Evil Academy

Full Version: How Andrew Breitbart decided to create Breitbart News
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
From Wikipedia's biography page:
Quote:Breitbart later said of his profession: "I'm glad I've become a journalist because I'd like to fight on behalf of the Israeli people...

During a stay in Israel, Breitbart and Larry Solov conceived of the idea of founding Breitbart News Network, with "the aim of starting a site that would be unapologetically pro-freedom and pro-Israel. We were sick of the anti-Israel bias of the mainstream media and J-Street."[28]

Solov has written:

One night in Jerusalem, when we were getting ready for dinner, Andrew turned to me and asked if I would de-partner from the 800-person law firm where I was practicing and become business partners with him. He said he needed my help to create a media company. He needed my help to "change the world." ... We were blown away by the spirit, tenacity, and resourcefulness of the Israeli people on that trip. Andrew could be quite convincing, not to mention inspiring, and I decided right there and then to "throw away" (my Mom's phrase) a perfectly good, successful and safe career in order to start a "new media" company with Andrew Breitbart.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Breitbart

Wikipedia's article on Breitbart News says:
Quote:Conceived by Breitbart during a visit to Israel in mid-2007 as a website "that would be unapologetically pro-freedom and pro-Israel",

Breitbart News was described by the Anti-Defamation League as "the premier website of the alt-right" representing "white nationalists and unabashed anti-Semites and racists."[69] The Zionist Organization of America rejected accusations of anti-semitism, saying that Breitbart News instead "bravely fights against anti-Semitism" and called for the ADL to apologize.[70][71] ... An article by Rabbi Shmuley Boteach in The Hill disputed the allegations, arguing that Breitbart defends Israel against antisemitism.[73] Alexander Marlow denies that Breitbart is a "hate-site", stating "that we're consistently called anti-Semitic despite the fact that we are overwhelmingly staffed with Jews and are pro-Israel and pro-Jewish. That is fake news."

Breitbart London

Breitbart London announced that it would have a staff of 10 along with hundreds of contributors covering Israel and the Middle East from the London office.

Breitbart Jerusalem
[Image: 188px-Breitbart_Jerusalem.svg.png]
Logo for Breitbart Jerusalem

On November 17, 2015, the website launched Breitbart Jerusalem, which covers events in Israel and the wider Middle East. It is edited by Israel-based American reporter Aaron Klein.[116] Rabbi Shmuley Boteach has been an occasional columnist.

"Friends of Hamas" story


On February 7, 2013, Ben Shapiro published an article on Breitbart News reporting allegations that former Senator and nominee for United States Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel (R-Nebraska) may have been paid to speak at an event sponsored by a group called "Friends of Hamas."[140] Breitbart News said that the story was based on exclusive information from U.S. Senate sources. ...

An investigation by Slate reporter David Weigel failed to confirm the existence of the purported group.[145] On February 19, New York Daily News reporter Dan Friedman said that the story had originated from a sarcastic comment he had made to a congressional staffer. "Friends of Hamas" was one of several groups which Friedman considered to be so over-the-top as to be implausible and obviously fictitious. He was investigating rumors that Hagel had been paid for speaking to "contoversial organizations", and asked sarcastically whether he had addressed "Friends of Hamas." Friedman followed with an email to the congressional staffer asking if Hagel had received a $25,000 fee from "Friends of Hamas" for his speaking engagement. No reply to the email was received, and the next day, Breitbart News ran a story with the headline "Secret Hagel Donor?: White House Spox Ducks Question on 'Friends of Hamas'."[146][147]

Breitbart News maintained that the report was accurate, posting articles defending the website and criticizing Weigel and Friedman.[148][149] Writers for The Washington Post,[150] New York magazine[151] and The Daily Beast[152] criticized Breitbart News for the "Friends of Hamas" story.

Conspiracy theories about President Obama

According to the New York Times, Breitbart News promoted the falsehood that President Obama was a Kenyan-born Muslim.

False report of Muslim mob in Germany

On January 3, 2017, Breitbart News's Virginia Hale wrote that "[a]t a New Year’s Eve celebrations in Dortmund a mob of more than 1,000 men chanted ‘Allahu Akhbar’, launched fireworks at police, and set fire to a historic church"[172] giving the impression of "chaotic civil war-like conditions in Germany, caused by Islamist aggressors" according to The Guardian.[173] The story was later shown to be false;[174] St. Reinold's Church is neither the oldest church in Germany nor was the church set on fire. While 1000 people did gather, which is not unusual on New Year's Eve in a public place, video footage from the scene does not show a "mob", and no policemen were targeted.

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

Can Breitbart's politics and goals be explained by his connections? In the Middle East, the Israeli state sees the Muslim world as opponents. It's to their advantage for the US to feel the same way about the Muslim world and to have a "Clash of Civilizations". As a result Breitbart may want to focus its anti-Muslim message to the "alt-right" and conservatives in US politics in order to ramp up anti-Muslim hostility. The "Alt-right" may have been identified by Breitbart as the biggest potential source of anti-Muslim fervency and Breitbart may have a goal to activate the Alt-Right as a domestic constitutiency that could push America into greater conflict with the Mideast.

This desire can explain the anti-Muslim prejudices in the stories Breitbart promotes, like Barack Obama being supposedly Muslim and a "mob" in Germany burning down a church, which didn't happen.

