of young people who are concerned about these issues towards constructive, nonviolent means of dealing with policy grievances. These are serious issues. We have to have these conversations. With our policy makers, with young people who convert to Islam. So they are not continuously fooled by propaganda they see from groups like ISIS and Al-Qaeda."

NOTE: Al-Marayati's response to "What are the common grievances that draw people towards joining radical groups?," is to typically immediately spew a worn propagandistic line, "the violation of the rights of Palestinians." What anti-Israel apologists mean by this is that Israel has no right to inconvenience Palestinian Arabs as it tries to thwart the actions of murderous terrorists from the Palestinian community.

Secondly, his propagandistic assertion, "the West has completely turned a blind eye to the suffering of Palestinians" is belied, for example, by the costly support by the United States and other Western nations for the U.N. Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA). This agency, with most of its funding contributed by the United States (quarter billion dollars a year), exists entirely to maintain Palestinian Arab refugees. No other refugee group has such a specialized UN agency, all other refugee groups coming under the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees.

September 27, 2014 – 7:29 AM

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

Topic: Should Congress return to vote on Iraq and Syria [regarding ISIS – Islamic State terror group].

Caller: Bill from New Mexico (click here to view).

Typically, a C-SPAN host is either unable or unwilling to respond to a caller's easy-to-answer question (or point) that tends to demean Israel. This question or point is often posed by callers.

Caller: “I'm a Vietnam veteran from the 227th Aviation Battalion, Vietnam. Gadhafi [Libyan dictator] shot down an American airline, killed hundreds. The next thing he did was set up his stance in an empty lot in New York city that Donald Trump owned. Coalition – how come Israel is not on the list of the coalition?”

Host: “So, should congress be called back, do you think?”

[Bizarrely, the disjointed caller is repeatedly indulged by host Echevarria.]

Caller: “I'm going to a town hall meeting this afternoon. I'm going to tell my congressman to get his rear end back to Washington immediately.”

Host: “Who is your congressman?”

Caller: “Heinrich and Pierce.”

[Martin Heinrich and Steve Pierce are indeed New Mexico congressmen.]

Host: “For what you intend to raise with them, how do you think they will react?”

[Bizarrely, host Echevarria apparently has no problem with caller apparently strangely believing he is represented simultaneously by two individuals in congress.]

Caller: “I don't know but I'm going to rile up the crowd – that's for sure – and I want him (indiscernible) to go back to Congress, Pierce especially, thank you.”

NOTE: Typically, a C-SPAN host is either unwilling to explain or is ignorant concerning a point (that tends to demean Israel) brought up nearly every day recently by a caller. Israel does not participate (it has offered) in such conflicts is because the United States doesn't want Israel to participate publicly. The reason is to avoid agitating Arab-Muslim publics indoctrinated by generations of religious and political incitement against Jews and Israel. Covert cooperation, as between Israel and Jordan during Syrian intervention on the side of the Palestine Liberation Organization's civil war against Jordan's King Hussein in 1971, and U.S.-Israel secret operations against Iran's nuclear weapons program, including the Stuxnet computer virus, quietly endorsed if not publicly applauded by Saudi Arabia and other Gulf Arab states, is another matter. Not that C-SPAN viewers would know from Washington Journal hosts.

September 27, 2014 – 9:02 AM

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

Guest: Congressman STEVEN HORSFORD (D-Nevada).

Topic: 2014 midterm elections and U.S.-led efforts in the Middle East [to thwart ISIS terror army].

Caller: Paul from Morganton, North Carolina (click here to view).

Another of numerous indulged C-SPAN callers who vent obsessive blame-the-Jews rants.

Caller: “I was listening yesterday or the day before and I heard a comment from one of the folks on your show saying, talking about the targets and so forth and it was brought up that China was not a target, you know, and they didn't have this problem to worry about. Well, if you look at how this has evolved since World War II, it only goes back to redrawing (indiscernible) country lines and so forth. And we continue to support Israel regardless of what they do and I'm thinking, till Israel is held accountable for their actions that they take in that region and so forth, we will continue to be a target because they see us as supporting a power that is a total threat to the whole region and I'm not antisemitic but I do think Israel does need to be reigned in.”

Guest: “First let me say there is no greater ally to Israel than the United States and our relationship is so strong and meaningful because they are the strongest democracy in a region that desperately needs more democracy. Also, let me say that ISIL does not reflect the Muslim community. And we cannot associate their barbaric attacks which have been, you know, repudiated from others as an example of how others think or the reason that they are doing those types of actions. And so, I hear the caller's concerns and comments and I believe that we need to continue to have Israel and our other allies in that region work together towards peace. But right now we have a threat, both specifically to that region of the world and the United States as a world leader cannot just turn a blind eye to the atrocities that are occurring. And that's why we are a leader in trying to bring this international response to bear.”

NOTE: Guest comments responsibly. But again, an indulged C-SPAN caller vents an obsessive blame-the-Jews rant, seemingly angry that the Jewish nation would dare defend its citizens against the Hamas murderous terrorists. The caller's detachment from reality is evident in apparently being unaware that the terrorists are driven by the obsession to set up a worldwide caliphate (Islamist government) administering sharia law.

Furthermore, in denigrating Israel, this phoner's verbiage is remarkably similar to that of other like-minded C-SPAN callers. But chronically guilty of journalistic malpractice, particularly pertaining to Israel (or Jews), Washington Journal hosts rarely if ever probe such callers' sources of propagandistic misinformation and indoctrination.

September 26, 2014 – 8:15 AM

Host: PETER SLEN (pslen@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org).

Guest: KEVIN BARON, Defense One [Web site] executive editor.

Topic: Military campaign against ISIS [Islamic State terror group].

Caller: Patricia from Libertyville, Illinois (click here to view).

Another of numerous indulged C-SPAN callers making detailed dubious demands concerning U.S. Middle East policy and, unsurprisingly, expressing hostility towards Israel.

Caller: “I think the strategy that the U.S. has adopted towards ISIS is absolutely ludicrous and the very definition of insanity, which is to repeat actions which lead to nothing and nowhere. Interestingly enough, as an aside, I take note that the mention of Al-Qaeda has disappeared altogether. I just want to point that out. At the bottom line is that the U.S. needs to rethink its strategy towards Iraq and pull out all of its contractors, and it needs to rethink its policy towards Israel and the Middle East as a whole. I do not know why this man is saying that he does not see there is going to be a third war or that there will not be boots on the ground in the future. I cannot believe that that will not happen in time as we have multiple embassies over there to protect and we also have U.S. oil interests over there to protect. So the bottom line is that I am convinced that the U.S. should withdraw from Iraq altogether and let their people decide their future as they see fit. When I say withdraw, I mean also withdrawing all the contractors, period.”

Host: “Thank you, Patricia. Mr. Baron -- ”

Guest: “That is a common feeling. You are absolutely right, the mention of Al- Qaeda has somewhat disappeared. That is kind of to be expected because there is a new, urgent media story happening. At the same time, in this region , at least, Al- Qaeda was never really the source of conflict. They were fighting in Yemen and that is still the greater terrorist group, but in Syria it was Assad, and this is a group that splintered off from Al Qaeda. In a way, a name is a name. A rose by any other name -- this is the same group. The Al- Qaeda of old really was the core group based out of Afghanistan, Pakistan, and that has degraded for a long time. It does not take much then beyond raising a black flag to call yourself Al- Qaeda around the world. About re-thinking the Middle East strategy, you are right for the academic side of national security in Washington and across the think tanks, if not inside the White House and other places in government. No, this is a big opportunity that not just requires rethinking of a larger Middle East strategy, but we should take advantage of it. Right now, the Middle East, at least some of the Middle East, is in such chaos that we are talking about a chance to redraw maps. What can the U.S. do to get it in that direction and get to that end state? We're talking decades-long strategy not what we do now against ISIS in the next six weeks or eight months – I don't think there will be a third war …”

NOTE: Caller, posing as one who is knowledgeable about the Middle East, makes numerous assertions. Typically, caller is not asked for her sources of information (or misinformation). Typically, neither host nor guest says anything about caller's Israel comment (“need to rethink … policy towards Israel”). Why and what to rethink about? The questions are not asked.

September 25, 2014 – 7:21 AM

Host: GRETA BRAWNER (gbrawner@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org).

Topic: Confidence in U.S. strategy against ISIS [Islamic State terror group]?

Caller: Aaron from Portland, Oregon (click here to view).

Another of the numerous C-SPAN callers who are against United States support of ally Israel's defense of its citizenry against murderous terrorists. Why? Because caller is concerned that such support damages other countries' opinions of the United States.

Host: “What is your confidence level in the president's strategies again ISIS? “

Caller: “Well, I'd have to say 70 percent, maybe 80 percent. But just some quick comments I want to make. You know, being a true Democrat, I try to look at both sides. You look at recent events with U.S. involvement in that area; the Bush invasion in 2003. I think maybe that did kind of began a hit in confidence in the United States. I agree with the caller from Pittsburgh that, you know, that Obama's red line comment was very damaging. You could also say that our actions, you know, about the Israel-Palestinian conflict in that area has damaged the world's view of the U.S. which has been a little tarnished. But overall, I think the great things that this country has done really since World War II overrides that and that's why free countries still look to us for leadership. And I think it's a wonderful thing.”

Host: “Alright.”

NOTE: Host Brawner merely responds, “Alright,” and goes to the next caller. But all is not right from the caller who evidently opposes, as do numerous indulged Washington Journal callers, Israel's actions in defending its citizens against murderous terrorists. But fortunately the harm is not all that bad, in Aaron's opinion, since the United States has been only “a little” tarnished.” Happily no more than “a little.” An involved host might have asked the caller what he thinks United States actions whould be if Americans are attacked from across national borders by murderous terrorists. At least host Brawner should have said something like, “Caller, your opinion about Israel is not shared by a sizable majority of Americans who, according to opinion polling, strongly support Israel.”

September 25, 2014 – 7:45 AM

Host: GRETA BRAWNER (gbrawner@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org).

Topic: Confidence in U.S. strategy against ISIS [Islamic State terror group]?

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

Another of numerous indulged C-SPAN callers who vent obsessive blame-the-Jews rants.

Caller: “Let's face it, President George W. Bush not only blew up the economy but blew up the Middle East by invading a Muslim country that did not attack us. As far as the strategy, President Obama, I give him a hundred percent. He inherited total chaos and also a Republican congress blocking him from day one. I think the man is a saint but it would help if Israel was held more accountable. You know, Muslims for many, many years have been angry because Israel was given a green light by past administrations. Two thousand dead in Gaza. They made a land grab three weeks ago – one thousand acres in the West Bank. Yeah, Muslims are angry, but let's hold Israel accountable when they put our security at risk by their actions.”

Host: “That was Carol in Florida, a Democratic caller.”

NOTE: Again, an indulged C-SPAN caller vents an obsessive blame-the-Jews rant, seemingly angry that the Jewish nation would dare defend its citizens against murderous terrorists. Evidently the caller would be less angry if a much greater proportion of the conflict's casualties were Jews. As to the so-called “land grab,” the land in question is owned by Israeli Jews and is considered to be part of disputed West Bank land that will most likely go to Israel in any peace settlement. An involved, informed host might have noted the foregoing and also that no Arab country has ever had legal sovereignty in any part of the West Bank which was the heartland of the ancient Israeli nation. Likewise, such a host might have informed viewers that what actually puts U.S. security at risk are the actions of fanatic Muslim jihadist armies working toward establishing a worldwide Islamist government.

September 22, 2014 – 9:18 AM

JOHN MCARDLE (jmcardle@eenews.net, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org). Guest host McArdle is a reporter for E & E Publishing which is mainly concerned with energy and climate policy.

Guest: General Henry "Hugh" Shelton (Ret), former chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Topic: Strategy to combat ISIS [Islamic State terror group].

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

"Anthony" is another of Washington Journal's numerous conspiracy mongering blame-the-Jews callers.

Caller: "I nominate Israel to clean up the mess seeing as how, according to Edward Snowden, Mr. Bakr [Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi] supposed head of ISIS, is Israeli Mossad trained. And by the way, Israel funded Hamas to build them up to use against the Palestinian opposition just like Israel and the U.S. were shipping arms to Iran to use them against Iraq and just like we supported ISIL when we were busing shipping arms to them through the clandestine CIA station in Benghazi [Libya]. Why don't you criminals stop trying to play the world like it's your gardamn..."

[Typically, host fails to challenge caller's unprovable allegations.]

Host: "Do you want to talk about the role of Israel in what's happening now with ISIS?"

Guest: "You can blame Israel for having trained different people. We have trained people as well. They do not always turn out the way we would like for them to turn out. But you identify who you think the good guys are, who represents what you feel is important for the people of that particular region or that country, and you give it your best shot. I think Israel can play a role in this, and I think they can play a role through a number of means. They can play a role in supporting an individual like [Haidar] Al-Abadi now taking charge in Iraq. They can eliminate the Shia militia that are closely allied with ISIL to make sure that they do not create an inclusive government and become another puppet of Iran. They can play a role in advising, the same role that the United States plays. They are much close to the region than we are. There are some issues that they have to deal with that we don't have to deal with. They can play a really valuable role.

September 21, 2014 – 7:40 AM

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

Topic: Justice Department to study the effects of racial bias in law enforcement.

Caller: Don from California (click here to view).

The baseless claim that contemporary Jews, including those in Israel are not the descendants of the biblical Jews – part of the ideology of fringe groups like the Christian Identity (Aryan Nations) movement and the Nation of Islam – is often heard on Washington Journal. Here a repeat caller repeats the canard, and the host thanks him for a "history lesson."

Caller: “Every time I call in and start talking about the Bible, you hang up on my face. This racism thing started way back in the ancient Egyptian days when they persecuted the Jews, the black Jews, the only real Jews in the world today, the black Jews. The white people know that and they try to oppress us and they have since then. How can we be racist when the white man came and took everything from us…?”

Host: “Thanks for the history lesson. As far as the study from the Justice Department, what do you think?”

Caller: “With the white folks in power, it's not going to work. Everything is geared to make them stronger.”

NOTE: Typically, a C-SPAN host indulges a caller conveying an absurd, racist message. Rev. Louis Farrakhan and his] Nation of Islam propagate this historical denial. It is rooted in the 19th Century "British Israelite" movement that imagined the 10 Lost Tribes of the northern Kingdom of Israel, conquered and displaced by Assyria in the eighth century B.C.E., settled in the British Isles and that today's Jews descend from post-biblical, non-Mediterranean groups. Hence Farrakhan's references to modern Jews as "so-called Jews."

Contradicting this is 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 geneological continuity and Middle Eastern origins.

