Israel Reportedly Uses Fake Social Media Accounts To Influence US Lawmakers On Gaza War (nytimes.com) 146
An anonymous reader quotes a report from the New York Times: Israel organized and paid for an influence campaign last year targeting U.S. lawmakers and the American public with pro-Israel messaging, as it aimed to foster support for its actions in the war with Gaza, according to officials involved in the effort and documents related to the operation. The covert campaign was commissioned by Israel's Ministry of Diaspora Affairs, a government body that connects Jews around the world with the State of Israel, four Israeli officials said. The ministry allocated about $2 million to the operation and hired Stoic, a political marketing firm in Tel Aviv, to carry it out, according to the officials and the documents. The campaign began in October and remains active on the platform X. At its peak, it used hundreds of fake accounts that posed as real Americans on X, Facebook and Instagram to post pro-Israel comments. The accounts focused on U.S. lawmakers, particularly ones who are Black and Democrats, such as Representative Hakeem Jeffries, the House minority leader from New York, and Senator Raphael Warnock of Georgia, with posts urging them to continue funding Israel's military.
ChatGPT, the artificial intelligence-powered chatbot, was used to generate many of the posts. The campaign also created three fake English-language news sites featuring pro-Israel articles. The Israeli government's connection to the influence operation, which The New York Times verified with four current and former members of the Ministry of Diaspora Affairs and documents about the campaign, has not previously been reported. FakeReporter, an Israeli misinformation watchdog, identified the effort in March. Last week, Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram, and OpenAI, which makes ChatGPT, said they had also found and disrupted the operation. The secretive campaign signals the lengths Israel was willing to go to sway American opinion on the war in Gaza.
ChatGPT, the artificial intelligence-powered chatbot, was used to generate many of the posts. The campaign also created three fake English-language news sites featuring pro-Israel articles. The Israeli government's connection to the influence operation, which The New York Times verified with four current and former members of the Ministry of Diaspora Affairs and documents about the campaign, has not previously been reported. FakeReporter, an Israeli misinformation watchdog, identified the effort in March. Last week, Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram, and OpenAI, which makes ChatGPT, said they had also found and disrupted the operation. The secretive campaign signals the lengths Israel was willing to go to sway American opinion on the war in Gaza.
Stop giving them money. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Fiscal conservatives sudden clamming up when you mention Israel getting over $3 billion a year.
Re: (Score:2)
Answer me this. Would you be ok with Japan or Taiwan putting a military base in Kansas?
Re: (Score:2)
Answer me this. Would you be ok with Japan or Taiwan putting a military base in Kansas?
You know the U.S. don't just "put" military bases in other countries - right? We asked and those countries have agreed. Pretty sure we've also committed to help defend them if needed. If Japan or Taiwan "put" military in Kansas it would be because the U.S. agreed to and allowed it.
Re: Stop giving them money. (Score:2)
Some of those countries agreed, others had no choice as they were on the losing side in a war. We don't have to shed many tears for the latter, though.
Re: (Score:2)
You don't have to answer his inane questions. I don't think Archie is arguing in good faith.
Re: (Score:2)
Not at all. I am responding directly to Archie telling us how fiscal conservatives don't want to talk about money to Israel.
As a fiscal conservative I very much want to talk about that and all the rest of our money that gets spread around the world Willy nilly.
If you want to talk strategic value, there is almost no strategic value in Ukraine, there is extremely high value in Europe but it would sure be nice if our Eu friend felt the same way and spent mor4 on their own defense, and Israel has high strategi
Re: (Score:2)
Where is here? No idea what you're trying to say. What was your point?
This is why people post AC.
Re: Stop giving them money. (Score:2)
His point was that Europe is spending more than the USA in Ukraine, which was obvious from context.
If the USA is going to brag about how great it is, surely it can afford to help stop Putler from conquering Europe. Not only do we have allies there, but they are also our trade partners.
By the same token, surely we can stop supporting genocide in Palestine.
Re: (Score:2)
Europe giving more money is irrelevant. So what?
Putin is not invading any NATO country. That is ridiculous nonsense. He can barely hold even against a country 1/10th Russia's size that uses old weapons gifted by the west. Complete bullshit.
The original point here was you think fiscal conservatives like me do not want to talk about $3b/year going to Israel.
I do. I did. You are wrong.
