27 aug 2013
A facebook youth group called for a symbolic funeral march next Wednesday in Ramallah city to demand the Palestinian Authority (PA) to immediately stop its negotiations and security cooperation with the Israeli occupation in response to the killing of three young men in Qalandiya refugee camp by its soldiers. The facebook page, which was named "the blood of our martyrs is not cheap" was established by a group of young activists living in the West Bank.
The group strongly denounced Adnan Addameri, the spokesman for the PA security agencies, for describing in remarks on Monday the Qalandiya crime as an Israeli attempt to torpedo the peace negotiations.
"Do we have, after this crime, to frustrate the occupation's attempt to destroy the negotiations and hang on to it more and more?" the group questioned.
The group also demanded the PA to end its restrictions on the Palestinian resistance in the West Bank and give it a free hand to restore the dignity of the Palestinian people which was violated by the occupation in the camp.
The protesters will march from central Ramallah towards the PA headquarters, carrying symbolic coffins draped with Palestinian flags.
The group strongly denounced Adnan Addameri, the spokesman for the PA security agencies, for describing in remarks on Monday the Qalandiya crime as an Israeli attempt to torpedo the peace negotiations.
"Do we have, after this crime, to frustrate the occupation's attempt to destroy the negotiations and hang on to it more and more?" the group questioned.
The group also demanded the PA to end its restrictions on the Palestinian resistance in the West Bank and give it a free hand to restore the dignity of the Palestinian people which was violated by the occupation in the camp.
The protesters will march from central Ramallah towards the PA headquarters, carrying symbolic coffins draped with Palestinian flags.
On Monday 26th August, Palestinian hacker activists, defaced the Google.ps domain to protest Google maps labeling of Palestinian and Israeli borders.
The hackers posted a Google maps image of historical Palestine with this statement, "uncle google we say hi from Palestine to remember you that the country in google map not called israel. its called Palestine."
In May of this year Google officially labeled the search engine page as "Palestine" as oppose to its prior label as "Palestinian territories."
A Google spokesperson claimed that google.ps was not hacked, but that some users were directed to a different website and were resolving the issue.
The hackers posted a Google maps image of historical Palestine with this statement, "uncle google we say hi from Palestine to remember you that the country in google map not called israel. its called Palestine."
In May of this year Google officially labeled the search engine page as "Palestine" as oppose to its prior label as "Palestinian territories."
A Google spokesperson claimed that google.ps was not hacked, but that some users were directed to a different website and were resolving the issue.
26 aug 2013
Israeli army spokesperson Avital Leibovich speaks to MICS 2011 participants at IDC Herzliya.
(Media in Conflicts Seminar) Dozens of young journalists, including at least one working for the BBC, are in Israel this week for a government-backed junket designed to give them “a more positive attitude” toward Israel’s policies.
The journalists are attending the Media in Conflicts Seminar (MICS) at the Interdisciplinary Center at Herzliya (IDC Herzliya).
Now in its fifth year, the seminar is the brainchild of the advocacy group StandWithUs.
The Media in Conflicts Seminar is “hasbara for foreign media personnel, diplomats and youth from all over the world,” according to the website of Israel’s Ministry for Public Diplomacy (which was recently absorbed into the prime minister’s office).
Hasbara is a Hebrew word that literally translates as “explaining” but is used specifically to describe government propaganda and outreach efforts to gain support for Israel’s policies.
According to the ministry, the Media in Conflicts Seminar specifically targets non-Jewish Europeans.
Participants
Those attending this year include Zahra Ullah, a broadcast journalist with BBC Wales; Indre Anskaityte, a radio journalist from Lithuania; Rachel Dzanashvili, a freelance contributor to Fox News; Tomas Halasz, a photographer from Slovakia; Joseph Shawyer, a staffer at the Bethlehem-based Ma’an News Agency; and Mariana Granja, a reporter for Agence France Presse.
George Hale, a senior editor for Ma’an News Agency, confirmed that Shawyer was attending the seminar. However, Hale told The Electronic Intifada in an email that Shawyer was doing so “in a personal capacity, not on behalf of Ma’an.”
Hale added that Shawyer is “not a member of the news team.”
US journalist Anna Lekas Miller was accepted to attend, but announced on Twitter on Sunday that she was denied entry to Israel. Afghan journalist Mirwais Jalalzai reported on the MICS Facebook page that he was denied a visa as well.
Previous participants include Florence DaveyAttlee of CNN International, Carl Fridh Kleberg of Swedish news agency Tidningarnas Telegrambyrå, and Keith Demicoli of Television Malta.
MICS published lists of participants and speakers for 2009 and 2010 on the IDC Herzliya web site. Past participants can also be seen in videos posted to the MICS YouTube channel.
Winning friends
(Media in Conflicts Seminar) Dozens of young journalists, including at least one working for the BBC, are in Israel this week for a government-backed junket designed to give them “a more positive attitude” toward Israel’s policies.
The journalists are attending the Media in Conflicts Seminar (MICS) at the Interdisciplinary Center at Herzliya (IDC Herzliya).
Now in its fifth year, the seminar is the brainchild of the advocacy group StandWithUs.
The Media in Conflicts Seminar is “hasbara for foreign media personnel, diplomats and youth from all over the world,” according to the website of Israel’s Ministry for Public Diplomacy (which was recently absorbed into the prime minister’s office).
Hasbara is a Hebrew word that literally translates as “explaining” but is used specifically to describe government propaganda and outreach efforts to gain support for Israel’s policies.
According to the ministry, the Media in Conflicts Seminar specifically targets non-Jewish Europeans.
Participants
Those attending this year include Zahra Ullah, a broadcast journalist with BBC Wales; Indre Anskaityte, a radio journalist from Lithuania; Rachel Dzanashvili, a freelance contributor to Fox News; Tomas Halasz, a photographer from Slovakia; Joseph Shawyer, a staffer at the Bethlehem-based Ma’an News Agency; and Mariana Granja, a reporter for Agence France Presse.
