Saturday, December 16, 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 2016


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

September 23, 2016 – 7:19 a.m.

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

Topic: Police shootings and race relations in the U.S.

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

Note: In spite of caller Don's opening remark announcing his intention to "again" purvey his bogus belief about the "real Jews," host Brawner repeats her August 11, 2016 performance (see NOTE below) with Don – which is to say one of nonfeasance – "Okay, we heard your point." Caller's preposterous racist claim – typically unchallenged – could influence vulnerable viewers.

Caller: “This is Don and I am calling again just to tell these blacks, Hispanics, and native Americans that they are the real Jews of the Bible and that this whole race riot and all this stuff is not going to get any better because the Lord said he would bring the wrath back on the Israelites which are the real Jews of the Bible and the powers that be – They know who we are. They know that we are not Africans. They know that we are the real Jews of the Bible. So, they are trying to keep that real information from us. The way that they are doing that is transgressing all the laws of the Bible which say that they are supposed to treat us differently then they do but they are keeping us down. “

Host: “Okay, Don we heard your point. Matthew in …”

NOTE: Again, a Washington Journal host fails to offer a rebuke or challenge – in response to this repeat caller's usual incendiary racist falsehoods concerning Jews right out of the playbook of Rev. Louis Farrakhan and his Nation of Islam. Journal's chronic journalistic malpractice continues apace pertaining to Israel.

The caller's baleful misinformation is easily refuted by the facts. There is a continuous Jewish diaspora history, from the Roman expulsions to the rebirth of Israel as a Jewish state, and modern DNA testing that strongly indicates both Jewish genealogical continuity and Middle Eastern origins of the current Israeli population. Washington Journal's chronic failure to refute such myths allows antisemitic fallacies to be repeatedly disseminated potentially to millions of viewers.

Don's prior calls all of which contain the same racist misinformation: August 11, 2016 (9:58 a.m.) (hosted by Greta Brawner) (click here to view); Sept. 27, 2015 (7:37 a.m.) (click here to view); June 17, 2015 (7:35 a.m.) (click here to view); May 2, 2015 (8:29 a.m.) (click here to view); April 11, 2015 (7:23 a.m.) (click here to view); Sept. 21, 2014 (click here to view).

September 23, 2016 – 8:22 a.m.

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

Guest: MARK WALKER, U.S. Representative [R] North Carolina.

Topic: Congress and campaign 2016.

Host: Pat from Pompano Beach, Florida (click here to view).

Caller: “Mr. Walker, you are doing a good job coming in and looking the camera in the face. You say you are a man of faith. I was wondering if you ever read Leviticus 28:16 [curses for disobedience]? I believe that the Bible was talking about the nation of Israel which is the black people. The Lord allowed the nation of Israel to come into slavery because of our disobedience. You being a man of faith, I was wondering if you ever read Deuteronomy 28: 16?”

Guest: “I actually have. Today I read Bible scripture. About a theological discussion, I am certainly happy to go that route and – just a brief comment. I don't believe that the African-American community is the same as Israel in the Bible. Though, there are some parallels when it comes to some experiences throughout history that both groups have suffered over the years.”

NOTE: This caller purveys basically the same mythology as does “Don from California” (7:19 a.m. caller above).

September 21, 2016 – 8:17 a.m.

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

Guest: Congressman XAVIER BECERRA (D-CA).

Topic: Congressional efforts to keep government funded in order to avoid a government shutdown.

Caller: Michael from South Carolina (click here to view).

Caller: "There are too many Republicans and Democrats in this country. We need to have more independent thinkers. Another thing in the budget – was the $ [indistinct] billion paid to Israel in the budget – there was no discussion about it. One thing the Democrats and Republicans have in common is that funding for Israel. And another thing – I know you [Rep. Becerra] are of Hispanic descent – you talk about how great you are but this country can't afford all these [indiscernible] and they're doing bad things – we are $ [indistinct] trillion in debt ..."

Guest: "I don't deny that there are people who end up doing bad things in this country, whether they were born here or came into this country and we thought they would do the right thing. I would agree with that, there are bad characters and if they came into this country representing themselves a certain way, we have the right and we should deport them as quickly as we can. No argument from me on that. What you see is that the majority of people who make a real effort to come to this country and give up everything they had back home, try very hard. On the issues of the budget, and of the gentleman's thinking about aid to Israel and other such aspects – those are the debates we have in Congress and they are robust debates. We now are fighting more about whether we should even keep our government operating or not. But hopefully we will soon get back to those kinds of debates because you and others are entitled to hear what we choose to do with the dollars that you and others ... from your taxes. I appreciate your call."

NOTE: When a Washington Journal caller complains about the cost burden of foreign aid in terms of the U.S. budget (which is often), the only country mentioned generally is Israel. Here, the caller claims that aid to Israel is an unaffordable expense and both sides in Congress fail to discuss it. The implication is that a conspiracy is involved. Caller is wrong on all counts. Invariably, C-SPAN fails to inform viewers of the mutual benefits of such aid. First, financial (it is military only) aid to Israel constitutes only a tiny portion of the federal budget (less than 0.1 percent). Second, Israel is required by U.S. law to spend 74 percent (soon to be 100 percent) of the U.S. aid in the United States for the purchase of military materials which helps create or sustain thousands of American jobs.

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

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

September 17, 2016 – 9:44 a.m.

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

Guest: ROBERT BESAL, responsible for readiness mission at Council for a Strong America.

Topic: Making young Americans citizen-ready.

Caller: Mary from Potomac, Maryland (click here to view).

Note: Caller airs misinformation about Israel and neither guest nor host reply – not even to note that caller's remarks are completely unrelated to topic at hand. This is standard operating procedure for C-SPAN's Washington Journal “public service” program mainly, if not only, when the one country – Israel – is concerned.

Caller: “I love watching your show, and I try to do it every day. Just about a week ago, I heard on TV that the U.S. gave $89 billion to Israel. And I said to myself, every child in Israel is better off than 90 percent of our children here, and this is what our country is spending money on? Why do we have to bow down to Israel when we need the money so desperately here? Thank you.”

Note: Where does caller obtain her information from? Typically for C-SPAN Washington Journal when Israel is disparaged, the question is not asked. These are the facts: The new military aid agreement, a mutually beneficial one (see NOTE below), will provide for $3.3 billion annually for weapons, including jet fighter aircraft, with $500 million for missile defense. That's 38 billion over the next decade and the arrangement requires that all of the money is to be spent in the United States. So, phoner's assertion that “U.S. gave $89 billion to Israel” is grossly exaggerated. Likewise, the wild claim, “every child in Israel is better off than 90 percent of our children here,” cannot be substantiated.

Host: “In terms of the funding recommendations that you have, you've laid out increasing Head Start [program]and other issues. How big is the federal government's role in preparing this age group for citizenship?”

Guest: “I think that the federal government's role, first of all, is to provide for the national defense. That includes a pool of citizens who will be physically and mentally capable of handling those challenges of defending the country. I cannot take issue or side against or for spending abroad. But I can tell you – if we can keep a child drug-free and out of criminal activity and without criminal record, we save tremendous amounts of money. There are studies that show early childhood education reaps on the order of $30,000 per student in cost avoidance. For someone who does not graduate and winds up with the use of drugs record and is incarcerated, becomes a career criminal, we spend $2.5 million on that person over their lifetime. So, it becomes, pay me a little bit now, or pay me a lot later. That is why we are advocating for stronger family conditions through programs, healthier and more active schools, and early childhood education to help our folks become the successes we want them to be.”

