C-SPAN September – October 2009

• October 26, 2009 – 7:06 AM


Caller: Jim from Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.

Host: “Should the bombings in Baghdad precipitate or slow the U.S. withdrawal from Baghdad in Iraq?”

Caller complained about the invasion of Iraq and Baghdad’s protective wall (green zone) for first half of his call and ended up bashing Israel: “All we are doing now is targeting Israel’ s biggest enemies in the Middle East. That’s what we have been doing from the beginning. The creation of Israel in 1948 was an invasion of Muslim territory and it was one of the biggest mistakes of the past 200 years. We need to cut our ties to Israel and Israel needs to take down that flag with the Star of David on it and put its name back to Palestine the way it was for the past 1300 years, cut our ties to Israel.”

NOTE: Host neither interrupted nor commented on the caller’s anti-Israel rant containing bogus historical claims. Is it possible Scanlan does not know that Israel was re-established on part of the Jewish people’s ancient homeland, or that there had been a continuous Jewish presence in the land even after the Roman expulsion? Is he unaware that, contrary to the caller, the only “Palestine” that existed in the past 1300 years was the League of Nations (later United Nations) British Mandate for Palestine (1920 – 1948), which incorporated the 1917 Balfour Declaration’s pledge to help reestablish the Jewish national home in Palestine? If Scanlan is not ignorant of these fundamental facts, contradicted by the caller’s falsifications, why does he fail to challenge them? He challenges callers on other subjects from time to time.

• October 18, 2009 – 8:34 AM


Caller: Larry from Manchester, England.

Caller: “Well, of course it’s changed and it’s been a positive change. But, I think, then we have to keep in context that anybody except George Bush would have been a huge positive difference. But if we were to study the facts – not the rhetoric – not the presentation – not the (indistinct) – but the actual facts. Has America abided by international law? What is Obama’s position toward resolving the (indistinct) conflict between Israel and Palestine? Can he get Israel to obey international law and freeze settlements? Can the U.N. Human rights commission report on the atrocities in Gaza? (indistinct) atrocities and indiscriminate rocket fire. Can that be implemented? These are the hard questions. I don’t think Obama deserved the Nobel Peace prize. Not for the same reason as the likes of Limbaugh and Beck – but because I actually believe it’s an improvement from Bush – can he actually get America to obey international law and get Israel to obey international law? Because I think that without international law (indistinct) – international law only applies to the third world countries, sometimes oil-rich countries with dictators that are not doing America’s bidding. Obama is an improvement, but there is still a very, very, very long way to go.”

NOTE: Host does not interrupt, rebut or simply comment on caller’s anti-U.S., anti-Israeli rant. Erroneous references to international law and Israeli West Bank settlements (they are both legal and encouraged), a reference to the discredited U.N. “Goldstone Report” and implication that America has not abided by international law – are all permitted to stand uncontested.

• October 12, 2009 – 7:24 AM


Caller: Deloris from Houston, Texas (frequent caller).

Caller: “Hello. I want to back up a caller up that you kind of cut off there. Her name was Linda. And she mentioned – what she was trying to say was that it was our support for Israel that got us into all these wars. AIPAC has such a big control over both bodies of Congress. We got attacked on 9/11 because of our support for Israel. You can look in the 9/11 commission report.”

Host: “This morning we are focusing on Afghanistan or Pakistan or both and how should the Obama administration make their next move? Atlanta, Georgia on the line.”

NOTE: Again, a C-SPAN host fails to challenge obviously false anti-Israel claims. As noted above, there is no substance to the charge that AIPAC controls Congress or that the September 11 attacks took place “because of our support for Israel.” This frequent caller continually violates C-SPAN’s 30-day rule, having called in on September 21 (as Sally from Recida, California), as well as October 12 (as Deloris from Houston).

• October 6, 2009 – 8:58 AM


Caller: Jamie from Nashville, Tennessee (frequent caller).
Caller: “Yeah, the bottom line is – we went into Afghanistan because of 9/11, and 9/11 happened because we support Israel’s brutal oppression of Palestinians. You can go and look at what motivated the 9/11 hijackers at neoconzionistthreat dot com. We’re in there because of Israel. I think it’s time to get out now.”