George Hale, a senior editor for Ma’an News Agency, confirmed that Shawyer was attending the seminar. However, Hale told The Electronic Intifada in an email that Shawyer was doing so “in a personal capacity, not on behalf of Ma’an.”
Hale added that Shawyer is “not a member of the news team.”
US journalist Anna Lekas Miller was accepted to attend, but announced on Twitter on Sunday that she was denied entry to Israel. Afghan journalist Mirwais Jalalzai reported on the MICS Facebook page that he was denied a visa as well.
Previous participants include Florence DaveyAttlee of CNN International, Carl Fridh Kleberg of Swedish news agency Tidningarnas Telegrambyrå, and Keith Demicoli of Television Malta.
MICS published lists of participants and speakers for 2009 and 2010 on the IDC Herzliya web site. Past participants can also be seen in videos posted to the MICS YouTube channel.
Winning friends
New York Times journalist Ethan Bronner speaks to MICS 2011 participants at IDC Herzliya.
(Media in Conflicts Seminar) “The purpose of the seminar is to find young journalists who will work in the world of media, as well as those who aspire to be ‘opinion makers’ in their countries, and to put them through workshops about media coverage of conflict zones,” organizers stated in a fundraising appeal.
According to its official website, the Media in Conflicts Seminar includes “A 5-day fully subsidized stay in Israel (Not including airfare)” and a “strategic tour of Jerusalem and the conflict areas.”
It also boasts that “participants develop skills to face the challenges of conflict reporting, create a priceless professional network and experience the world’s most covered conflict zone.”
In addition to seminars on “terrorism,” and military and political topics, the participants meet Israeli political leaders, academics and senior Israeli journalists.
Past speakers are a who’s who of Israeli political and military echelons, including Avital Leibovich, who became notorious as army spokesperson during the 2008-2009 invasion of Gaza, and former Minister of Public Diplomacy Yuli Edelstein.
In 2011, the seminar was addressed by Ethan Bronner, then the ethically-challenged New York Times bureau chief in Jerusalem. BBC Arabic journalist Ahmad Budeiri also addressed the seminar [PDF] in 2012.
This year’s seminar will be addressed by Israeli foreign ministry spokesperson Ilana Stein.
The organizers have touted the success of previous seminars, claiming, “The impact of MICS is evident in [the participants] subsequent media coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.” [PDF]
Ties to the government
The Media in Conflicts Seminar bears the hallmarks of Israel’s strategy to fight “delegitimization,” laid out in 2010 by the Reut Institute, a think tank with military-intelligence ties.
In an influential report, Reut recommended that Israel “maintain thousands of personal relationships with political, cultural, media and security-related elites and influentials” around the world.
A 2009 press release says the project is “Approved by the Ministry of Public Diplomacy and Diaspora.”
A 2012 report by Molad, [PDF] the center for the renewal of Israeli democracy, includes an appendix that identifies the Media in Conflicts Seminar as part of the government’s “hasbara apparatus.” [PDF]
The Molad reports notes, referring to MICS, that “the Minsitry of Public Diplomacy organizes a yearly seminar, in cooperation with the Interdisciplinary Center in Herzeliya, for members of the media and senior journalists from Europe to develop personal, intimate relationships that encourage a more positive attitude towards Israel’s foreign and domestic policies.”
Conceived by StandWithUs
The Media in Conflicts Seminar was conceived by the StandWithUs Israel Fellowship recipients in 2009.
StandWithUs is the multi-million dollar US-based anti-Palestinian advocacy group that works closely with the Israeli government.
A press release and an email newsletter published in 2009 by IDC Herzliya identify Taly Gerber, an artillery Instructor in the IDF Field Intelligence Unit, [PDF] Nuphar Schwartz and Sharon Savariego as the main organizers of the first seminar.
While IDC Herzliya students have held online fundraisers and a vintage clothing sale for the Media in Conflicts Seminar, these have raised no more than a few hundred dollars.
The total cost of the Media in Conflict Seminar in 2010 was 150,000 shekels ($41,600), of which 80,000 ($22,000) was paid by the Israeli government and the rest by StandWithUs, according to an official Ministry of Public Diplomacy budget.[PDF]
IDC Herzliya: hotbed of government propaganda
The Media in Conflicts Seminar claims that it is a “student initiative” at IDC Herzliya, and the unsuccessful online fundraising campaigns can perhaps be seen as an effort to lend authenticity to this claim.
In fact, IDC Herzliya students are heavily involved in state propaganda efforts, and the seminar is only one example.
IDC Herzliya itself is an Israeli academic institution that has become synonymous with an annual conference attended by military and political leaders who have often used it as a platform for racist and belligerent statements.
One perk of attending the Media in Conflicts Seminar is access to the annual IDC Herzliya conference.
And as Yara Sa’di reported for The Electronic Intifada last month:
IDC Herzliya’s Ambassador Club is a year-long program for more than two hundred students from thirty countries run in partnership with StandWithUs. The program includes lectures on media, economy and history in order to “arm the students with the latest surveys and data and to teach them how to present the Israeli narrative” in North America and Europe. At the end of the course, each participant receives “an accreditation endorsed by the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs,” according to the StandWithUs website.
Last November, during Israel’s bombardment of Gaza, students there set up a “war room” to “send out messages in support of the attack on social media websites like Facebook and Twitter.”
IDC Herzliya would therefore appear to be the ideal model for the recently revealed “covert” effort to recruit students at all seven Israeli universities into a social media propaganda program run out of the Prime Minister’s Office.
Media in Conflicts Seminar is no place for journalists
Given the clear government backing and propaganda goals of the Media in Conflicts Seminar, it is inappropriate for any media organization seeking to maintain its credibility reporting on Palestine and the Israelis to allow its staff to participate in this junket.