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

It's not surprising that former Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Admiral Mike Mullen called the relationship with Israel “absolutely critical” to U.S. national security. Additionally, Israel, with less than nine million people, is America's 20th largest customer (larger than Russia or Spain). Consider votes in the United Nations over the last several years that coincided with U.S. votes – Israel sided with the United States 90 percent of the time, all other recipients of U.S. support stood at less than 20 percent – Pakistan, Jordan, Egypt, Iraq, Afghanistan, Philippines and others. Unjournalistically, such basics rarely if ever turn up when the Jewish state and its supporters are slandered on C-SPAN. Instead, C-SPAN's Washington Journal is biased by commission, tolerating if not encouraging many antisemitic, anti-Zionist callers, and not supplying essential context.

September 10, 2016 – 9:14 a.m.

Host: YLAN MUI, Washington Post financial reporter [journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org, @ylanmui, @cspanwj, facebook.com/cspan ].

Guest: ANTHONY CORDESMAN, chairman of Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Topic: $1.7 billion payment to Iran.

Caller: Henry from Fort Gratiot, Michigan (click here to view).

Note: “Henry” previously called C-SPAN's Washington Journal at least twice (see NOTE below) identifying himself as being from Port Huron, Michigan. Then as now he accused Republican lawmakers and officials of treason and defamed Israel.

Caller: “Mr. Cordesman you are such a refreshing voice as someone who is knowledgeable. Thank you for explaining to the Obama haters that this money that was paid is actually Iran's money. My question is that recently President Obama was on a trip overseas and was met with many insults. You know, the insult with Putin... I would like to know if you believe this mistreatment of America, the mistreatment of the President by foreign entities is the result of the letter that 47 Republican Senators actually signed and sent to the Ayatollah [Iran's dictator] while the President was negotiating the nuclear agreement. And the Republicans [in Congress] inviting the Israeli Prime Minister [Benjamin Netanyahu] here to insult our President. I am an American citizen. Can you tell me why this is not treason?”

Guest: “We need to be very, very careful. Partisan politics are partisan politics. It is a very rough game and often played two extremes. That is done by both parties. Some historical context is important. First, the tensions we have seen centered around China and other powers there, the problems we face in the Middle East, reassertion of Russia's power in the Middle East. All of these are consequences of United States policy. The tensions reflect the goals of leaders of China, Iran, North Korea, and Russia. A lot of them have different levels of competition and cooperation with the United States. The idea that the U.S. is going to live in a world where we do not face these challenges is simply not realistic. If you look at the planning guide, it clearly recognizes this and it does not tie it to the actions of any given leader. When you look at the actions of the Supreme Leader [of Iran] over the last year, they are tied much more to the fact that what they had hoped would be a major flow from new oil sales has not happened. It's also tied to the fact that the United States is an ally to the Gulf states. The major source of the tension in this region is not between the United States and Iran, though that is real, it is between Iran and Saudi Arabia.”

NOTE: Fringe, conspiracy-mongering phoner Henry, in a call on May 7, 2013 (8:23 a.m.) (click here to view) was forthrightly handled by guest Eli Lake of Newsweek/Daily Beast who responded to Henry's false accusation that Republican leaders wanted to go to war “for the greater glory and good of Israel.” Lake said, “I don't want to take this caller seriously. I would like to tell you, if you are watching, sir, I regard you as a nonsense person. The notion that Lindsey Graham and John McCain, who are elected U.S. Senators, are somehow cutouts for the state of Israel as part of a large conspiracy – as populist fringe theory – enjoy your basement, enjoy your conspiracies. Back here in reality, I would like to cover the world as it is.” Guest was evidently too forthright for C-SPAN since Mr. Lake has not since appeared on Washington Journal. In a May 21, 2011 (8:28 a.m.) call, this same Washington Journal phoner, Henry, (click here to view) was indulged by both host and guest when he accused Republicans of treason and took a swipe at Israel.

August 28, 2016 – 9:26 a.m.

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

Guest: MICHAEL EISENSTADT, director of the military and security studies program for the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

Topic: U.S. military role in the Middle East.

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

Note: Caller's disputable (at least) claim negatively portraying Israel is typically unquestioned by both C-SPAN host and guest.

Caller: “Good morning Mr. Michael. My question is about overreach by the United States policy in countries. Hillary Clinton was part of the decision-making that Obama wanted to go and make a coalition and she also supports getting rid of Assad. Yes, these guys may have had some bad history in the country, but Donald Trump says that he wants to be neutral in his approach with Israel. Israel is guilty of civil rights violations against the Palestinians, so my question is in the cases with the United States intervening, those places are not so good and then you have a man that says the facts and then make a judgment, so which would be more beneficial going forward?”

Note: Caller should have been challenged about the invidious claim, “Israel is guilty of civil rights violations against the Palestinians.” Instead, viewers are led potentially to conclude that such an invalid accusation is legitimate and respectable. But this nonfeasance is typical for C-SPAN's Washington Journal when the Jewish state is involved as CAMERA's C-SPAN Watch online feature has documented continously since November 2008.

Host: “Let me jump in because there was also a tweet from related to what Eric said, and it seems the U.S. just reacts to the latest Middle East crisis. What must be overall long-term strategy to achieve lasting peace?”

Guest: “One of the things I say in this monograph I mentioned before is that Americans have to give up this propensity for its solution is him. That Americans think that all problems can be solved if you simply apply enough political capital and effort to solving them. I think we have to recognize that many of the problem are not solvable, at least at this point. We should be engaged though we should do it long-term and short-term, building on positive developments, and the exist and also trying to mitigate negative trends. When the policy is marked sustainable because it is better balance, and therefore, our market against heavy footprint approach. There is no way to walk away from the problems or to solve them either, so we are stuck managing them. With the Israeli conflict, I did not see that being that this point, unfortunately, the right solution. We need to be engaged dramatically in that area and we need to do things in order to prevent the situation with the Palestinians from deteriorating into open conflict again. I think it was a mistake by the Obama administration to invest so much political capital and diplomatic efforts to solve the problem, which I think our stuff they did, but we do not need to walk away. We need to be engaged. It is a matter of striking the right balance in order to web in diplomatically and militarily and in Syria, and in a way that is sustainable, and what I mean by a sustainable, is that the American people can support not just months but for years to come, so that means the heavy footprint operation and the end of exposure but it still means we cannot adding others.”

NOTE: The caller's unchallenged accusation, “Israel is guilty of civil rights violations against the Palestinians,” is demonstrably false at least as a general proposition. First, the 20 percent of Israeli citizens who are Arabs have equal civil rights as do all Israeli citizens. This is not surprising since Israel is a Western style society as contrasted with its neighbors especially the Palestinians. All non-Jewish Israelis enjoy equal civil rights in ways unimaginable for minorities in Arab countries.