NOTE: Host allows the frequent caller an uninterrupted platform (including the promotion of a familiar anti-Semitic Web site). Host ignores preposterous allegation that the September 11 attacks and the U.S. involvement in Afghanistan are due to Israel. This is a familiar anti-Israel canard and September 11 conspiracy theory espoused by a number of C-SPAN callers. This caller is again allowed to violate C-SPAN’s self-imposed 30-day rule. Recent calls by the same speaker include: Sept. 8 (James from Mission Hills, California), Sept. 21 ( James from Lake Jackson, Texas), Sept. 23 (Danny from Plano, Texas), Sept. 26 (Timothy from Georgia) as well as Oct. 6 (Jamie from Nashville).

• September 30, 2009 – 7:43 AM


Guest: ALEX VATANKA, Senior Analyst, IHS Jane’s Middle East.

Caller: Christopher from Boca Raton, Florida.

Caller: “Hi. I have two questions. First, in 2007 We had a U.S. National Intelligence estimate that basically implied that Iran ceased its nuclear weapons program in 2003. What do you think about that? Second of, in terms of you guys position on negotiating, wouldn’t it be better (indistinct) considering that the United States has illegally gave nuclear weapons to the people of Israel? I do not believe Iran is as anti-Semitic as people make it out to be. They have a community of about 6,000 Jewish people already living there and in their parliament. And the Palestinian Christians do not look too kindly upon Israel either. Thank you.”

VATANKA: “Thank you. You are absolutely right on the later point. One of the things that is so interesting about Iran is its diversity. There are about 25,000 Jews, the second largest Jewish population in the Middle East outside of Israel. And there are Christians, there are other minorities and they do coexist. That’s one of the realities about Iran. There’s no one Iran; there are two or even more Irans. Going back to your point about the National Intelligence estimate, from December 2007, the consensus by the U.S. Intelligence committee was that Iran had halted its military dimension to its nuclear program in 2003. What happens at home doesn’t necessarily mean that the Iranians are continuing or restarting a military dimension to that program. What it tells us is that they are doing things that they are not disclosing.”

NOTE: Neither host nor guest challenges the caller’s baseless allegation that Israel received nuclear weapons from the U.S. (or any other country). The gratuitous reference to Palestinian Christian enmity toward Israel offers no hint that this community is under greatest threat from radical Palestinian Muslims who have seized their property and otherwise intimidated them to such an extent that thousands have fled.

• September 30, 2009 – 7:53 AM


Guest: ALEX VATANKA, Senior Analyst, IHS Jane’s Middle East.

Caller: Richard from Laurel, Maryland.

Caller: “It’s been my observation through the years that as Israel goes, so goes the whole Middle East. The reason I have come to that conclusion is because Israel appears to want one thing and that’s their original Biblical boundaries in place – and the removal of the Islamic mosques on the original Temple site. I do not think Israel is intent on overtaking the whole Middle East as such as in an invasion of Saudi Arabia, Iran, or Iraq, or any of those other Middle East countries nor do I think any of those Middle East countries are intent on taking Israel as additional land to their geographical set up.”

VATANKA: “The point of Israel is obviously crucial here. I was in Iran in 2005. When you asked people what Ahmadinejad stood for, no one had a good answer. Before he was elected for his first term, everything that he talked about was about moderation. As soon as he was elected, there he was, talking about Israel, denying the Holocaust and all of the rest of it. That is the dimension of this debate, complicating matters is significantly. What they have said in very clear terms, basically they told the question to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. How are you serving national security by questioning the existence of the Holocaust? How do you serve Iranian national security? I think that Ahmadinejad thinks that he has a clear answer, but I think that the vast majority of people in Iran are appalled. He does not serve their national interest. He does not improve their standing in the region or on the international stage.”

NOTE: Neither guest nor host disputes the caller’s baseless claim that “Israel appears to want one thing and that’s their original Biblical boundaries in place – and the removal of the Islamic mosques on the original Temple site.” Likewise they do not refute the caller’s claim that “…nor do I think any of those Middle East countries are intent on taking Israel as additional land to their geographical set up.” Calls for the elimination of Israel are uttered virtually daily by Arab and Muslim leaders and groups in the Middle East.