C-SPAN is long overdue in correcting the problem of Washington Journal hosts, whether by ignorance or design, fecklessly indulging anti-Jewish, anti-Israel callers. C-SPAN's chronic failure in this regard repeatedly allows inflammatory, antisemitic fallacies to be disseminated to millions of potential viewers (C-SPAN claims 28 million weekly viewers).

September 21, 2014 – 8:16 AM

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

Guest: Thomas W. Lippman, Middle East Institute adjunct scholar.

Topic: Role of Arab states in fighting ISIS [Islamic State terror group].

Caller: Felix from Spenser, Oklahoma (click here to view).

Another of numerous Washington Journal callers usually indulged by the host who falsely and negatively portray Israel.

Caller: “I have a question for you. It seems that Israel is very militarily capable, given the light of the recent dealings with the Palestinians in Gaza. There is no doubt that they are militarily capable and armed to the gills. I'm just curious – if they are supposed to be one of our most staunch allies, how is it that they are not in this coalition [against ISIS]?”

Guest: “That is not a difficult question to answer. The members of the coalition will not stay in the coalition if Israel is brought into it. There is no way that the Saudis can be seen lining up actively, visibly with Israel to fight against Sunni Muslims. That is not politically realistic. The same could be said about other members of the coalition. Furthermore, this is not Israel's fight. As for the idea that Israel is allied with and supported by the United States and therefore should stand by our side in the wars, they did not send troops to Korea. Their defense forces are named the defense forces because that is their assignment. This is not Israel's fight, at least not yet.”

NOTE: Guest's response is appropriate and on target.. It could also have been pointed out that the U.S. 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-Israeli Arab and Islamic radicals. So Israel indirectly helps strengthen the United States' ability to fight and defeat Islamic extremists including ISIS, which benefits Arab states like Saudi Arabia. But such understanding of the region and Israel's role and the ability or perhaps desire to convey it in rebutting anti-Israel callers, appears beyond that of C-SPAN's hosts.

September 20, 2014 – 8:54 AM

Host: Ylan Mui, Washington Post financial reporter (journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org).

Guest: GORDON ADAMS, American University School of International Service U.S. foreign policy professor.

Topic: National security threats and Defense spending.

Caller: Thomas from Maryland (click here to view).

Caller: “I am listening to your guest's theory because he doesn't know actually what is going to happen. We give money, we have a CIA budget that is off the books. We have nations such as China and Russia that are participating in anything. So, we can't say this [ISIS threat] is such a great threat. Also – this is an off-counter question – why do we say Israel is our biggest ally but they never participate in anything in the Middle East.”

Host: “Do you have any response to the caller?”

Note: Typically for C-SPAN, neither guest nor host deals with a caller's rhetorical question negatively portraying Israel. Both are either unwilling or incapable of explaining that the reason Israel does not participate (it has offered) in such conflicts is because the United States doesn't want Israel to participate publicly. The reason is to avoid agitating Arab-Muslim publics indoctrinated by generations of religious and political incitement against Jews and Israel. Covert cooperation, as between Israel and Jordan during Syrian intervention on the side of the Palestine Liberation Organization's civil war against Jordan's King Hussein in 1971, and U.S.-Israel secret operations against Iran's nuclear weapons program, including the Stuxnet computer virus, quietly endorsed if not publicly applauded by Saudi Arabia and other Gulf Arab states, is another matter. Not that C-SPAN viewers would know from Washington Journal hosts.

Guest: “Caller raises a very interesting a question. What is a realistic American approach to engagement in the world? How much should the United States be carrying the burden? What is the role of other countries? The ISIS case really crystallizes that issue. Fundamentally it is not America's responsibility to remake the Middle East. We can't do it. We have tried to do it for the last 15 years. It is very clear that we can't do it. Our efforts to do it achieves the kind of pushback that ISIS represents. ISIS extremism and it's more military version of the extremism is nothing but a modern version of something that has been going on for 1200 years in the region. For the United States to think that it can settle such conflicts is not only hubris but highly unlikely to succeed. The end result has not been stability in the region. It has been instability in the region. We are not responsible for all of that. We have unleashed a flood tide of that reaction in the region. The key player here is going to be moderate Islam and moderate government in states in the region. The only way that we can argue about who is in charge, is going to be answered in the region. The United States might be able to play a supporting role at the margins with air power.”

September 20, 2014 – 9:14 AM

Host: Ylan Mui, Washington Post financial reporter (journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org).

Guest: GORDON ADAMS, American University School of International Service U.S. foreign policy professor.

Topic: National security threats and defense spending.

Caller: Herman from Richmond, Virginia (click here to view).

Caller: “I have a question. I don't understand why we went into this war. I'm more disturbed about this than when George Bush and Cheney went in …They changed the dynamics. They were wrong when they put in people in the positions where they could control other people and … the same way they did in Israel. They put people in positions in Israel to control other people, the Palestinians … that's why there's a conflict … they didn't put in the original people … the Israelites … they put in American Jews ...”

Guest: “This is a very tough region. The United States has a long record of …this is not our region …”

NOTE: Typically, a C-SPAN host indulges a caller with an absurd anti-Israel message. Unfortunately, the guest's lengthy reply also omits any mention of caller's false claims about Israel. The caller exposes essentially racist views when he makes the claim that the Israeli Jews are not the "original people." This ideological tic, shared by more than a few white and black supremacists, seems to be a variant of the 19th century British-Israelite myth. This fantasy held that the biblical Ten Lost Tribes of Israel were early settlers of the British Isles, making modern Britons "the original Hebrew Israelites."

The extreme right-wing "Aryan Nation" and "Christian Identity" movements in late 20th century America held to a version of this myth. So too, changing geography to account for racial differences, do many followers of Rev. Louis Farrakhan's Nation of Islam movement. They repeatedly use descriptions like "the so-called Jews that are in Israel right now are not the Jews from Israel," that is, not descendants of biblical Jews.

In fact, continuous Jewish diaspora history, from the Roman expulsions to the rebirth of Israel as a Jewish state, and modern DNA testing, which indicates strongly both Jewish geneological continuity and Middle Eastern origins, contradict the "British Israelite," "Hebrew Israelite," and "Christian Identity" myth.

C-SPAN is long overdue in correcting the problem of Washington Journal hosts, whether by ignorance of design, fecklessly indulging and failing to challenge anti-Jewish, anti-Israel callers. C-SPAN's chronic failure in this regard repeatedly allows inflammatory, antisemitic fallacies to be disseminated to millions of potential viewers (C-SPAN claims 28 million weekly viewers).

September 15, 2014 – 9:08 AM

Host: JOHN MCARDLE (jmcardle@eenews.net, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org). Guest host McArdle is a reporter for E & E Publishing which is mainly concerned with energy and climate policy.

Guest: ELI LAKE, Daily Beast senior correspondent for national security.

Topic: President Obama's ISIS [Islamic State terrorist entity] strategy.

Caller: Patrick from Carnegie, Pennsylvania (click here to view).
Repeat caller "Patrick" is today's first lunatic fringe blame-the-Jews Washington Journal phoner.

Caller: "When I listen to your guest, it's almost astonishing when I look at the level of deceit, particularly when it comes to the facts of the words ‘existential threat.' The only existential threat to the United States of America is the Israeli government which represents a true existential threat which was an active participant in 9/11. "

[Two unavoidable questions for C-SPAN management: How do such flat-Earth, anti-Israel conspiracy theory callers periodically get past Washington Journal screeners and why do program hosts not cut them off before entertaining their questions or allegations, or handing them off to guests?]

Guest: "I would like to jump in. Make sure, sir, if you're watching this, to look out for the man in a white lab coat. He is only trying to help your recovery. I wish you luck with your mental illness."

[Guest properly labels lunatic fringe caller.]

NOTE: This conspiracy mongering repeat caller vilifies Israel as he has done in previous calls, a recent one being on Jan. 1, 2014 (8:28 AM) in which he was allowed to violate C-SPAN's ostensible one-call-per-30-days rule since his prior was Dec. 26, 2013. Such lunatic fringe callers are routinely indulged on Washington Journal.

September 15, 2014 – 9:27 M

Host: JOHN MCARDLE (jmcardle@eenews.net, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org). Guest host McArdle is a reporter for E & E Publishing which is mainly concerned with energy and climate policy.

Guest: TODD HARRISON, Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments senior fellow.

Topic: Counter-terrorism efforts and the Department of Defense budget.

Caller: Pete from Windsor, Connecticut (click here to view).

Note: Phoner "Pete," today's second lunatic fringe blame-the-Jews caller to Washington Journal, is allowed to violate C-SPAN's ostensible one-call-per-30-days rule having called yesterday (Sept. 14 at 9:18 AM) with the same absurd accusation about Israel and AIPAC as in today's broadcast.

Caller: "Just to let you know, you could spend all the money you want, because the bottom line is that the United States will never ever win anything in the Middle East as long as Israel and AIPAC [the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the registered pro-Israel lobby] are attached to our Congress' (indiscernible)."

Host: "We will move on."

NOTE: Host McArdle, perhaps smarting from the indelicate, yet appropriate, handling of the prior lunatic fringe (9:08 AM) phoner by that segment's guest, Eli Lake, prevents a possible similar handling of this second lunatic fringe blame-the-Jews caller, by immediately moving on to the next caller.

C-SPAN's obsessive anti-Israel phoners like this one frequently but falsely claim a grossly exaggerated influence for AIPAC such that it supposedly controls congressional Republicans and Democrats. As should be obvious, the two large parties, with tens of thousands of activists and millions of supporters, are "controlled" by no one, not even their top elected leaders. They are umbrella groups representing often internally divergent, sometimes competing interests. As for AIPAC, it is not a foreign agent. It does not represent the Israeli government nor any Israeli political party. Rather, AIPAC is a registered U.S. lobby, speaking for American members united in support of strong U.S.-Israel ties. It is not a political action committee and does not donate to political campaigns.
 
Examples of AIPAC opposition defeating major U.S. government arms sales to Arab countries are virtually non-existent. The organization's foreign policy influence primarily is due to its presentation of factual information to political leaders and the fact that a large majority of the American public, according to numerous polls, sides with Israel in its conflict with Arab neighbors. AIPAC may be one of the most influential foreign policy lobbies, but bigger groups with more political clout would include, for example, the American Association of Retired Persons, labor unions, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the dairy farmers' lobby or the National Rifle Association. But Washington Journal is not a magnet for callers obsessed by such organizations; rather, it chronically serves as a megaphone for anti-Israel, anti-Jewish obsessives.

A lobbying heavy-weight that is rarely if ever brought up in a C-SPAN Washington Journal discussion, is the petro-dollar funded pro-Arab lobby, whose influence is felt not only on Capitol Hill, the State Department and Pentagon, through multi-billion dollar weapons purchases but also in academia, with large-scale grants to prominent universities and think tanks, and in society in general through subsidies and material support to mosques, religious schools and advocacy groups. But Washington Journal hosts rarely deal with such substance when the subject is Israel and the Middle East, often instead tolerating and even encouraging anti-Jewish fantasists such as the above caller.

September 12, 2014 – 7:22 AM

Host: PETER SLEN (pslen@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org).

Topic: President Obama's ISIS [Islamic State terrorist entity] strategy.

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

Lunatic fringe caller allowed without rebuke to curse the Jewish nation, an ally of the United States.

Caller: “I would like to say that I support attacking ISIS, but only if we can also attack Israel as well, and perhaps the Federal Reserve and any other institution that has served to undermine the U.S. economically, politically, socially, and culturally over the past hundred years. At this point …”

Host (interrupting): “That was Bob.”

NOTE: On today's Washington Journal broadcast “Bob” was the only lunatic fringe caller out of dozens yet the host's handling of this phoner was so reprehensible as to make it more notable. Host Peter Slen did a severe disservice to the public discourse by failing to cut off the caller immediately upon cursing Israel (“… attack Israel as well …”), instead waiting until much more of the phoner's inflammatory message was delivered to viewers.

This is yet another of numerous instances – many hundreds monitored by CAMERA since November 2008 – of Washington Journal's journalistic malpractice that victimizes only one ethnic/religious group – Jews and Israel – on a regular basis.

September 11, 2014 – 7:31 AM

Host: GRETA BRAWNER (gbrawner@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org).

Topic: President Obama vows to destroy ISIS [Islamic State terrorist entity].

Caller: Darrell from Defiance, Missouri (click here to view).

“Darrell” is another of C-SPAN's several conspiracy mongering, anti-Israel repeat callers.

Caller: “I can't understand who the real terrorists are, because first we go into Iraq based on a lie and slaughter two or three million Iraqis and destroy their country. What did we think we were going to create? Then we turn around and go in and we kill Gaddafi [Libya's dictator] and slaughter people in Libya and look at that country now. And now we're talking about going in to Syria because of ISIS or ISIL, another CIA created terrorist organization to keep Americans scared or whatever we're doing. I still don't understand, you know, the media in this country. Nobody paid for the lies in Iraq. And look at that country. It was much better off under Saddam Hussein. Why are we over there anyway? We're over there because Israel wants us to be over there…”

Host (cuts off caller): “Those are Darrell's thoughts.”

NOTE: “Darrell” is a Washington Journal lunatic fringe (one of many) frequent caller who invariably focuses his huge reservoir of wrath upon America's policies and the Jewish nation. C-SPAN hosts normally indulge him and accord him unmerited respectability. Here, host Brawner belatedly cuts phoner off as he begins his anti-Israel rant. Host should have also pressed caller for his conspiracy misinformation sources and commented something like, “Caller is a conspiracy monger whose allegations are unreliable.” Darrell's previous call as “Darrell from Defiance, Ohio” (yes, there's a Defiance in both Ohio and Missouri) providing his typical lunatic fringe allegations, in which he was blatantly indulged and accorded respectability by senior Washington Journal host Steve Scully, occurred on July 18, 2014 (7:16 AM) (click here to view).

Darrell's past calls – all anti-Israel, anti-American -- include: Dec. 10, 2013 (7:20 AM), June 16, 2013 (7:19 AM), April 16, 2013 (7:04 AM), Jan. 13, 2013 (8:40 AM), Jan. 8, 2013 (7:04 AM), Nov. 21, 2012 (7:34 AM), April 15, 2012 (7:36 AM), Feb. 5, 2012 (7:19 AM) as Bill from Defiance, Missouri; Oct. 21, 2011 (7:16 AM) as Bill from St. Louis; Oct. 12, 2011 (7:19 AM) as Bill, Sept. 21, 2011 (7:06 AM) as Bill, May 19, 2011 (7:15 AM), May 2, 2011 (9:18 AM) as Bill, March 18, 2011 (7:30 AM) as Bob, Feb. 26, 2011 (7:16 AM) as Bill, Feb. 1, 2011 (7:21 AM) and so on back to Sept. 30, 2009 (8:21 AM) as Darrell from St. Louis.

September 11, 2014 – 8:50 AM

Host: GRETA BRAWNER (gbrawner@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org).