The appalling treatment of women in many Arab and Islamic societies, including Palestinian communities, has been much discussed. For example, Gaza women are generally denied inheritance rights (Jerusalem Post article by Rachelle Kliger, March 7, 2010). Abuse of women in Palestinian society and elsewhere in Islamic societies is rife. Common are patriarchal practices across the Arab/Islamic world such as the taking of several wives, and beating them at will and so-called “honor killings” of thousands of women by male family members in the name of family honor for “capital crimes” such as alleged pre-marital sexual relations.

In the West Bank Palestinian territories, Palestinian workers in Israeli settlements are covered under Israeli minimum wage and other labor standards. But most Palestinian workers don't work for Israeli enterprises, and are therefore covered by the Palestinian Authority's labor laws. And under the PA there is no minimum wage. Does this sound like a community deprived of civil rights or just the contrary — Palestinians farmers often complain to Israeli authorities that settlers cut their trees and hurt them and their livelihoods. At times, IDF soldiers and police have to protect the Palestinian olive trees in the territories during the olive harvest season. But Israeli police suspect that in some cases the Palestinians themselves are the ones cutting the trees and then blaming the settlers and demanding compensation from the Israeli Civil Authority.

August 23, 2016 – 9:41 a.m.

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

Topic: Viewer comments on news of the day.

Caller: Hal from Lincoln, Nebraska (click here to view).

Note: An anti-Israel caller's numerous false claims are characteristically accepted without question by a C-SPAN Washington Journal host.

Caller: “I've got something that has been bugging me for a while. It's foreign aid to a country with 11 million people. We give them $47 billion a year in military aid and economic assistance, which works out for economic assistance to about $500 per person.”

Host: “What country are we talking about?”

Caller: “I'm talking about Israel.”

Host: “Okay.”

Caller: “They practice apartheid over there. They create a great deal of animosity with the surrounding people in the region. We did absolutely nothing to the Palestinians and I think it makes us look bad, and it think it is unfair to the American taxpayers because I don't know of anybody – I don't get a $500 check from my government every year. I don't know anybody that does.”

Host: “Okay. That's Hal in Nebraska.”

NOTE: With his reply limited to “Okay,“ host McArdle demonstrates, as he so often has previously, that he is either clueless about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict or unwilling to even mildly challenge. The later would be consistent with Washington Journal's chronic journalistic malpractice as it pertains to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Truth and accuracy have never been characteristics of the hate-Israel crowd and CAMERA's C-SPAN Watch has documented Journal's nonfeasance regularly since November 2008.

First, regarding caller's false claim that Israel receives economic assistance – Israel receives no economic assistance from the United States. Second, the military assistance is $3 billion per year not the caller's wildly exaggerated number of $47 billion. The “$500 check” assertion is preposterous. Moreover, the military relationship yields important benefits to the United States (see below).Third, Israel's population in 2016 is less than nine million not the caller's exaggerated number of 11 million.

The caller's falsehood, “They [Israel] practice apartheid over there,” requires refutation. The term “apartheid” originated in South Africa to describe the country's system of enforced separation between blacks and whites. There has never been anything comparable to this in Israel as between any groups. The assertion that Israel is an apartheid state is a slander. Israeli Arabs enjoy greater political, social and economic rights, not to mention personal safety, than their brethren in virtually all Arab countries. For those who routinely falsely accuse Israel of “apartheid,” rarely, if ever, is there criticism of those who genuinely practice or advocate apartheid. For example, Palestinian leaders' advocacy of apartheid in insisting on “not a single Jew” in any new “Palestine.” Most Arab societies practice apartheid of women, apartheid of homosexuals, apartheid of Christians, of Jews, of democracy. In Saudi Arabia, they hang homosexuals; in Sudan, genocide has taken place; women all over the Arab world get murdered if they don't wear the hijab or if they fall in love with the wrong man.

Furthermore, Palestinians are brainwashed by a steady stream of antisemitic, anti-Israel incitement from Palestinian media, mosques and schools in violation of Article 26 (2) of the U.N. Universal Declaration of Human Rights, as well as in violation of Israeli-Palestinian agreements. On the other hand, there is nothing in mainstream Jewish society relating to Arabs (or any ethnic/religious/racial group) that is remotely analogous to that found chronically in official Palestinian sources aimed at the destruction of Israel and Jews. Thus it is that Palestinian Arabs (and not surprisingly – their anti-Israel supporters elsewhere) demand a Jew-free apartheid in the West Bank.

C-SPAN's Washington Journal virtually never informs viewers of the facts of the mutually beneficial America-Israel relationship when the subject comes up as here. Several points are relevant. First, financial (it is military only) aid to Israel constitutes only a tiny portion of the federal budget (less than 0.1 percent). Second, Israel is required by U.S. law to spend most (74 percent, which amounts to $2.2 billion) of the American aid in the United States for the purchase of military materials which helps create or sustain thousands of American jobs. Third, cooperative arrangements with Israel provide technology benefits to America related to unmanned aircraft, anti-missile defenses, battlefield medical techniques – and intelligence on anti-U.S. as well as anti-Israel Arab and Islamic radicals.

August 17, 2016 – 9:29 a.m.

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

Guest: SCOTT ANDERSON, novelist, journalist, war correspondent, author of New York Times Magazine lengthy feature (40,000 words) about the Arab world that appears in the newspaper's August 14 print edition and online (August 10) (click here to read). The article is both uncontroversial and unremarkable.

Topic: The fractured state of the Arab world.

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

Note: This anti-Israel, conspiracy mongering caller has phoned at least once before to C-SPAN's Washington Journal (see NOTE below).

Caller: “Mr. Anderson, in a book called "When the Facts Change," by Tony Judt, he writes, ‘It is tacitly conceded by those in a position to know, that America's reasons for going to war in Iraq were not necessarily those advertised at the time. For many in the current U.S. Administration, a major strategic consideration was the need to destabilize and then reconfigure the Middle East in a manner thought favorable benefit Israel.' Would you comment, please.”

Note: Author Tony Judt is an unreliable source for information about the Middle East (see below).

Guest: “I completely agree with everything right up to the end, but I am not sure that it was all done to the benefit of Israel. The United States was indeed supposed to be the biggest beneficiary of change in the region. For one thing, the Bush administration realized quite quickly was that if you bring democracy to the Middle East, that there is this whole overture done after the American invasion of Iraq in about 2005, 2006. There was this democracy initiative. I think the notion was that if you create democracies in this part of the world, they are going to be pro-American. In fact, in country after country, those that benefit from the true democratic election is people who are the [Muslim] Brotherhood, Hezbollah – groups that are inimical to American interests. So, that whole democracy initiative of the Bush administration got reeled back in pretty quickly.”

NOTE: Tony Judt's book “When the Facts Change: Essays, 1995-2010” contains numerous mischaracterizations and distortions defaming Israel as do others of his works. So, it's not surprising that Washington Journal anti-Israel phoner “Barbara” would cite Judt for the incendiary false claim that the cause of the war in Iraq was the need to “benefit Israel.” At least once before, Jan. 26, 2016 (8:50 a.m.) on Journal, “Barbara from New York” defamed Israel. The CAMERA C-SPAN entry is here; view it here.

August 17, 2016 – 9:54 a.m.

