tactics and public opinion

Submitted by myth (Germany), Jun 6, 2010 at 12:20

Looking at the flotilla incident I discovered two core tactics of the anit-zionist movement to win public opinion:

1) they deliberately act slowly, lack of speed conceals an attack. The flotilla took a long time to load, board passengers and finally approach Gaza. An attack carried out really slow would not be regarded as an attack by the media for the news focus on daily news not a long evolution of planned events. Consequently Israel's reaction, which was executed quickly, drew the attention and appeared as an attack. I believe that acting very slowly is essential to islamism-2.0 advances.

2) Distribution of forces hide their strength: As Dr Pipes pointed out, Israel is considered as a superior power. That is because we look on their military power alone which is located in a tiny strip of land, they act on their own in a concerted operation with speed-boats and helicopters, with no open support from allies. On the other side we have Turkey organizing the goods, providing port and boat, a swedish known writer and two german MPs on board of the ship, possibly arms from Iran. I am already counting four countries, at least five organizations taking part in this, not counting in the array of governments complaining about Israel after the events. I conclude that the enemies of Israel are in fact stronger.

Yet, because they are distributed they appear to be the weaker party. 3) deny warfare: The flotilla was sold as an act of humanitarian aid for Gaza rather than an act of war against Israel. This denies the idea of warfare altogether and in opinion restricts as Dr Pipes says the Israelis to police-level interventions by measures of public opinion.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".