Topic: President Obama vows to destroy ISIS [Islamic State terrorist entity].

Caller: Stephen from Aberdeen, Maryland (click here to view).

“Stephen” is another of Washington Journal's numerous, usually indulged by hosts, blame-Israel-for-everything callers.

Caller: “I'm trying to ascertain your displeasure with the people who call in and just address the Israel – their influence on this particular issue regarding ISIS and/or the region. I notice that you're wearing the necklace that represents the mosaic of Israel [Sic.]. I'm wondering why you have a disdain for those who addressed the Israel aspect of of this issue?”

Host: “Okay. I think you're reading too much into the necklace. And there are people who have called in – it's okay to call in and be critical of Israel. That is your right. Free speech. But there have been phone calls that go beyond that with an antisemitic message with thoughts and that is where the hosts that sit in this chair have the challenge of moving on quickly because this is a town hall format. We are trying to do democracy. But we also want to be respectful and appropriate and not allow that kind of message, whether it's antisemitism or racism or anything else, that kind of message. It's a challenge because there is no time delay. And the host has to be listening, obviously, and move on when we hear that kind of rhetoric. So, it's a challenge in this sort of format.”

NOTE: Host Brawner's response is appropriate.

September 9, 2014 – 8:55 AM

Host: JOHN MCARDLE (jmcardle@eenews.net, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org). Guest host McArdle is a reporter for E & E Publishing which is mainly concerned with energy and climate policy.

Guest: BRAD SHERMAN, U.S. Representative [D] California, member Foreign Affairs subcommittee as ranking member.

Topic: President Obama to outline ISIS [Islamic State terrorist entity] plan this week.

Caller: Michael from Lebanon, New Jersey (click here to view).
 
A rarity on Washington Journal, guest appropriately refutes repeat caller's absurd conspiracy theory, involving the United States and Israel, as to the creation of ISIS.

Caller: “Mr. Sherman, why don't you tell the American people that this policy of ISIS –attacking ISIS – that you've actually – this represents the interests of Saudi Arabia and Israel. Basically what it represents is that they created the ISIS and the rebel forces in Syria and which we have supported in order to overthrow the government of Syria. ISIS is the creation of a Sunni group by Saudi Arabia and you are merely representing them now to still get at – get them out of the way, to get the – the final goal which is to overthrow the government of [Syria's] Assad. Importantly, sir, let's put three things together here. Syria, Iraq, Libya, have something in common. They all involve our attacking them and supporting rebels and terrorists in that act.”

[Typically, a C-SPAN host, in a disservice to viewers, fails to press for caller's inflammatory misinformation sources.]

Guest: “I think it's absurd to say that the United States created ISIS. ISIS began as part of Al Qaeda and then broke away. ISIS was once a franchisee of Al Qaeda central. And then, supposedly for their cruelty, but I think because they overstepped their bounds and tried to take the Syrian franchise as well, they were banished by Al Qaeda central and declared themselves to be the Islamic caliphate. But I think it's absurd. It's also, you know, I don't know where to begin with – with that question. But if you believe that the United States created Al Qaeda and created its splinter groups, then you're going to have to talk to somebody else about this.”

NOTE: This repeat phoner made a similar absurd allegation on Sept. 8, 2013 (9:12 AM) in objecting to any U.S. targeting of Syria's Assad government, "We [United States] are representing Saudi Arabia and Israel as part of a plan that started with Libya, Syria, Egypt, and that is to make them dysfunctional countries by attacking them and supporting rebels to do that." This was in addition to his inflammatory falsehood, typically unchallenged by the (Al Jazeera) guest at that time, claiming Israel committed atrocities against Christians.

September 4, 2014 – 7:22 AM

Host: GRETA BRAWNER (gbrawner@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org).

Topic: How should President Obama respond to ISIS [Islamic State] and Russia?

Caller: Tony from District Heights, Maryland (click here to view).

Repeat caller “Tony” is one of several Washington Journal callers who apparently exist in their own information bubble, paying little, if any, attention to the news media but lots of attention to fringe conspiracy theorizing (usually anti-Israel) sources. Typical of Washington Journal's chronic journalistic malpractice, caller's delusional conspiracy mongering is unchallenged.

Caller: “I want to piggyback off of that last caller. I'll tell you what, ma'am – nothing is going to happen here. These are falsified beheadings. I don't believe ISIS even exists. I believe we need to always have to have a boogeyman that keeps the Defense Department budget set. I believe that the Defense Department is contracting with companies like Boeing, Northrop, General Dynamics – all these big cats – they're the ones that's driving this nonsense besides the government of Israel, because we have to constantly support them no matter what.”

Host: “Alright, Tony.”

NOTE: A previous Washington Journal call  (Dec.26, 2013 – 7:26 AM) from “Tony from District Heights” impugned Israel and denied the reality of terrorism (“Terrorism is a business, folks, and that's just the way it is. It's like war. It is a never ending war. But a lot of companies are making money off of terrorism, especially with the Defense Department”). In other similar calls, “Tony from District Heights” identified himself as “John from District Heights.”

September 4, 2014 – 8:37 AM

Host: GRETA BRAWNER (gbrawner@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org).

Guest: Robert Levinson, Bloomberg Government Network magazine, retired lieutenant colonel in the U.S. Air Force.

Topic: NATO alliance challenges.

Caller: George from Lafayette, Louisiana (click here to view).

Caller: “First, eastern Europe. First the U.S. promised Gorbachev that if they dismantled the Soviet Union, they'd would become part of NATO and would become one superpower. Second, that didn't happen. Third, George Bush promised Putin that the U.S. would not interfere in eastern Europe. Second, James Baker promised Putin that the U.S. would not go in one inch into eastern Europe and that happened in Malta. And now here we are inducing a revolution in the Ukraine. The majority of the people do not want to join NATO and the country is split, and we have $17.5 trillion deficit due to the Iraq war. How will we resolve our own problems instead of having to support revolutions and induce wars in other countries simply because of our interests and the oil interests. No one in the world, and I don't mean no one – we're five percent of the world and then we have Europe which is another ten percent of the world – may agree with us, but the rest of the world, especially with our support to Israel, do not agree with us. And no matter what we will do over there – whoever comes into power, they are not going to agree with us.“

Guest “Well, I think, you know, the caller talks about certain promises thst were made at the end of the Cold War. There were a lot of tacit promises – one that was made about the Ukraine. Ukraine had nuclear weapons at the end of the Cold War. They were Russian nuclear weapons. And the Ukraine agreed to give them up...”

[Guest's lengthy response failed to address caller's assertion about Israel.]

NOTE: On the supposed public-service Washington Journal program, hosts never and guests rarely, if ever, express any thoughts as to why America supplies military aid to Israel in response to complaints from numerous uninformed, anti-Israel phoners. There are at least four relevant points about the mutually beneficial relationship between America and Israel. First, financial (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 most (74 percent) of the U.S. aid ($3 billion per year) 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 – and intelligence on anti-U.S. as well as anti-Israeli Arab and Islamic radicals.

Fourth and perhaps most important in the long run, Israel, the only Western-style democracy in the Middle East, is a technologically advanced open society with equal rights for Christians and Muslims as well as Jews. Israel has women's equality, an independent judiciary, free press and is the only country in the region where Americans could live as freely as they do at home and one that, absent religious and ethnic prejudice, ought to be an example for the Middle East's many countries now in intra-communal upheaval.

September 4, 2014 – 9:53 AM

Host: GRETA BRAWNER (gbrawner@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org).

Topic: How should President Obama respond to ISIS [Islamic State] and Russia?

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

Caller alleges that Israel is responsible for ISIS. This is another of the numerous Washington Journal lunatic fringe, conspiracy mongering callers, existing in their own information bubble, paying little, if any, attention to the news media but apparently lots of attention to fringe media sources living off the "blame the Jews" syndrome.

Caller: “I'm very, very disappointed about the media the way everything is being portrayed. We're giving too much focus on ISIS when we shouldn't. We're putting fear on the people here in the U.S. when we should not be doing that. But government should be focusing and trying to get all of the parties together, trying to figure out what kind of ISIS – what is the background, where do they come from? Who are they? And instead of preparing ourselves here to go and start another war and what have you. We just had Palestine two weeks ago – people dying, dying by the thousands. And we didn't do anything about that. So now we are focusing on ISIS with one person, one American that died. Yes, I feel very, very sad about this. But I feel like that the U.S. should concentrate more about what's going on and I feel this is part of Israel. Israel is doing all of this. Trying to get people to ...”

Host (interrupting): “Why would you think Israel is involved with ISIS?”

Caller: “I think they're involved because they want to have control of Syria. The Golan Heights – they want to control that area there. They always want people to ...”

Host (interrupting): “Janet, what's your evidence of that?”

Caller: “My evidence – Palestine – just recently – it – it just happened for a month and now it's gone. We don't hear about it anymore.”

Host: “Okay, alright, let's go on to ...”

NOTE: Host Brawner appropriately demands caller's source evidence for absurd allegations that Israel is responsible for ISIS. But Brawner should have also clearly stated that there isn't a shred of evidence to support these false allegations. The failure to do so epitomizes C-SPAN's long-time tolerance of phoners who are ill-disposed toward Jews and the Jewish nation of Israel. As CAMERA's C-SPAN Watch has documented for years, this is the only ethnic/religious group routinely vilified by indulged callers on a regular basis on Washington Journal.
 
August 31, 2014 – 8:27 AM

Host: PAUL ORGEL (porgel@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org).

Guest: PHILIP KLEIN, Washington Examiner commentary editor.

Topic: Threat from ISIS (Islamic State in Iraq and Syria).

Caller: John from Quincy, Illinois (click here to view).

Conspiracy mongering caller absurdly blames the CIA and Israel among others for ISIS threat. On Aug. 20 and 29, 2013, this repeat phoner absurdly blamed Israel and U.S. Congress for the Syrian civil war. Such phoners are commonplace on C-SPAN's Washington Journal as they correctly perceive C-SPAN to be a welcoming place for them as CAMERA's C-SPAN Watch has documented over a period of several years.

Caller: “I remember Eisenhower, and I heard him say one time he just did not believe in what he called brush wars, these small wars, because they always expand and get larger. If you go back to the (indistinct) document, and I watched the people there on AEI, the American Enterprise Institute, they were talking about the American Army, that when the cold war was over there was nothing for them to do. So, they took up [the idea] to go to the Middle East to clean it up and get rid of the dictators so as to make it safe for Israel. They pushed that but Clinton would not buy that thing. But finally after 9/11, Bush could not get in there quick enough, and you can just see how that thing has expanded now. Now we are worried about ISIS over there. I read here a little while back that we were training and helping arm people over there in Jordan and Syria to try to overthrow Assad. We had the CIA in Syria trying to overthrow him [Assad] there. It just keeps growing and growing and growing, and Eisenhower went through eight years there and hardly lost a soldier because he kept his nose out of these things.”

Guest (refuting the caller): “Well, first of all, bringing up Israel into this and suggesting that people wanted to go to war for Israel not only has an underlying whiff of antisemitism to try to suggest that somehow people are putting Israel's interests in front of the United States, but it also lacks an understanding of what Israel's interests were at the time of the Iraq invasion, which is that a lot of Israelis did not agree with the Iraq war and thought that actually it would eliminate a threat by Iran so that it would increase Iran's strength in the region, and a lot of Israelis were against that. So I think it is an ignorant question [by the caller] with a conspiratorial antisemitic stench.”

NOTE: Guest Philip Klein's comments are appropriate and incisive.

August 26, 2014 – 8:22 AM

Host: GRETA BRAWNER (gbrawner@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org).

Guest: James Jay Carafano, Heritage Foundation's Davis Institute for International Studies director.

Topic: What should be the U.S. response to the ISIS threat?

Caller: Kathleen from Pompano Beach, Florida (click here to view).

Caller: “I have a question. Can you just answer this question? What is a Zionist? What does it mean to be a Zionist?”

Guest: “Yes, I'm not an expert on Israeli issues. So, we should go on to something else.”

Host: “We'll move on.”

NOTE: It's a bit surprising that the typically well-informed guest, James Carafano, Heritage's international studies director, did not define “Zionist.” But this is something C-SPAN hosts have never done in response to anti-Israeli, anti-Jewish callers misusing the term. A Zionist is one who supports Zionism, the modern national liberation movement of the Jewish people. Beginning in the 1890s, it led to the reestablishment of a sovereign Jewish homeland in part of eretz Yisrael, the land of Israel.

However, the call is indicative of the fever swamp C-SPAN's Washington Journal has become for viewers obsessed by the state of Israel when, given that the subject of the program segment is the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, the caller demands a definition of Zionism.

August 25, 2014 – 7:17 AM

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

Topic: Can the GOP woo African American voters?

Caller: Beverly from North Hills, Michigan (click here to view).

C-SPAN host allows unhinged caller two-minutes of repetitive spewing of a hateful falsehood against the entire American Jewish community which impugns the American political system.

Caller: “My concern is not so much about the Democrats and the Republicans. My concern is the Jewish vote, okay? There's four million Jews in the United States. There are 30 million blacks in the United States and we can't get anything to vote. But the four million Jews get exactly what they want?”

Host: “Which is what?”

Caller: “Whatever – the congressman, the senators – whatever. With four million Jews, 30 million blacks – and you're asking a question like this. Just think about it. Four million Jews in this country and whatever they say, you all jump. And we got 30 million blacks and no one says anything. This is a diversion. That's all this is. Have a good day.”

Host: “Beverly, are you still with us? Clarify that one point, when you say we all jump, what do you mean.”

Caller: “Any time congress, especially the senators – which is Feinstein Democrats and the Republicans – have something to do with the Jewish vote, they jump. With 30 million blacks, we can't get anything done.”

[Caller completes her rant. Host has no response.]

NOTE: Host Scully should have recognized an antisemitic call when he heard one, and cut off "Beverly" immediately after her first allegations that Jews get everything they want from Congress while blacks get nothing. Besides falsely assuming both minority groups are unitary blocs with uniform political agendas, her claim fantasizes a nonexistent Jewish power and a helpless, unheeded black community.

The caller is another of the numerous Washington Journal lunatic fringe phoners who blame Jews or Israel for whatever angers them. Callers tarring a minority group in this manner are acceptable to C-SPAN only if the religion/ethnic group under attack is the Jews and, by extension, the Jewish state. Instead of cutting off this bigot, host Scully encourages her.

August 23, 2014 – 8:14 AM

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

Guest: Andrew Tilghman, correspondent for Military Times.

Topic: Defense Department's Approach to the Islamic State (ISIS) in Iraq.

Caller: Herby from Mississippi (click here to view).

Typically, a conspiracy-mongering, anti-Israel caller is indulged during a discussion about ISIS.