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

Guest: SCOTT ANDERSON, novelist, journalist, war correspondent, author of New York Times Magazine lengthy feature (40,000 words) about the Arab world that appears in the newspaper's August 14 print edition and online (August 10) (click here to read). The article is both uncontroversial and unremarkable.

Topic: The fractured state of the Arab world.

Caller: Ayishah from Las Vegas, Nevada (click here to view).

Note: Sometimes identifying himself as a Palestinian Arab, this phoner, typically indulged by the Washington Journal host, in previous calls has identified himself as “Corey from Las Vegas” or “Awad from Las Vegas” or “Ayishah from Las Vegas.” Each time he defamed Israel and America (see below) with preposterous accusations like “World War I, World War II was all about creating the state of Israel.”

Caller: “I am from Palestine – Jerusalem, in 1947. The New York Times is guilty of war crimes, first of all, against the Arab world especially Palestine – with all of the false information about Israel, which does not exist. Europeans are occupying my country of Palestine. I am an American of [indiscernible]. That is the name of this country from Canada down to Mexico. This is occupied land and it's still giving us all hell because we have done nothing but world wars. Now, the last two world wars were about creating the state of Israel.”

Host: “Do you want to respond to that?”

Guest: “Not really, no [laughing]. I do not agree [laughing].”

NOTE: This deceiving, repeat caller tends to assign different names to himself in Washington Journal calls as C-SPAN typically indulges his racist, anti-Israel falsehoods: March 27, 2016 (7:20 a.m.) as “Corey” – click here for C-SPAN Watch entry, click here to view; Nov. 15, 2015 (7:07 a.m.) as “Ayishah” – entry is here; view here; Sept. 9, 2012 (9:34 AM) as “Awad” – entry is here, view here.

August 14, 2016 – 9:01 a.m.

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

Guest: ALIREZA NADER, senior analyst for international affairs at Rand Corporation.

Topic: U.S.-Iran relations.

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

Note: Repeat anti-Israel caller “Doug” (with a distinctive British accent) is again indulged by host Scully who typically fails to acknowledge familiarity with him. This is in contrast with how Scully responds to other callers known to him.

Caller: “In the Spring of 2015, there was a United Nations Security Council resolution that proposed making the Middle East into a nuclear free zone. Iran was in favor of this but it was vetoed. It was vetoed by the United States presumably to protect Israel's nuclear monopoly in the area. Now, I understand that there is a lawsuit against the government of the United States for its failure to protect the [indiscernible] and enforce the [indiscernible] amendment against Israel. I was wondering whether your guest has any information on this. Thanks.”

Host: “Doug, thank you.”

Guest: “There's been discussion about a nuclear free zone in the Middle East going back decades. While it seems radical, it is worth pursuing and it will be hard to achieve, like you [caller Doug] said, it [the concept] has U.S. opposition, and Israeli opposition, as well. Of course Iran has used the concept to push back against Israel in the region but there are a number of other countries, like Egypt, Arab countries, that are very big proponents of the concept. In the future, if conflict goes down in the Middle East, which is a big if, we could see a more aggressive push toward a nuclear free zone in the Middle East but for now it is unrealistic.”

NOTE: In 2015, in the United Nations – the United States, U.K. and Canada opposed an Egyptian plan for a nuclear-free region in the Middle East because it unfairly targeted Israel which is reported to possess nuclear weapons. Whenever Israel is assailed about nuclear weaponry, C-SPAN viewers are rarely if ever reminded that there is little reason to fear Israel's presumed nuclear capability since Israel does not threaten other countries with destruction and is perceived as highly unlikely to share any nuclear weaponry knowledge with any other country as, for example, Iran which has threatened to destroy Israel. Israel's purported nuclear weapons role, for deterrence in the volatile Middle East, is analogous to the role of America's nuclear weapons role in keeping the Cold War with the Soviet Union from turning hot. Israel, a close ally, consults with the United States on defense matters, including concerning threats from Iran, Hezbullah or Hamas. Israel has not participated in the proliferation of nuclear weapons technology to other countries as have Pakistan, China, North Korea and, reportedly, Iran.

Repeat caller "Doug" succeeds again in planting an anti-Israel seed thanks in no small part to host Scully. Doug's previous call-ins include at least three hosted by Scully: (“Iran nuclear deal”) June 12, 2016 – 8:46 a.m. (“Why should Israel have a nuclear monopoly in the area?”) (click here to view); Jan, 25, 2015 – 9:20 a.m. ("... the power of these [Israeli lobbyists] and their ability to affect United States outcomes.") (Click here to view); Typically, Scully remains silent to anti-Israel slur. Scully hosted Doug's anti-Israel tirade on Nov. 8, 2015 ( 8:56 a.m.). – Doug insulted the guest, former ambassador Marc Ginsberg (click here to view).

Doug's blame-Israel messages (routinely unchallenged by C-SPAN) include Aug. 23, 2015 (8:50 a.m.); Oct. 20, 2013 (9:55 a.m.); Sept. 15, 2013 (9:54 a.m.); March 20, 2013 (9:52 AM); Feb. 3, 2013 (8:21 AM); Oct 19, 2012 (8:15 AM); May 4, 2012 (9:14 AM); March 4, 2012 (9:18 AM); Jan. 8, 2012 (9:06 AM), Nov. 25, 2011 (9:06 AM), April 24, 2011 (9:32 AM), Feb. 19, 2011 (8:45 AM), Dec. 27, 2010 (7:50 AM), Nov. 24, 2010 (9:10 AM), April 11, 2010 (8:51 AM), Jan.1, 2010 (9:13 AM), Dec 20, 2009 (9:09 AM).

August 14, 2016 – 9:09 a.m.

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

Guest: ALIREZA NADER, senior analyst for international affairs at Rand Corporation.

Topic: U.S.-Iran relations.

Caller: Sam from Falls Church, Virginia (click here to view).

Note: Caller with a heavy foreign accent (probably Middle Eastern) speaks up for Iran and lambastes Israel.

Caller: “I have a question regarding – there an article in the Washington Post that we are giving Israel $10 to $12 billion. What is it for and why there is no talk about that? We give Iran their own money and some say this is a ransom, but if we give Israel $10 to $12 billion, it is nothing. This is in spite of the – behavior [indiscernible] and all this stuff that Mr. [Israel Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu is doing to Palestinians. So, there is no justification of American taxpayer to give [indiscernible] so I went your guest to explain to me how does it work.”

Guest: “Actually, the United States and Israel are renegotiating their military cooperation agreement and Israel is supposed to get a very large and I would say favorable military package from the United States. This shows that the U.S.-Israeli military and security operation has improved. I would argue that not only has the Iran nuclear agreement improved Israel's security and the security of other U.S. allies in the region, but I think we are looking at probably the closest thing to an era of real American-Israeli security and military cooperation in the Middle East.”

NOTE: Caller falsely reduces the Israeli-Palestinian conflict (see NOTE for 9:22 a.m. entry below) to “all this stuff that Mr. [Israel Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu is doing to Palestinians.” Guest fails to point out that Iran's financial windfall owing to the nuclear agreement is extremely risky in terms of Iran's extensive financial support of terrorism on a worldwide basis. Iran is arguably the world's leading sponsor of terrorism.

