return to table of content

Israel reportedly used fake social accounts to garner support from US lawmakers

nerdjon
42 replies
1h9m

I find it quite concerning just how much propaganda the US seems to get from Israel. Where I live there are big billboards around, I regularly see ads on YouTube.

I know propaganda is a thing, but it feels like we are getting more about a foreign government than our own.

I feel like before what is going on now I was aware of some of the groups responsible for this being a thing, but was not fully aware just how much money there was in it those organizations until recently.

Some of the practices are concerning, like I found out recently apparently the Boston police regularly go over to Israel for training?

Regardless of what is going on right now, I don't understand how this much power over the US was ever deemed acceptable?

cempaka
10 replies
1h3m

The best part is when it comes from our own "newspaper of record" i.e. with the extraordinarily dubious "mass rape" article the NYT published. They finally dismissed the one Israel-connected reporter who had liked tweets calling for a brutal response against Gaza, but that of course has seen about one billionth the attention that her original claims continue to receive.

You also get stuff like the POTUS repeating lies like "40 beheaded babies" and "a mother and child had kerosene poured on them" with none of the usual media freakout you usually see over "misinformation."

mupuff1234
8 replies
53m

The NYTimes also reported about an alleged Israeli strike on a hospital killing hundreds despite it ended up being a Hamas failed rocket.

It seems to me the the NYTimes is trying to be somewhat objective but just gets stuff wrong occasionally.

drpossum
3 replies
45m

"Getting stuff wrong" by not corroborating facts using reliable sources is not acceptable for a news organization.

mupuff1234
2 replies
42m

You're right, but just want to dispute the claim that NYTimes is somehow Israeli propaganda - I think it's clearly not.

mupuff1234
0 replies
24m

They were told to not used those words because they are disputed and not consider facts, pretty sure they can and still use those words in opinion pieces.

asveikau
2 replies
39m

This line of propaganda is kind of infuriating. Separate from this incident, Israel bombed afaik every hospital in Gaza. They claimed Hamas was operating inside them or under them and produced absolutely zero credible evidence of it. They killed a lot of doctors and patients. But if they start out polluting minds with the claim that one time at the Al Ahli parking lot, there was an Islamic Jihad rocket once, they then by extension use that to imply that Hamas is somehow responsible for all the deaths in hospitals that happen by Israeli hands on every other day.

mupuff1234
1 replies
21m

You are changing the subject, I'm just disputing that NYtimes is Israel propaganda, I'm not claiming anything about the righteousness of Israeli actions.

asveikau
0 replies
15m

My personal opinion of NYT is that their record is mixed on the subject.

If you'll allow me to change the subject to one that is less presently divisive to provide an instructive example, NYT's conduct in the lead-up to the Iraq war is a great example of where they acted as a pro-war propaganda mouth piece, and maybe the institution doesn't deserve our total trust.

sillystuff
0 replies
21m

It seems to me the the NYTimes is trying to be somewhat objective

"Somewhat" is doing some heavy lifting here. The NY Times internal pro-Israeli editorial guidelines were leaked. NY Times is a pro-Israel biased source:

https://theintercept.com/2024/04/15/nyt-israel-gaza-genocide...

CNN even sends all stories to Israel to be approved/disapproved and/or edited to ensure pro-Israel bias, so I guess NY Times is at least better than CNN:

https://theintercept.com/2024/01/04/cnn-israel-gaza-idf-repo...

It is pretty disgusting. All major US corporate media is biased in favor of Israel:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_coverage_of_the_Arab%E2%...

Israel also has put fear of god into US government officials through their lobby group, AIPAC (the only foreign lobby group of its kind that is not required by the U.S. to register as a foreign agent). While no fan of former president Reagan, he called the Israeli attacks on Lebanon a "holocaust" and stopped Israeli atrocities against Lebanon by threatening cutting off US aide. Now all our representatives line up behind Israel in their perpetration of genocide-- especial Biden.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIPAC

https://www.amazon.com/Foreign-Agents-Committee-Fulbright-Es...

https://www.wrmea.org/north-america/aipac-election-role-rais...

nerdjon
0 replies
59m

I have struggled to even look at my News app anymore.

Next to articles about the protests or other things, there are the articles about the hostages or something else that just feels like a propaganda piece aimed at one thing.

And that is just the headlines.

ein0p
9 replies
34m

Do you find it concerning that no presidential candidate can even pass the primary without first kissing the ring of AIPAC? That Zionist lobby openly attacks insufficiently pro-Zionist candidates and then openly brags when they lose elections? With Zionist lobby trying to outlaw any criticism of Israel in direct violation of 1st amendment? Etc, etc. IDK about others, but I think this is insane.

leoh
5 replies
26m

I hope you two realize that it’s exactly this kind of rhetoric that has led to Israel putting so much money, time, and effort into defending their reputation

Antisemitism is a very very old problem

nerdjon
4 replies
24m

Trying to shut down a conversation with "Antisemitism" does not help your case.

Being critical of their actions does not equal antisemitism.