(Media in Conflicts Seminar) “The purpose of the seminar is to find young journalists who will work in the world of media, as well as those who aspire to be ‘opinion makers’ in their countries, and to put them through workshops about media coverage of conflict zones,” organizers stated in a fundraising appeal.
According to its official website, the Media in Conflicts Seminar includes “A 5-day fully subsidized stay in Israel (Not including airfare)” and a “strategic tour of Jerusalem and the conflict areas.”
It also boasts that “participants develop skills to face the challenges of conflict reporting, create a priceless professional network and experience the world’s most covered conflict zone.”
In addition to seminars on “terrorism,” and military and political topics, the participants meet Israeli political leaders, academics and senior Israeli journalists.
Past speakers are a who’s who of Israeli political and military echelons, including Avital Leibovich, who became notorious as army spokesperson during the 2008-2009 invasion of Gaza, and former Minister of Public Diplomacy Yuli Edelstein.
In 2011, the seminar was addressed by Ethan Bronner, then the ethically-challenged New York Times bureau chief in Jerusalem. BBC Arabic journalist Ahmad Budeiri also addressed the seminar [PDF] in 2012.
This year’s seminar will be addressed by Israeli foreign ministry spokesperson Ilana Stein.
The organizers have touted the success of previous seminars, claiming, “The impact of MICS is evident in [the participants] subsequent media coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.” [PDF]
Ties to the government
The Media in Conflicts Seminar bears the hallmarks of Israel’s strategy to fight “delegitimization,” laid out in 2010 by the Reut Institute, a think tank with military-intelligence ties.
In an influential report, Reut recommended that Israel “maintain thousands of personal relationships with political, cultural, media and security-related elites and influentials” around the world.
A 2009 press release says the project is “Approved by the Ministry of Public Diplomacy and Diaspora.”
A 2012 report by Molad, [PDF] the center for the renewal of Israeli democracy, includes an appendix that identifies the Media in Conflicts Seminar as part of the government’s “hasbara apparatus.” [PDF]
The Molad reports notes, referring to MICS, that “the Minsitry of Public Diplomacy organizes a yearly seminar, in cooperation with the Interdisciplinary Center in Herzeliya, for members of the media and senior journalists from Europe to develop personal, intimate relationships that encourage a more positive attitude towards Israel’s foreign and domestic policies.”
Conceived by StandWithUs
The Media in Conflicts Seminar was conceived by the StandWithUs Israel Fellowship recipients in 2009.
StandWithUs is the multi-million dollar US-based anti-Palestinian advocacy group that works closely with the Israeli government.
A press release and an email newsletter published in 2009 by IDC Herzliya identify Taly Gerber, an artillery Instructor in the IDF Field Intelligence Unit, [PDF] Nuphar Schwartz and Sharon Savariego as the main organizers of the first seminar.
While IDC Herzliya students have held online fundraisers and a vintage clothing sale for the Media in Conflicts Seminar, these have raised no more than a few hundred dollars.
The total cost of the Media in Conflict Seminar in 2010 was 150,000 shekels ($41,600), of which 80,000 ($22,000) was paid by the Israeli government and the rest by StandWithUs, according to an official Ministry of Public Diplomacy budget.[PDF]
IDC Herzliya: hotbed of government propaganda
The Media in Conflicts Seminar claims that it is a “student initiative” at IDC Herzliya, and the unsuccessful online fundraising campaigns can perhaps be seen as an effort to lend authenticity to this claim.
In fact, IDC Herzliya students are heavily involved in state propaganda efforts, and the seminar is only one example.
IDC Herzliya itself is an Israeli academic institution that has become synonymous with an annual conference attended by military and political leaders who have often used it as a platform for racist and belligerent statements.
One perk of attending the Media in Conflicts Seminar is access to the annual IDC Herzliya conference.
And as Yara Sa’di reported for The Electronic Intifada last month:
IDC Herzliya’s Ambassador Club is a year-long program for more than two hundred students from thirty countries run in partnership with StandWithUs. The program includes lectures on media, economy and history in order to “arm the students with the latest surveys and data and to teach them how to present the Israeli narrative” in North America and Europe. At the end of the course, each participant receives “an accreditation endorsed by the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs,” according to the StandWithUs website.
Last November, during Israel’s bombardment of Gaza, students there set up a “war room” to “send out messages in support of the attack on social media websites like Facebook and Twitter.”
IDC Herzliya would therefore appear to be the ideal model for the recently revealed “covert” effort to recruit students at all seven Israeli universities into a social media propaganda program run out of the Prime Minister’s Office.
Media in Conflicts Seminar is no place for journalists
Given the clear government backing and propaganda goals of the Media in Conflicts Seminar, it is inappropriate for any media organization seeking to maintain its credibility reporting on Palestine and the Israelis to allow its staff to participate in this junket.
24 aug 2013
By Nasser Lahham
In some countries, people use the term watchdog journalism. In a way, journalism is described as dog because media outlets "bark and howl" at those who arouse suspicion. This is allegedly a positive comparison because dogs have the ability to recognize smells ten times better than humans. In addition, dogs are loyal and faithful when they guard properties against thieves and drug dealers.
A few days ago, a new youth movement was announced in Gaza on Facebook with the name Tamarrad (Rebel) Against Injustice. It is not clear whether this is a serious youth movement, or who stands behind this group. The public cannot tell whether this movement is a factional offset trying to support Fatah, or a group of amateurs who look at the world in their own way.
Surprisingly, the reaction of Hamas and its de facto government in Gaza to the new phenomenon reflects fear and dismay. The reaction to Tamarrad in Gaza seems even tougher than the rebellion itself, prompting a curious question of whether the Hamas-run government in Gaza fears any popular action in the Gaza Strip? Is popular action forbidden? Aren't young people in Gaza entitled to protest and express their points of view? Why have all these threats and intimidation been aimed at the Tamarrod activists?