There is no strategic value for the US in Ukraine. None. "Oh, but Putler will wipeout Eurrrrrrope!!!" Super eye roll b
Re: (Score:2)
Putin is not restoring the USSR.
That's MIC and Cold War warrior propaganda.
How exactly is the broken remnant of the Soviet empire going to rise from the ashes?
Their economy was roughly the size of Ohio's at last check. No one thinks Ohio has the economic might to take over Europe or destroy NATO in a stand up fight or do much of anything else besides grow corn and wheat.
Re: (Score:2)
That's right. Let the US withdraw from the world. Why try to fight tyranny and fascism outside our borders when we can grow it at home?
Re: (Score:2)
Who do you define as fascist and tyrannical?
Archie would have you provide money to Hamas and cut off Israel. Hamas murdered their way into power and hasn't held an election since. Israel has multiple parties including an Arab party and holds elections like clock work. Is there a single Arab country with a Jewish party? Or a single Jew holding any office, even dog catcher? Ok then....
How about Ukraine? Gets tagged by independent bodies as roughly equal corruption as Russia every year and used the war t
Re: (Score:2)
Feel free to suggest alternatives to fill the role of world police. I'm not saying we're any good at doing it, just what our supposed mission has been.
Re: (Score:3)
What strategic value did Belgium and France have in 1914 to the US? People like you tried to keep the US out of WWI on the same grounds.
People with strategic minds knew that the US would sooner or later be involved in that war; The Germans did enough things to piss off neutral countries through their U-boat campaign, starting with the sinking of the Lusitania.
What Russia is doing is the same. And the parallels are there, viz. the Von Schlieffen plan vs. the breaking by Russia of international treaties.
Tw
Re: (Score:3)
Gets tagged by independent bodies as roughly equal corruption as Russia every year
While Ukraine is corrupt as shit it is rapidly improving while Russia moves just as rapidly in the opposite direction.
Press freedom Ukraine 61st ... Russia 162th
https://rsf.org/en/index [rsf.org]
EIU
Ukraine 5.1, Russia 2.2..
https://ourworldindata.org/gra... [ourworldindata.org]
CPI
Ukraine 104, Russia 141
https://www.transparency.org/e... [transparency.org]
and used the war to skip this,last election.
Britain famously suspended elections during WWII.
Democracies have elections.
Democracies have laws. It is unconstitutional to hold elections under martial law in Ukraine.
Oh that's right if we don't stop them in Ukraine we'll be fighting them on the streets of London and Chicago. Putin is a vicious evil bastard but he's not stupid.
Russian state media openly and routinely discusses Russia's fu
Re: (Score:2)
Russia is a pathetic pale shadow of the former USSR.
They can barely hold even against a country 1/10th their size that uses gifted old stockpile weapons from the west.
They stand absolutely zero chance of successfully defeating NATO in a conventional war. The concept is wildly ridiculous.
We have no business in Ukraine. What we are doing is getting the fight the last of the Cold War warriors always wanted against the USSR and never got because we defeated them economically. So now 30+ years later those pie
Re: (Score:2)
Russia is a pathetic pale shadow of the former USSR.
They can barely hold even against a country 1/10th their size that uses gifted old stockpile weapons from the west.
Ukraine has 1/4th the population of Russia.
They stand absolutely zero chance of successfully defeating NATO in a conventional war. The concept is wildly ridiculous.
This isn't a matter of the Russia of today it is a matter of a future Russia having absorbed Ukraine, its people and industry and having most certainly absorbed Belarus, Moldova and Georgia. A country whose industry and populations have been on war footings for years.
We have no business in Ukraine. What we are doing is getting the fight the last of the Cold War warriors always wanted against the USSR and never got because we defeated them economically. So now 30+ years later those pieces of shit are pushes hard to have a big bloody war with Russia so they can hand out some medals, pat themselves on the back, get their place in history books, and fill their pockets when they transition out of government into their jobs waiting for them in the the military industrial complex.
Are you able to objectively support any of these assertions? Who is pulling the strings behind the scenes wanting the war they never got? What are their names? Where is your evidence? What is the
Re: (Score:2)
Lmao, ok, sure, I agree we should stop giving Trump billions of dollars in foreign aid every year.
Re: (Score:2)
Apples versus oranges. Israel is a terrorist state, Europe and Ukraine aren't.
Re: (Score:2)
My handle is accurate.