Caller: “Air attacks and stuff like that creates enemies. They're going to fight back. Wasn't it true that in Iraq we are over there fighting for the oil companies just like what's going on in Israel? They're over there (indistinct) for someone other than United States citizens. Those people are not bothering us or raiding us in the United States. We continue to try to take something from them or try to control their territory. People always have (indistinct). If you take out the people that are promoting this thing this thing about war for all, also if Israel stopped taking the Palestinian land. I think if we would get rid of those two things there we wouldn't have war at all.”

Guest: “Well, I am reluctant to conflate those two issues – the situation in Iraq with the Israeli-Palestinian issue. I think they are different in a lot of ways. But the point about oil is an interesting and valid one. One of the things that is troubling about ISIS right now is if you look on the map and the areas they are moving into and where some of the oil production is in the region, they are beginning to seize some real oil-producing assets over there. This has a lot of implications in terms of the price of oil and maybe the global economy. But, also their ability to bring in revenue and to maintain a military force. So, I think it is a little bit oversimplified to say this is about oil. But certainly there is the factor of oil in here and it complicates the situation and it is something that people watching it are keeping an eye on.”

NOTE: In connection with the ISIS situation in Iraq (and Syria), caller asserts “… if Israel stopped taking the Palestinian land.” At least host Echevarria could have either pointed out that this has nothing to do with the topic or asked what the caller is talking about. Is caller referring to the restoration of the Jewish nation (there has been a continuous Jewish presence in the land for thousands of years) in the Jewish ancestral land? Does caller refer to the disputed territories of the so-called West Bank – heartland of the ancient land of Israel -- which is not and never has been the rightful land of any sovereign Arab nation – or for that matter – never itself a sovereign nation? Does the caller refer to the racist false narrative of “Nation of Islam” or its ilk which promotes the lie that the Jews of today have no connection to the ancient Israelite Jews?

Strangely, neither guest nor host makes mention of the real issue involving ISIS' brutal onslaught on the “other” in Iraq and Syria – the campaign to establish a world wide Islamist “caliphate” government.

The handling of “Herby” is yet another one of the many hundreds of instances over the years of Washington Journal's journalistic malpractice totally inconsistent with the claim of rendering a public service. Moreover, the cable/satellite TV provider industry that is the financial supporter of C-SPAN should question C-SPAN's tolerance of numerous Washington Journal callers who obsessively spew hatred of Jews and false, inflammatory accusations defaming nation of Israel.

August 12, 2014 – 8:18 AM

Host: GRETA BRAWNER (gbrawner@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org).

Guest: BOB CUSACK, The Hill editor-in-chief.

Topic: Political News Review with Bob Cusack.

Caller: Jason from Henderson, Nevada (click here to view).

Conspiracy-mongering caller absurdly blames “Jewish lobby” for Iraq war. “Jewish lobby” is most often a euphemism for pro-Israel groups consisting of both Jews and Christians, each significantly.

Caller: “I was calling about President Obama and Hillary Clinton. They are basically one and the same. They basically bow down to the Jewish lobby in this country. None of them can make a decision without the consent of the Jewish lobby. We are watching right before our eyes …”

Host (interrupting): “Jason, where do you – why do you make that claim? What evidence do you have of that?”

Caller: “Okay. The Iraq war. I was there. I was a contractor. I went to Iraq. Those people did not have rocks, let alone anything else to throw at us. But we went to Iraq on the permission and the advice of Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz.”

[Host preempts any possible challenge by guest to the antisemitic slur:]

Host: “Okay, alright. So, that is your link, Jason, making that claim. We will go to Raymond, Duluth, Georgia.”

[What link? Does Brawner mean (irrational) “reason.” No explanation. Viewers are left to wonder.]

NOTE: The blame-Jews syndrome often includes grossly exaggerating the influence of activist, organized supporters of Israel. Ironically, the most potent element of these groups in America is arguably Christian evangelicals defining themselves as Christian Zionists, who along with Jewish Zionists, believe that the Jews are both a religious community and a people with unbroken, 3,000-year-old roots in Jerusalem and the land of Israel.

The best known group is AIPAC, American Israel Public Affairs Committee, which according to antisemitic mythology, often is said to control congressional Republicans and Democrats. As should be obvious, the two large parties, with tens of thousands of activists and millions of supporters, are "controlled" by no one, not even their top elected leaders. They are umbrella groups representing divergent, sometimes competing interests. AIPAC is not a foreign agent. It does not represent the Israeli government nor any Israeli political party. Rather, AIPAC is a registered U.S. lobby, speaking for members united in support of strong U.S.-Israel ties. It is not financed through political action committees nor does it act like a political action committee. Examples of AIPAC opposition defeating a major American Middle East policy initiative are virtually non-existent. The organization's influence primarily is due to its presentation of facts to political leaders and the fact that a large majority of the American public, according to numerous polls, sides with Israel in its conflict with Arab neighbors. AIPAC may be one of the most influential foreign policy lobbies, but bigger groups with clout on broader legislation would include, for example, the American Association of Retired Persons, the Catholic Church in America, labor unions and the dairy lobby or the National Rifle Association.

An example of a lobbying heavy-weight that is rarely if ever brought up in a C-SPAN Washington Journal discussion, is the petro-dollar funded pro-Arab lobby, whose influence is felt not only on Capitol Hill, the State Department and Pentagon, through multi-billion dollar weapons purchases but also in academia, with large-scale grants to prominent universities, and in society in general through subsidies and material support to mosques, religious schools and advocacy groups. But Washington Journal hosts rarely deal with such substance when the subject is Israel and the Middle East, often instead tolerating and even encouraging anti-Jewish fantasists such as this caller.

As for the Israel/United States alliance, 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-Israeli Arab and Islamic radicals.

August 12, 2014 – 9:42 AM

Host: GRETA BRAWNER (gbrawner@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org).

Topic: Hillary Clinton's criticism of President Obama's foreign policy approach to Iraq, Syria, Iran, and Israel.

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

Conspiracy mongering caller absurdly blames Jews and “Israeli lobby” for war in Syria.

Caller: “Thanks for C-SPAN. This [turmoil in Syria] is not about (indistinct). This is about political contributions from the Israeli lobby not aggression. The fact of the matter is, Syria – Assad actually protected the minorities. It's the regime, the Alewites, protected the Christians, Druze and all the other minorities. They are on the side of the existing regime. It's not a regime to be proud of; it's an authoritarian regime. But the Israelis want it destroyed. Consequently American politicians take these champagne contributions. Sheldon Adelson put out $100 million – one single donor giving $100 million to politicians who support their number one (indistinct) which is the

protection of Israel.”

Host: “Okay, alright.”

NOTE: Typically, host Brawner, like other Washington Journal hosts, fails to scrutinize anti-Jewish, anti-Israel distortions.

August 10, 2014 – 9:02 AM

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

Guest: DANIELLE BRIAN, executive director of the Project on Government Oversight.

Topic: Legislative Reforms Post-Watergate.

Caller: Bill from Oklahoma (click here to view).

Host Scully preempts challenge to conspiracy-mongering, anti-Israel, anti-Jewish caller.

Caller: "The young lady, I hope you take some time to read several of the books that have been written about the Watergate situation. I think you will find that the general consensus was that the Watergate situation was created by the CIA to eliminate Richard Nixon. To the other gentleman who was on, Mr. Ginsberg, I think the Israelis will be – what they are doing in Palestine and throughout the Middle East has created more terrorists than the United States can kill. And Mr. Ginsberg, of course, would be not objective in his views as to that matter."

Caller defames the guest of a previous segment, Marc Ginsberg (former ambassador to Morocco and Middle East advisor to presidents Carter and Clinton) whose topic was "U.S. policy in the Middle East." Caller falsely claims that Ginsberg could not be objective because he is a Jew. Host Scully preempts any challenge to the anti-Israel assertion and anti-Jewish slur, by not immediately identifying it as such and cutting off the bigoted caller but rather following up one of the caller's references with a related question to the guest. Imagine C-SPAN's Scully responding to a caller asserting an African-American guest could not be objective about matters pertaining to blacks, or innuendo that a female guest had no credibility speaking on matters affecting women by actually taking up one of the caller's claims.

Host: "Okay, Bill. Let's take the first point. Let me go back to the issue of Richard Nixon. Was there an appetite in Washington to make some of these changes before the Watergate affair developed?"

Guest: "I think that's the only sort of silver lining to Watergate is that there had not been an appetite for this type of reform had there not been the dramatic scandal that unfolded by Watergate in the sense the executive branch was absolutely unaccountable. Certainly, the CIA was running roughshod beyond its limits. But certainly there's no way that Nixon didn't bring this thing upon himself."

Host: "We'll go to Frank in California."

NOTE: The Washington Journal host fails to challenge the caller's lunatic fringe claim that "the general consensus" is that the Central Intelligence Agency arranged the Watergate affair to oust President Nixon. Foolishly keeping such a phone-in on the line, Scully then manages not to ask the obvious questions: What do you think Israel should do in response to aggression from the Gaza Strip? What would you expect the United States to do if terrorists were bombarding it from Canada or Mexico? As is so often the case when Israel or Jews are discussed, whatever C-SPAN's flagship "public affairs" program is doing, it's not public affairs journalism.

August 9, 2014 – 7:38 AM

Host: JOHN MCARDLE (jmcardle@eenews.net, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org). Guest host McArdle is a reporter for E & E Publishing which is mainly concerned with energy and climate policy.

Guest: DION NISSENBAUM, Wall Street Journal Pentagon reporter.

Topic: New U.S. airstrikes in Iraq.

Caller: James from Durham, North Carolina (click here to view).

Host McArdle indulges anti-Israel caller and then preempts guest's refutation.

Caller: “I want to say that I voted for the president twice but I totally disagree with this move that he's making now for two reasons. One is that there is no such thing as a humanitarian bombing campaign. Number two is, there is no difference between what ISIS is doing to the Kurds and what Israel is doing in the Gaza Strip to the Palestinians. Can you imagine what we would be doing if the Palestinians had slaughtered 2000 Jews in the past few weeks. Every country in the world would be coming down on the Palestinians. Yet, nobody is doing anything about Israel slaughtering the Palestinians.”

[In a discussion of Iraq, host allows the completion of caller's lengthy defamation of Israel and then preempts guest's refutation. “Stick to Iraq,” host McArdle instructs, and poses an Iraq related question to guest:]

Host: “James, stick to Iraq. Dion Nissenbaum, how much of an effort does the president have to do to sell this to the American public? There is a story in today's Washington Post talking about recent opinion polls on U.S. action in Iraq. A June Washington Post poll found 45 percent, fewer than half of Americans, supported launching airstrikes against Sunni extremists in that country and only 30 percent supported deploying ground troops. Several surveys show that the majority says the United States does not have the responsibility to stop violence in that country.”

Guest: “The president has yet to sell it himself. He's been reluctant to put people on the ground. We have several hundred people there who have been assessing the situation. This group at the Pentagon had not even made former recommendations of how to handle this, and the thought was they were going to wait until there was change of leadership in Baghdad, which has not yet happened. You have the president himself who has been very reluctant to carry out this air campaign and wants to keep it limited. He does not want to get back into a ground war in Iraq. He said there are not going to be troops on the ground. So, that's where it starts. He's not even that interested in doing this, trying to keep it limited. So, when you start there, I think you have a ways to go to sell it to the American public about what the American interests are there.”
 
NOTE: Caller's bashing of Israel irrationally equates Israel's defensive action against unprovoked terror tunnel and rocket attacks against Israeli civilians (while Israel takes extraordinary measures to minimize Palestinian Arab civilian casualties in Gaza which, on the other hand, Hamas has greatly increased by purposefully embedding their rocket launchers among these civilians in Gaza) – with that of jihadist Sunni religious fanatics in Iraq slaughtering Christians and other Muslims (mainly Shiite Arabs and Kurds). Host McArdle's fecklessness here typifies Washington Journal's chronic journalistic malpractice especially pertaining to Jews and Israel as exemplified by McArdle on July 30  (below) and other recent McArdle fiascos.

August 7, 2014 – 8:33 to 9:18 AM

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

Topic: Israeli-Palestinian cease fire continues (click here to view).

Guest: JAMES ZOGBY, Arab American Institute founder and president.

Zogby's position as a persistently severe critic of Israel is in sharp contrast with that of other prominent Christian Arab Americans who hold views opposite those of Zogby. For example, Brigitte Gabriel (like Zogby, an American Arab of Lebanese Maronite Christian descent), founder, president and CEO of ACT! for America (279,000 members), dedicated to preserving national security by exposing the dangers posed by radical Islam – and Nonie Darwish, an Egyptian-American human rights activist, and founder of Arabs For Israel. However, unlike Zogby, who has been a Washington Journal guest on at least two occasions, Neither Gabriel nor Darwish have ever appeared on Washington Journal.

Zogby's position as a persistently severe critic of Israel is in sharp contrast with that of other prominent Christian Arab Americans who hold views opposite to those of Zogby. For example, Brigitte Gabriel (like Zogby, an American Arab of Lebanese Maronite Christian descent) and Nonie Darwish, an Egyptian-American human rights activist, and founder of Arabs For Israel.

A January 2014 CAMERA report showed how Zogby is so wedded to the Palestinian narrative of grievance and victimization that he cannot present a factually accurate historical account. He accuses Israel's supporters of clinging to myths. But it is Zogby who can't let go of his cherished myth of Palestinian innocence and Israeli aggression.

CAMERA's report on a previous Zogby Washington Journal guest appearance (May 8, 2011 – 9:47 AM) is applicable to this Aug. 7, 2014 broadcast: To whitewash Palestinian aggression, Zogby knowingly ignores the Hamas charter, the main aims of which are the destruction of Israel and genocide of the Jews. His claim that Hamas is ready to accept a "two-state solution" is false. The group had, within days of his appearance, shown that it had no intention to "moderate." Ismael Haniya, Hamas' Gaza Strip prime minister, said in reply to America's May 1 [2011] killing of al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden: "We condemn the assassination and the killing of an Arab holy warrior …We regard this as a continuation of American policy based on oppression and the shedding of Muslim and Arab blood."

But Zogby needn't concern himself with such an inconvenient fact. Zogby disingenuously equates Palestinian extremists with Israeli “extremists” when such Palestinian radicals, like Hamas, win elections but Israeli extremists are marginalized, largely rejected by the electorate and society in general. Zogby's obviously false equation virtually invites a challenge from the host along the lines of, “Who is slaughtering innocents – Palestinian extremists or Israeli extremists, which society, Palestinian or Israeli, celebrates the murders of civilians, and which people tell pollsters they are ready to accept a two-state solution as the end of the conflict between them, not merely as the next stage in continued warfare?" Zogby falsely and manipulatively implies that a fringe view in Israel, that Palestinian Arabs are aliens with no legitimate claims, is a significant if not mainstream belief, but is silent over the fact that the "moderate" Palestinian Authority, let alone Hamas, teaches its children, asserts in its sermons and disseminates through its communications media the lies that the Jews are not a people and have no historic roots in the land. C-SPAN's host asks no hard, necessary questions but rather floats innocuous queries that permit Zogby to continue what basically is a dishonest monologue.