I fully understand why they are doing what they are doing, they would be stupid not too. That doesn't mean its ok and we should accept it.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/apr/17/pro-israel-m...

nsguy
2 replies
15m

How do you propose we determine the fine line between the antisemitic "The Jews run the World" and "being critical of their actions"? What would e.g. be the piece of evidence that convinces you that we're dealing with antisemitism and not legitimate criticism?

We shouldn't shut down conversations about Israel with antisemitism but we also shouldn't shut down conversations about antisemitism with "being critical of their actions".

There are many other groups lobbying for various causes in the US, e.g.: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_lobby_in_the_United_State...

"According to ProPublica, 4 of the top 10 governments lobbying in Washington are Arab, in terms of spending. The United Arab Emirates places first, having spent $10,914,002 in 2007 and 2008. Iraq, Morocco and Saudi Arabia also each spent over $3 million, and the non-Arab, Middle Eastern nation of Turkey also spent over $3 million."

Why the focus on Israel here?

nerdjon
0 replies
2m

Why the focus on Israel here?

That is the what the article is about and there is something going in involving Israel.

I can't find the article I read a while ago with a graph showing their massive increase in spending, but according to a few articles AIPAC plans to spend $100Million this year.

As far as how to distinguish between them. I really don't think this should be complicated.

Criticizing a government is not criticizing a religion or people.

If I start to attack a religion or to attack a group of people based on those beliefs, then yeah that is antisemitism. Actually having and voicing a problem with jewish people.

A government is not that. We criticize our own government all the time and we are not anti-American (ok, admittedly some do try to make those claims but that's a different story).

yes I will also admit that this got complicated with the protests.

ein0p
0 replies
8m

Because the original post is about Israel using fake social media accounts to get US representatives to support genocide in Gaza. We’ve literally just passed some laws to _sanction the ICC_ for their daring to say anything negative about Bibi Netanyahu. Does the Arab lobby also have this kind of power? I mean, are you going to seriously argue that this is normal: https://www.politico.com/news/2024/03/03/aipac-israel-spendi... ?

leoh
0 replies
2m

You are shutting down the conversation by doing the thing you are accusing me of.

Defending your position with false arguments that have been disproven repeatedly is unquestionably antisemtic.

Please wake up.

nerdjon
2 replies
30m

100% yes.

TBH when I said "propaganda" I was grouping a lot of that under that when I should have been more specific.

But that and similar things is what I was referring to with "I don't understand how this much power over the US was ever deemed acceptable".

I remember seeing the articles about them funding the campaign of someone opposing someone else who had been critical if Israel. I don't remember which state or what position, but it wasn't just a one off either.

leoh
0 replies
29m

What the actual fuck

dfxm12
0 replies
17m

AIPAC is one such group. Here's an article about their spending in 2022: https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2022/11/american-israel-pub...

and also a story from earlier this year: https://www.politico.com/news/2024/03/03/aipac-israel-spendi...

The MO is basically to try and defeat democrats in primaries who aren't giving carte blanche in terms of spending or support. If their candidate wins the primary, it doesn't matter much who wins the general election, since they have support of R's.

Retric
7 replies
57m

I don't understand how this much power over the US was ever deemed acceptable?

Free speech sometimes applies to things you don’t like. There’s pro and anti propaganda for just about any foreign interest. Some of it’s just more subtle such as recommendations on TikTok.

Ukraine had really obvious pro Ukraine requests for military aid and images of destruction, but quite a bit of pro Russia propaganda was more subtle aiming for people to stay out of it.

With Israel you see some really blatant pro Israel propaganda, but both sides also have a lot of more subtle stuff.

justin66
3 replies
51m

Free speech sometimes applies to things you don’t like.

...and in the United States we've defined down "free speech" to include "monetary donations."

fsckboy
2 replies
29m

somebody needs to pay for the billboard, or rent a hall to give a speech, or printing the flyers for your lost cat. How is money not essential to speech? Your proposal is that to support a cause, one should only be allowed to go outside and yell, because that's purer than the corrupting influence of money?

pnut
0 replies
13m

Once money gets involved, you inherently have a commercial interest. What's the ROI?

I personally think people misunderstand to whom "freedom" is granted and defended in the US, it is demonstrably not freedom of the individual, but of the powerful.

Retric
0 replies
10m

One person, one vote.

You yourself saying something even on a billboard or convincing other people to say something is different from paying someone to troll forums to spread a message. At that point it’s no longer your message being sent but rather how the person writing the post on your behalf interpreted your message.

It might seem silly to separate a billionaire sitting down and writing a TV commercial from one paying a firm to come up with a bunch of slogans, but the second is inherently inauthentic. Which causes knock on effects.

1shooner
1 replies
42m

Speaking of free speech, can you name another foreign interest that has managed to make it illegal in the US to boycott it's companies?