The reason I ask is to touch on the mentality of the rulers in Gaza and whether there really is good governance there or not. If it is forbidden to speak, to criticize and to demonstrate, people in the opposition will have to consider other means which could eventually become more harmful, less moral and more vehement.
It is worth remembering that the opposition leaders in Israel are entitled to a government salary similar to that of the prime minister. They are also entitled to a car and two body guards. Opposition leaders take part in all decisive decisions such as declarations of war. They also partake in decisive leadership meetings and reception of high-profile visitors to the country. The French foreign minister Laurent Fabius, who is currently visiting Israel, has asked to meet with opposition leader Shelly Yechimovich right after his meeting with Netanyahu.
Thus, if current Palestinian leaders stubbornly insist on treating opposition with intimidation, they will eventually end up behind bars just like their counterparts in some Arab countries who "wake up as presidents, and enter the evening as humiliated prisoners." Each government, namely the Hamas-run government, should realize that excessive use of power against opposition will sooner or later negatively affect the rulers. I wish we could have learned lessons from the examples of our neighboring countries. I wish rulers and officials could stop this empty tone of intimidation which proves their fear of the future as they have no self-confidence, and neither do they trust their people.
Hackers affiliated to Hamas recently took over Ma'an Network’s Facebook page, using it as a platform to verbally attack the Palestinian president and other Palestinians. The Hamas-run ministry of interior surprisingly started to run the page. Ma'an has been in contact with Hamas leaders including the bureau of premier Ismail Haniyeh about the case and several leaders expressed solidarity with Ma'an. They tried their best to work out a solution but "a handful of narrow-minded people in the ministry of interior foiled all efforts." This highlights that the Hamas ministry of interior is running the Gaza Strip like gangsters and smugglers rather than responsible governments. Otherwise, what does it mean when a government hacks a media outlet? "We can grasp it when a dog bites a man, but we can never understand that a man bit a dog."
In other words, a person or a recidivist may hack a website of a ministry or government, but I never heard of a government hacking a media outlet and publishing its interior ministry data on a hacked page. It is possible they don't trust their own media outlets, satellite channels, and the large numbers of spokesmen they have, and so they needed Ma'an's Facebook page to publish their thoughts? If hacking Ma'an's Facebook page will solve problems in the Gaza Strip, our page is at your service, and we hereby offer to create another page for you.
Had the Gaza ministry of interior asked Ma'an's editor-in-chief to publish all its data on Ma'an for free, I swear we would have agreed politely and respectfully. Nevertheless, "nature can't beat out inherently evil nature," and "a lizard's eyes reveal its bad intentions."
More surprising was the Facebook administration who were reluctant to intervene and help Ma'an restore its page. This situation actually leaves no room for doubt that the Palestinian programmer Khalil Shreateh was treated unjustly by the Facebook administration which proved to be deceitful, irresponsible and immoral and is evidence that "all that glitters is not gold."
In some countries, people use the term watchdog journalism. In a way, journalism is described as dog because media outlets "bark and howl" at those who arouse suspicion. This is allegedly a positive comparison because dogs have the ability to recognize smells ten times better than humans. In addition, dogs are loyal and faithful when they guard properties against thieves and drug dealers.
A few days ago, a new youth movement was announced in Gaza on Facebook with the name Tamarrad (Rebel) Against Injustice. It is not clear whether this is a serious youth movement, or who stands behind this group. The public cannot tell whether this movement is a factional offset trying to support Fatah, or a group of amateurs who look at the world in their own way.
Surprisingly, the reaction of Hamas and its de facto government in Gaza to the new phenomenon reflects fear and dismay. The reaction to Tamarrad in Gaza seems even tougher than the rebellion itself, prompting a curious question of whether the Hamas-run government in Gaza fears any popular action in the Gaza Strip? Is popular action forbidden? Aren't young people in Gaza entitled to protest and express their points of view? Why have all these threats and intimidation been aimed at the Tamarrod activists?
The reason I ask is to touch on the mentality of the rulers in Gaza and whether there really is good governance there or not. If it is forbidden to speak, to criticize and to demonstrate, people in the opposition will have to consider other means which could eventually become more harmful, less moral and more vehement.
It is worth remembering that the opposition leaders in Israel are entitled to a government salary similar to that of the prime minister. They are also entitled to a car and two body guards. Opposition leaders take part in all decisive decisions such as declarations of war. They also partake in decisive leadership meetings and reception of high-profile visitors to the country. The French foreign minister Laurent Fabius, who is currently visiting Israel, has asked to meet with opposition leader Shelly Yechimovich right after his meeting with Netanyahu.
Thus, if current Palestinian leaders stubbornly insist on treating opposition with intimidation, they will eventually end up behind bars just like their counterparts in some Arab countries who "wake up as presidents, and enter the evening as humiliated prisoners." Each government, namely the Hamas-run government, should realize that excessive use of power against opposition will sooner or later negatively affect the rulers. I wish we could have learned lessons from the examples of our neighboring countries. I wish rulers and officials could stop this empty tone of intimidation which proves their fear of the future as they have no self-confidence, and neither do they trust their people.
Hackers affiliated to Hamas recently took over Ma'an Network’s Facebook page, using it as a platform to verbally attack the Palestinian president and other Palestinians. The Hamas-run ministry of interior surprisingly started to run the page. Ma'an has been in contact with Hamas leaders including the bureau of premier Ismail Haniyeh about the case and several leaders expressed solidarity with Ma'an. They tried their best to work out a solution but "a handful of narrow-minded people in the ministry of interior foiled all efforts." This highlights that the Hamas ministry of interior is running the Gaza Strip like gangsters and smugglers rather than responsible governments. Otherwise, what does it mean when a government hacks a media outlet? "We can grasp it when a dog bites a man, but we can never understand that a man bit a dog."