In this Aug. 7, 2014 Washington Journal broadcast, Zogby's lengthy initial comments (preceding the first phone call) contained several mendacious accusations, including:

Zogby: “The hopeful thing is there was a reconciliation agreement [between the P.A. and Hamas]. Israel did not recognize it. The U.S. did. Israel tried to scratch the agreement, and then try to literally destroy Hamas … Understand that the current wave of violence started with the tragic kidnapping and killing of those three young men, but then continued with 400 Hamas leaders in the West Bank arrested, and Israel bombarding Gaza, and Hamas responding to that. It is as if Israel created a trap for Hamas and in responding, Hamas created a trap, and Israel went into it…

[Note: The Israeli government said Fatah, the major party in the Palestine Authority administering the West Bank, had a choice: negotiating peace with Israel or joining a "unity government" with Hamas, recognized by both Israel and the United States as a terrorist organization, one which continues to refuse the U.S., U.N., European Union and Russian requirement that it cease terrorism, recognize Israel and agree to uphold previous Israeli-Palestinian agreements. The U.S. government said it would deal with "technocrats" in the Palestinian unity government so long as they were not influenced by Hamas. Also contrary to Zogby's version, the current wave of violence began when Hamas and its allies intensified mortar and rocket fire into Israel, apparently to disrupt Israel's search for the three kidnapped (and murdered) Israeli teens and prevent Israel from discovering more it its tunnels into the Jewish state.]

Nothing made them [Israel] strangle the population, deny them their freedom and the ability to grow and transform themselves into a functioning society. It is Israel that created this, and they owe it to themselves to own [up] … for what they have done in Gaza. It is a terrible crime. The [Israeli] prime minister might try to do this cleanup operation to straighten out the world, and claim if you do not agree with me, you are not on the civilized side, you are on the barbarian side. It does not wash. There were wrongs committed here. Hamas clearly committed wrongs, but Israel, as the occupying force has special responsibilities and they have not lived up to those responsibilities.”
 
[Note: Zogby continues a transparent attempt at inverting reality. As was clear by the time of his C-SPAN appearance, Hamas had spent up to an estimated $2 billion not on providing basic services, constructing civilian residences or economic development in the Gaza Strip but on building a vast tunnel network, importing and building rockets and storage depots for them under hospitals, mosques and apartment buildings, and through intimidation including murder of Palestinian dissidents, imposing an Islamic theocracy on the people of Gaza. Although not in occupation of the Strip since September, 2005 and under frequent attack from it – more than 10,000 mortars and rockets threatening more than one million Israelis before Operation Protective Edge – Israel continued to allow large quantities of food, medicine and other humanitarian aid into Gaza despite Hamas' aggression. The Palestinian leadership of the Strip, however, refused to abide by the first requirement of international law – non-aggression against neighbors.]

August 7, 2014 – 8:42 AM

Caller: Kay from Athens, Ohio.

"Kay" is an obsessively anti-Israel repeat caller – whose lengthy, uninterrupted rants are always indulged rather than challenged or terminated by C-SPAN's hosts.

Caller: “Mr. Zogby, I so respect your work, but as you said, this has been going on a long time, five or six decades now, really. This is the first time that I think the American public I'm a media watcher, right, left, and center, and this is the first time the American mainstream media has actually shown the American people what the Palestinian people have been going through for decades. We know that in 2008, Israel blocked journalists from reporting what was actually going on. So, if you could talk about what is going on in our media, and why are we hearing pundits talk about the people of Gaza instead of the Palestinian people living in Gaza? Please talk about how like -- C-SPAN put up a map of the West Bank and Israel, and they continually put up inaccurate maps of what is taking place on the West Bank? So, if you could talk about that as well.”

ZOGBY: “I have not seen the maps, but I can comment on the media. You're right. Television has done a much better job, a fundamentally better job than we have seen before, and the folks, some of the people from CNN on the ground there covering, and some of those from NBC on the ground covering have done a brilliant job and I appreciate that. Print media, not so good. I think print media has continued to suffer from what I call the fundamental distortion of the issue, which goes back before the conflict. It goes back to the early period in the 1920's and the 1930's, where Israel is seen as the bastion of western civilization going into the barbarous world trying to create a Western outpost. They were dealing with what they called the Red Indians, how they characterize the indigenous people, the Palestinians, and it stayed that way… The lost Israelis were humanized. The lost Palestinians were objectified and presented as a lump sum. That is a problem of print media and I think it is still a problem. Television has done a somewhat better job, certainly from the earlier Gaza assault that you noted when television did nothing but cover it from outside of the borders.”

NOTE: Repeat caller “Kay” (one of her many aliases) is one of several serial Washington Journal serial callers who seem to exist in their own information bubble, paying little attention to the news media but lots of attention to fringe conspiracy (usually anti-Israel) sources. Whatever the topic, this caller always manages to assign blame to Israel and, as well, to America's foreign policy. This caller most recently phoned Washington Journal as “Hannah from Dayton, Ohio” on June 5, 2014 (8:50 AM). Previously it was “Kathleen from Dayton, Ohio” on March 18, 2014 (7:09 AM), "Kathleen from Athens, Ohio" on March 16 (7:06 AM). In many similar calls monitored by CAMERA over the years, this caller has variously identified herself as: Kathleen, Patricia, Jackie, Kay, Kate, Ann, Mary, Hannah.

C-SPAN hosts invariably indulge her, undermining their own credibility each time. Here host Echevarria continues to indulge Zogby's Orwellian Middle East revisionism as well. But in fact, the Jews in returning to eretz Yisrael (the land of Israel) their ancient homeland, especially the modern Zionist movement beginning in the 1880s, were providing one of history's few examples of an indigenous people, long exiled and suppressed, returning to and rebuilding their land. The Arab population in what became – after the World War I collapse of the Ottoman Turkish empire – the British Mandate for Palestine, generally did not identify as "Palestinians" or "Palestinian Arabs." If they felt allegiance to a collective identity beyond clan and locality it usually was as residents of "greater Syria." Contrary to Zogby's myth-weaving, it was Zionist development that spurred Arab migration and population growth in what would become Israel in 1948 and it was in reaction to Jewish nationalism, Zionism, that a Palestinian Arab identity began to spread, first among intellectuals and political leaders, after 1920.

August 7, 2014 – 8:46 AM

Caller: Joseph from California.

Caller: “I never could understand why the Israelis think they have authority over that entire region. They only have authority in Israel. The blockade against the Palestinians is an act of war, aggressive war. The Palestinians have every right to fight as hard as they can because Israel has no rights to do anything outside of Israel.”

ZOGBY: “The issue of the occupation is ignored, and Israel makes the case that they left Gaza in 2005. If you leave Gaza, take your settlements out, continue to surround it by land, air, and sea, then you have not left. What you have done, and they hate this term, but it is a fact -- they have created an open air prison. There are young people in the 20's and 30's who have never had a job, have no prospects of a job, and never left Gaza because they cannot get out. That is occupation.

When the Oslo peace agreement was signed, there were 170,000 settlers in the West Bank. Today there are almost 600,000 in occupied lands. It has tripled since we signed the Oslo agreements. They say we honor the of course and the Palestinians have not. The issue of occupation is fundamental and has been ignored in the media. Israel says they have the right to defend themselves, but they do not have the right to strangle people in Gaza. They do not have the right to build on other people's land, to confiscate lands, to demolish homes, to deny people the opportunity to import, export, and grow an economy.”
 
NOTE: No interjection here by the Washington Journal host that the Israeli-Egyptian blockade of the Gaza Strip did not begin when Israel evacuated the area in 2005 but a year later, when Hamas won Palestinian legislative elections, took over the Strip and began, along with Palestinian Islamic Jihad and other groups recognized as terrorists by the United States, firing the first of what would total, by the second cease-fire in Operation Protective Edge, early in August, 2014, 13,500 mortars and rockets into Israel. No mention that hundreds of truckloads of food, medicine and other humanitarian supplies go from Israeli to the Gaza Strip each week or that thousands of Gazans are treated in Israeli hospitals annually.

If the Gaza Strip is, as Zogby alleges, "an open air prison," it is the Palestinian Arabs who have made it so, first by electing Hamas, then by either cheering or being intimidated into acquiescing to Hamas' anti-Israel jihad. Zogby's mutilation of recent Israeli-Palestinian history omits the fact during the early Oslo "peace process" years, tens of thousands of Gazans worked in Israel, that traffic through the crossing points was heavy, that an international airport was opened in Gaza but, within months of the 1993 Oslo Accords between Israel and the Fatah-led Palestine Liberation Organization, Hamas began sending suicide bombers into Israel to destroy chances for peace.

Rather than go unmentioned by news media, as Zogby would have it, the term "occupation" has been applied almost without meaning. Israel was the legitimate military occupational authority in the Gaza Strip and West Bank as a result of successful self-defense in the 1967 Six-Day War. It took those territories not from any Palestinian Arab state – there was none – but from Egyptian and Jordanian occupation, respectively. No mention either that Jews, like Arabs, have claims to the West Bank (Judea and Samaria), including the right to live and build there – in the case of the Jewish asserted in the League of Nations' Palestine Mandate, Article 6 and affirmed by the United Nations Charter, Chapter 12, Article 80. One of the main purposes of Israeli-Palestinian negotiations is to establish sovereignty over the West Bank and Gaza Strip, the last, unallocated portion of Mandate lands (Jordan, with a Palestinian Arab majority, long sovereign over 77 percent of those lands). So Zogby's rhetoric about building on "other people's land, to confiscate lands" is empty – but rarely questioned by news media. Such journalistic failures, when it comes to Jews and Israel, are chronic and fundamental on Washington Journal. As used by Zogby, "occupation" is an empty buzz word.

August 7, 2014 – 8:49 AM

Caller: Roberta from San Diego, California.

Caller: “I just wanted to I am 77 years old and I have never heard anything from the Israelis that they want to put the Palestinians off of the face of the Earth, but I have heard, however, that the Hamas organization definitely wants the Israelis off the face of the Earth. I do not think we can deal with people who absolutely, for whatever reason, take in Hamas like they are the Red Cross, when obviously they are not. I do not know how we try to justify these things. I have seen an awful lot of the same kind of garbage conversations and I do not think anyone should be mistreated or in any way kept from reaching their potential. But I do think we need to do a little bit of looking around because I see our young people in this country having the very same kind of thing going on with them. Their potential is not being realized, they are encouraged to go into debt, there are no jobs for them.”

ZOGBY: “Listen, from the very outset Israel sought to create a Jewish state, and I understand the yearning of people. What I do not understand is the displacement of Palestinians and I cannot tolerate or accept that. Israeli historians today accept the fact that they committed ethnic cleansing against Palestinians. A book just recently out and highly acclaimed … lays out in detail how they [Israelis] expelled the people. Maybe some Palestinians said they wanted to wipe Israel off the Earth, but Israel actually did wipe Palestinians off. They destroyed 423 villages in what became Israel. They simply demolished them so that the refugees outside had no place to go. They forcibly expelled them. They tried to do the same kind of cleanup operation after the war …”
 
NOTE: Israel's alleged "ethnic cleansing against Palestinians" must have been quite a failure: The Israeli Arab population has grown from around 150,000 in 1948 to roughly 2 million today. The Arab population of the West Bank and Gaza Strip boomed during Israel's post-1967 control, in large part because of improved medical care and decreased infant mortality, better sanitation and provision of clean water, extension of electrical service and so on. The book Zogby may be referring to, Ari Shavit's My Promised Land, alleges an Israeli massacre of several hundred Arabs at Lydda (Lod) during the 1948 War of Independence. The claim has been thoroughly discredited by historians. See, for example, "Ari Shavit's Lydda Massacre," CAMERA, Oct. 26, 2013. No Arab villages would have been destroyed in what became Israel had the Arab states and Palestinian Arab leadership not rejected the 1947 U.N. partition plan and the armies of five Arab countries and Palestinian "irregulars" not invaded Israel in 1948. Zogby essentially claims "no-fault aggression" for the Arabs and then victim status because their aggression failed. Of the estimated 420,00 to 650,000 Arabs who fled what became Israel (the lower estimate that of a U.N. official on the scene, the higher the difference in Arab population between the last British and first Israeli census), only a small minority were "forcibly expelled," and in those cases – as at Lydda – usually only a few dozen miles outside Israeli military lines. Many more, who fled to the Gaza Strip, West Bank or Jordan to get out of the way of a war caused by Arab aggression, never left what had been Mandatory Palestine. For Zogby, the real crime seems to be Israel's successful self-defense, whether in 1948 or 2014. And C-SPAN's host sits by silently, less an example of journalistic futility than invisibility.

August 7, 2014 – 8:53 AM

Caller: Allan from Chicago, Illinois.

Caller: “Thank you for C-SPAN. I enjoy the show [Washington Journal] and I watch as much as I can. I have a question. I have been following what has been happening there from what I have read, and I am trying to get a hold on this – isn't it just that Palestine was invaded and occupied in 1948 when displaced European Jews that did not want to go back to Europe after the war. For some reason they were not accepted here in the United States. This was, as far as I know, without any consultation with the Palestinians. Their country was overran and occupied. And even people trying to get their country back, I cannot see what is wrong with that and I'm wanting to make a point there. Also, why is the United States supporting this? Again, I think the U.S. is on the wrong side. I look at Israel and see an apartheid state. Why our government has supported that over the years has been a mystery to me. I'm wondering if you can address that, and clear up what possible justification could there be for the Israelis to occupy Palestine.”

ZOGBY: "The conflict actually began in the form that it takes place right now after World War I. Arabs were promised that if they joined the Allies against the Axis [Sic. Central Powers; the Axis were the World War II Allies' enemies], they would get independence – an independent Arab state. At the same time the British were signing letters to the Arabs promising them independence from the Ottoman empire, they were also making an agreement with the French, and accord in which they pledged among themselves to decide to divide the region into spheres of influence with the French control in one part, and the British on in another, and at the same time, they were signed and agreed with the world Zionist movement saying we will give you a Jewish state. The reason Britain said we will recognize a Jewish homeland was to protect the northern part of the Suez Canal… Lord Balfour [British foreign secretary during World War I] said the aspirations of the 700,000 native people of that land mean nothing to me. I will ignore them in favor of the Zionist movement. That means much more to me. That was the beginning of this whole issue back then. Yes, the Holocaust played a role, because it certainly sent lots of people who were escaping the horrors of Europe to Palestine and it fueled the concept further, but the Palestinians were resisting the notion that their land should be promised to other people early on…"

NOTE: Zogby distorts history in his paraphrase of Lord Balfour concerning “aspirations of the 700,000 …” as an incomplete rendering (or mental reservation) of the relevant historical context. Balfour's intentions involved providing a home for the Jewish people in the Palestine mandate land which is within their ancient homeland, whether or not the 700,000 Arab residents of the Palestine mandate land approved of it. But Balfour also stipulated that “… nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of the existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine …” So, Balfour intended that the Jewish residents would be on an equal footing with the 700,000 Arab residents.

