Private Mossad for Hire(newyorker.com)
With so many separate distinct groups trying to influence US voting, all we have is an election.
And then again.. This would be the ideal psy-op, especially this time with governmental shutdowns in the USA. What sources are truly reliable now a days, whomst has no agenda to advance and no agenda to push...
Wow, I was thinking the same thing. You’re really smart fellow.
Spoiler: the op backfires and actually increases public outrage over these naked manipulation tactics, resulting in a massive electoral victory for the target.
I feel like the same thing may be happening with BDS. The naked attempts to smear and dox college kids is just shining a light on these shady tactics that right-wing Israel activists have employed for years.
There should be as much outrage over Israeli meddling in domestic politics as there is in Russian meddling in domestic politics. Sure Israel is not a competitor to the US and so Israel meddling only affects countries, people, or groups not friendly to Israel or Israeli companies supplying tech to dictators, it's still something that should be concerning for affecting the process of democracy and for general world peace.
It’s starting to happen. As much as we think otherwise — the outrage doesn’t spontaneously manifest. It begins as more and more of the independent voices start to pay attention and notice that things are off.
Israel is considered a "Designated Country of Missile Technology Concern" according to the Department of Commerce. https://oiir.hq.nasa.gov/nasaecp/docs/DCList_10-24-2018.pdf
There's a difference that's important to understand. U.S. support for Israel's aggressive policies is not a result of Israeli "meddling" or even the domestic "Israel lobby". Those things would never be permitted over so many decades if there wasn't a bipartisan U.S. geopolitical objective to begin with: namely, to have a strong Western-aligned military ally to project power over the region.
For comparison, Russia is nothing like that kind of client state ally, and support for their meddling is a fairly recent and specific case and not likely to last.
> U.S. support for Israel's aggressive policies is not a result of Israeli "meddling" or even the domestic "Israel lobby". Those things would never be permitted over so many decades if there wasn't a bipartisan U.S. geopolitical objective to begin with
A successful lobby will of course convince its targets- politicians, but the entire public opinion when necessary- that its objectives coincide with their objectives. Mearsheimer and Walt, in their famous "the Israel lobby" argued that "no [other] lobby has managed to divert U.S. foreign policy as far from what the American national interest would otherwise suggest, while simultaneously convincing Americans that U.S. and Israeli interests are essentially identical".
In fact, have you ever thought exactly how would the interests of Israel coincide with those of the US?
The idea that an "all-powerful small ethnic Jewish lobby" can trick the corporate elite of America for decades to do things against their interests is, putting aside its anti-semitic implications, utterly ridiculous. It is a way of deflecting blame away from the U.S. government itself.
The strategic interests are obvious: Israel is one of the largest military powers in the middle east and a means to project U.S. power over it. This was observed by the Pentagon as early as the late 1940s. This is why the U.S. has given so much financial, military and diplomatic aid to Israel, one of the effects of which has been to build up its tech industry.
> The idea ... is, putting aside its anti-semitic implications, utterly ridiculous.
And yet it's what any other lobby does. Let's just clear a first point: the lobby exists. It has websites:
And it's not just made of "ethnic jews":
As for the strategic interest, it might have been obvious at the beginning of Israel, now not so much. Let me remind you that Israel is an aggressive state in contravention of international law since many decades, with a history of ethnic cleansing  and apartheid , and that such practices are drivers of instability and violence in the region, and that supporting and defending them has a political and military cost. The 9/11 attacks and the subsequent "war on terror" were part of this costs, as stated clearly by the perpetrators of the attacks. 
Have a read of this article by a former US ambassador in the region, that discusses the reality of the strategic value and "US power projection" provided by Israel to the US:
The United States has never had a problem supporting aggressive states in contravention of international law with a history of ethnic cleansing and apartheid. It is itself such a state.