ESTheComposer
0 replies
51m

I believe the issue here is how much sway Israel has on the US and how rabid many US politicians are about Israel (to the point where many straight up accuse you of anti semitism if you just criticize the country or their policies)

Also issues like where you are not allowed to refuse to work with Israel if you are an arms manufacturer in the US (but you can refuse to work with the US military). I know that part of that is due to Israel being part of the FMS list but they are also the largest recipient on it...

ravenstine
2 replies
41m

On the other side of town where I live, billboards appeared with slogans like "Be pro-Semitic." This happened almost immediately after the latest conflict involving Israel began. So I can't just be against anti-Semites, but I have to be pro Jewish ethnicity? Interesting. There was also one stating that anti-zionism is anti-Semitic; I guess my Jewish friends and family who are not Zionists didn't get the memo.

I can't prove that these are somehow connected to funding from Israel, but it seemed like these billboards were ready to go at a moment's notice.

As far as why we deem foreign propaganda as acceptable, I like to think that we play dumb about it in part so we can strategically point it out when it is in the favor of politicians and/or elites. Remember how Russian propaganda supposedly got Trump elected even though it was going on during prior years when the establishment insisted on the integrity of the elections? On the other hand, maybe we are just dumb.

nerdjon
1 replies
35m

I can't prove that these are somehow connected to funding from Israel, but it seemed like these billboards were ready to go at a moment's notice.

Right, that is what we got in Boston. The timing is just too convenient.

Whether or not it is from Israel themselves or funding here for Israel is kinda a moot point when both have the same purpose: Propaganda for a foreign government.

pvg
0 replies
16m

Whether or not it is from Israel themselves or funding here for Israel is kinda a moot point

It's not at all a moot point and you're coming pretty close to a generic 'dual loyalties' trope.

neves
1 replies
59m

Imagine if it were Russia or China

croisillon
0 replies
2m

Well it can’t be China because China don’t kill their muslim popula… oooh…

ajross
1 replies
56m

A message being on a billboard or in an advertisement on YouTube doesn't make it "propaganda", though. In fact there a very large constituency[1] for pro-Israel policymaking right here in the United States, and they want you to know what they think and why, and are willing to spend money to do it.

Now, you clearly don't agree with them. I don't either, in at least some aspects[2]. But our beef with the AIPAC and the Israel lobby isn't with a "propaganda" organization run by the Israeli government. It's a POLITICAL fight with our fellow americans, and we shouldn't conflate the two.

[1] Likely larger than in Israel proper, in fact, both in headcount and budget.

[2] Though I stop way, way short of the eliminationist sloganeering that has taken over a lot of the left. Handing the region From the River to the Sea over to a Palestinian-controlled army would be far more horrifying than anything happening in Gaza today, and I really don't think that people understand how intractably violent the situation in the Levand really is.

zardo
0 replies
50m

Regardless of what is going on right now, I don't understand how this much power over the US was ever deemed acceptable?

US politicians can direct funds to Israel and Israel can support them or attack their rivals.

spamizbad
0 replies
18m

Weirdest thing about their propaganda is that it seems squarely aimed at older wealthier Americans and politicians. The amount of content produced targeted at anyone under the age of 40 is much smaller and less sophisticated. There's this narrative that Israel is "losing the propaganda war" but I think they're just targeting it towards major stakeholders. We're not the intended audience of the billboard - it's the editorial writer, the business leader, the member of congress (and their staff).

The Israel / Palestine conflict is one of those low-valence issues with the general public where a politician rarely gets punished for voting one way or another with the notable exception of cash lobbying and super PACs for/against a given candidate.

shrubble
0 replies
40m

Wait until you read up on NUMEC and Rafael Eitan.

jimbob45
0 replies
31m

like I found out recently apparently the Boston police regularly go over to Israel for training?

That's really common for most countries on earth though[0]. Gaining exposure and experience from other countries is very valuable for police forces.

[0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_Enforcement_...

downWidOutaFite
0 replies
16m

It's crazy that AIPAC is not registered as a foreign agent. They funnel orders directly from Netanyahu to our politicians.

2OEH8eoCRo0
0 replies
50m

I find it quite concerning just how much propaganda the US seems to get from Israel.

How do you know how much we get from Israel relative to others?

SkipperCat
28 replies
5h37m

Not a comment about who's right or wrong in this war, but it is fascinating that we have entered the age of the Internet being a place where warfare is fought. There have always been people posting web content about conflicts but now with Gaza and Ukraine, it seems that the nations fighting are actively looking at the internet as the fourth field of battle.

Just waiting for a random US future president to create an "Internet" branch of the military. Maybe that's already happened.

runarberg
9 replies
3h6m

I’m of the opinion that what we are witnessing is the first information age genocide. Just like how the holocaust was the first genocide to use industrial technology and processes to conduct the horrors, today, Israel is using information age technology to commit and propagandize their genocide.

jamal-kumar
1 replies
1h41m

The holocaust came of age in the dawn of the information age if you count the radio as information technology, albeit a very one-sided information technology where you had the government giving everyone cheap radios that were only marked to tune to German and Austrian radio stations, unless you dared to go out at night to get an antenna up to receive others. [1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volksempf%C3%A4nger

runarberg
0 replies
1h28m

This also applies to the Rwandan genocide. A lot of it was perpetrated via mass media, especially radio. But you can also claim that there were Industrialized genocides before the Holocaust, but what sets it apart is just how much it was defined by industrialized processes.