In other words, a person or a recidivist may hack a website of a ministry or government, but I never heard of a government hacking a media outlet and publishing its interior ministry data on a hacked page. It is possible they don't trust their own media outlets, satellite channels, and the large numbers of spokesmen they have, and so they needed Ma'an's Facebook page to publish their thoughts? If hacking Ma'an's Facebook page will solve problems in the Gaza Strip, our page is at your service, and we hereby offer to create another page for you.
Had the Gaza ministry of interior asked Ma'an's editor-in-chief to publish all its data on Ma'an for free, I swear we would have agreed politely and respectfully. Nevertheless, "nature can't beat out inherently evil nature," and "a lizard's eyes reveal its bad intentions."
More surprising was the Facebook administration who were reluctant to intervene and help Ma'an restore its page. This situation actually leaves no room for doubt that the Palestinian programmer Khalil Shreateh was treated unjustly by the Facebook administration which proved to be deceitful, irresponsible and immoral and is evidence that "all that glitters is not gold."
22 aug 2013
Israel: Official's comment on Hiroshima 'unacceptable'
Israel has distanced itself from a government official who made crude comments about the World War II nuclear bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Responding to a Japanese request for clarification, a top Israeli envoy told Japan that the comments were "unacceptable" and that the official had been suspended. Danny Seaman was a government public relations official and posted on Facebook that he was "sick" of "self-righteous" Japanese and international commemorations of Hiroshima and Nagasaki victims. He said those events were the results of "Japanese aggression."
Israel has distanced itself from a government official who made crude comments about the World War II nuclear bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Responding to a Japanese request for clarification, a top Israeli envoy told Japan that the comments were "unacceptable" and that the official had been suspended. Danny Seaman was a government public relations official and posted on Facebook that he was "sick" of "self-righteous" Japanese and international commemorations of Hiroshima and Nagasaki victims. He said those events were the results of "Japanese aggression."
20 aug 2013
Former Hamas official Dr. Khader Mahjar on Tuesday accused the Islamist group of hacking into his Facebook account.
"Those who use religion for political purposes are far from religion," Mahjar said, adding that his Facebook page has been hacked three times this month.
Hamas has implemented a policy of "shutting mouths", which included closing down the Gaza offices of Ma'an News Agency and Al-Arabiya, Mahjar said.
He called on human rights groups to condemn Hamas for targeting media organizations.
"Those who use religion for political purposes are far from religion," Mahjar said, adding that his Facebook page has been hacked three times this month.
Hamas has implemented a policy of "shutting mouths", which included closing down the Gaza offices of Ma'an News Agency and Al-Arabiya, Mahjar said.
He called on human rights groups to condemn Hamas for targeting media organizations.
19 aug 2013
Daniel Seaman
Danny Seaman, who recently became the head of Israel’s ‘Internet Hasbara (Hebrew for Propaganda)’ branch of the government, has been issued a warning by the Netanyahu administration for a series of racist and offensive postings against Palestinians, Arabs, Muslims and Japanese people on his Facebook page.
As head of the Internet Hasbara program, Seaman is tasked with promoting Israel, while downplaying the Israeli occupation of Palestinian land and continued human rights abuses, in an effort to sell the world a more ‘positive vision of Israel’. To that end, he has begun a program to pay college students around the world to say positive things about Israel on their social networks and campuses.
But on his own Facebook page, Seaman has engaged in numerous statements that are anything but positive. In a comment about the attempts to re-start negotiations with Palestinian chief negotiator Saeb Erekat, Seaman wrote, "Is there a diplomatic way of saying 'Go F*** yourself'?"
At the beginning of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, Seaman wrote, "Does the commencement of the fast of the Ramadan means that Muslims will stop eating each other during the daytime?"
And when the annual commemoration of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki took place, he wrote "I am sick of the Japanese, 'Human Rights' and 'Peace' groups the world over holding their annual self-righteous commemorations for the Hiroshima and Nagasaki victims. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were the consequence of Japanese aggression. You reap what you sow..."
It was this comment that sparked Japanese diplomats to contact the Israeli government and demand an explanation for the behavior of its Public Relations official. There are dozens, if not hundreds, of additional abusive comments posted by Seaman on his Facebook page, in addition to those mentioned here.
In response, the Israeli government stated that it issued Seaman a warning, saying, "Danny Seaman's statements on Facebook are unacceptable and do not express the view of the Israeli government. The directorate instructed Seaman to immediately refrain from making such statements."
Seaman served for over a decade as the head of Israel’s ‘Government Press Office’, which issues credentials to foreign journalists. Many journalists have complained over the years of discrimination against Arab and other international reporters, many of whom have been denied credentials if their media agency has published articles or reports critical of Israeli policy or actions.
In a 2002 interview with the Israeli magazine Kol Halr, Seaman shared his belief that Israel is presented in a bad light in media worldwide not because of the state’s actions and policies, but because of a conspiracy of Palestinian reporters who have managed to infiltrate every media agency. In response to Seaman’s statements, the Bureau Chief for the BBC stated at the time, “The thought that ..Palestinian workers decide which news will be broadcast abroad could be funny if it were not so insulting. It is even more infuriating when one bears in mind that Mr. Seaman's office has been barring press cards from our Palestinian staff members.”
In the same interview, Seaman admitted to targeting certain journalists for removal who he claimed had engaged in reporting that was critical of Israel, naming “Suzanne Goldberg from the British Guardian, Lee Hockstader from the Washington Post, Sandro Contenta from the Toronto Star and Gillian Findlay from ABC. Seaman accuses each one of the four of inaccurate reporting, to understate things. Now, none of the four are in Israel any longer. ‘We simply boycotted them’, recounts Seaman. ‘We didn't revoke their press cards, because this is a democratic country. But in the name of that same value I also have the right not work with them. The editorial boards got the message and replaced their people. When the Washington Post saw that a smaller newspaper, such as the Baltimore Sun, was getting exclusive material, they understood that they had a problem.’”