If you had anything more than weak ad hominem you would had provided it.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
We all live in the same world, there is no such thing as "being neutral." Norway and Sweden stayed out of NATO because they wanted to be neutral, but Russia convinced them that they were playing with fire.
The reality is, Hamas started this war. Israel has long been a staunch ally of the US, and vice versa. We should stand by our friends.
Re:Stop giving them money. (Score:4, Informative)
The reality is, Hamas started this war.
From the Palestinian viewpoint, the Israelis invaded their land and declared it belonged to them now. They would say Israel started it.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
From my point of view, Benjamin Netanyahu, a major voice in the "Palestine is a threat to Israel" faction, was about to lose the election and possibly face criminal charges. Hamas, a major voice in the "Israel is a threat to Palestine" faction, launched a surprise attack on Israel (thus proving Netanyahu correct and electable) which resulted in an invasion of Palestine (thus proving Hamas correct and electable). Iran, incidentally, provides a huge portion of Hamas' budget, and they hate Israel. The nearby n
Re:Stop giving them money. (Score:4, Informative)
I get that. The Ottoman Empire allied itself with Germany, and oppressed the Jews. Germany & Ottoman lost. The rest of the world carved out a land for the Jews, eventually calling it Israel. So while the Palestinian viewpoint is as you say, the rest of the world made that happen, and agreed that the Jews should have that land. Their beef is with the League of Nations, and then the United Nations after it.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, and what's your point? The Palestinians aren't content with their half, they want to drive the Israelis out of the other half and have it all to themselves. Why else would they have attacked Israel on October 7 (and at least 15 other times times since WWII)? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org] It was these wars, *all* started by Palestinians, that gradually drove Israel to occupy the West Bank, and now to destroy Gaza.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Why else would they have attacked Israel on October 7 (and at least 15 other times times since WWII)?
If this is a serious question: the blockade is why. And for the other times: other offenses. That's the nature of a feud, there's always a reason to blame the other side for continuing the feud.
And yes, the Palestinians aren't content with their half. Partly for the reason you gave above, and partly because they don't have a half. Or any portion at all. What you're suggesting is a Palestinian state, something which doesn't exist.
Re: (Score:3)
They *had* a half, there *was* a Palestinian territory not governed by Israel, but they wouldn't stop attacking Israel. So Israel clamped down and imposed additional security restrictions like blockades. If Mexico continually attacked Texas with bombs and kidnappings and killings, I have no doubt the US would occupy a portion of Mexico too. For Gaza, it seems like natural consequences to me. If they want their statehood, they're going to have to stay within their borders and stop attacking Israel.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I would actually go back to WWI, when the Ottoman Empire, which oppressed the Jews, allied itself with Germany, and lost. That lead to a land being designated for Jews by the League of Nations. The UN then made it an official nation in 1948 after WWII.
You are right that they've been battling for thousands of years. In the current war, Israel has been behaving itself like a democracy, while Hamas usurped power from the Gazans. The two are not equivalent.
Re: (Score:2)
Arguably, the Palestinians have never had a state even now. The All-Palestinian government was largely powerless and was ultimately disbanded by Egypt. The Palestinians have always been subjects in one form or another, they've never really had self rule as an independent state.
Re: (Score:2)
No, not the Palestinians specifically, but yes, Muslim Arabs. There is no historical precedent for the Palestinians having a state of their very own, it was invented during the creation of Israel, as a way to parcel some of the land to Muslim Arabs, rather than giving it all to the Jews.
Re: (Score:2)
Every subjected people in the world dreams of self-rule, that's not something that an outsid
Re: (Score:2)
There is no reason to "limit the discussion" to Palestinians. That makes no historical sense. After the Arab-Israeli war in 1948 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org] Israel became established, and recognized by the UN, as a nation. This territory did not include Gaza (which was under Egyptian control) or the West Bank (which was under Jordanian control). Why should Palestinians be granted sovereignty from Egypt and Jordan? They never had their own nation before. They could have retained their land, ruled by Jo
Re: (Score:2)
Why should Palestinians be granted sovereignty from Egypt and Jordan?
Because every subjected people in the world dreams of self-rule. Why should Indians or Americans be granted sovereignty from the British? Why should Bangladesh be granted sovereignty from Pakistan? Why should Taiwan be granted sovereignty from China?