• September 30, 2009 – 8:04 AM


Guest: ALEX VATANKA, Senior Analyst, IHS Jane’s Middle East.

Caller: Mark from San Diego, California.

Caller: “Hello. Yes it seems to me that the nuclear threat in the Middle East really comes mainly from Israel because they’ve generated so many enemies in that region with the prime crimes they’ve committed dating back to 1948 when the country first began. They massacred people in towns like Yassin – (spelled) Y A S S I N – which can be googled -in 1948. That’s what the struggle is all about. And it seems to me that we constantly hear about the countries that Israel is threatening and whether or not they present a threat to Israel rather than the threat that Israel presents to the world and not just to the countries that are in that region. And I would be interested to know what in what this guest thinks about the IEAE’s monitoring and whether or not they are monitoring Israel’s nuclear weapons.”

VATANKA: “You know, actually what the caller is pointing out is very significant in the sense that I suspect one of the points the Iranian representative at Geneva will be mentioning tomorrow is the idea of a nuclear free Middle East. And by that they’re referring to Israel. And, I think, a lot of Arab states will probably support an Iranian move on that front. What I don’t think is going to happen is that that answer from Iran alone is going to make the results tomorrow a success. Because, I think, once you bring the Israeli nuclear arsenal into the picture, you complicate the matters. From a legal point of view, for the simple reason that Israel is not a member of the IEAE as far as I know. They have not signed the NPT so therefore they are not supervised the same way the Iranians are.”

NOTE: Neither guest nor host expresses objection to the vilifying of Israel, and thus gives unwarranted respectability to the caller’s unfounded accusation that Israel is a danger to the area and the entire world. This is a key feature of anti-Semitism – blaming Jews or the Jewish state for world problems. Guest and host also tacitly accept portrayal of Israel as guilty of massacres, though events at Deir Yassin (the event cited) have been marked by much exaggeration and distortion. Not only Jews, but Arabs have clarified what actually happened there. According to survivor Ayish Zeidan:
The Arab radio talked of women being killed and raped, but this is not true…I believe that most of those who were killed were among the fighters and the women and children who helped the fighters. The Arab leaders committed a big mistake. By exaggerating the atrocities they thought they would encourage people to fight back harder. Instead, they created panic and people ran away. (The Daily Telegraph, April 8, 1998)

Hazem Nusseibeh, an editor of the Palestine Broadcasting Service’s Arabic news in 1948, admits that he and Hussein Khalidi, the secretary of the Arab Higher Committee (the representative body of the Arabs of British Palestine), fabricated atrocities in reporting about the battle at Deir Yassin “so the Arab armies will come to liberate Palestine from the Jews.” Nusseibeh said in a BBC television series “Israel and the Arabs: the 50 Year’s War” that, “This was our biggest mistake. We did not realize how our people would react. As soon as they heard that women had been raped [a fabrication] at Deir Yassin, Palestinians fled in terror.”

C-SPAN abets gross misinformation about Israel also in failing to mention the incessant attacks by Arabs against Jews beginning in the early 20th century, including destruction of the Jewish community of Hebron in 1929, for example, and the repeated attempts by neighboring Arab countries to annihilate Israel. Israel’s nuclear capability is defensive, and serves as a deterrent against the oft-stated and frequently attempted aim to remove Israel from the region.

September 30, 2009 – 8:21 AM


Caller: Darrell from St. Louis, Missouri.

Caller: “Good morning. I was alive during that Cuban missile crisis. The policy against Iran has been a total failure. Also, the sanctions against Cuba has been a total failure. If we want to put sanctions on anybody, we should have sanctions against Israel. We should also take away their nuclear weapons if we are demanding Iran not have nuclear weapons. Why should Israel be allowed to have nuclear weapons. And why hasn’t anybody said anything about Israel’s nuclear arsenal. They are after all massacring Palestinians. Who are the Iranians killing right now? I don’t think they’re killing anybody. Have a good day.”

NOTE: Host is silent as caller accuses Israel of massacres and calls for sanctions.