This is what Lord Balfour said: “The Four Great Powers are committed to Zionism. And Zionism, be it right or wrong, good or bad, is rooted in age-long traditions, in present needs, in future hopes, of far profounder import than the desires and prejudices of the 700,000 Arabs who now inhabit that ancient [Jewish] land …”

But also, Balfour said in a personal letter: “Dear Lord Rothschild, I have much pleasure in conveying to you, on behalf of His Majesty's Government, the following declaration of sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations which has been submitted to, and approved by, the Cabinet: 'His Majesty's Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of the existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or he rights and political status enjoved bv Jews in any other country.' I should be grateful if you would bring this declaration to the knowledge of the Zionist Federation.”

As to the original mandate land (consisting essentially of the ancient Jewish historical homeland described in the Bible), the 1922-1948 League of Nations/United Nations mandate Palestine land, held by Great Britain, as envisioned by the drafters of the San Remo Treaty in 1920, included all of what today is Jordan (78 percent of the Palestine mandate land today), Israel, the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, and the Golan Heights. Israel, including the disputed territories, accounts for roughly 22 percent of historic Palestine. If Israel were to withdraw completely from the West Bank, it would possess a little more than 17 percent of the original mandate lands.

NOTE: "Allan" is one of several serial Washington Journal serial anti-Israel callers. He is either misinformed or playing at it, including tossing in the "apartheid" slander against the most diverse, tolerantly multi-cultural country in the Middle East. Of course, European Jews did not "invade" British Mandatory Palestine in 1948. They had been building the infrastructure of a Jewish community (the yishuv) there since the 1880s, including founding Tel Aviv, which by 1948 had become a small, modern Jewish city. Jewish development proved a magnet for Arabs from comparatively poorer non-Jewish areas of the Mandate and from Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and elsewhere. Rather than European Jews invading and occupying, riots and massacres of Palestinian Jews by Arabs in the 1920s and 1930s induced British authorities to violate their Mandate by virtually closing Palestine to Jewish immigration just as the Holocaust began. The only attempt to "over-run and occupy" came with Arab anti-Jewish guerrilla war and terrorism beginning in November, 1947 and exploding into the 1948-1949 Arab war against Israel. Palestinian Arabs, contrary to Zogby, were not "resisting the notion that their land should be promised to other people." Nothing in the Balfour Declaration or League of Nations/U.N. Palestine Mandate permitted displacement of permanent Arab residents. The documents did recognize the Jewish people's national rights in their ancestral homeland and it was this that the Arabs resisted, aggressively and violently.

August 7, 2014 – 9:01 AM

Caller: Thomas from San Jose, California.

Caller: “Thank you very much C-SPAN and thank you Mr. Zogby. I really appreciate the education that you are providing me and all of the American people on this issue. I think it is so important -- your message is not getting out through the major media whatsoever. I want to encourage people to learn about this struggle, because it is so important what the truth is here. I think that the only real solution to this problem will come once Israel agrees to withdraw from all of the occupied territories, not just Gaza, which technically they do not occupy at the moment, but they control everything that Gaza does. It is basically a ghetto, like you say, a prison. But Israel has to back off from its hegemonic control of the Palestinian people and their way of life.”

ZOGBY: “…This notion that Palestinians celebrate death is nonsense and evil. It is a racist notion that tries to absolve the killer and blame the victim. And it means that those who say it either do not understand or do not want to understand the Palestinian reality. I do not want to see anybody dying, Jewish babies dying, Arab babies dying. I do not want to see children in fright in Israel or in Palestine [Sic.]. But at the point where we are right now, people need to be separated so that they can, each of them, have their own rights protected within their own society. I will tell you, Israel built the wall. The problem I have with that wall, build it on your own damn land if you are going to build a wall, but it snakes in and out of the West Bank. It takes valuable property. It denies Palestinians in some villages to go to their land. It was built illegally on Palestinian land in the West Bank. But separation may be the thing in order right now. Otherwise we are heading for another century of conflict, which is not going to do anybody any good. I mean, if Israel wants to be free and be protected, they have to understand that Palestinians want to be free and protected, too…”
 
NOTE: Zogby keeps ticking off items on his talking points with no hindrance from C-SPAN's moderator. Hamas repeatedly declares that it "loves death more than the Jews love life." Hence the Palestinian idolization of suicide bombers as "martyrs." The real racism underlying Israeli-Palestinian conflicts is widespread refusal to accept the Jews as a people – not just a religious minority -- with national rights including a sovereign state on a portion of their ancient homeland. Zogby tries to use "blaming the victim" as a shield against legitimate charges of terrorism against Hamas, not to mention Palestinian Islamic Jihad, the Palestinian Resistance Committees, the al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigade of Fatah and so on. Israel's West Bank separation barrier has contributed to a dramatic decline in lethal terrorism from the territories into Israel proper. Zogby says he doesn't want to see anybody, Jews or Arabs, dying. Then he should applaud the barrier. As for it being built "illegally on Palestinian land," the U.N.'s International Court of Justice ruling to that effect was a) an advisory opinion without force of law, b) irrelevant in that the court had no jurisdiction in a matter for diplomatic negotiation between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, and c) the West Bank is not "Palestinian land." If it were, there would be no need for negotiations about its sovereign status as anticipated by U.N. Security Council resolutions 242 and 338, the 1995 Israeli-Palestinian interim agreement and the 2003 "road map" of "the quartet" of the United States, Russia, United Nations and European Union. And if the Palestinian side was anxious to gain "its own land" in a peace agreement with Israel, why did it reject the 2000 and 2001 Israeli-U.S. "two-state" proposals or the 2008 Israel offer? A good question for Zogby that Washington Journal's Echevarria lets go begging.

August 7, 2014 – 9:05 AM

Caller: Hannah from Riverside, California.

Caller: “When Israel first started, didn't like six countries attacked them and they won? It seems to me like that little Israel, the size of New Jersey, I think, if anyone was surrounded by a bunch of nations that they knew disliked them -- and there is a strain of evil extremist people that really want to annihilate them, I think I would be pretty paranoid. And if I had the choice of letting somebody, you know, have their freedom that I knew they had embedded, you know, these people that are the ones that want to destroy them, I think anybody would go to any means to survive. That is what the Israelis are doing. God chose them because they were the first one to worship the true Christian god. And at the end, Jesus is going to come act to save them because….”

[Host cut-off the caller.]

ZOGBY: “I am not sure that Jews were the first one to worship the Christian god. They actually worship a Jewish god. Then Jesus came and it was a change in the message. And then Muslims believe Mohammed came, and they faced the same god, but all three affirm a belief in the same god. But I do not think Muslims call it the Christian god or the Jewish god. I do not think Christians: the Jewish god or Jews call it the Christian god. Let's be clear, there are some differences in the three. But with regard to the question of the fear and the six nations attacking Israel, none of those six nations ever entered what the U.N. called the Jewish state. They were trying to save the remnants of what was left of the Arab states because the Jewish armies were actually advancing into those areas. If you look at what became Israel, it was much greater than what the U.N. had partitioned as the Jewish state. Arabs, yes, they rejected that partition or they rejected that petition because what was to be the Jewish state was 55 percent Arab, even though it included almost all the Jews living in Palestine. It still had a majority Arab population per they said we want a unitary state, a one-state with equal rights for everybody, and the Jewish side and not accepted. You can argue that that was a wrong decision, but do not mix up the history about that. That is why I think that reading the history is so important, because all of us on all sides have been victims of mythologies that we have used to justify our intransigence, used to justify our confusions, and to create fear. There are solutions to this. One side is not demonic and the other side. Lee. Those are real people who have real claims that can be set around the table and negotiated, but we have to understand, real people negotiating problems with other real people, not godly people fighting demonic people. If you operate like that, there is no solution at all other than one site has to exterminate the other. I do not think that is how it should go.”

NOTE: Zogby's theology when it comes to monotheism seems shaky enough. His Arab-Israeli history is sheer rubble. The Arab countries and Palestinian Arab forces that invaded Israel in May, 1948 were not trying to "save the remnants of Arab lands," they were trying to strangle the Jewish state in its infancy. They failed. In failing, they lost additional territory the 1947 U.N. partition plan had assigned to the putative second Arab state in Palestine (Jordan being the first). Being the aggressors, the loss was theirs. As invaders, they not only were attempting to destroy Israel, but also to prevent a new Arab state. Hence Egypt ended in possession of the Gaza Strip and Jordan of Judea and Samaria, which it renamed the West Bank – and no one between 1948 and 1967 called for a Palestinian Arab state in those territories. The Arabs already had several large countries and territories created and/or guided for them by the Europeans out of the debris of the Ottoman Empire, and would gain more in the post-colonial era. What they, including the Palestinian Arabs, could not bear was a Jewish state of any size. Hence the declaration of a "war of extermination" and a massacre of historic proportions by Arab leaders in 1948 and of wiping Israel off the map and throwing the Jews into the sea in 1967. Hence their repeated rejections of partition and peace offers, including Israel's post-1967 proposal to return virtually all the territories gained in the Six-Day War – the Sinai Peninsula, Golan Heights, Gaza Strip and West Bank, but not the eastern portion of reunified Jerusalem – in exchange for peace.

August 7, 2014 – 9:09 AM

Caller: Justine from Lynn, Massachusetts.

Caller: “Thank you. I was waiting for almost half an hour, but it is good to talk to you. I have a question. I am disappointed in Mr. Obama from yesterday when he said I have no sympathy for Hamas. The reason I am disappointed in Mr. Obama -- first of all, I am not Palestinian. I am a Somalian-American. Somalian and Jewish people are different. I know many Jewish people [indiscernible] these people, Obama said this before -- he said I have no sympathy with Hamas. These people attacking, and then they say they are fired on in a civilian area. That is unfair. I watch CNN. I think -- there is an Egyptian-American that is doing a great job. He asked, is this people Hamas? I think this is unfair.”

ZOGBY: “I have no tolerance for the behavior of Hamas. They have horrible priorities as a political movement and their tactics as a military movement are just deplorable. I am completely on board with that. But America could have and should have done more to stop the murder, and they did not. What that does when they do that, it compromises America in the eyes of the world. It makes us complicit in what Israel has done. And it reinforces the anger and despair that leads to extremist movements like Hamas, feeling justified that the West and America do not understand and do not support them. Is it important that America take a balanced position, and I do not think we have been as balanced as we ought to be if we want to play a constructive role.”
 
NOTE: What Zogby calls "murder" appears to be Israel's self-defense against aggression by Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and their allies. He keeps targeting Israel when it was Hamas, et. al. that committed a multitude of war crimes. These included using Gazans as human shields, indiscriminately targeting Israeli noncombatants, putting its headquarters under hospitals, storing rockets in schools, firing from or adjacent to schools and mosques, booby-trapping apartment buildings, murdering "collaborators" – anyone who openly disagreed – and firing hundreds of mortars and rockets into their own people as munitions repeatedly fell short. He doesn't specify these crimes and gives barely general lip service to them. It's Israel, Israel, Israel he's after.
 
August 7, 2014 – 9:13 AM

Caller: Don from California.

Caller: “What needs to be stated, why hasn't Mr. Zogby mentioned one time what is going on with ISIS and all of the Christians and what they are doing to the churches and the people? That is the ideal that the Muslims are pushing all across the world. I mean, watching the Washington pro-Palestine speeches, you can see that all the uninformed Americans are being told -- I mean, I am a Christian, and they [Christians] are the ones keeping ISIS from coming across Lebanon and all the way into Israel …”

ZOGBY (interrupting): “Can I stop you right there? Look, I did not mention anything about ISIS or the Islamic state because I was not asked a question about it. You ask the question and I will respond. They are a group that deserves to be condemned, not just condemned, but they must be stopped. I am Christian, Maronite Catholic, and my family is from Lebanon. I feel strongly about my Syrian Christian brothers and sisters in Iraq and what they are enduring right now. I organized a meeting for the Christian community to come meet with the deputy national security adviser at the White House, and we have a meeting today as part of a summit we are doing. I feel very strongly about the tactics used by not just ISIS but other extremist groups that have been persecuting not just Christians but using these – but other minority groups. An evil, sectarian virus has caught hold in Iraq, Syria, and elsewhere, and it is one that must be stopped… But don't confuse Hamas with them [ISIS], they are protecting Christian churches – this is what I've been told by Christians.”

NOTE: The caller is cut-off, perhaps because he is not in lock-step with Zogby's apologia for Hamas but rather making the connection between one Sunni Islamic extremist group and another, both derived from the "mother ship" of Sunni Muslim extremism, Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood. As for Christian Arabs of the Gaza Strip, this once small but viable community has been reduced, first during the rule of Yasser Arafat's PLO, then by Hamas, to a few hundred thoroughly intimidated people, their bookstores burned, churches not so much "protected" (from whom, if not Islamic extremists like Hamas itself?) as under surveillance. Zogby in effect abandons Christian Arabs he pretends to identify with while trying to whitewash Hamas – because as always, his primary purpose is to target Israel. Zogby does what he can get away with – and in this travesty of C-SPAN's "public affairs journalism," that turns about to be anything and everything.

July 30, 2014 – 7:11 AM

Host: JOHN MCARDLE (jmcardle@eenews.net, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org).

Topic: New U.S, E.U. sanctions on Russia – right strategy?

Caller: Joseph from Providence, Rhode Island (click here to view).

[Anti-Israel caller is cut off too late to avoid clearly audible f-bomb word uttered by caller.]

Caller: "This thing about Russia – the United States should leave Russia alone. Because you got China – China is just going to put sanctions on the United States and this thing about Iran – not Iran – Egypt. Egypt, and all the other stuff. You know, if someone in some way (indiscernible) Iran, Sweden – not Sweden – Pakistan. If all them people get together and take Israel out – because Israel should be gone. Israel ..."

Host (interrupting): "We're not talking about Israel this morning. We're talking about Russia and the sanctions. Are you worried about sort of starting a sanctioned arms race here?

Caller: "I was saying the United States should f------ ..."

[Host cuts caller off for dropping f-bomb word which is clearly audible.]

Host: "I apologize for that. We'll talk to ..."

[Host would have avoided utterance of f-bomb if cutoff was done as soon as caller hatefully cursed Israel. At Washington Journal, feckless is as feckless does.]