The Gaza Genocide is similar, the use of AI for target selection (or rather generation), the social media campaigns, using drones for killings, etc. We haven’t seen a genocide before which uses information technology to the extent it really defines whole processes of the genocide.

dragonwriter
1 replies
23m

Its not at all, even if you mean “social media age”, and not “information age”, it's just one of the first (there are other disputed candidates, e.g., in Ukraine) that are getting first world attention other than after-the-fact.

The Rohingya genocide in Myanmar in which Facebook’s role was widely discussed (largely, in the first world, after the fact) was probably the first social media age genocide, if you don't restrict it to ones with immediate first-world attention at a significant level.

runarberg
0 replies
5m

I’m thinking in terms of processes and propaganda. While other genocides use information technology for communication and propaganda, this one is unique in that information technology is used throughout, including in target selection and killings. The Rohingya Genocide does not e.g. use drones to carry out killings with targets selected by AI.

dang
1 replies
34m

Your account has continued to use HN primarily for political battle after we asked you recently to stop:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40519369 (May 2024)

If you keep this up we're going to have to ban you, for reasons explained on many past occasions: https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme....

Edit for anyone concerned: yes, this principle applies regardless of which side of any political conflict an account is identified with.

oddtuple
0 replies
13m

Dang, We get you’re frustrated but he’s just stating his opinion. It’s not out of line relative to the other discourse in this thread.

nsguy
0 replies
1h9m

I think you got this the wrong way around. It's the first time in the information age that a country [is] forced to yield a war via false claims propagated through social media.

megous
0 replies
1h26m

A lot of people have both mechanisms to record what's happening, and share it.

It's been that way with Syria conflict, too, though. A lot was shared in twitter/youtube during that one.

One thing that's seemingly a bit new is how much ordinary Israeli soldiers are sharing their behavior, empowered by their self-righteousness, I guess. Videos from shooting unarmed deaf people up close in their homes, to all kinds of calls for atrocities, actual assaults on international humanitarian aid trucks and violence against the drivers, cheerful mocking of starving people, dedicating videos of them blowing up peoples homes as gifts to their spouses back home in Israel, looting and stealing, wanton destruction of property (like going around and breaking things in someone's gift shop), burning people's houses down, etc. There's so much of this.

Entire 130k strong Israeli telegram channels are dedicated to collective cheering on and mocking of dead and suffering people: https://t.me/s/dead_terrorists Total dehumanization.

hedgehog
0 replies
1h27m

Tigray region and Mynamar are two earlier candidates.

germinalphrase
4 replies
4h54m

Espionage/propaganda/public relations/influence campaigns are hardly new. Social media is just a new flavor to go along with the others.

marginalia_nu
2 replies
4h12m

I do think the economy is different. You've always been able to just hire a bunch of thugs to stage an event to shape the narrative, like old-school cold war style. That takes money and effort and a modicum of skill and the risk of being caught with your pants down is not negligible.

Difference today is you can stoke the flames of public outrage with just a few people, without even setting foot in the country, while maintaining a lot of plausible deniability, since the modern playbook relies heavily on uncertainty and confusion, meaning you can safely target allies without significant risk of being caught (even if you're caught, you can deny it and say it's hostile propaganda).

somenameforme
0 replies
1h9m

This seems reasonable, but it runs into a little problem. If you engage in political discussion anywhere on the internet, the first thing you'll find is that people, if they have formed an opinion, have exactly 0 interest in changing their mind. If you already hold a genuine and internally formed view on e.g. the Israel - Palestine conflict, then even if somebody sat you (or me) in front of 24/7 propaganda for the other side, they'd be unlikely to ever change either of our minds.

Propaganda only seems to work in two situations. The first is on topics people know nothing about. Each time the US invades some places most people couldn't even find on a map, support for it rises in accordance with the propaganda. But as people learn more, and gradually form their own values, that support tends to rapidly decline. And there are also long-term consequences, because people will remember being lied to. My views on the US war machine and geopolitics in general seem unlikely, at this point, to ever change. And they were largely formed due to the Iraq War. Irrefutable [1] and Undeniable [2] are two 21 year old articles I still go back to on occasion.

The other situation is when it's true. During the Cold War we spread endless propaganda about things like having stocked store shelves. This is doubly effective in the same way that lying propaganda is doubly ineffective. Because not only does it create a desired perception, but once people gradually find out it's really true, it also tends to turn them against their own government who invariably misrepresents such situations. Again, people don't like being lied to.

[1] - https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/opinions/2003/02/06/i...

[2] - https://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/06/opinion/irrefutable-and-u...

AnimalMuppet
0 replies
1h11m

Even in the old days, if your operation was caught, you could always claim that it was an enemy false flag. (And if it was your false flag and you were caught, you could always claim that it was an enemy provocation.)

paul7986
0 replies
1h36m

Indeed and one reason i don't watch or pay attention to news media(TV, online, etc) especially political news. What to believe is real / the truth and with the advent of AI, Deep fake voices and deep fake videos the Internet becomes an even worse place for deciphering truth.