Danny Seaman, who recently became the head of Israel’s ‘Internet Hasbara (Hebrew for Propaganda)’ branch of the government, has been issued a warning by the Netanyahu administration for a series of racist and offensive postings against Palestinians, Arabs, Muslims and Japanese people on his Facebook page.
As head of the Internet Hasbara program, Seaman is tasked with promoting Israel, while downplaying the Israeli occupation of Palestinian land and continued human rights abuses, in an effort to sell the world a more ‘positive vision of Israel’. To that end, he has begun a program to pay college students around the world to say positive things about Israel on their social networks and campuses.
But on his own Facebook page, Seaman has engaged in numerous statements that are anything but positive. In a comment about the attempts to re-start negotiations with Palestinian chief negotiator Saeb Erekat, Seaman wrote, "Is there a diplomatic way of saying 'Go F*** yourself'?"
At the beginning of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, Seaman wrote, "Does the commencement of the fast of the Ramadan means that Muslims will stop eating each other during the daytime?"
And when the annual commemoration of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki took place, he wrote "I am sick of the Japanese, 'Human Rights' and 'Peace' groups the world over holding their annual self-righteous commemorations for the Hiroshima and Nagasaki victims. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were the consequence of Japanese aggression. You reap what you sow..."
It was this comment that sparked Japanese diplomats to contact the Israeli government and demand an explanation for the behavior of its Public Relations official. There are dozens, if not hundreds, of additional abusive comments posted by Seaman on his Facebook page, in addition to those mentioned here.
In response, the Israeli government stated that it issued Seaman a warning, saying, "Danny Seaman's statements on Facebook are unacceptable and do not express the view of the Israeli government. The directorate instructed Seaman to immediately refrain from making such statements."
Seaman served for over a decade as the head of Israel’s ‘Government Press Office’, which issues credentials to foreign journalists. Many journalists have complained over the years of discrimination against Arab and other international reporters, many of whom have been denied credentials if their media agency has published articles or reports critical of Israeli policy or actions.
In a 2002 interview with the Israeli magazine Kol Halr, Seaman shared his belief that Israel is presented in a bad light in media worldwide not because of the state’s actions and policies, but because of a conspiracy of Palestinian reporters who have managed to infiltrate every media agency. In response to Seaman’s statements, the Bureau Chief for the BBC stated at the time, “The thought that ..Palestinian workers decide which news will be broadcast abroad could be funny if it were not so insulting. It is even more infuriating when one bears in mind that Mr. Seaman's office has been barring press cards from our Palestinian staff members.”
In the same interview, Seaman admitted to targeting certain journalists for removal who he claimed had engaged in reporting that was critical of Israel, naming “Suzanne Goldberg from the British Guardian, Lee Hockstader from the Washington Post, Sandro Contenta from the Toronto Star and Gillian Findlay from ABC. Seaman accuses each one of the four of inaccurate reporting, to understate things. Now, none of the four are in Israel any longer. ‘We simply boycotted them’, recounts Seaman. ‘We didn't revoke their press cards, because this is a democratic country. But in the name of that same value I also have the right not work with them. The editorial boards got the message and replaced their people. When the Washington Post saw that a smaller newspaper, such as the Baltimore Sun, was getting exclusive material, they understood that they had a problem.’”
18 aug 2013
Image from khalil-sh.blogspot.ru
A Palestinian information system expert says he was forced to post a bug report on Mark Zuckerberg’s Facebook page after the social network’s security team failed to recognize that a critical vulnerability he found allows anyone to post on someone's wall.
The vulnerability, which was reported Khalil from Hebron allows any Facebook user to post anything on the walls of other users - even when those users are not included in their list of friends. He reported the vulnerability through Facebook’s security feedback page, which offered a minimum reward of US$500 for each real security bug report.
However, the social network’s security team failed to acknowledge the bug, even though Khalil enclosed a link to a post he made on the timeline of a random girl who studied at the same college as Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg.
“Sorry, this is not a bug,” Facebook’s security team said in response to Khalil’s second report, in which he offered to reproduce the discussed vulnerability on a test account of Facebook security expert.
Palestinian Ensures Safety of Millions of Facebook Users
Khalil Shreateh, a Palestinian man from the suburb of Yatta near Hebron, discovered a bug in facebooks’ security settings that compromised the safety of the social media websites’ users.
After many attempts to report the bug to the Facebook Security Team using traditional avenues, and being dismissed, Shreateh decided to utilize the bug and post a message to facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg’s page. Within moments of Zuckerberg receiving this post, Facebook engineers contacted Khalil about the bug, and discussed ways of fixing it. They also disabled Shreateh’s facebook account as a “precaution”.
This bug could have been exploited by spammers to post to anyone’s facebook. Khalil, one of many unemployed Palestinians, could have made an impressive amount of money by selling the exploit, but instead chose to notify facebook. His actions ensured the security of millions of facebook users.
Facebook’s policies compensate individuals who discover bugs and report them with a minimum of $500. The severity of the bug Shreateh’s discovered would have earned him thousands of dollars – but facebook is unwilling to award him the money, due to the ‘nature of reporting’. Had facebook’s security team not continually dismissed Shreateh’s reports, most likely due to his poor English skills, he would have received the money, which could have significantly improved his living standards.
A Palestinian information system expert says he was forced to post a bug report on Mark Zuckerberg’s Facebook page after the social network’s security team failed to recognize that a critical vulnerability he found allows anyone to post on someone's wall.
The vulnerability, which was reported Khalil from Hebron allows any Facebook user to post anything on the walls of other users - even when those users are not included in their list of friends. He reported the vulnerability through Facebook’s security feedback page, which offered a minimum reward of US$500 for each real security bug report.
However, the social network’s security team failed to acknowledge the bug, even though Khalil enclosed a link to a post he made on the timeline of a random girl who studied at the same college as Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg.
“Sorry, this is not a bug,” Facebook’s security team said in response to Khalil’s second report, in which he offered to reproduce the discussed vulnerability on a test account of Facebook security expert.