As to caller's complaint about what “we give Israel,” C-SPAN's Washington Journal virtually never informs viewers of the facts of the mutually beneficial America-Israel relationship when the subject comes up as here. Several points are relevant. First, financial (it is military only) aid to Israel constitutes only a tiny portion of the federal budget (less than 0.1 percent). Second, Israel is required by U.S. law to spend most (74 percent, which amounts to $2.2 billion) of the American aid in the United States for the purchase of military materials which helps create or sustain thousands of American jobs. Third, cooperative arrangements with Israel provide technology benefits to America related to unmanned aircraft, anti-missile defenses, battlefield medical techniques – and intelligence on anti-U.S. as well as anti-Israel Arab and Islamic radicals.

It's not surprising that former Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Admiral Mike Mullen called the relationship with Israel “absolutely critical” to U.S. national security. Additionally, Israel, with less than nine million people, is America's 20th largest customer (larger than Russia or Spain). Consider votes in the United Nations over the last several years that coincided with U.S. votes – Israel sided with the United States 90 percent of the time, all other recipients of U.S. support stood at less than 20 percent – Pakistan, Jordan, Egypt, Iraq, Afghanistan, Philippines and others. Unjournalistically, such basics rarely if ever turn up when the Jewish state and its supporters are slandered on C-SPAN. Instead, C-SPAN's Washington Journal is biased by commission, tolerating if not encouraging many antisemitic, anti-Zionist callers, not supplying essential context and granting bigotry a platform.

August 14, 2016 – 9:22 a.m.

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

Guest: ALIREZA NADER, senior analyst for international affairs at Rand Corporation.

Topic: U.S.-Iran relations.

Caller: Teresa from Bolingbrook, Illinois (click here to view).

Note: Typically for C-SPAN's Washington Journal, a caller's racist, anti-Israel polemical tirade is accepted without challenge.

Caller: “I'd just like to say as a person of color, the propaganda about Iran is just insulting people's intelligence. If people read the history behind Iran and the United States, they will find out who started this conflict – it was the U.S. The U.S. starts most of the conflicts in the world, but they blame everybody else. The money that the United States gave Iran – it was Iran's money that the United States had been holding just like they held Libya's money and it probably never even gave Libya their money back [indiscernible]. And as far as Israel is concerned and Israel's security, how did Israel get that land – it was colonialism, they kill people. After what they went through in Germany, they went to the Middle East to Palestine and killed a bunch of Arabs and Muslims and took their men and put the rest of them in refugee camps.”

Host [addressing the guest]: “Your response?”

Guest: “There is a lot of misconception I think in both countries about the relationship. Unfortunately, Iran has an issue of intense partisan debate in the United States and in Iran, the government creates a lot of propaganda about [indiscernible]. So I think in Iran, the public is beginning to get a better picture of the United States because of social media, because of the ability to access information internationally. So hopefully, at a societal level in Iran, some of the misinformation is going to go away and Iranians will have a better sense of what the United States is really about and with a nuclear agreement, the hope is that there could be more people to people exchanges and for Iranians to come to the United States and learn more about the United States, and for Americans to go back and see Iran, and that is difficult when the Iranian government is arresting Iranian-Americans. But in the future, relations between the countries could open up.”

NOTE: Here, typically for C-SPAN's Washington Journal chronic journalistic malpractice, neither host nor guest responds to caller's polemic defaming Israel with lies and distortions misleading potentially millions of viewers. The caller's hideous, false accusations, “… how did Israel get that land – it was colonialism … they went to the Middle East to Palestine and killed a bunch of Arabs and Muslims …” requires a response.

First, there has been a continuous Jewish presence in the land since long before Muslims came and conquered the land. In fact, from the 1860s, the Jewish population of Jerusalem exceeded that of every other group until 1948 when Jews were forcefully expelled from eastern Jerusalem by Jordanian Arab Muslim troops. If other peoples have a right to live securely in their homelands, then the Jewish people certainly have a right to live securely in their homeland. This includes Jewish communities (“settlements”) established in only six percent of the West Bank (part of ancient Israel) on purchased land. The 20th century restoration of the nation of Israel was never intended to be at the expense of anyone. In 1948, the Jews accepted the U.N. partition plan but the Arabs initiated their genocidal campaign aimed at cleansing the land of all Jews. International law -- the League of Nations' Palestine Mandate, Article 6, calls for "close Jewish settlement" on the land west of the Jordan River. Article 6 is incorporated by Article 80 of the U.N. Charter, sometimes referred to as "the Palestine article." The United States endorsed the mandate, including Article 6, in the 1924 Anglo-American Convention. The West Bank is not sovereign territory of any country, but rather land disputed by both Israel and the Palestinian Authority. It was illegally occupied by Jordan from 1948 to 1967, when Israel took control as a result of successful self-defense in the 1967 Six-Day War. As Eugene Rostow – a co-author of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242 (1967), the keystone of all subsequent successful Arab-Israeli negotiations pointed out – 242 does not require complete Israeli withdrawal. Rather, the status of the territory, to which Jews as well as Arabs have legitimate claims, is to be resolved in negotiations as called for in the resolution and by U.N. Security Council Resolution 338 (1973). Meanwhile, Jewish villages and towns built in the West Bank (Judea and Samaria, the ancient homeland of the Jewish people) since 1967 are no more deserving of condemnation than are Arab villages built since then in previously existing Arab villages and towns.

The Arabs continue to refuse to accept Israel as a Jewish state (evidently 22 Arab Muslim states is fine but one Jewish state is one too many) and continue to insist on the right of return of Palestinian Arabs and their descendants to Israel which would result in engulfing the state. The result would be the replacement of Israel by a 23rd Arab Muslim state. The basic propaganda narrative underlying the Arab “right of return” to Israel is the so-called “nakba” (Arabic for "catastrophe") myth, which falsely claims that Palestinian Arabs in 1948 suffered a forced exodus at the hands of Israeli Jews comparable to the Holocaust suffered by European Jews at the hands of the Nazis and their sympathizers. Nakba Day on May 15 is marked by Arab protests (including in recent years confrontations along Israel's frontiers) while Israel's birthday is celebrated on May 14, the modern Jewish state of Israel having declared its independence on May 14, 1948, in keeping with the U.N.'s 1947 partition plan. Furthermore, according to authoritative sources, in the wake of Israel's War of Independence in 1948, the overwhelming majority of Arab refugees from what became the Jewish state were not expelled by Israelis. But, ironically, a much larger number of refugees, Jews who had resided in Arab countries for many generations, were forced to flee their native lands. Thus the Jewish "nakba" dwarfed the Arab "nakba" and moreover, while the new Jewish state welcomed and assimilated these Jewish refugees, the Palestinian Arab refugees and their descendants were cynically penned up by their Arab brethren in refugee camps – a condition which still persists. Unfortunately, C-SPAN viewers never hear information like this.

August 14, 2016 – 9:24 a.m.

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

Guest: ALIREZA NADER, senior analyst for international affairs at Rand Corporation.

Topic: U.S.-Iran relations.

Caller: Alicia from Arkansas (click here to view).

Caller Alicia represents here the position of the largest group of Americans (Christian Zionists) who strongly support the Jewish nation of Israel.