Here's AI Trump and AI Biden debating live now on Twitch (video isnt great as of today but the voices are) https://m.twitch.tv/videos/2157689323

vitus
2 replies
1h53m

Just waiting for a random US future president to create an "Internet" branch of the military. Maybe that's already happened.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Cyber_Command is the closest thing that we have today. It's not a formal branch, though, but rather a joint effort across the existing branches.

lucubratory
0 replies
58m

That's much more oriented to network security, spectrum and hardware, stuff like that. For an American military organisation engaged in internet influence operations you'd want to look at the signature reduction program. Something like 50,000 people strong at this point, insane amounts of resources going into that.

sva_
1 replies
17m

Wasn't there something with the Canadian military fighting (what they called) misinformation on social media during the pandemic? Seems like it's already ongoing.

betaby
0 replies
1m

Canadian government was the source of misinformation on social media during the pandemic! Literal curfews were in place with propaganda machine saying how good idea it was.

xanthor
0 replies
50m

The Internet as we think of it is already a military project. Why do you think so much emphasis is put on countries that assert sovereignty over their own information space?

wruza
0 replies
1h1m

The internet created a whole stratum of people who don’t use tv, radio and newspaper anymore. It’s not that we entered internet warfare, we just exited absolute control of large mass media. Now every TLA has to deal with it somehow.

Why internet is the battlefield? Because everything in our world is based on an opinion. You can sell a lot of bs to your “client” if he has “correct” opinion.

Bad news, our opinion system was designed for groups and villages, not for the internet.

shrubble
0 replies
38m

Eglin Air Force Base and their involvement with Reddit...

gdsdfe
0 replies
4h36m

we entered the age ?! we've been here for at least a decade

dfxm12
0 replies
47m

"Manufacturing Consent" was written in the 80s mostly in response to newspapers, but the ideas have been adapted to the Internet for some time (and talk radio, and cable news, etc.). I'm old enough to remember this from the Iraq war. Yeah, we didn't have microblogging back then, but there were Email campaigns, blogs, message boards, chat rooms, etc.

axus
0 replies
1h50m

I've always been a keyboard warrior, volunteering to defend my country on message boards.

anigbrowl
0 replies
1h26m

We entered that some time ago; or rather, the Internet accelerates the use of such information operations. This is (imho) why Musk bought Twitter.

pokepim
13 replies
5h41m

Just as russian bots, israeli bots spreading fake news are worst thing that happened to our society. Crazy that people are falling for this but here we are

greenavocado
12 replies
2h2m

How many congressmen are dual citizens with Israeli citizenship? This is even worse. Also, AIPAC is allowed to exist. As a thought experiment replace Israeli with Russian citizenship for the Israeli dual citizens in Congress and replace AIPAC with a hypothetical Russian ARPAC. Imagine how crazy this would be. Yet the current situation is somehow completely acceptable.

jhp123
3 replies
1h48m

How many congressmen are dual citizens with Israeli citizenship?

Zero? I can't find a reliable source for any congress member being an Israeli citizen

tumsfestival
1 replies
14m

This post was brought to you by the IDF, remember if you don't agree with us you're as bad as Nazis.

wonderwonder
0 replies
2m

so did OP not mean Jews or are we saying that anyone inferring that someone is anti semitic is working for the IDF?

wonderwonder
2 replies
1h47m

"How many congressmen are dual citizens with Israeli citizenship"

By this do you mean Jews? Should be prevent Jewish people from being allowed in congress?

"AIPAC is allowed to exist" Should we prevent it from existing becuase it supports a Jewish state? You have no issue with the hundreds of other lobbying groups, just the jewish one.

throw310822
1 replies
1h3m

It's not Jewish, it's pro-Israel (American Israel Public Affair Committee). Israel is a foreign country whose interests might be conflicting with those of the US. That's different, don't you think?

golergka
2 replies
1h56m

As a thought experiment replace Israeli with Russian citizenship for the Israeli dual citizens in Congress and replace AIPAC with a hypothetical Russian ARPAC

Is Russia the main American ally in the region that contributes enormously to American intelligence and R&D, while also supporting American military operations?

throw310822
0 replies
58m

Have you considered that things might go the other way around: if Russia had such a strong influence on the US through its political action lobby as Israel does, Russia would be considered by politicians the main ally of the US, and the economic and military ties between the two countries would be unbreakable. Because the purpose of these lobbies is exactly to influence how a certain country feels and acts about another.

Hikikomori
0 replies
1h44m

South Africa was also their ally in that region.

wk_end
0 replies
1h39m

How many congressmen are dual citizens with Israeli citizenship?

I don't know. How many? I was curious and Googled, and couldn't find any good authoritative lists. This Quora answer [0] implies that the answer is zero, as does this Snopes article [1]. Both answers mention that there's various incorrect lists going around that are white supremacist propaganda.

[0] https://www.quora.com/Which-current-members-of-Congress-have...