September 29, 2009 – 8:20 AM


Guest: BANNING GARRETT, Director Atlantic Council of the U.S. Asia Program.

Caller: Doug from Boston, Massachusetts.

Caller: “Hi. Is it not true that under the Geneva conventions, if Israel strikes Iran without a United Nations Security Council resolution, then they are guilty of a war crime and that the people who ordered that strike are guilty of a war crime? Aren’t the people in Nuremberg guilty for doing exactly what Israel proposes to do? So how will Israel abide by these charges? Thank you.”

GARRETT: ” I am not an international law expert, so I cannot answer that question directly. I do think the Israelis would be very reluctant to find themselves in that position. On the other hand, their sense of what is required to maintain their existential security interests could lead them to defy international law as you might see it and take the risk. They went after the Syrian installation installed by the North Koreans. They did not suffer any international sanctions, at least no charges of war crimes. They took out the nuclear weapons facilities in Iraq. That would not be their problem. The bigger problem is what happens next.”

NOTE: Guest does reiterate that Israel has “existential security interests.” But here the Host has allowed another anti-Israel caller who is a violator of C-SPAN’s 30-day rule, having previously called on Sept. 20 at 7:18 AM.

• September 28, 2009 – 7:06 AM


Caller: Identified as from Baltimore, Maryland.

Caller: “Good morning. What I want to say is that Iran has the full right to test anything they want in their land. The only problem with Iran and the only reason that the media here puts a lot of attention on Iran is that they are anti-Zionist, which Zionism is a theology or methodology of ethnically cleansing the Christians and Muslim Palestinians from Palestine to make it a Jewish majority state called Israel. You call it “Israel,” I call it the “fourth reich” and the “fourth reich” controls the media here and so they set the agenda on what is important and they keep fear mongering people about Iran.”

Host: “Should Israel be concerned over its security with Iran apparently having the ability to strike it?”

Caller: “Well, if you notice how insecure Hitler was, the Third Reich was, because they had bad intentions – Hitler had bad intentions – for he was always insecure about Russia and everybody against him. Because he was out against everybody – Hitler was. The same thing with the Jews. They are against everybody.”

Host: “That’s the view from Baltimore, Maryland.”

NOTE: The host’s bland follow-up statement, after allowing the caller to rant uninterrupted, occurred coincidentally on the holiest day of the Jewish year, Yom Kippur. The minimal C-SPAN rejoinder conveys indifference to the bigotry of the statements.

September 27, 2009 – 8:47 AM


Guest: TRUDY RUBIN, Philadelphia Inquirer

Caller: Tim from Alexandria, Virginia (frequent caller).

Caller: “Thank you for taking my call. You can go to America-hijacked dot..”

(Cutoff by host).

NOTE: Neither Host nor guest provide comment. This was a case in which the network ended a call promoting an anti-Semitic Web site.

September 26, 2009 – 7:46 AM


Guest: BARBARA SLAVIN, Assistant Managing Editor Washington Times.

Caller: Timothy from Atlanta, Georgia (frequent caller).

Caller: “Hi. You can go to america-hijacked dot com and why aren’t we talking about the IAEA and how they just passed a resolution about asking Israel to open up their nuclear program for inspection. This is an AIPAC-driven war we are facing. Israel should be the focus,not Iran. If I had a country that was near me and close by like Israel is to Iran, I’d want to build a nuclear weapon as well and there’s no credible evidence that Iran even has a nuke but we know damn well that Israel has 2 to 400. Then we have AIPAC and American-Israel Public Affairs.”

Host: “Timothy, we are going to leave it there.”

SLAVIN: I catch your drift. But Israel is an ally of the United States and it has been for a long time. Iran is not. I remember a conversation I had with a former Iranian nuclear negotiator, a guy named (indistinct). He was complaining ‘double standard, double standard. Why does Israel get their way? Why does Pakistan? Why does India? W hy not Iran?’ I said, ‘Well, you know, if you’re an ally of the United States, you’re in a somewhat better position. Iran is not an ally of the United States.’ Iran and the United States have been fighting an undeclared war for the last thirty years since the revolution. You can read about it in my book … Until Iran either gets better relations with the United States or does something else to change the scene there (indistinct). The pressure is going to continue. You may think it’s unfair but that’s the way the world works.”