You do indeed seem to be dismissive of the notion that Palestinians are a genuinely distinct group, but your own historical reference shows that they are. It wasn't Gazans who didn't want to be Egyptians and, separately, people from the West Bank who didn't w
Re: (Score:2)
So you're saying that West Bank Palestinians were subjugated by Jordan, and Gazans were subjugated by Egypt? Why would that be the case, when the Palestinians shared ideology and religion with those nations, and had already been part of those nations since the Ottoman Empire? There was no reason why they would want to have self-rule rather than be governed by Jordan and Egypt.
Oh wait, you're saying they were subjugated by Israel? No, that's not true, this didn't happen until *after* they attacked Israel, tr
Re: (Score:2)
Why would that be the case, when the Palestinians shared ideology and religion with those nations, and had already been part of those nations since the Ottoman Empire?
There's more to life than religion. You're suggesting that the Americans never should have wanted to separate from the British empire, what with being Christians and all.
That's nonsense. Don't lump all Arabs together, Palestinians are a distinct group as illustrated above. Why don't you ask why Egypt and Jordan are separate from one another? Or Saudi Arabia? They're not the same, Egyptians and Jordanians and Saudi
Re: (Score:2)
First, the early American Pilgrims were fleeing Britain precisely for freedom of religion.
Second, if the Palestinians were so unhappy with Jordan and Egypt, why did they form alliances with them and fight Israel as one?
You are making a log of suggestions about the plight of the Palestinian people, without any evidence. All along the way, I've cited sources, while you simply state opinions.
Yes, the League of Nations indeed carved out a land for Israel from the Ottoman Empire, which lost WWI to the allies. Ch
Re: (Score:2)
Second, if the Palestinians were so unhappy with Jordan and Egypt, why did they form alliances with them and fight Israel as one?
You can just read about this. You apparently don't like it when I just tell you stuff, so here's [wikipedia.org] a link. People form alliances for many reasons.
I don't know what "evidence" you want for a statement like, "People want self-government." Or, "the Palestinians are a distinct group of people." All of what I've said is pretty obvious, and I did give a reason above for why you can't just treat all Arabs like they're the same. Which factual part of it do you doubt?
And how am I "twisting" anything? The only th
Re: (Score:2)
Good! You provided some interesting links, but didn't actually answer my question, the question you quoted at the top of your reply.
From your link:
Arab countries were "drawn into the war by the collapse of the Palestinian Arabs and the Arab Liberation Army [and] the Arab governments' primary goal was preventing the Palestinian Arabs' total ruin and the flooding of their own countries by more refugees.
The Arab League was not trying to oppress Palestine, they were trying to strengthen the Arabs there.
As for self-rule, yes, I don't dispute that people want self-rule. But does Connecticut want to split off from the US? Does London want to split off from the UK? No. Why not? Because they are already ruling themselves as part of a larger nation. My point about self
Re: (Score:2)
But your last paragraph actually gets the point. The rest of the world decided that the Jews should have a homeland of their own, and the rest of the world decided that homeland should be the Palestinian homeland. Fuck the Palestinians.
Re: (Score:2)
No, you're not getting it. What I'm saying is that there is no evidence that Palestinians didn't want to be part of Jordan, or Egypt. You inserted that into the narrative.
The Palestinians joined in the effort to eliminate the Jews. They lost. Being on the wrong side of history has consequences.
The South fought to keep slavery. They wanted to secede, they wanted self-rule. They lost. Being on the wrong side of history has consequences.
Re: (Score:2)
What I'm saying is that there is no evidence that Palestinians didn't want to be part of Jordan, or Egypt.
Why on earth would this require evidence? Not a single thing that I mentioned above is something for them to be happy about. If they had wanted to join Egypt or Jordan there was never a time when they didn't have that opportunity. You're really grasping at straws here trying to sell this notion that the Palestinians liked being kicked out of their homes because it gave them the opportunity to be ruled by someone else.
Frankly, and I don't mean to sound insulting here, but this notion that all Arabs are th
Re: (Score:2)
I never said all Arabs are the same, I said they were allies. There's a big difference.
Why are they separate countries? They actually were unified, until repeated wars against Israel broke them apart from their former nations.
Palestinians are on the wrong side of history in exactly the same way the Confederacy was on the wrong side of history. Both were intent on oppressing another race of people. Both lost, and in both cases this was the correct and justified outcome.