[1] https://www.snopes.com/news/2024/02/05/dual-citizenship-elec...

mountainofdeath
0 replies
1h44m

To my knowledge, zero. If you really mean Jews, I think there are roughly 40 between both houses of Congress. None of them are Israeli citizens. Jews are not automatically citizens of Israel though they do have dedicated pathway to obtaining it, but it's not as simple as merely showing up and claim you are Jewish.

erellsworth
11 replies
4h11m

Why is this flagged? What rule does it violate?

dang
9 replies
1h59m

Posts on all sides of this topic get flagged quickly (by users), and mods turn off the flags on limited occasions—mostly when some significant new information arises and there's at least some chance of a substantive discussion about it.

It's pretty important that most stories about this conflict and similar current affairs get flagged, because otherwise HN's front page would consist of little else, and that's not the purpose of the site. But it's also important that the topics not be ignored completely, even though they're painful. There's no happy medium here, unfortunately.

Here are some links to previous explanations. If you (or anyone, of course) have a look at these and still have a question that isn't answered there, I'd be happy to take a crack at it.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40418881 (May 2024)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39920732 (April 2024)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39618973 (March 2024)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39435324 (Feb 2024)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39435024 (Feb 2024)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39237176 (Feb 2024)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39161344 (Jan 2024)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38947003 (Jan 2024)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38749162 (Dec 2023)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38657527 (Dec 2023)

jimbob45
3 replies
1h23m

The problem is that we've already solved these issues many times over on other sites that are decades old. HN simply refuses to implement 21st-century forum enhancements.

Brigaded reports? 4chan solved it by adding a mandatory enum to reports to specify what the report is reporting for. Identifying bad reports and banning users as a result becomes trivial.

Flooding with stories about a particular topic? That's what stickies are for and they work particularly well so that mods can auto-delete any non-sticky stories pertaining to the MOT.

Flamewar on a MOT? Add a sticky to the top of the thread like reddit does saying moderation will be minimal and to enter the thread at your own risk.

zen928
1 replies
17m

Use the appropriate forum to debate topics in the manner you prefer instead of trying to force others to conform to your standards.

pessimizer
0 replies
11m

There is no planet where the opinion above represents "force." Stop telling people who disagree with you to shut up.

dannyobrien
0 replies
51m

I think I prefer dang's approach, at least at the scale that HN operates.

pandeiro
0 replies
57m

Reasonable approach and I applaud your effort to maintain the site's purpose while also not ignoring these issues (that do have some relation to the tech industry, as we've seen). Thank you.

jules-jules
0 replies
1h12m

Thank you dang. Doing the lords work.

jakupovic
0 replies
1h30m

Thanks Dang this is much better than previously.

erellsworth
0 replies
1h43m

Thank you for the explanation.

DevX101
0 replies
1h25m

Appreciate the case by case basis approach to moderation here. There are quite a few topics where discussion becomes suppressed when blanket bans are enforced.

raxxorraxor
0 replies
3h53m

Articles get flagged if users perceive it to not be desired content and not necessarily because it violates a specific rule.

WhackyIdeas
11 replies
1h34m

Israel never got the memo about calming their propaganda campaigns down - now even the most average Joe (at least in the UK) can spot them a mile off. They aren’t subtle about it.

For a country which is meant to be one of the smartest out there, their propaganda campaigns are an utter disaster giveaway to anyone with a pulse and a few dozen brain cells.

diggan
5 replies
1h28m

For a country which is meant to be one of the smartest out there

Seems their propaganda works just fine if that's a commonly held belief :)

WhackyIdeas
1 replies
1h23m

Maybe that is just the dregs of a time when they used to be half decent at propaganda ;)

I take it back. They are smart with their hacking and that’s where it ends.

jajko
0 replies
57m

They are smart with their hacking and that’s where it ends

So are often russians, or chinese. Maybe the concentration is on another level, they are a tiny country but highly educated for generations.

I'd bet if we properly educated and developed whole world we would discover Einsteins and Bolts in many many places out there. Ie elite athletes often come from places around where they could do sport, ie mountaineers but also many others.

tehjoker
0 replies
1h25m

Yea, US propaganda is the same way. It's not subtle, it's just so many people are onboard with it they don't really care.

some-guy
0 replies
1h21m

My wife lived in Israel on and off for years, I got to visit her for awhile during her dissertation work in the West Bank. Only a few blocks of Tel Aviv deserve the "modern Middle Eastern country" label in my mind. And even then it wasn't nearly as impressive as I thought. Haifa is a lovely town though :)

nemo44x
0 replies
51m

As a group, Ashkenazi Jews have an average IQ of around 110. If you subtract Palestinians from Israel (group average IQ of 83) and other Jewish groups that make up the remaining 70% of the country (group IQ around 90), Israel probably would be the smartest by far. But yeah, overall fairly typical when you mix all the groups.

cjk2
3 replies
1h25m

To be fair propagandists generally don't have to aim high. They only have to shift the undecided and uninformed opinions a little bit.

You want to see some of the crap the agencies were pushing out pre-Brexit and it worked, so I wouldn't classify the average UK citizen as much to be contended with (I am UK as well for ref).

WhackyIdeas
2 replies
1h19m

The only good thing to come from Brexit is that for some people they woke up and smelt the more expensive coffee than it used to be and had some self reflection. I have spoke with a good few people now that were like ‘I was lied to’… well duh.

cjk2
1 replies
1h12m

Unfortunately it was mostly "I was lied to, but I agree with it anyway because of X" where X is some loose justification to absolve themselves of the self-inflicted mess they got themselves into.