Caller: “I would like to start – we were founded – this country – on Judeo-Christian beliefs. Judeo-Christians believe that they are grafted in to a covenant with Jesus Christ, which is a Jew. We believe that we need to back Israel 100 percent. We do not agree – most Judeo-Christians – with an Iran agreement that was made through this [Obama] administration. The Persians [Iranians] back Hamas which is an enemy of Israel, and as far as Israel's land, God made that established in [the book of] Exodus in the Bible. Everybody can believe what they want to believe, but that is truth.”

Guest: “It is because Iran poses such a threat to Israel and U.S. interests in the Middle East that I think the nuclear agreement is very important because, again, it really constrains Iran's ability to weaponize its program. Before the agreement, analysts believed that Iran was about a month away from being able to weaponize this program and breakout. Now, Iran is about a year away, and if it decides to weaponize the program, the United States has a year to respond to Iran's provocation. So, again, the nuclear agreement makes the region safer and not the other way around.”

August 13, 2016 – 9:23 a.m.

Host: YLAN MUI, Washington Post financial reporter [journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org, @ylanmui, @cspanwj, facebook.com/cspan ].

Topic: Viewer comments on news of the day.

Caller: Sal from Baltimore, Maryland (click here to view).

Note: Caller's two-minute rant castigating Israel, among others, is tolerated by host (“Alright. We hear your point”). It's business as usual at C-SPAN's Washington Journal daily call-in show.

Caller: “Thank you for taking my call. I just want to speak a little bit about all of this political posturing, talking about [Presidential nominee Donald] Trump, anytime people want to talk about something bad. I know Trump is a racist. I know Trump is a bigot. I know Trump is a sexist. But one thing I really, really do know, is that Donald Trump – his policies we don't know about them. He is kind of foolish, but we did elect George Bush twice who is the epitome of a spoiled rich kid, underachiever. The whole ISIS [Islamic State terrorist entity] thing, ISIS is just a word. ISIS is a bunch of trash. Clinton and Obama and Bush before them created ISIS with their propping up and their continuing support of regimes like Saudi Arabia and Israel, who are the major players in the destabilizing of the Middle East. And it's the Arabian Peninsula, not Saudi Arabia. The house of Saud is just a bunch of Bedouin trash.”

Host: “Alright. We hear your point. Let's leave it there.”

NOTE: This indulged caller could mislead potentially numerous habitually uninformed or misinformed viewers among the millions in C-SPAN's viewing audience. A clueless or unwilling host fails to challenge the false claim that Israel – the only Western style democracy in the Middle East, the most stable country in the Middle East – is a destabilizing factor in the region. What information sources inform the caller (who seems to be obsessed with Saudi Arabia and its “Bedouin trash”)? Typically for C-SPAN's Washington Journal allegedly public service program, such a relevant question is not asked.

August 11, 2016 – 9:58 a.m.

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

Topic: Department of Justice's report on policing in Baltimore.

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

Note: Typically, a Washington Journal host fails to rebuke or challenge – not even a word except "Alright" – in response to this repeat caller's usual incendiary racist falsehoods concerning Jews right out of the playbook of Rev. Louis Farrakhan and his Nation of Islam. Actual historical facts (see NOTE below) completely contradict the mythology. Washington Journal's chronic journalistic malpractice continues apace.

Caller: "Yes; thanks for C-SPAN. I am calling just to let these black and these Hispanic and these native American people here in America – let them know that they are the Jews of the Bible and that the American people here, all these Edomites – which all the white people are – are against us Israelites. We are the real true people of the Bible and the whole system is twisted around to where people think that the Jews in Israel are the real Jews but the real Jews are black and ... "

Note: The Bible discusses the Edomites who were the descendants of Esau, the elder son of the Hebrew patriarch Isaac. God's covenant with the Hebrew people (later to be called Israelites and Jews) passed on to Isaac's younger son, Jacob. The Edomites became antagonists of the Hebrew people. There is no basis in fact for correlating the Edomites to "the white people" in America.

Host: "Alright. Thomas in Stratford, New Hampshire ..."

NOTE: The caller's myths are easily refuted by the facts. There is a continuous Jewish diaspora history, from the Roman expulsions to the rebirth of Israel as a Jewish state, and modern DNA testing that strongly indicates both Jewish genealogical continuity and Middle Eastern origins of the Israeli population. Washington Journal's chronic failure to refute such myths allows antisemitic fallacies to be repeatedly disseminated to millions of potential viewers.

Caller "Don" has been welcomed and indulged by C-SPAN's Washington Journal as he spewed his antisemitic racist lies:  Sept. 27, 2015 (7:37 a.m.) (click here to view); June 17, 2015 (7:35 a.m.) (click here to view); May 2, 2015 (8:29 a.m.) (click here to view); April 11, 2015 (7:23 a.m.) (click here to view); Sept. 21, 2014 (click here to view).

August 4, 2016 – 9:15 a.m.

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

Guest: LEO SHANE, correspondent covering U.S. Congress for Military Times magazine.

Topic: Military issues and campaign 2016.

Caller: Vincent from Melbourne, Florida (click here to view).

Note: As in a previous call (see below) to Washington Journal, this indulged caller acts as an apologist for the totalitarian Islamic Republic of Iran while condemning Israel.

Caller: "My question is – why is everybody blaming Iran as the world's leading terrorist, when the source of the trouble is the Wahhabi brand of Islam promoted by Saudi Arabia. I cannot understand it. Iran is a great civilization. And outside of pressure from Israel, which scares all of our politicians into supporting this false theme that Iran is a terrorist, what have they done to us outside of kidnap a few people. We know that everyone in the world – I'm an ex-intelligence agent – everybody has spies. And when they say, ‘[indiscernible] our people,' I would bet that they [our people] are guilty..."

Host: "Thanks for the call Vincent; we are running out of time. This is likely to be an issue that the President has to talk about at his news conference today – and that is – the money that was sent to Iran on the very same weekend that those hostages were released. The White House saying it is not a ransom. Republicans saying it looks like a ransom."

Guest: "Iran and how to unpack this. That is an issue – the $400 million sent that was sent over there. "That's an issue that would have been front-page news most weeks if not for the ongoing controversies with the Trump campaign. I would expect some of these issues to come up at the Pentagon press conference – but just to get to the caller's comment – Iran has been seen by many in the government, and within the Republican party as a major threat, as a major foe to the U.S., a destabilizing agent for the Middle East. That is because of their relationship with terrorism groups. Saudi Arabia has been a long time problematic ally for the United States. It is a matter of the problematic friend that we have the the problematic enemy that we have, and how can we get them on some sort of equal footing? The Obama administration has said throughout the deal and his presidency that he thinks that bringing them into the fold and having some sort of relationship makes it safer than keeping them on the outside. Republicans disagree strongly. They think there should be virtually no interaction and there should be a much harsher tone. That is the only way they will learn. Both sides have danced around how do we deal with Saudi Arabia. How does that fit in? This is not an issue that will go away. It will be a major foreign-policy headache for either of the two candidates if they become commander-in-chief."

NOTE: Devious caller "Vincent" phoned in at least once previously – on March 28, 2015 (9:04 a.m.) – identifying himself as "Robert from Melbourne, Florida" (click here to view). Then as now, he provided an apologia for the totalitarian Islamic Republic of Iran while condemning Israel.