July 30, 2014 – 7:18 AM

Host: JOHN MCARDLE (jmcardle@eenews.net, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org).

Topic: New U.S – E.U. sanctions on Russia – right strategy?

Caller: Eric from Hollywood, Florida (click here to view).

Caller: "Good morning. First time, long time. Regarding the sanctions, I agree with one of the previous callers that the president's handling – first of all I think it's good to see – it's refreshing that someone in leadership such that cooler heads prevail, et cetera. One other thing, if I may, since I'm a long time listener, regardless of the [Washington Journal] topic at hand , regardless of what part of the world where it's taking place, I play a game and it's amazing how long it takes someone to crawl out of the woodwork and whatever the subject is, to blame Israel for everything. Now, I can't imagine I'm the only one who feels that way, and is cognizant of that fact. Thank you very much for allowing me to voice my opinion."

Host: "Eric in Hollywood, Florida.".

NOTE: Caller's point is valid. Blaming Israel for many and any problems is a long-time norm at C-SPAN's Washington Journal. The culprit is usually a caller but on occasion is a guest.

July 30, 2014 – 8:59 AM

Host: JOHN MCARDLE (jmcardle@eenews.net, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org).

Guest: Representative Diana DeGette (D-CO).

Topic: The Highway Trust Fund and other subjects.

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

[Neither host nor guest refutes caller's incendiary defamation of Israel.]

Caller: "I have two questions. People (indiscernible) are fleeing because of the [drug] cartel. What is the government doing concerning that? And concerning the war with Israel and Palestine, the refugees (indiscernible) that Israel is slaughtering so many children – is America going to take some of them?"
 
[The lie about "slaughtering...children" is beyond the pale. Israel is defending its citizens against barrages of rockets from Gaza. Israel is trying to eradicate the rocket launchers and rockets. As the only modern, Western style democracy in the area, Israel does not seek to harm civilians but some collateral damage is almost inevitable since the terrorist rulers of Gaza purposefully place their rockets and rocket launching facilities among its populace. In fact, Israel uses extraordinary means to avoid harming non-combatants including warning the population in advance of attacks which in turn subjects Israel's own soldiers to great danger. This is unprecedented in war. In effect, it is the ruler of Gaza that is to blame for casualties suffered by its populace.]

Guest: "Many of the children coming here are fleeing from their countries because of the violence in the cartel's. Some of those children have either been sold or given in to prostitution or as tools of the cartel. So they are coming here. They are really refugees from Those situations and we have to figure that out. But some of them are coming here because their families are so desperately poor that their families think they could have a better life in the United States. Of course, if they are not refugees, they are not entitled to come here legally and they will be sent home. So I think that -- I just met with the consul general of Mexico in Colorado last week in my office in Denver, and we talked about how Mexico can help us both secure the southern border of Mexico so those kids do not come across that border but also how we can work together with the presidents of those countries, to let their citizens know that they should not be sending money on this treacherous journey, but also that they need to work together to try to eliminate the cartels and the violence that those children are subject to. With respect to Israel and Palestine, that is a terrible situation and I know that Secretary Kerry is there trying to help negotiate a cease-fire. I really hope and pray that works because it is a bad situation in both directions. Obviously nobody wants to see the violence we have been seeing there."

NOTE: Guest seems to be lacking in knowledge about the Gaza-Israel conflict which is caused by Hamas, the terrorist organization ruling Gaza, dedicated to the eradication of Israel. Likewise guest seems misinformed about "Palestine" – there is no such country. What there is – is a disputed land area governed by an entity known as the "Palestinian Authority." Viewers are malinformed again.

July 26, 2014 – 9:53 AM

Host: Ylan Mui, Washington Post financial reporter (journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org).

Topic: Open phones.

On today's Washington Journal program, a total of three callers commented on the Hamas-Israel conflict, waiting for the end of the broadcast. All three ranted mendaciously against Israel. The host could have easily been replaced by a machine that said initially, “Here is <name of caller> from <location>” and at the end of the call, “<name of caller>, thank you for the call.”

Caller: Lyle from St. Paul, Minnesota (click here to view).

Caller: “I'm calling about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. I come down on the side of the Palestinians. I'm not going to vote for any Jewish politicians until the state of Israel changes its attitude about peace.”

Host: “We've heard your comments, Lyle.”

NOTE: An uninformed, antisemitic caller has his say with no questions asked by the unprofessionally performing host.

July 26, 2014 – 9:55 AM

Host: Ylan Mui, Washington Post financial reporter (journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org).

Topic: Open phones.

Caller: Eddy from Millbury, Massachusetts (click here to view).

Caller: “I'm glad the president acknowledges that we have to lower our corporate taxes. It has been years since Halliburton left the country and (indistinct). We have to offset that with sales taxes. We import more than 50 percent of (indistinct) now. We need to lower spending and one way to save money is to stop giving $3 billion going to Israel to supply munitions to kill the Palestinians, that could be a starter. Thank you”

Host: “Thank you, Eddy.”

NOTE: Here's a response that would have been informative to viewers: First, it is absurd to explain the Hamas-Israel conflict as simply, Israel using “munitions to kill the Palestinians.” Israel is defending itself against barrages of deadly rockets shot from Gaza into Israel. Israel simply wants to live and let live but the jihadist ruler of Gaza, Hamas, is dedicated to the destruction of Israel and behaves accordingly including using its people as human shields of its rocket launchers. In fact, Hamas believes in the slaughter of any people everywhere who will not submit to Allah.

Furthermore there are at least four relevant points about the mutually beneficial relationship between America and Israel. First, financial (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 most (74 percent) of the U.S. aid ($3 billion per year) 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 – and intelligence on anti-U.S. as well as anti-Israeli Arab and Islamic radicals.

Fourth and perhaps most important in the long run, Israel, the only Western-style democracy in the Middle East, is a technologically advanced open society with equal rights for Christians and Muslims as well as Jews. Israel has women's equality, an independent judiciary, free press and is the only country in the region where Americans could live as freely as they do at home and one that, absent religious and ethnic prejudice, ought to be an example for the Middle East's many countries now in intra-communal upheaval.

July 26, 2014 – 9:56 AM

Host: Ylan Mui, Washington Post financial reporter (journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org).

Topic: Open phones.

Caller: Filacey from Melbourne, Florida (click here to view).
 
Uninformed caller rants freely for two minutes, using Washington Journal as an anti-Israel propaganda platform. This type of journalistic malpractice is the norm at “public-service” Washington Journal.

Caller: “I wanted to just make a couple of comments on the Palestinian situation. This is concerning the Gaza Strip, which is basically a prison concentration camp. I am 66 years old. This is been going on for 67 years or so where the Palestinians have been trapped in this terrible situation with great power and weaponry poured against them. There have been 800 women and children killed. The silence of our leaders is such a tragedy. Using American supplied weapons where people will go out and people pick up weapons made in America. This is totally against our values and our belief systems. I am amazed at the lack of political will on the part of our president and the congress. This government of Israel -- I saw President Obama be out of the country when [Israeli] Prime Minister Netanyahu came over here. He received standing ovations and praise as a great leader. While our president was out of the country, he was being disrespected as our president. I am amazed that the lack of values and sincerity. I can't believe (indistinct)... This is a terrible concentration camp.”

Host: “Filacey, we will have to leave it there. You are our final caller. We will return on Monday at 7:00 AM for more Washington Journal.”

NOTE: Refer to previous Note for the 9:55 AM caller.

July 25, 2014 – 9:37 AM

Host: PETER SLEN (pslen@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org).

Topic: Open phones.

Caller: Margie from Hollis, New Hampshire (click here to view).

[Conspiracy mongering caller accuses Israel and U.S. Congress. Typically for C-SPAN's Washington Journal, host is silent.]

Caller: “For decades, our Congress has been biased towards Israel and I believe it's detrimental to our democracy. I'll give you a glaring example: in 2006 Israel attacked Lebanon and they killed over 1300 people and totally devastated Lebanon's infrastructure. At that time Iraqis had just elected [Nouri] Al-Maliki as their leader. Maliki criticized Israel for bombing of Lebanon. Our Congress was outraged. Maliki was scheduled to come to Washington but our Congress said they did not want him to visit Congress. So, our soldiers who were fighting and dying in Iraq to bring them democracy, but when the newly elected leader dares to criticize Israel, all bets are off. Something is very wrong with this picture.”

[Host has no response to caller's accusations.]

NOTE: It's true that Congress has strongly supported Israel for both moral and strategic reasons for decades and it's also true that there has been overwhelming support of Americans for decades for Israel as confirmed by opinion polling. As to caller's conspiracy claim regarding Maliki's non-visit in 2006, it is true that rank and file members as well as leadership of Congress criticized Maliki ("Iraqi Prime Minister's Maliki's criticism of Israel's right to defend itself is unacceptable," House Speaker Pelosi in July 2006). But the Congress was also outraged by Maliki's comments criticizing U.S. military treatment of Iraqis.

As to caller's misplaced outrage regarding Israel's defensive war against Arab terrorists in Lebanon in 2006, “The perception that Israel's response to Hezbollah attacks was disproportionate, and that indiscriminate force was aimed at the Lebanese population, was largely a result of media reports on the casualty breakdown in Lebanon. Throughout the hostilities and after the fighting stopped, many news outlets unquestioningly accepted Lebanese claims that almost all Lebanese casualties were civilians. At the same time, they implicitly rejected or ignored Israel's assertion that between 500-600 of the Lebanese fatalities were Hezbollah fighters.”

July 23, 2014 – 8:26 AM

Host: GRETA BRAWNER (gbrawner@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org).

Guest: Representative Jim Himes (D-CT), Member of the House Intelligence and Financial Services committees.

Topic: Intelligence Gathering on Foreign Conflicts.

Caller: Tony from Chapel Hill, Tennessee (click here to view).

Typically for Washington Journal, both guest and host fail to challenge or even scrutinize caller's remark defaming Israel.

Caller: "Glad to talk to you all. I have been watching C-SPAN for a long time. Please don't cut me off Greta. You are bad about cutting people off when you don't want to hear what they have to say. I have a statement and a correction. My statement is – this man right here [guest] and ... is the very reason we need to get rid of incumbency. I have not elected but two people to my Congress and Senate because I vote for independents. People say you lose your vote. But don't be stupid and do vote for independents. My question is, when in the devil are we going to stop blindly following Israel? They killed a 16-year-old with a bulldozer. Come on, people."

Guest: "Well, Tony, I appreciate your comment. In just about 100 days the American people will have the opportunity to throw the bums out, if they want to do that. Every single one of my colleagues is up for reelection in November. The beauty of our system, which doesn't exist and many other places around the globe, you will have the opportunity to weigh in on who represents you hear in just about three months. That is a good thing. Obviously, I hope my constituents will vote, but most importantly I hope that everyone out there will make their voices heard and exercise their right to vote on election day."

Host: "Before Congress adjourned it sounds like order security needs to be addressed in terms of funding. That there needs to be some emergency funding passed. The story this morning is that there are two dueling bills, the Senate will have a bill that is $1 billion less than what the president wants and the House is going to have a bill that is a little bit less than $2 billion."

July 18, 2014 segment from 7-8 AM

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

Topic: Investigation into Malaysian airplane crash in Ukraine (click here to view).

A total of 22 calls were taken in this segment whose specified topic concerned the airliner shot down over Ukraine (no connection to Israel). However, typically for C-SPAN's Washington Journal, a large portion, nearly 30 percent (six) of the callers expressed their opinions in terms of denigrating and defaming Israel.
 
Four other callers objected to the six biased off-topic calls: “Israel had the courage to go in and take out Hamas” (Dean from Kentucky). “Nobody wants them, not even their brothers, so do not criticize Israel – criticize the other Arab countries” (Tom from Louisiana). “Would these people feel better if more Israelis were killed?” (Sheila from New York). “Believe you me you antisemites [callers], the Israelis will never take another train ride [to the death camps]. They will go down fighting” (Mary from Michigan).
 
Host Scully managed the anti-Israel calls irresponsibly in keeping with his history of malpractice-handling of such calls, normally indulging the callers as he did in this segment. Noteworthy in this regard is Scully's blatant collusion with a March 18, 2014 (7:09 AM) serial anti-Israel caller. The stark truth that Scully (like other C-SPAN hosts) is either unable or unwilling to say (or even hint at) is that the Gaza Strip ruler, Hamas, is avowedly committed to the destruction of Israel and holds to an interpretation of Islam that claims killing Jews, Christians and non-believing Muslims is a guaranteed path to paradise if one also dies in the process. Israelis, by contrast, would much rather live and let live. Israel left Gaza unilaterally in 2005, under international pressure, hoping that the security risk would be worth it, and expected to be rewarded with tranquility rather than rocket fire. But this is too much reality to be accepted by Washington Journal's cadre of anti-Israel callers committed to expressing unreasoned, unending animosity toward the Jewish people and/or Israel.

In condemning Israel for a lopsided conflict with Gaza's Hamas rulers, the anti-Israel callers invariably ignore the reality that Israeli citizens have bomb shelters, sirens and an Iron Dome system to keep them safe from incoming rockets while Gaza civilians, due to Hamas' unwillingness to protect them, have none of these means of protection against Israeli airstrikes. Israel has invested heavily in both technology and construction to safeguard its citizens and to provide them with critical life-saving warnings as well as high-tech and low-tech protection, while the Hamas government of Gaza, which has not taken steps to safeguard its people, has actually gone out of its way to endanger them, in effect using them as human shields to protect missile launchers and the like.

While Hamas intentionally targets Israeli civilians (an international war crime), Israel goes out of its way to avoid harming Gaza civilians, even giving them advance warning of hostilities to take place near to them.

July 18, 2014 – 7:11 AM

Caller: Peter from Rockford, Illinois.

Caller: “Back in March, the 5th I believe, that is when Israel launched the missiles and rockets and fired into Syria because it was said that Syria was moving some kind of weapons. I think they broke some kind of law when they did that. About three days later, (indistinct) and then, and in breaking into the airway, they knocked what Israel did off of the airwaves, off the TV, so all they talked about was the plane for about three months. And the same thing that happened here, Israel shot those – was responsible for four kids dying, not to mention I think 300 other people.”

[Scully fails to reply to caller's anti-Israel nonsense.]

July 18, 2014 – 7:16 AM

Caller: Darrell from Defiance, Ohio.

Caller: “It kind of reminds me of the Iranian plane that we shut down with civilian passengers on board. But anyway, this is what we get when we spend $5 billion to destabilize Ukraine. What did we think we were going to get? Maybe the Palestinians can get some of those missiles to use on Israel, F-16s that are slaughtering Palestinian everyday, not a peep from the media and people like you. Why don't you do a special on Israel and what they are doing in Palestine?”