My father was a fine one. His staff fucked off back to Europe, he couldn't hire anyone else and had to fold his company and retire. Then he found out he got cancer and that the NHS had staffing problems due to Brexit.

Me, I am better off for it as I fill a niche demand, but I voted against it because it was generally bad for society and I do not always vote in self-interest.

WhackyIdeas
0 replies
31m

Our business lost around 90% of European customers. Then the odd customer now from Europe emails in a rage because they had to pay import duties… so then having to tell them that ‘Brexit’ happened!

You are so right though - most people just will refuse to accept they were taken for fools with all the nasty rhetoric about ‘people coming in to our country’… and so many have even been convinced that ripping up the Human Rights act is somehow a good thing (??? Wtf!).

Rich people manipulating the minds of poor people was what Brexit was all about. At the time I was convinced this was a Russian move to make UK weaker. But then again, I was convinced for many years that Trump was a Russian asset to make America implode (which is kind of what happened).

All this hate for foreigners. It’s disgusting.

r00fus
0 replies
1h19m

See, this is the thing - this propaganda is only meant as the "rationale" that goes along with the real bribe - campaign funding from the likes of AIPAC and DMfI.

The funding is what secures these politicians' votes. The propaganda is what the politicians can use to justify their actions to everyone else. That it's laughably bad is a function less of the capabilities of Israel than the utter fealty that these politicans have to the Israeli cause.

partiallypro
9 replies
2h2m

I'm sure the story is true, but I doubt it was effective. I don't think most politicians are really looking at their social media given most of it is trolling junk. I'm sure Russia/Iran/Hamas adjacent countries were doing the same. I just don't think they have been that effective in getting politician support. Direct lobbying or phone/email is much more effective than an online troll farm to get the attention of a politician in DC. I have worked in DC and this still feels very true to this day.

I think the more worrying is going after the low information voter. I didn't think Russia's election interference had much effect in 2016, but now when you look at US Media (largely conservative outlets) their footprint is very visible.

laweijfmvo
4 replies
1h41m

One thing I've learned about old people (and in the US, the people in charge are _OLD_) is that they have no concept of being scammed like this.

So they may recognize trolling, but if you tell them "Hey, the President of Israel tweeted at you," they just assume it was the President of Israel.

cafard
1 replies
1h36m

I am in my upper 60s--if a bit junior for Congress, let alone the White House--but like to think of myself as a bit more skeptical than that.

some-guy
0 replies
1h15m

Helping my parents in their mid-70s is a constant uphill battle with these things. I simply tell her to ignore *everything* and if she needs confirmation to get in contact with me.

partiallypro
0 replies
1h37m

Aside from the terminally online politicians (like Mike Lee, AOC, Cruz, MTG) most do not use their own accounts or even look at them. They might have a firm that measure constituent engagement, but still to this day the most effective way to complain to your congress person is a phone call or email. If we're being serious, the latter is what these bot farms, etc are after. They want to influence actual constituents to do their ultimate bidding. Now if we can get evidence of a huge phone campaign using AI voice, that would be much more alarming. Israel is doing it, and Iran/Russia/Hamas adjacent are doing it. There's absolutely no denying it.

The_Colonel
0 replies
1h9m

So the logic is something like this:

* my grandmother can't recognize fake information

* my grandmother is old

* politicians are old

* therefore politicians can't recognize fake information

Politics has always been full of deception, people doing politics professionally for decades should know a bit or two about it.

PurpleRamen
1 replies
1h56m

It's not just for the politicians, but the people around them, the companies researching the mood, the normal citizen who will carry the mood to others. It not simply to quantify the effect of this type of social engineering.

partiallypro
0 replies
1h40m

I'm aware how it works. But those numbers just aren't that compelling, because as I said every large social media platform is full of large troll farms. It's more about influencing actual constituents to write their Congress person.

seydor
0 replies
3m

OTOH i ve seen politicians care about social media much more than average joe does.

Hikikomori
0 replies
1h51m

Politicians are already influenced by AIPAC and other powerful groups working for Israel, doubt they needed more. They've managed to push anti-bds laws/orders in most states.

nextstep
6 replies
4h29m

Also reported on by NY Times and posted here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40583068

but like most articles about Israeli hacking, US Big Tech involvement in the war, etc it was immediately flagged once it reached the front page.

I don’t know how much of this is moderators removing posts, or if there is a pro-Israel brigade that is censoring HN’s front page.

davesque
1 replies
10m

I flagged it because it's really boring to see people go through the same predictable, tribal motions on a topic that's been covered to death by every media outlet.

bluish29
0 replies
3m

Did you thought about clicking on the hide button that is next to "flag" as an alternative?

Animats
0 replies
1h21m

JIDF turned out to be one guy. That was a sideshow.

This article is from Hareetz, which is a major newspaper in Israel.