A fuller explanation is warranted concerning the danger posed by Iran. Designated by the U.S. State Department in 1984 as a "State Sponsor of Terrorism," Iran remains today as the most active state sponsor of terrorism. The Lebanon-based Hezbullah terrorist group is mainly supported by Iran's fanatical leadership. Iran seized the U.S. embassy in Tehran in 1979 and held and abused 52 American diplomats for more than a year. In 1983, its agents blew up the American embassy and Marine barracks in Beirut, killing 241 American soldiers and marines. In 1996, it blew up Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia, murdering 19 American soldiers. Iran via its Islamic Revolutionary Guards and Hezbullah is believed to have been behind the infamous 1994 attack on the Jewish community center in Buenos Aires, Argentina. In 2011, senior Iranian officials plotted to blow up a busy Washington, D.C. restaurant to kill the Saudi ambassador. Iran is a brutal police state (it tortures and executes its own citizens in large numbers) controlled by Shi'ite Muslim clerics with an apocalyptic world-view. These clerics tout the necessity of a war of destruction with Israel and the West in order to hasten the return of a messianic "twelfth imam."

July 30, 2016 – 8:06 a.m.

Host: YLAN MUI, Washington Post financial reporter [journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org, @ylanmui, @cspanwj, facebook.com/cspan ].

Guest: MEGAN McARDLE, columnist for Bloomberg News.

Topic: Democratic and Republican Party platforms look to break up the banks [calling for the restoration of the 1933 Glass-Steagall Act which bars commercial banks from participating in high-risk investments].

Caller: “Rick from Louisville, Ohio (click here to view).

Note: "Rick" (or “Ranting Rick”) is a Washington Journal conspiracy theorist, serial caller who spews political and economy-related gobbledygook in lengthy rants tolerated by C-SPAN hosts. These invariably involve heaping blame upon the Jewish people as he did in this two-minute screed. Typically, his antisemitic accusation here goes unchallenged.

Caller: “Basically the problem that we have right now this second is that you have somebody from Bloomberg News [Bloomberg is a Jewish sounding name, so apparently that's why it's a 'problem'] on here trying to explain the banking system. In reality, if you go back to the Constitution, the Constitution says only Congress can print money. So you go to the Federal Reserve, they lower interest rates 13 times in one year and are printing nothing but fake dollars – false dollars – to try to manipulate the global economy. Now, what this lady [the guest] says is that what happened with Clinton -- in 1934 [President Franklin] Roosevelt said that Wall Street could not touch the bank money, pension money, or your insurance money. Well, Clinton said, we are going to do away with that. So they stole $10 trillion, five trillion from the banks – 2.5 for pensions, 2.5 for insurance – and what you have to understand is – you keep on talking about banks. There are no banks. I am 60 years old and I grew up in Detroit when there were banking laws and antitrust laws in place. Now, this is where C-SPAN is going to be forced to hang up on me because we have to talk about JP Morgan, Citigroup, AIG and Goldman Sachs – and those are run by Jews…”

Host: “Alright. We are going to hang up on you now.”

[Host confirms caller's prediction that his call will be terminated.]

Host: “Megan McArdle.”

Guest: “I am not sure where a lot of his numbers came from. I am actually kind of not sure what the question was [laughing].”

Host: “Let's look at this. This is a New York Times Op-Ed from Hillary Clinton in December where she put forth her plan on how to intervene in Wall Street…”

NOTE: Each previous call from “Ranting Rick” assigned blame for various problems faced by the United States to his list of alleged culprits that includes only one ethnic/religious group – "the Jews" or "the Jewish state." On Washington Journal, no other ethnic or religious group has been subjected to such continuous and virulent defamation by mendacious, hate mongers like this caller. Previous such C-SPAN calls from Rick monitored include March 27, 2016 – 8:27 a.m. (click here to view); May 26, 2015 (7:16 a.m.); April 21, 2015 (7:34 a.m.); April 3, 2015 (7:08 a.m.); March 19, 2015 (7:17 a.m.); Dec. 31, 2014 (7:12 a.m.); Feb. 10, 2014 (8:06 a.m.); Jan. 22, 2014 (8:20 a.m.); and Dec. 19, 2013.

Here as in past calls, Rick dredges up the classic antisemitic canard that the banking world is dominated by Jews. He names a few investment entities including one with a Jewish sounding name (“Goldman Sachs”): “JP Morgan, Citigroup, AIG and Goldman Sachs – and those are run by Jews…” The reality here is that the only one of these four “run by a Jew” is Goldman Sachs. Likewise, the large majority of the other large such entities are also not “run by a Jew” including US Bancorp, Wells Fargo, Bank of America and so on.

The canard can be traced to the prevalence of Jews in the money-lending profession in Europe during the Middle Ages. This was due in part to prohibition against Christians in that business and ban on Jews owning land. The infamous Czarist-era forgery, The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion repeated this canard. Washington Journal routinely airs such anti-Jewish conspiracy theories without refutation. The most that can be expected from C-SPAN based on past performance is caller cutoff as in this case, albeit prompted by the caller himself.

July 25, 2016 – 9:44 a.m.

Host: PETER SLEN [pslen@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org, @pslen ].

Topic: Viewer comments on the first day of the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia.

Caller: Dave from Michigan (click here to view).

Note: Host Slen characteristically accepts, without comment, caller's allegation of malicious activity perpetrated by Israel.

Caller: "I'd just like to say that this conspiratorial gobbledygook about the Russians breaking in to the DNC [Democrat National Committee] files and creating all of this gobbledygook that we are seeing here – you are blaming the wrong people, my friends. It's my folks – the Israelis. They've given Mr. Obama a piece of his own medicine because he tried to bust up Bibi [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu's chances when Bibi was running for office in Israel. The Israelis just turned around and gave Obama a piece of his own medicine. The Russians – they have nothing to do with it. That is really gobbledygook. They just want to create some conspiratorial tale to hurt Donald Trump."

Host: "That was Dave in Michigan."

NOTE: Does the caller have any evidence for his assertion or is it just wild speculation? Unsurprisingly for Washington Journal, the question is not asked.

July 5, 2016 – 9:02 a.m.

Host: PEDRO ECHEVARRIA [pechevarria@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org, @PLEchevarria ].

Guest: DENNIS ROSS, former senior adviser for Middle East policy to President Obama, special advisor for the Persian Gulf and Southwest Asia to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, currently a fellow at The Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

Topic: U.S.-led efforts to combat ISIS (Islamic State terrorist entity).

Caller: Grant from Washington, D.C. (Click here to view).

Note: Repeat Washington Journal caller identified here only as "Grant from Washington D.C." is Grant F. Smith , a Washington, D.C. author and director of an anti-Israel advocacy organization. He has been an apologist for Islamic terrorists and the totalitarian Islamic Republic of Iran.
 
Caller: "Hey Dennis, I want to know why there is such strict enforcement of the Jerusalem embassy Act that Presidents have to sign a waiver not to move the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem. And there's no enforcement of the signings of the glen amendments to the Foreign Aid Act of 1961 which absolutely prohibits any U.S. foreign aid to clandestine foreign nuclear weapons states like Israel. Is it because there are so many people who are essentially Israel lobbyists, like yourself, in government?"