Palestinian Ensures Safety of Millions of Facebook Users
Khalil Shreateh, a Palestinian man from the suburb of Yatta near Hebron, discovered a bug in facebooks’ security settings that compromised the safety of the social media websites’ users.
After many attempts to report the bug to the Facebook Security Team using traditional avenues, and being dismissed, Shreateh decided to utilize the bug and post a message to facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg’s page. Within moments of Zuckerberg receiving this post, Facebook engineers contacted Khalil about the bug, and discussed ways of fixing it. They also disabled Shreateh’s facebook account as a “precaution”.
This bug could have been exploited by spammers to post to anyone’s facebook. Khalil, one of many unemployed Palestinians, could have made an impressive amount of money by selling the exploit, but instead chose to notify facebook. His actions ensured the security of millions of facebook users.
Facebook’s policies compensate individuals who discover bugs and report them with a minimum of $500. The severity of the bug Shreateh’s discovered would have earned him thousands of dollars – but facebook is unwilling to award him the money, due to the ‘nature of reporting’. Had facebook’s security team not continually dismissed Shreateh’s reports, most likely due to his poor English skills, he would have received the money, which could have significantly improved his living standards.
Image from khalil-sh.blogspot.ru
After receiving the reply, Khalil claims he had no choice but to showcase the problem on Mark Zuckerberg’s wall.
Screenshots on his blog show that Khalil shared details of the exploit, as well as his disappointing experience with the security team, on the Facebook founder’s wall.
After receiving the reply, Khalil claims he had no choice but to showcase the problem on Mark Zuckerberg’s wall.
Screenshots on his blog show that Khalil shared details of the exploit, as well as his disappointing experience with the security team, on the Facebook founder’s wall.
Image from khalil-sh.blogspot.ru
Just minutes after the post, Khalil says he received a response from a Facebook engineer requesting all the details about the vulnerability. His account was blocked while the security team rushed to close the loophole.
Just minutes after the post, Khalil says he received a response from a Facebook engineer requesting all the details about the vulnerability. His account was blocked while the security team rushed to close the loophole.
|
|
After receiving the third bug report, a Facebook security engineer finally admitted the vulnerability but said that Khalil won’t be paid for reporting it because his actions violated the website’s security terms of service.
Although Facebook’s White Hat security feedback program sets no reward cap for the most “severe” and “creative” bugs, it sets a number of rules that security analysts should follow in order to be eligible for a cash reward. Facebook did not specify which of the rules Khalil had broken. Somewhere between the second and third vulnerability reports, Khalil also recorded a video of himself reproducing the bug. In its latest reply, Facebook reinstated Khalil’s account and expressed hope that he will continue to work with Facebook to find more vulnerabilities. |
A new initiative to market Israel to American Jews is expected to cost up to $300 million annually, three times the Birthright budget. But a cheaper project for both Americans and Israelis that could bolster Israel’s image much more effectively is not on the table: Ending the occupation.
The Jewish Agency is reportedly developing its priciest campaign ever to connect Jews and Israel and it’s going to cost a lot of money. The budget is expected to reach $300 million per year in the next five years, The Forward reported. The massive operation is expected to launch in 2014 and concentrate on four main elements: Israel Education, Israel Experiences, Israel Engagement on College Campus and Aliyah (immigration) of Young Adults (All things already being pursued heavily by “pro-Israel” groups for decades)
According to a report on the eJewishphilanthropy website, the Jewish Agency expects one third of the funding to come from the Israeli government – meaning Israeli taxpayer money – and will apparently dwarf Birthright, whose annual budget is a mere $100 million, and which similarly, also draws a third of its budget from Israeli taxpayers.
The project is being coined ”The Prime Minister’s Initiative” even though Netanyahu’s office hasn’t actually endorsed it. But as the Jewish Agency’s U.S.-based fundraising chief, Misha Galperin, told the Forward: “This is the interest and the direction the prime minister wants to move in.” Well, that’s a relief. We wouldn’t want millions of dollars spent in the American Jewish community on programs that Netanyahu wasn’t behind, right?
The Jewish Agency is organizing a meeting in October to flesh out the campaign’s strategies with Israeli government representatives, heads of Jewish organizations and foundations, and a bunch of affluent donors. I can pretty much guarantee that no one in that room will represent an anti-occupation view or even one critical of Netanyahu’s government – despite the fact that these are views held by many American Jews, both those engaged and not engaged.
The choice to coin the campaign “The Prime Minister’s Initiative” is bizarre and quite telling. Apparently the organizers are interested in branding all programming regarding Israel in the U.S. as coming directly from Netanyahu and his government – not Israel, the country/society. I mean, why not coin it as “pro-Israel” as these programs usually are? Are we to understand that the Jewish Agency and the others involved in this overpriced operation are more interested in promoting the prime minister of Israel than the country itself?
It is also interesting timing, considering the fact that the government official in charge of promoting Israel’s image on social media platforms has been warned to halt his activities due to complaints of racist and incendiary language. Daniel Seaman, appointed by Netanyahu to head Israel’s digital public diplomacy, posted a comment during Ramadan that read:
Does the commencement of the fast of the Ramadan means that Muslims will stop eating each other during the daytime?
He also wrote a response to a demand by the Palestinian chief negotiator, Saeb Erekat, for an end to new settlement expansion that read: “Is there a diplomatic way of saying ‘Go F*** yourself’?”
When you also take into consideration the comments made recently by Jewish Home chairman Naftali Bennett that if you catch terrorists you simply have to kill them and that he’s killed plenty of Arabs in his life without any problem; or Upper Nazareth mayor’s statement that he will never allow the establishment of an Arab school in his town as long as he is mayor, so as to keep Israel purely Jewish (followed by his op-ed in Haaretz asserting that if anyone thinks he’s racist then so is Zionism) - or the myriad of racist comments and actions taken against African asylum seekers (i.e. “cancer in our body“) [PDF] then it seems pretty obvious why it will require so much dough to promote Israel among American Jews: It ain’t easy marketing this place, especially with this government in power.