There's a huge, organized Israel lobby aimed at the US. It's no secret. There's AIPAC, the American-Israel Political Action Committee. "Lobbying for Pro-Israel Policies", it says on their web site. There are official organizations in the government of Israel which do "public diplomacy".[1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_diplomacy_of_Israel

nickff
0 replies
1h2m

I'm one of the people who flags some of these articles (though not this one), because they're generally uninteresting, and repetitive. I'm not Jewish, have never been to Israel, and am not part of any brigade.

michaeljhg
6 replies
1h19m

Is there a country that doesn't do this?

kergonath
1 replies
1h4m

So, enlighten us: is there? Any example of this sort of things between allies? Or is this just an extreme case of both-sides?

Spying and keeping tabs on your friends is one thing. Influence campaigns among close allies are generally not the way it works.

gmarx
0 replies
44m

before the US entered WWII the british had an office of propaganda with offices in New York that was dedicated to getting the US to enter the war.

some-guy
0 replies
1h13m

Not the point here: Israel is our "greatest ally" and the target is our lawmakers.

seydor
0 replies
4m

It's not common at all in liberal countries. Perhaps azerbaijan or china do it

neves
0 replies
58m

USA censor Social Networks that don't allow them to do it.

Maxatar
0 replies
14m

I don't know of any government department in Canada, Mexico, the UK, France, Germany, Australia that target U.S. law makers with fake social media accounts.

Do you know of any? Can you cite them?

cjk2
5 replies
1h36m

Well their enemies used social accounts to garner support from US citizens so you've got to start somewhere!

It's not like we haven't done this either. I worked for a company in 2005 which was doing this paid for by politicians. Moment I worked this out, I quit.

Kapura
3 replies
1h34m

This seems extremely unethical no matter who is doing it.

cjk2
2 replies
1h31m

100% agree (hence my point about quitting) but the problem is it's a difficult position to be in when everything is narrative driven and misreporting and propaganda are rife.

You can sit there and do nothing and wait for your enemy to paint you in a bad light and the next thing you know your usual political allies are throwing money and aid at your enemy. Or you protect your citizens as best as possible by entering the game. The moral high ground may have a higher body count.

This point applies to both sides for ref. And because it's a war, the rules of fair play go out of the window until people are on trial afterwards.

gmdrd
0 replies
8m

[delayed]

FpUser
0 replies
50m

"until people are on trial afterwards"

Speaking of trials: U.S. lawmakers had voted to sanction ICC if it tries to prosecute citizens of the US or it's allies.

I guess it is always one rule for thee and another one for me. So much for rules based order.

croes
0 replies
11m

So it's ok to do something wrong, if others do it too?

mathgradthrow
4 replies
1h59m

Perhaps they are trying to achieve parity with the propaganda of their adversaries, Russia, China, and Qatar.

hartator
2 replies
1h56m

Didn’t we almost go to war against Russia for doing precisely that?

adolph
0 replies
1h50m

Isn't the US already in a (barely-proxy) war with Russia?

0xcafefood
0 replies
1h52m

Yes, but Israel is our Greatest Ally, so it's different when they do it.

TillE
0 replies
1h54m

It's certainly striking that the quality of the propaganda is very much on par with that of Russia. It's clumsy, it often espouses political views (eg, the faux-anarchist stuff) which are incoherent in America or really anywhere in the West.

dang
1 replies
1h48m

We merged that one hither.

sva_
0 replies
20m

This article itself seems to be written by chatgpt to some degree at least? I've developed trust-issues with bullet point lists in that format.

frob
1 replies
5h22m

This was on the front-page for a brief moment and is now nowhere in the top 150. The irony writes itself.

cyclecount
1 replies
4h25m

…and like that, it’s flagged and gone. Discussion averted, thanks mods!

dang
0 replies
2h1m

Mods didn't touch it*. Users flag things.

* (before I turned off the flags a few minutes ago)

KenArrari
1 replies
3h51m

Wow it's been up for a full hour.

jules-jules
0 replies
3h36m

No it’s gone. We would need admin support to get it unflagged again, most likely.

sdfghswe
0 replies
1h13m

What?! Noooo way! /s

Read "The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy" by John Mearsheimer.

guerrilla
0 replies
5h27m

Of course it did. This is modern warfare. Welcome to the future.

Just like how we knew everyone was always spying on everyone else long before Snowden, we should all know that everyone is doing this to everyone else long before all the revaluations come down to us. There is no benefit to assuming good faith here.

Talkative32
0 replies
3m

It's wrong identity

SimbaOnSteroids
0 replies
10m

The wild part about this, at least to me, is the wholesale incompetence demonstrated by Israel in this regard. If I couldn't google the talking points the bots make and see Israeli officials saying the same things, one would think these bots were Iranians acting with the intent to make Israel look bad.

AzzyHN
0 replies
1h17m

Truly shocking. Who could've seen this coming.

On a more serious note, I figured the majority of US lawmakers already supported the genocide. I'm surprised Israel feels the need to use propaganda for this

2OEH8eoCRo0
0 replies
9m

If there are influence operations online is it ethical to counter them with your own? Obviously none would be preferable.

We need to better define what propaganda is. To me it's misleading or false information toward a political outcome. Or deceptive information not meant for selling a product.