Re: (Score:2)
If you wanted to make an American analogy the right one would be with the colonists, who decided that the Native Americans' homeland should be the colonists' homeland. I have no idea how
Re: (Score:2)
From the Palestinian viewpoint, the Israelis invaded their land and declared it belonged to them now. They would say Israel started it.
Hardly. Israel didn't invade, they were given the land by a 3rd party as agreed internationally. If they have a beef then it's with those people.
But in any case you're talking about a long history of minor armed conflicts. We're talking about a very specific war, one that was objectively started by a single event caused by a unilateral decision by Hamas. Now was Hamas desperate given their conditions and oppression by the neighbour? Maybe. They possibly felt quite justified in doing so.
Long term regional in
Re: (Score:2)
From the Palestinian viewpoint, the Israelis invaded their land and declared it belonged to them now. They would say Israel started it.
Hardly. Israel didn't invade, they were given the land by a 3rd party as agreed internationally.
The Palestinian people who were forced off of their land didn't agree to it.
Whose point of view? [Re:Stop giving them money.] (Score:2)
From the Palestinian viewpoint, the Israelis invaded their land and declared it belonged to them now. They would say Israel started it.
Hardly. Israel didn't invade, they were given the land by a 3rd party as agreed internationally.
You think that's the Palestinian viewpoint?
From your point of view they were "given" the land. From their point of view, the land that they lived on was invaded by people who declared "this belongs to us now."
But in any case you're talking about a long history of minor armed conflicts.
From your point of view it's a "long history of minor armed conflicts". From their point of view, it was one invasion and conquest, that is still ongoing.
Re: (Score:2)
I mean this is what happens when you side with Nazis, try to take over the world, and lose. It's like the Russians claiming they should have all of Europe under their control because they once owned it. It's a point of view, sure, but not one I'm going to give an ounce of respect to.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
The reality is, Hamas started this war.
From the Palestinian viewpoint, the Israelis invaded their land and declared it belonged to them now. They would say Israel started it.
A-huh... So this justifies their actions.
The fact is, if it weren't for Hamas' actions on the 7th of October, most of those Palestinians would still be alive (well, the ones that weren't being killed by Hamas, there's a reason average Palestinians were opposing them). History will remember it this way regardless of what propaganda Hamas wants it's useful idiots to spout.
Re: (Score:3)
The reality is, Hamas started this war.
From the Palestinian viewpoint, the Israelis invaded their land and declared it belonged to them now. They would say Israel started it.
A-huh... So this justifies their actions.
No. That explains their actions. Explaining something and justifying it are different things.
The statement that "Hamas started this war" is a viewpoint-dependent statement.
Re:Stop giving them money. (Score:5, Funny)
The West was supposed to bring an International Rules Based Order to the world. Europe seems to take it more seriously, with both the International Criminal Court and the International Court of Justice located there.
I'd argue we should intervene to stop genocide and other crimes against humanity, if we can. Unfortunately we mostly seem to ignore things like that an only intervene when our trade and oil supplies are at stake.
Israel has managed to completely undermine Europe and the US as the moral centres of the world, and other countries are moving in to fill the void. We may be entering a new age where former colonial countries are the ones pushing for international justice, on both stuff like this and on issues like climate change. It all weakens The West as soft power and gravitas slip away.
It's really quite incredible how Israel has managed to screw basically everyone who ever supported it, and the first live-streamed real-time genocidal state.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A fleet of YF23 costs nothing.
No such thing was ever made.
There were a few demonstrators made and it stopped there.
Re: (Score:2)
This is slashdot. When someone says something dumb, I don't assume troll. I assume ignorance, it's far more likely.
As an aside, as awesome as the F22 is, I think the F23 would have been a better plane, not that it matters as the F22 hasn't seen combat either.
Re: (Score:2)
You can't have one. Not for sale. Was never built. Good luck with that.
Re: (Score:2)
You're arguing about wasting 0.48% of the US budget. As if there aren't bigger slices of waste to worry about.
Rogue State (Score:2)
is the name for it.
Re:We can't do that (Score:4, Insightful)
Israel doesn't need the help for Gaza, a problem they've made worse for decades.
If they want to continue a civilian genocide they can do it without help.
If you want to placate nuclear-armed countries, what will you say when Putin demands the return of Alaska?
Re: (Score:2)
The have nukes. A *lot* of nukes. I forget the name for it, but they've got a plan where if they feel threatened they launch everything.
Is this a secret plan that only you know about? Or did they officially publish it somewhere? Cause threats work better when someone knows about it.