But will it bother American Jews that the Israeli government is forking over a third of the budget for this program? According to Hillel’s vice president for marketing and communications, Ellen Goldstein, not at all:
Goldstein said that she is not concerned about potential objections to pro-Israel programming on campuses in the United States being funded directly by the Israeli government. “The student who goes on Birthright doesn’t care where their free trip is coming from,” Goldstein said. “I imagine it would be similar to that.”
And there you have it. Why should there be any conflict of interest whatsoever in promoting Israel with money coming directly from the partisan Israeli government? As long as it’s free, why should they care?
A couple of questions to keep in mind: Who gives the Jewish Agency, a few right-wing Israeli government officials and some “leading” (read: outdated and conservative) American Jewish organizations the mandate to take all this money and do as they please with it? Most of these people were appointed, not elected, so their legitimacy is in question. And what about the Israeli citizens’ say in all this, whose taxes are paying for a portion of it? While most Israelis may not oppose this initiative or the notion of “pro-Israel” programming as much as me, I’ll bet many would prefer their money be spent differently.
And lastly and most obviously – With everything Israel is doing to entrench itself deeper in occupation and settlements, isolating itself in world, and with all the contempt and racism coming out of the echelons of Israeli government officials and bodies, wouldn’t the money be better spent, by say, ending the infrastructure of military occupation?
The Jewish Agency is reportedly developing its priciest campaign ever to connect Jews and Israel and it’s going to cost a lot of money. The budget is expected to reach $300 million per year in the next five years, The Forward reported. The massive operation is expected to launch in 2014 and concentrate on four main elements: Israel Education, Israel Experiences, Israel Engagement on College Campus and Aliyah (immigration) of Young Adults (All things already being pursued heavily by “pro-Israel” groups for decades)
According to a report on the eJewishphilanthropy website, the Jewish Agency expects one third of the funding to come from the Israeli government – meaning Israeli taxpayer money – and will apparently dwarf Birthright, whose annual budget is a mere $100 million, and which similarly, also draws a third of its budget from Israeli taxpayers.
The project is being coined ”The Prime Minister’s Initiative” even though Netanyahu’s office hasn’t actually endorsed it. But as the Jewish Agency’s U.S.-based fundraising chief, Misha Galperin, told the Forward: “This is the interest and the direction the prime minister wants to move in.” Well, that’s a relief. We wouldn’t want millions of dollars spent in the American Jewish community on programs that Netanyahu wasn’t behind, right?
The Jewish Agency is organizing a meeting in October to flesh out the campaign’s strategies with Israeli government representatives, heads of Jewish organizations and foundations, and a bunch of affluent donors. I can pretty much guarantee that no one in that room will represent an anti-occupation view or even one critical of Netanyahu’s government – despite the fact that these are views held by many American Jews, both those engaged and not engaged.
The choice to coin the campaign “The Prime Minister’s Initiative” is bizarre and quite telling. Apparently the organizers are interested in branding all programming regarding Israel in the U.S. as coming directly from Netanyahu and his government – not Israel, the country/society. I mean, why not coin it as “pro-Israel” as these programs usually are? Are we to understand that the Jewish Agency and the others involved in this overpriced operation are more interested in promoting the prime minister of Israel than the country itself?
It is also interesting timing, considering the fact that the government official in charge of promoting Israel’s image on social media platforms has been warned to halt his activities due to complaints of racist and incendiary language. Daniel Seaman, appointed by Netanyahu to head Israel’s digital public diplomacy, posted a comment during Ramadan that read:
Does the commencement of the fast of the Ramadan means that Muslims will stop eating each other during the daytime?
He also wrote a response to a demand by the Palestinian chief negotiator, Saeb Erekat, for an end to new settlement expansion that read: “Is there a diplomatic way of saying ‘Go F*** yourself’?”
When you also take into consideration the comments made recently by Jewish Home chairman Naftali Bennett that if you catch terrorists you simply have to kill them and that he’s killed plenty of Arabs in his life without any problem; or Upper Nazareth mayor’s statement that he will never allow the establishment of an Arab school in his town as long as he is mayor, so as to keep Israel purely Jewish (followed by his op-ed in Haaretz asserting that if anyone thinks he’s racist then so is Zionism) - or the myriad of racist comments and actions taken against African asylum seekers (i.e. “cancer in our body“) [PDF] then it seems pretty obvious why it will require so much dough to promote Israel among American Jews: It ain’t easy marketing this place, especially with this government in power.
But will it bother American Jews that the Israeli government is forking over a third of the budget for this program? According to Hillel’s vice president for marketing and communications, Ellen Goldstein, not at all:
Goldstein said that she is not concerned about potential objections to pro-Israel programming on campuses in the United States being funded directly by the Israeli government. “The student who goes on Birthright doesn’t care where their free trip is coming from,” Goldstein said. “I imagine it would be similar to that.”
And there you have it. Why should there be any conflict of interest whatsoever in promoting Israel with money coming directly from the partisan Israeli government? As long as it’s free, why should they care?
A couple of questions to keep in mind: Who gives the Jewish Agency, a few right-wing Israeli government officials and some “leading” (read: outdated and conservative) American Jewish organizations the mandate to take all this money and do as they please with it? Most of these people were appointed, not elected, so their legitimacy is in question. And what about the Israeli citizens’ say in all this, whose taxes are paying for a portion of it? While most Israelis may not oppose this initiative or the notion of “pro-Israel” programming as much as me, I’ll bet many would prefer their money be spent differently.
And lastly and most obviously – With everything Israel is doing to entrench itself deeper in occupation and settlements, isolating itself in world, and with all the contempt and racism coming out of the echelons of Israeli government officials and bodies, wouldn’t the money be better spent, by say, ending the infrastructure of military occupation?