NOTE: Host yet again allows the same frequent caller an anti-Israel propaganda platform unchallenged by either guest or host both of whom fail to mention the Iranian leadership’s contention that Israel has no right to exist and will soon meet its demise. This caller is again allowed to violate C-SPAN’s own 30-day rule. The most recent calls: Sept. 1 (James from Los Angeles), Sept. 2 (Harold from Atlanta Georgia), Sept. 8 (James from Mission Hills, California), Sept. 21 (James from Lake Jackson, Texas), Sept. 23 (Danny from Plano, Texas), as well as Sept. 26 (Timothy from Georgia).

September 25, 2009 – 7:48 AM


Guest: HENRY D. SOKOLSKI, Executive Director Nonproliferation Policy Education Center

Caller: James from Georgia.

Caller: “What I would like to say is this. You know, you all talk about Iran and North Korea and these other countries. What I would like to know is this – and I would like to have a direct answer. Does Israel have nuclear weapons? Is the United States aware – have they notified the United States that they have nuclear weapons? How were these nuclear weapons developed? Where did this technology come from? Who provided the bombs and the materials for these weapons for Israel? Isn’t this the cause of every other country in that area wanting nuclear weapons. Aren’t they actually the reason for these arms races?”

NOTE: Both host and guest fail to respond to the charge that Israel’s possession of nuclear weapons is the cause of the nuclear arms race in the Middle East or to indicate that Western nations have recognized Israel’s possession of nuclear weapons is for defensive purposes.

September 25, 2009 – 8:16 AM


Caller: Joe from Hatfield, Pennsylvania.

Caller: “Good Morning. Just a comment on the woman who called before and said that we all know that Ahmadinejad is crazy. We don’ t know that he is crazy. I have seen his writing. He definitely is not crazy. He is intelligent. He is not suicidal. He has no desire to attack the United States or Israel because he knows it would be suicidal, for him to do that for one thing. The only country in that area of the world – the Middle East – that’s ever attacked America is Israel. They did so deliberately in 1967. They attacked the USS Liberty. For hours, they saw the American flag flying. The original plan was to blame Egypt and they denied this and tried to claim it was an accident. They have nuclear-weapons. They admitted they were ready to use them, not even in defense necessarily, even in a so-called pre-emptive strike. This propaganda that’s being spread for us to get into another no-win war with Iran is crazy. We have to learn the lesson of Iraq. It was a no-win war and it was a disaster for this country. The last eight years of our foreign policy has been a disaster and let us not continue it with Iran to kowtow to the AIPAC crowd.”

NOTE: While providing an anti-Israel propaganda platform, the host ignores the caller’s dubious praise of Ahmadinejad. The tragic USS Liberty event was an accident as has been acknowledged by the U.S. Israel had nothing possible to gain and everything to lose by attacking its closest ally. Host ignores fact that the worst attacks in history upon America, the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, were perpetrated by Al Queda which was in alliance with the Taliban government of Afghanistan.

September 25, 2009 – 8:52 AM


Caller: Jerry from Louisiana.

Caller: “Yeah, I’d like to. It is highly coincidental that every time one of these Middle Eastern countries decides to switch their petrodollars from American to Euro, suddenly WMDs pop up and secret facilities popup. I find it highly suspicious that this is going down. I would like to reference again that Israel did attack the U.S.S. Liberty. Nothing was done about that. That should be investigated. They are the ones causing a lot of the problems over there.”

NOTE: Host is unwilling to challenge the slanderous accusation concerning the USS Liberty. The event was thoroughly investigated by the U.S. government in six separate inquiries. All concluded the event was unintential, a mistake involving no malice.

September 24, 2009 – 7:50 AM

Guest: REP. PETE HOEKSTRA, R-Michigan.

Caller: Joseph from Marietta, Georgia.