Re: (Score:2)
The have nukes. A *lot* of nukes. I forget the name for it, but they've got a plan where if they feel threatened they launch everything.
Is this a secret plan that only you know about? Or did they officially publish it somewhere?.
Well, Wikipedia seems to know about it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
So their official policy is that maybe they have nukes, maybe not, and if they do they won't tell anyone what their plans for them are?
Re: (Score:2)
In particular relevant:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
There is some ambiguity about the term "Samson Option". Some use it to refer to any Israeli nuclear strike against its enemies. Some for the plan as described in this thread above. Some even include the possibility of a nuclear strike against Israeli allies (with the justification that those allies did not do enough to protect Israel). In all cases the term refers to a plan of a large-scale use of nuclear weapons in case Israel feels existentially
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Sounds like we should be pushing for regime change in Israel, and disarmament in the region in general. Iran would be more inclined to negotiate an end to its weapons programme if Israel was not a threat, for example.
Really the whole state of Israel just needs to be replaced by something better, with a government that can represent both Arabs and Jews. It may seem very hard to imagine, but look at South Africa. While far from perfect, it didn't turn into a revenge-fuelled bloodbath.
Re: (Score:2)
Better than that: the United Nations should act responsibly to stomp on them and return the territories that its predecessor, the League of Nations, stole from the surrounding states.
The "surrounding states" that the League of Nations "took" the territories from was the Ottoman Empire (now modern-day Turkey.)
The arabs fought wars to get free of the Turks, do you think they should be "returned" to Turkey.
Re: Stop giving them money. (Score:3)
Land was given to the Palestinians under the UN partition plan and Israel took it. Can someone tell me why Israel taking land it was not entitled to is acceptable?
Notably missing ... Tiktok (Score:3)
Zuck/Musk: We wouldn't do such a thing as turn a blind eye.
Who taught them (Score:2)
lawmakers! (Score:2)
Foreign malign influence (Score:5, Insightful)
The US government should view state sponsored influence campaigns as an attack by a foreign power and respond accordingly.
Re: Foreign malign influence (Score:2, Informative)
Like when Obama funded NGOs in Israel that were campaigning against Netenyahu in the early 2010s?
Or when he stumped against Brexit in the UK prior to the vote?
The Prime Directive is for Star Trek. America clearly doesn't abide by it, even with our friends.
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
Like when Obama funded NGOs in Israel that were campaigning against Netenyahu in the early 2010s?
Or when he stumped against Brexit in the UK prior to the vote?
The Prime Directive is for Star Trek. America clearly doesn't abide by it, even with our friends.
Overt statements from foreign leaders are not the same as covert state sponsored influence campaigns.
Regardless I have absolutely no doubt the US does it too. Just like I have no doubt the US spies on its allies. This changes nothing. It's still an attack and still warrants a response. I expect nothing less from those on the receiving end of any US malign influence campaigns.
Re: (Score:2)
We rightly criticized Trump and his conies for their ties to Russia during the 2016 campaign, under the principle that foreign powers shouldn't be interfering in our elections (though they are allowed to express their opinions, as you say). And we also rightly criticiz
Re: (Score:2)
AIPAC has deep pockets and are not afraid to use them. They are the NRA of the Middle East.
Re: (Score:3)
The US government should view state sponsored influence campaigns as an attack by a foreign power and respond accordingly.
What makes you think the US government isn't responding accordingly? Seriously do you think any government relevant on an international stage isn't waging a significant information war? Or is this something you only recognise when it happens to you?
Re: (Score:2)
What makes you think the US government isn't responding accordingly?
I didn't make any assertions in this regard.
Seriously do you think any government relevant on an international stage isn't waging a significant information war? Or is this something you only recognise when it happens to you?
Addressed this previously...
"Regardless I have absolutely no doubt the US does it too. Just like I have no doubt the US spies on its allies. This changes nothing. It's still an attack and still warrants a response. I expect nothing less from those on the receiving end of any US malign influence campaigns."
Re: (Score:2)
Check out how much AIPAC donates to US politicians: https://trackaipac.com/ [trackaipac.com]
On their website they boast about how AIPAC backed politicians never lose. There is zero chance of ending the foreign interference because the only people who could do it are also benefitting greatly from it.
Oh come on... (Score:3, Insightful)
Like Hamass isn't using thousands of 'useful idiots' to spread their 'we are the victim' propaganda.