Scully: “Well, we have, caller; we brought that up with Shane Harris. It'll be broadcast on Sunday focusing on the incursion of the Israeli military into Gaza. Did you want to watch that program by the way?”

Caller: “What time is that on?”

Scully: “All of our programs are available on our website at c-span.org.”

[In a blatant departure from responsible journalism, Scully not only fails to challenge caller's malicious remarks, he actually reinforces the serial caller's antagonism for Israel and Jews]

NOTE: Washington Journal hosts typically indulge and encourage this off-topic, lunatic fringe, frequent caller who invariably focuses his huge reservoir of wrath upon America's policies and the Jewish nation. Responsible handling of such callers requires C-SPAN hosts to repudiate or at least seriously challenge them rather than outrageously according them unmerited respectability.

Caller “Darrell” who has also identified himself in past years as "Bill" or "Bob," was monitored by CAMERA on a Dec. 10, 2013 (7:20 AM) call (click here to view). Previous calls monitored include June 16, 2013 (7:19 AM), April 16, 2013 (7:04 AM), Jan. 13, 2013 (8:40 AM), Jan. 8, 2013 (7:04 AM), Nov. 21, 2012 (7:34 AM), April 15, 2012 (7:36 AM), Feb. 5, 2012 (7:19 AM) as Bill from Defiance, Missouri; Oct. 21, 2011 (7:16 AM) as Bill from St. Louis; Oct. 12, 2011 (7:19 AM) as Bill, Sept. 21, 2011 (7:06 AM) as Bill, May 19, 2011 (7:15 AM), May 2, 2011 (9:18 AM) as Bill, March 18, 2011 (7:30 AM) as Bob, Feb. 26, 2011 (7:16 AM) as Bill, Feb. 1, 2011 (7:21 AM) and so on back to Sept. 30, 2009 (8:21 AM) as Darrell from St. Louis.

July 18, 2014 – 7:25 AM

Caller: Gertrude from Inverness, Florida

Host: “As the investigation continues into that Malaysian Airlines crash, all 298 people on board killed. Good morning to you.”

Caller: “Why are we giving Israel $3 billion a year? We've been giving it to them for years and years for their military. Why are we doing that?”

[Host fails to reply.]

NOTE: Typically, Scully expresses no thought as to why military aid is supplied to Israel. At least three points are relevant about the mutually beneficial relationship between America and Israel here. First, financial (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 most (74 percent) of the U.S. aid ($3 billion per year) 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 – and intelligence on anti-U.S. as well as anti-Israeli Arab and Islamic radicals.

July 18, 2014 – 7:31 AM

Caller: Bobby from Virginia.

Caller: “I have two quick comments in less than two minutes. The first is the tragedy that happened to the Malaysian flight. My question would be to those especially here in this country. What exactly was the United States' involvement in that? My second pertains to a caller, who spoke about Israel and Gaza, you did not cut him off, so do not cut me off. President Nasser of Egypt said in 1952 that they do not want peace in Israel. He said how did the Israelis leave here black and they came back white? That is something for everyone to ponder on. Thank you and have a nice day.”

[Scully remains silent to caller's mendacious comments.]

July 18, 2014 – 7:44 AM

Caller: Charles from Ann Arbor, Michigan. Good morning.

Caller: “I would like to make a comment about Israel. We all say that Israel has a right to defend itself and of course it does, but I would like to pose a hypothetical – how would we in the U.S. feel if, for example, the Canadians begin to build settlements in Minnesota, and suppose the U.S. was too weak to defend itself, and the settlements kept growing and growing and growing? How would we feel? What would we do? Just ask yourself if that situation occurred, how would you as a Minnesotan or American react to it?”

NOTE: Scully remains silent to caller's false, ridiculous analogy. The so-called “settlements” are not located in a sovereign nation but rather in disputed land that was previously part of the ancient Jewish homeland of Judea and Samaria.

• July 18, 2014 – 7:45 AM

.Caller: Rob from Gardner, Kansas.

Caller: “Bill Maher mentioned the phrase ‘observable reality', and I think we can apply that here. Ukrainians have no reason to shoot down the plane, so it had to be the pro-Russian rebels, and the Russians will never admit to it even after the investigation is complete. They will say they are not responsible, so that is one reality. The other one is that innocent people in Gaza are being killed. Children and the elderly, okay? So I do not know what benefit Israel is getting out of killing innocent people. So, that is the observable reality. If we have a situation in the mall where somebody was holding 200 people hostage, do you want to kill the hostages and say they are being used as human shields? That is not how we apply that logic to the situation. So, we should apply that to the Israeli situation. It is appalling.”

Scully: “Rob from Kansas, thank you for the call.”
 
[Scully remains silent to caller's mendacious comments]

July 15, 2014 – 7:45 AM

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

Topic: National security – do you favor isolationist or internationalist policy?

Caller: Linda from Houston, Texas (click here to view).

[Misinformed caller "Linda" is kept misinformed typically by C-SPAN's Washington Journal]
 
Caller: "I am an internationalist and I believe that the children coming in from Latin America – They are taking back what is rightfully theirs – this is the Americas. And I don't see why people from Europe should come and take (indistinct) in the Americas. And what is happening – look at what happened to Texas, to California, to New Mexico. All those lands were stolen from the Mexicans. Now they are taking back what is rightfully theirs and we have to deal with it. This is the Americas and these children need to stay in their land. This is their continent. And nobody should be pushing them out and treating them like they are dogs because look what happened to Israel – look at Israel. They went to Israel and set up that little country in Palestine. And that is what is causing the war in Palestine [Sic.]. And all those borders that they're setting up in Israel. That's what is happening. Because people went there and set up their borders and they try to push out the Palestinians and they are fighting back. And they are fighting back for what is rightfully theirs and that is what is going to happen in the Americas because this is the Americas."

Host: "Linda from Houston. She will be the last call on the topic."

NOTE: Host Echevarria tacitly accepts caller's tenuous assertions denigrating the United States and Israel. The assertions about Israel are probably easier and – perhaps more important to refute since C-SPAN's viewers are repeatedly bombarded with anti-Israel propaganda from a dedicated cadre of anti-Israel, antisemitic callers chronically indulged by Washington Journal.

First, the caller asserts that Jews arrived in the land, with no historical attachment to it, intending to displace the native Arabs ("push out the Palestinians") from the land. False history and false accusation. The first Israelite Jewish communities pre-dated the first Arab communities in the land by 2000 years. Continuous Jewish diaspora history, from the Roman expulsions to the rebirth of Israel as a Jewish state, and modern DNA testing indicate strongly both Jewish genealogical continuity and Middle Eastern origins.

In 1947, the United Nations resolution took historic Palestine and split it into what was called a ‘Jewish state' and an ‘Arab state.' That was the two-state solution back in 1947. In 1948 Israel declared independence. The Palestinians could have had their Palestinian state as part of the U.N. resolution. Instead, the Arab countries attacked Israel and tried to destroy it before it was ever a country. There were no settlements until 1967, those were 19 years since 1948. The Palestinians could have had a state. They chose not to do it." Arab/Islamic hostility to Jewish equality and a sovereign Jewish state, in any borders, existed long before there were "settlements" in the West Bank.

Further, the most relevant international law, the League of Nations' Palestine Mandate, Article 6, encourages "close Jewish settlement on the land" west of the Jordan River and that Article 6 is incorporated by Article 80, the so-called "Palestine article" of the U.N. Charter. The United States upheld the Mandate, including Article 6, when Congress approved the Anglo-American Convention of 1924. Assertions that Jewish communities in the land are "illegal under international law" are political and propagandistic in nature, regardless of who makes them, but not legal or binding.

Furthermore, those who read the Bible can find several biblical passages that assert the prophetic vision of the land of Israel unified under Jewish rule.

July 12, 2014 – 8:08 AM

Host: JOHN MCARDLE (jmcardle@eenews.net, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org). Guest host McArdle is a reporter for E & E Publishing which is mainly concerned with energy and climate policy.

Guest: RUTHIE EPSTEIN, official with American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).

Topic: ACLU class-action lawsuit against U.S. government filed on behalf of unaccompanied immigrant children who had [illegally] crossed the U.S.-Mexican border.

Caller: Herbie from Moss Point, Mississippi (click here to view).

In a discussion about children entering United States illegally from Mexico, caller “Herbie” lashes out about “money we [federal government] give to Israel and different things like that.” Typically for C-SPAN (it's always open season for disparaging Israel on C-SPAN's daily morning call-in show), the negativism concerning Israel is accepted without comment. Viewers are never informed of the mutually beneficial relationship between America and Israel (see below).

Caller: “It's beginning to look like we're concerned about non-citizens more than citizens. We have a lot of kids that's going to jail for non-violent crimes, doing a whole lot of time and the ACLU don't represent half of them. If they were representing them, a big percentage of them wouldn't be locked up for the long period of time that they're being locked up. Also, it's believed these people are wanting something for nothing. Our country has this theory that the American citizens want something for nothing. They want to cut food stamps. There's different things that citizens are not getting. It bothers me because in America, in the inner cities, we have so many black children being deprived of the American dream, and we want to try to give the American dream to some non-citizens. We're quick to give out this to non-citizens, even its money we give to Israel and different things like that. We could make our cities flourish if we were to use this money right here. The ACLU should start standing up for black people here in America. That has been unjustly done since America has been here, period.”

NOTE: Guest, responding, is “sympathetic to a lot of the concerns that the caller is raising” while neither guest nor host responds specifically to the caller's concern as to “money we give to Israel.” Three points are relevant about the mutually beneficial relationship between America and Israel here. First, financial (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 most (74 percent) of the U.S. aid ($3 billion per year) 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 – and intelligence on anti-U.S. as well as anti-Israeli Arab and Islamic radicals.

July 7, 2014 – 7:39 AM

Host: JUANA SUMMERS (jsummers@npr.org, jsummers@politico.com, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org).

Topic: Should President Obama use executive power to address immigration?

Caller: Kathleen from Athens, Ohio (click here to view).

Note: Repeat caller "Kathleen" [one of her many aliases] is one of several Washington Journal serial callers who whatever the topic, always manage to deceptively portray Israel. Host Summers allows the caller a two-minute uninterrupted rambling monologue here just as Summers did on June 5, 2014 for this same caller who at that time called identified herself as "Hannah" ("What we are doing is the destabilization of the Middle East for U.S. and Israeli interests.").

Caller: "I agree with so many of your other callers that the Republicans have left President Obama with no other choice. And I'm wondering if C-SPAN or any of your guests later have any other numbers that show that President Obama's use of executive power is far less than other presidents. I know he's used it far less but we'd love to hear the numbers. When you turn on or read a mainstream media source there is no focus over the decades on those who hire from among illegal immigrants.

I live in Boulder, Colorado part-time. There are neighborhoods of really beat-up trailer courts where Mexican immigrant families live and then they clean the houses of multimillion dollar homeowners just two blocks away, and do their lawns. So, we don't talk about who hires and why these people are not fined over the decades. I have a suggestion for guests. Yesterday on MSNBC, Melissa Harris Perry focused on the Israeli-Palestinian issue. But they did not put any focus on how long these beatings – I mean – it is very sad, both for the Israeli kids and Palestinian kids who get killed and beat up. But they don't focus on how the American public has not really seen what is really going on in the situation and how Palestinian kids have been beaten, incarcerated, and killed far more than Israeli kids."

[Host does not reply to caller.]

NOTE: Caller deceptively said, "… Palestinian kids have been beaten, incarcerated, and killed far more than Israeli kids." But far more Israeli children have been killed or injured by Palestinian Arabs in terrorist attacks than Palestinian children killed or injured by Israelis. The tragedy of Palestinian children killed or injured resulting from violent confrontations with Israeli soldiers is due largely to the Palestinian society systematically raising new generations to seek violence and death in a zero-sum war against Israel. The real obstacle to peace is the indoctrinated hatred of Israelis and Jews promulgated by the Palestinian Authority's media, school textbooks, mosques, rallies, summer camps and political statements.

This caller most recently phoned Washington Journal as "Hannah from Athens, Ohio" (click here to view). Prior to that it was as "Kathleen from Dayton, Ohio" on March 18, 2014 at 7:09 AM (click here to view) allowed by C-SPAN to violate its ostensible one-call-per-30-days rule since she called only two days prior as "Kathleen from Athens, Ohio" (March 16 – 7:06 AM). In many similar calls monitored by CAMERA over the years, this caller has variously identified herself as: Kathleen, Patricia, Jackie, Kay, Kate, Ann, Mary.

July 2, 2014 – 9:29 AM

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

Guest: RICHARD JUST, National Journal editor.

Topic: 2016 presidential landscape.

Caller: Paul from Meriden, Connecticut (click here to view).

Caller: "I just have a couple of things to say about the Hillary situation. I am concerned that Hillary approaches politics with the ‘let's fine tune it' manner and if it doesn't work saying it this way then say it in the opposite way or say it some other way. I don't get a sense of fidelity from her. In particular I am concerned that she is really kind of in the back pocket of the Zionists who hang around the White House."

Note: Anti-Zionist caller "Paul" is concerned that Hillary Clinton is “in the back pocket of the Zionists who hang around the White House.” What Zionists hang around the White House? The question is not asked. It's likely that the caller is using the word "Zionists" to refer to "Jews." In other words, that would  nean he's a Jew-hater. Numerous such callers phone into Washington Journal and are normally indulged. It's the natural order of things at Washington Journal

Guest: "Well, I obviously disagree with the notion that she is in the back pocket of Zionists. I think that Hillary obviously over the years has sort of moved around on the political spectrum. There is no question that she came out of the 1990's struggling with the perception that she was very liberal. I don't know that – that perception was ever really true. But she occupied a ... in the Democratic party. She set about in a very concrete way in her years in the Senate in the early 2000's trying to change that image of herself, trying to move to the center and make it clear that she was not a left winger, but a centrist Democrat. I think that was something that actually got her into trouble in the campaign when she had moved too far to the center for the base of the Democratic party, particularly on issues of foreign policy like Iraq and Iran. So, it will be interesting to see how she positions herself for 2016."

NOTE: In this latest instance of such journalistic malpractice, both host and guest are remiss in not rebuking "Paul" who is another member of the sizable cadre of Washington Journal conspiracy mongering callers that thrive on the blame-Jews-for-everything syndrome. While such callers indicate concern about "Zionist" (or "Jewish") influence, they never indicate concern about, say, Islamist, Muslim, Arab, Nazi or communist influence on the government. Ironically, the most potent Zionist element in America is arguably a large group of Christian evangelicals who refer to themselves as "Christian Zionists." This group, along with Jewish Zionists and agnostic Zionists, believes that the Jews are both a religious community and a people with unbroken, 3,000-year-old roots in Jerusalem and the land of Israel. Christian Zionists' dedication to Zionism is based on an understanding of the Bible.


Bookmark and Share