Caller: “Yes, how you doin? Okay, yes, I’m just – my comment would be that, you know what I’m sayin, if we look at the Middle East, you know what I’m sayin, that part of the Earth, is like, you know, that seems like where our main focus is in the Middle East and if we understand geographical areas – the Middle East – whoever controls the Middle East controls the world, you know what I’m sayin. So if we understand what war (indistinct) – you know, war is just basically, you know, a front for control and for profit. And you understand that most of the wars that we’re fighting are the wars that basically are wars that’s for Israel, you know what I’m sayin. So if we lose our soldiers – and our soldiers lose (indistinct) – our military people, you know, for wars for Israel. So my question for you would be – and I would like just a clear answer, a (indistinct) clear answer: What do the Taliban or any other terrorists want from America to make them stop doin what we consider so-called attacking America, bombing America? What do the Taliban want to make them stop?”

NOTE: Both host and guest ignore unfounded, anti-Israel allegation that “most of the wars that we’re fighting are the wars that basically are wars that’s for Israel.”

September 23, 2009 – 9:07 AM


Guest: MATT LATIMER, author of the book: Speech-less: Tales of a White House Survivor.

Caller: Danny from Plano, Texas (frequent caller).

Caller: “Thank you. The best book is the Transparent Cabal about the neocons that took us to war for Israel in Iraq. You can go to neoconzionistthreat dot com and america-hijacked dot com. Mr. Latimer, are you familiar with this b ook? It’s titled the Transparent Cabal and it’s by Dr. Stephen Sagowski. It has a very favorable review in the latest publication of Middle East Policy.”

Host: “Why do you bring it up, caller?”

Caller: “Because it has the most detail about the neo-bolsheviks, neo-conservatives that pushed into the Iraq quagmire to secure the realm for Israel. Now they’re pushing for troops to increase in Afghanistan. The same author, Dr. Stephen Sagowsky, has an article out and he makes the argument that the neocons want to basically build up in Afghanistan for a coming war with Iran.”

NOTE: Neither host nor guest comment on the caller’s unfounded allegation that Israel was part of a conspiracy to push the U.S. into war with Iraq and also Iran. The host readily provides a propaganda platform allowing this caller to promote anti-Semitic, anti-Israel Web sites and publications. This frequent caller, using different names and places of origin for his calls, is allowed repeatedly to voice the very same unfounded allegations while violating C-SPAN’s self-imposed 30-day limit for repeat calls. The most recent calls: September 1 (James from Los Angeles), September 2 (Harold from Atlanta Georgia), September 8 (James from Mission Hills, California), September 21 (James from Lake Jackson, Texas) and September 23 (Danny from Plano, Texas).

September 21, 2009 – 7:23 AM


Caller: Sally from Recida, California.(frequent caller).

Caller: “Good morning, Steve. You know, we are in Afghanistan because of Israel – okay? They work through AIPAC, The American-Israeli Public Affairs Committee. They have such a stranglehold on our Congress and on our President and on our Administration.”

Host: “Sally, draw the connection between Terrorism, the Taliban, Afghanistan and the Middle East.”

Caller: “Well, there is no connection really. Let me just explain. You know, we have enemies but we are getting attacked – first of all – Let me talk but about AIPAC for a second.”

Host: “We really want to talk about Afghanistan.”

Caller: “Yes, this has to do with Afghanistan – okay? Look what motivated this – us going into Afghanistan. It was Israel – okay? Anything to do with their security. They have such a stranglehold on our Congress and on our President. Look what motivated the 9/11 attacks. You can look at the 9/11 Commission report. It is because of our support for Israel. You want to get on board.”

Host: “Let me stop you there. How do you go after terrorists like the Taliban and al queda?”

Caller: “If we quit policing the world, they are not a problem.”

Host: “Who is responsible for 9/11?”

Caller: “Who is responsible for 9/11? Well, it’s our support for Israel.”

Host: “I’m going to stop you at that point.”

NOTE: Host finally challenged this frequent propagandist caller who continually is allowed to flout C-SPAN’s 30-day rule (she called on August 30, September 8 as well as September 21). However, the challenge was weak and the caller – who is familiar to the network – was allowed to repeat anti-Israel verbiage with respect to AIPAC and Israel’s alleged responsibility for the Islamist attacks on Sept. 11, 2001.