Note: When it comes to issues involving Israel, C-SPAN frequently fails to adequately inform viewers about pertinent facts. The controversy surrounding U.S. Presidents' persistent refusals to relocate the U.S. embassy from the city of Tel Aviv to Israel's capital city of Jerusalem is only one of many examples. These refusals are perhaps partially influenced by the power of Arab and other Islamic states. The policy of the U.S. government has been to treat Israel's capital city differently from other nation's capital cities – that is not recognizing Jerusalem as Israel's capital. However Jerusalem is the seat of government, home to the Knesset (parliament), Supreme Court, prime minister's office and residence and most other governmental agencies – and has been a capital city only of the Jewish people at any time in the past 3,000 years. Despite these facts, U.S. policy has not progressed beyond the 1947 U.N. partition plan, rejected by the Arab states and Palestinian Arabs. This called for the division of British Mandatory Palestine into one Arab and one Jewish state and the "internationalization" of Jerusalem. It could be argued that his stance may contribute to Palestinian insistence on redividing Jerusalem as it was during Jordan's illegal occupation from 1948 to 1967. The U.S. position implies that even overwhelmingly Jewish western Jerusalem, home to most government facilities, is disputed territory, not just formerly Jordanian-held eastern Jerusalem. For this reason, U.S. passports of Americans born in Jerusalem may not list Israel as the country of birth. The U.S. government justifies this policy on the grounds that it would interfere with U.S. foreign policy. The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the government's position by a six-to-three vote. Justice Antonin Scalia for the minority issued the dissenting opinion which included, "[M]aking a notation in a passport or birth report does not encumber the Republic with any international obligations." U.S. government policy in this case and the general case of refusal, on political grounds, to recognize Israel's capital (even the western section of the city) is opposed by a large majority of both houses of Congress.

Guest: "Well, I think that, ultimately, different Presidents have made the decision that when there are certain kinds of Acts that they think will affect us from a security standpoint, they choose that there is a national security waiver – they choose not to act on it. Congress has passed laws and resolutions that our embassy should be in Jerusalem and every President – Republican and Democratic alike – has decided at this point to exercise that waiver – not to move the embassy."

[End of Washington Journal comments on Grant Smith's message.]

[Guest chooses not to respond to caller's false assertion, intended to be an insult, that Ross, who has a long and distinguished record of government service, is "essentially [an] Israel lobbyist." The Washington Journal host typically fails to challenge the assertion.]

NOTE: Guest responds appropriately on the only point he chooses to address. But C-SPAN viewers deserve additional information related to caller's anti-Israel message. First, relating to Israel's purported possession of nuclear weaponry: Israel, like some other Middle Eastern countries but unlike Iran, did not sign the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) the purpose of which is to prevent the spread of nuclear weaponry capability. Therefore Israel, cannot avail itself of certain nuclear assistance from other NPT countries but at the same time it is not legally required to submit to NPT requirements including inspection of presumed nuclear facilities. Whenever Israel is assailed about nuclear weaponry, C-SPAN viewers are rarely if ever reminded that there is little reason to fear Israel's presumed nuclear capability since the Jewish state does not threaten other countries with destruction. Moreover, Israel is perceived as highly unlikely to share any nuclear weaponry knowledge with any other country. By contrast, Iran which routinely threatens to destroy Israel. Israel's purported nuclear weapons role, for deterrence in the volatile Middle East, is analogous to the role of America's nuclear weapons role in keeping the Cold War with the Soviet Union from turning hot. Israel is a close U.S. ally on defense matters of mutual concern, such as threats emanating from Iran, Hezbollah or Hamas. Israel has not participated in the proliferation of nuclear weapons technology to other countries as have Pakistan, China, North Korea and, reportedly, Iran.

Second, pertaining to "amendments to the Foreign Aid Act of 1961," the U.S. State Department has said this about the 1961 Act: "Reference is to two amendments to the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (as amended), one sponsored by Representatives Silvio O. Conte (R–Massachusetts) and Clarence Long (D–Maryland), the other by Senator Stuart Symington (D–Missouri). The Conte–Long amendment required the President to withhold economic assistance to any 'under-developed country' that used military assistance to acquire sophisticated weapons systems. The provision did not apply to Greece, Turkey, Iran, Israel, Taiwan, the Philippines, and Korea, or to any country that the President specifically exempted on the basis of national security. (81 Stat. 937 and 81 Stat. 940). The Symington amendment stipulated that the President terminate development loans and PL–480 assistance to any country that made military expenditures 'to a degree which materially interferes with its development." (81 Stat. 459).'" The Arms Control Association says about the Symington amendment that it "Prohibits most U.S. assistance to any country found trafficking in nuclear enrichment equipment or technology outside of international safeguards. President Jimmy Carter found Pakistan in violation of the Symington amendment in 1979 because of Islamabad's clandestine construction of a uranium enrichment plant. U.S. aid to Islamabad was possible between 1982 and 1990 only through the use of presidential waivers."

Clearly, there is no legitimate basis for assailing Israel here. As CAMERA's C-SPAN Watch has documented, Washington Journal chronically fails to refute anti-Israel fallacies that are repeatedly disseminated to millions of potential viewers. Rarely do guest speakers – journalists, authors, academics, government officials – offer information that counters these distortions and falsehoods.
 
July 4, 2016 – 9:48 a.m.

Host: BILL SCANLAN [bscanlan@c-span.org, journal@c-span.org, viewer@c-span.org, @bscanlanCSPAN ].

Topic: What's right with America/what's wrong with America?

Caller: John from Holyoke, Massachusetts (click here to view).

Note: Host Scanlan indulges an off-topic, conspiracy mongering caller who echoes the racist and antisemitic playbook of Rev. Louis Farrakhan and his Nation of Islam.

Host: “Holyoke, Massachusetts, John, what do you find wrong with America?”

Caller: “Well, there's a lot of people in this world that have the Internet, and don't do research. Your history, the history of your Bible has been whited out by the European countries who basically had hijacked religion, and basically have hidden the true identity of the people of the Bible. And we have occupiers in Israel. And basically that is what I am going to say. The same race that gave you Hitler are the ones that are giving you Communism, Zionism, racism and fascism.”

Host: “Al is in Atlanta, Georgia …”

[Host is silent as caller completes his hateful rant.]

NOTE: Preposterous, pernicious falsehoods vilifying the Jewish people are routinely accepted without challenge on C-SPAN's Washington Journal. This caller's myths are easily refuted by the facts. The Jews of today's Israel descend from the Jews of the Bible. There is a continuous Jewish diaspora history, from the Roman expulsions to the rebirth of Israel as a Jewish state, and modern DNA testing strongly indicates both Jewish genealogical continuity and Middle Eastern origins. C-SPAN hosts virtually invariably sit mute or even, at times, reinforce the bigoted rants that are indulged by them. It's mostly left to the occasional pro-Israel caller, often self-identified Christians, to provide moments of rationality. No other ethnic or religious group has been subjected to such continuous and virulent defamation on the network. Moreover, to date, C-SPAN has stonewalled all efforts to discuss this problem, while the hate-filled calls continue.

Bookmark and Share