From the perspective of U.S. planners there are both costs and benefits to aggressively projecting power over the middle east (and for that matter the rest of the world). You've only identified the costs. You omit the perceived benefits and implicitly exaggerate the influence of a small, (primarily) ethnic domestic lobby.
That is like saying the Roman empire was a bad idea because it obviously would lead to collapse--true--but instead of chalking it up to outsized imperialism by the Romans themselves you blame some like Mesopotamian lobbyists for overextending it.
> a history of ethnic cleansing and apartheid. It is itself such a state.
Well, you tried to score an easy win there. (1)
But Israel is engaging in such oppression now, we're not talking about a remote past. We're talking about very public and vociferous support for the very public actions of a democratic state- a state on whose policies the citizens have control through democratic elections and knowledge through public opinion.
> aggressively projecting power
It's the third time you use the expression "projecting power" in a handwavy fashion, without explaining what you mean in detail. I've linked in my previous comment the opinion of a former US ambassador, arguing that this supposed "power projection" amounts to nil. I was expecting some counter-arguments.
I'll paste an excerpt here:
"It's useful to recall what we generally expect allies and strategic partners to do for us. In Europe, Asia, and elsewhere in the Middle East, they provide bases and support the projection of American power beyond their borders. They join us on the battlefield in places like Kuwait and Afghanistan or underwrite the costs of our military operations. They help recruit others to our coalitions. They coordinate their foreign aid with ours. Many defray the costs of our use of their facilities with "host nation support" that reduces the costs of our military operations from and through their territory. They store weapons for our troops', rather than their own troops', use. They pay cash for the weapons we transfer to them.
Israel does none of things and shows no interest in doing them. Perhaps it can't. It is so estranged from everyone else in the Middle East that no neighboring country will accept flight plans that originate in or transit it. Israel is therefore useless in terms of support for American power projection."
1- As an aside, I understand that there might be a fundamental contradiction in the minds of the freedom and independence-loving Americans: while they repeal and condemn ethnic cleansing and oppression of native populations by superior force, they also somehow must accept its eventual historical outcome, as they are themselves that outcome.
You are being obstinate. I cited a couple extensive discussions of the matter backed by voluminous scholarly work, compared to your one ambassador to Saudi Arabia. You promptly ignored them. Israel is literally the only nuclear power in the middle east and they are essentially a client state of the U.S. They have helped destroy secular Arab nationalism (e.g. 1967) which was/is the greatest threat to U.S. control of the region. There is intelligence collaboration. There are internal U.S. planning documents going back to the 1940s demonstrating the perceived military value in supporting Israel.
The existence of dissenting voices within the establishment proves nothing. There are always hawks & doves that debate the costs & benefits of policies. It's as shabby an argument as the notion that a relatively small Jewish lobby could "trick" U.S. corporate powers that be into doing something against their perceived interests for decades.
> You are being obstinate. I cited a couple extensive discussions of the matter backed by voluminous scholarly work
Hm? Sorry, I think I missed them. I can only see two videos of Noam Chomsky.
> and they are essentially a client state of the U.S
This is what you are trying to prove. I haven't heard a single argument or seen a single good reference yet.
Yeah. And honestly it’s a giant source of hope for all activists.
Basically if you are on the right side of the issue you just gotta keep up the activism. If the corrupt refuse to reform their undoing begins once they start to try on shady tactics to discredit you and disrupt your effects.
what cracks me up about this story is that the voters triumphed simply because they were oblivious to the internet's lies
Like Uber, but for Mossad.
Lw pop po
The enemy within. Our government has plants all over the place. I guarantee it. The law of averages says so.
The reassuring bit is how remarkably useless this whole operation sounds - basically cargo cult Trumpism. Bet they could have hired a couple of local high school kids to run a more dirty tricks campaign that had more salience with the local population than a presidential campaign knockoff.
(edit: am really interested to know who thinks the draintulareswamp.com websites and questioning the ancestry of a Hispanic candidate in a 60% Hispanic town and resulting electoral defeat by an >80% margin was doing an effective job...)