September 21, 2009 – 7:49 AM


Guests: BETSY PISIK (Washington Times correspondent), LAURA TREVELYAN (BBC)

Caller: Lou from Colfax, California.

Caller: “The second thing is that – you cut off a lady who was talking about the connection between Afghanistan and Israel. Why did Osama bin Laden attack us? One of the main reasons was he said that we were supporting Israel against the Pakistanis, and that is one of his main reasons. You gotta bring that up. Of course the Israelis are connected to this. Well, Osama bin Laden is a rich Saudi Arabian. He is not an Afghanistani. He just landed there because it was a place he could be organized. I guess that’s all I have to say.”

NOTE: Neither host nor guests comment on caller’s claim that the U.S. was attacked because “we were supporting Israel against the Pakistanis.”

September 21, 2009 – 8:16 AM


Guests: Betsy PISIK (Washington Times correspondent), LAURA TREVELYAN (BBC)

Caller: James from Lake Jackson, Texas (frequent caller).

Caller: “Thank you for taking my call. While we are talking about the Israel factor, the two callers prior, you can go to what motivated the 9/11 hijackers at neoconzionistthreat dot com and also go to America-hijacked dot com. We are in Afghanistan because of 9/11 and 9/11 happened because of U.S. support for Israel’s brutal oppression of Palestinian people. I respect the BBC a great deal for their honesty and conveying that North American, Israel-first media does but why do the two reporters here skirt of the question not only by the prior caller in this segment but also by the young lady apparently in the prior segment?”

NOTE: Host neither interrupts nor challenges the frequent caller’s familiar anti-Israel propaganda rant. Guests fail to comment. The caller is a serial violator of C-SPAN’s 30-day call-in limitation rule: He called in most recently on August 23, September 1, September 2, and September 8 as well as September 21.

September 20, 2009 – 7:18 AM


Caller: Dougie from Boston.

Caller: “The measure of a great President is how prepared he is to stand up against the Israeli lobby. He is light years ahead of Bush and any other sycophants out there. My ideal would be someone like Jim Traficant. All you people in Ohio, I think you should vote for him wherever he’s from. Thanks.”

NOTE: Host neither interrupts nor challenges caller’s point that demands questioning since it asserts the highly dubious claim that the measure of a President is how “prepared he is to stand up against the Israeli lobby.” The host ignores the caller’s endorsement for public office, former Congressman James Traficant, fresh out of federal prison after serving a sentence for bribery and racketeering, and exercising his new-found freedom to pursue his “grudges,” with Israel topping the list.

• September 16, 2009 – 8:16 AM


Caller: Michael from Michigan.

Caller: “Yes. I believe that the Afghanistan/Iraq war is a trap because when Iran’s nuclear installations are attack ed, I do believe that Iran will attack our troops. And I do believe that Russia will also be involved with them because they are allied with Iran. And I think that this is all part of the plan to set up World War III. And I think that since both Bush and Obama have the worst interests of the United States at hand, not the best, that we’re gonna facilitate this trap. And I think the main reason is because we are the 50 colonies of the state of Israel. And Israel controls this country and we do the bidding of Israel. That’s why we’re over there in the Middle East.”

NOTE: The host neither interrupts nor challenges the anti-Israel caller’s nonsensical charge that the United States “are the 50 colonies of the state of Israel,” and has no legitimate interests of its own in the Middle East.

September 16, 2009 – 8:23 AM


Caller: Abraham from Tampa, Florida.

Caller: “Good Morning. My name is Abraham and I’m watching the C-SPAN show, which I am a fanatic of it and I’m speaking about the whole (indistinct) situation about economics. Economics has been destroyed when people start stepping on our constitutional rights. As for 9/11 is concerned, it was all nothing but a smokescreen. And as for George Bush and his cronies, who have infiltrated our government on the secret agendas, and from this standpoint, I can see that we stand for hidden government agendas that we don’t have no knowledge of and we pay the highest price for the Bush family, Haliburton, and all of these hidden government officials going to the point that we need a smokescreen and the smokescreen is the Twin Towers. And we are the slaves of the Jews, you see, because we are not being informed by our government by the hidden agendas, so we are paying for it.”