Re: (Score:3)
How dare they bomb us while we refuse to release hostages. What kind of monsters are they!
Re:Oh come on... (Score:4, Insightful)
The difference is that Palestinians are facing real genocide, and the "propaganda" images for dead children are genuine. Israeli claims of mass rape are unsubstantiated at best, while IDF solders and all the way back to veterans of the first Nakba boast openly about doing it.
Regardless of who is spreading it and for what reason, this is simple truth vs lies.
Naysayers can admit they're wrong now (Score:2)
ChatGPT, the artificial intelligence-powered chatbot, was used to generate many of the posts.
See, the LLMs are useful for something!
You can stop there. (Score:2)
Israel Reportedly Uses Fake Social Media Accounts To Influence US Lawmakers ...
Duh.
Re: (Score:2)
the fact that the new york times dares to talk about it is indeed news. maybe something's changing?
And our response to this should be... (Score:2)
...roughly modeled along the same lines as our response to the Russian interference with the 2016 election. A special counsel should be appointed, an investigation should be launched, and a detailed report should be published.
I'm a realist, so I'm not expecting the US government to *do* anything about their findings-- there won't be sanctions, there probably won't even be a symbolic gesture such as a vote to censure. But it's important to investigate and document what happened.
It should of course be empha
AI in politics (Score:2)
I guess this is the future of politics, potentially including:
AI political fundraising
political campaigns based on recommendations by AI
an AI with its own political party
laws written by AI
Where does this stop?
why not? (Score:2)
Hamas and their sympathizers use fake humans to push their position.
You can't tell me the morons marching as "trans queer pedophiles for Gaza" -When homosexuality gets you murdered in Gaza- are actual human beings.
The "alt right" has been talking about this for ye (Score:2, Interesting)
Please, no more pay-walled articles on slashdot (Score:2)
I totally get it that people need to make a buck. No problem with that whatsoever. But we can't use pay walled sources for discussions on slashdot, because all we have to go on are the summaries. That's like trying to discuss how a software function works under the hood with only the documentation for reference.
In this latest example, we have no hope of finding out any of the details of the influencing campaign, unless we personally subscribe to the New York Times. And since the NY Times readership leans st
Social Media is a cancer (Score:2)
Title says it all.
Society would be far better off without it.
everyone else does, why shouldn't they (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They made a few hundred accounts over multiple social sites that have hundreds of millions of users.
They did not participate.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
I see you're a supporter of the loon-right Israeli government's current policy of ethnic cleansing via US-supplied weapons.
Islam isn't an ethnicity.
Re: (Score:2)
A phobia is an anxiety disorder, defined by an irrational, unrealistic, persistent and excessive fear of an object or situation (source: Wikipedia).
Labeling the fear of Islam as a 'phobia' implies that it is an irrational fear of something that is relatively harmless. Do you consider Islam harmless, and unrealistic as a threat to all other forms of human culture?
Re: (Score:2)
Israel lost the propaganda war by not even participating in it,
Israel has, in fact, been participating in the propaganda war. The Hebrew word for it is "hasbara".
Re: (Score:2)
Neither side is a force for good. Both sides have some good people on them, but not in control.
It's two groups of people where the folks in charge hate each other, and they're (essentially) trapped together in a small space.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course truth got modded down because the pro-terrorist side has no points to stand on in an open debate so you go for censorship. Good job being so intellectually honest to let everyone know the only points you have are mod points.
You can mod this one down, too.
Re: (Score:2)
Lmao, my .sig is for you.
Hamas are Iranian puppets and you support their terrorist activities against unarmed civilians who were at a peace and love music festival.
What's your excuse for the non-Israelis and non-Jews they raped, murdered, kidnapped and still hold hostage?
So stupid. Of course I'm an automatic mod down, mod points are the only points you have. You have nothing else going for you. You can't debate, history is not on your side, the facts are not on your side, morals and ethics are not on you
Re: (Score:2)
The Americans raped, murdered and kidnapped were responsible for what, exactly?
The Europeans and others raped, murdered, and kidnapped were responsible for what, exactly?
The Israelis raped, murdered, and kidnapped were responsible for what, exactly:
If you claim group responsibility then the same applies to dead Gaza civilians and the whole "Israel is evil" argument falls apart instantly.
Be careful what logic you apply. It cuts both ways.