NOTE: The host neither interrupts nor challenges the caller whose tirade draws upon the familiar conspiracy theory canard that blames Jews for the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks. The host ignores the bizarre allegation that, “[W]e are the slaves of the Jews.”

September 8, 2009 – 9:12 AM


Caller: Rachel from California (frequent female caller).

Caller: “Hi there. Thanks for taking my call. First, I’d like to say that I think Obama has to get firm with Israel and stand up to AIPAC, who bought off Congress and paid for Congress, in stopping Israel from building the settlements and pushing for the war with Iran as well. And just go to america-hijacked dot com and you will see what even motivated the 9/11 attacks. Go to neoconzionistthreat dot com. Thank you.”

NOTE: Host allows, without interruption, the familiar C-SPAN caller an anti-Israel propagandist to use the show as her soapbox. Repeatedly violating C-SPAN’s 30-day rule, this caller was aired on August 10, August 16 and August 30 as well as September 8.

September 8, 2009 – 9:19 AM


Caller: James from Mission Hills, California (frequent male caller).

Caller: “Yeah, I’d just like to back up that earlier caller, Rachel, who talked about the Israel agenda and how we’ve gone to war for Israel for AIPAC. It’s outrageous. You can look up Philip Geraldi, the former CIA officer, antiwar dot com/geraldi. He talked about how these Congressional Reps were all in Israel last month and have come back here to push the war with Iran for Israel and to give Obama grief when he tries to stand up against Israel with the settlements. Netanyahu has said he will build now 400 settlements. So, the Israel firsters were using AIPAC money, which is basically using our money, as a front, to send to Israel. And why aren’t we talking about this? Again it’s Philip Geraldi’s article, The Best Congress Money Can Buy.”

NOTE: Host fails to challenge or interrupt the familiar anti-Israel, propagandist caller. Repeatedly violating C-SPAN’s 30-day rule, this caller was aired on August 8, August 23, September 1 and September 2 as well as September 8. The caller is allowed to use C-SPAN as a platform for conspiracy theory screed against Israel and its supporters.

September 2, 2009 – 7:58 AM

Host: SUSAN DAVIS, Wall Street Journal correspondent.

Guest: JEREMY SHAPIRO, Research Director for Brookings Institution Center on the United States and Europe.

Caller: Harold from Atlanta, Georgia (frequent male caller).

Caller: “Yeah. you can go to neoconzionistthreat dot com and look up what motivated the 9/11 hijackers at the Youtube there. And the bottom line is we’re in Afghanistan because of 9/11 and 9/11 happened because of U.S. support for Israel’ s brutal oppression of the Palestinian people. So, there’s another war, like Iraq, that was because of Israel. Are we going to address that? And also go to america-hijacked dot com and that Web site I mentioned first, neoconzionistthreat dot com. Look it up.”

NOTE: Host neither interrupted the repeat 30-day limit violator nor commented on the caller’s false accusations against Israel and his promotion of anti-Israel, anti-Jewish propaganda Web sites. Appropriate reply was made by guest: “When you look at the motivations for 9/11, it is complex. If you go back to read the al Qaeda statements, you see very little attention to Israel … The only way that we (America) would satisfy them (al qaeda) is to cease to exist.” This caller was aired on August 8, August 23 and September 1 as well as September 2.

September 1, 2009 – 7:23 AM


Caller: James from Los Angeles, California (frequent male caller).

Caller: “Hi. You can go to America-hijacked dot com and find out that we’ re in Afghanistan because of Israel. We were attacked on 9/11 because of our support for Israel’ s brutal oppression of the Palestinians. That was the pretext used to go into Afghanistan. So, it’s another war either like what we’re fighting in Iraq for Israel or because of Israel. How many more Americans have to die for that? I say we get out now. I’m in California. The fires are burning here like crazy. We don’t have the money to fight them to the extent that we have to and here we are as Rome burns with legions overseas in Iraq and Afghanistan. Get out now.”

NOTE: Host allows, without interruption or challenge, the familiar propagandistic, anti-Israel rant from the same caller who is yet again allowed to violate C-SPAN’s proclaimed 30-day rule, having been aired on August 8 and August 23 as well as September 1.

Comments are closed.