So rather than being a legitimate "Alt" news source, it is really a politically well-connected outlet repackaging and pushing well-known post-911 Neocon anti-Muslim policies onto conservatives who are disillusioned with the normal Establishment politics.

Other headlines from the IsraelNationalNews website reflect this:

Quote:Bannon: Breitbart pro-Israel, not anti-Semitic
Donald Trump's chief strategists denies allegations of anti-Semitism and bigotry, says Breitbart represents more than just alt-right.
JTA, 11/20/2016, 7:48 PM

Bannon backed by Republican Jewish Coalition board member
RJC board member Bernie Marcus defends Trump's new chief strategist from accusations of anti-Semitism, says he is very pro-Israel.
JTA, 11/15/2016, 9:38 PM

Breitbart News editor: Bannon is a 'defender of Israel'
A senior Breitbart News editor rejects allegations that Trump Chief Strategist is anti-Semitic. 'Steve is outraged by anti-Semitism.'
Arutz Sheva Staff, 11/15/2016, 5:35 PM
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/Tag.aspx/43253
Great info
.
It's amazing how they always paint alternate news sites as racist or anti-semite. I guess they only want you to eat at their table.
Breitbart repeats Hasbara talking points in politics, and tries to do its Alt Right readers' thinking for them. For example, when the topic of McMaster's role in the NSC came up, Breitbart followed the talking points like an authority:
Quote:How Sheldon Adelson uses the media to punish those he dislikes
By James Warren · August 10, 2017

Breitbart last night heralded "Exclusive — Zionist Organization of America Analysis Determines McMaster Hostile to Trump, Calls for Reassignment." Yes, "Exclusive!"

The "oldest pro-Israel group in the country," it revealed, had "completed its analysis of President Donald Trump’s National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster’s behavior and determined him to be a threat to Trump’s agenda."


Yes, H.R. McMaster is portrayed as a subversive Manchurian Aide, as if brainwashed by the Democratic National Committee, ACLU, Bernie Sanders and other leftie forces. And who's the prime backer of the organization? It's Trump partisan and ginormous Republican donor Sheldon Adelson.

As it revels in the attack on McMaster, Breitbart might now check some of Adelson's media holdings, including the Las Vegas Review-Journal and Israel Hayom (Israel Today). It's all the subject of a long dissection in Moment, an independent magazine for Jewish Americans that's especially good on Adelson's shilling for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu — until of late.

He's been an Israeli media power broker and exceedingly influential in backing both Trump and Netanyahu. It's been deemed a real force in turning the tide for Bibi in two elections. The paper there is read by 40 percent of Israeli newspaper readers and, being heavily subsidized and free (casino mogul Adelson has blown an estimated $200 million on it), really hurt others major papers, which just happen to be Netanyahu's critics.

Breitbart could simply go to an Israeli supermarket and pick up a copy of what a lot of serious journalists consider junk, "propaganda and not more than that," as a former top daily newspaper editor there put it to me. It adores Trump and was given a bunch of interviews during the campaign and one in the Oval Office several weeks after his inauguration.
https://www.poynter.org/news/how-sheldon...e-dislikes

Remember, Adelson donated 150% more to Trump's campaign than Trump did.

But Breitbart has to do a balancing act because it wants to appeal to an audience intolerant toward Muslims thus appealing to an audience with a strain of general intolerance, while also wanting to be pro-Israeli. So critics like the ADL see Breitbart as intolerant and anti-semitic, which makes Breitbart skirt the issue by trumpeting its pro-Israeli foundations:

Quote:Robert Mackey, November 16 2016, "Steve Bannon Made Breitbart a Space for Pro-Israel Writers and Anti-Semitic Readers", The Intercept

“They say that we are ‘anti-Semitic,'” Solov and Breitbart’s editor Alex Marlow wrote in August, when Hillary Clinton’s campaign first objected to Bannon taking charge of Trump’s campaign, “though our company was founded by Jews, is largely staffed by Jews, and has an entire section (Breitbart Jerusalem) dedicated to reporting on and defending the Jewish state of Israel.”

According to Dan Cassino, an associate professor of Political Science at Fairleigh Dickinson University who studies the right-wing media, in the early days of the site, when it was led by Andrew Breitbart, much of the reporting and commentary was focused on “calling out the left, but especially American Jews who were insufficiently loyal to Israel.” As Cassino explains it, Breitbart, who died in 2012, relentlessly pursued the argument that “the left is the enemy, but Jews on the left are worse because they are traitors” who are “selling out Israel.”

https://theintercept.com/2016/11/16/stev...c-readers/
So one of the real reasons why Breitbart attacks the Left is because it's seen as hostile to the Israeli state. The article then goes on to explain in a major irony how Breitbart ultimately ends up trading in anti-Semitic tropes to bring in more readers and attack liberals.
Breitbart is very effective at what it wants to do. There have been a major faction of voters who feel disenchranchised with Bush and Obama, not wanting to be Neocons, but also not wanting to support what they find to be a "Democratic" "Establishment". For someone who doesn't want to take out Syria, they are put in a tough place. The Neocons are pro-war with Libya, Iraq, and Iran, and the Democrats and Obama had conflict in Libya and Syria.

So some group like Breitbart can come in and present itself as an "alternative" viewpoint and fool a massive audience by opposing Obama and the Syrian rebels. Part of Trump's appeal was that he was not part of the Establishment and was critical of the conflict in Syria. So by recognizing these factors, Breitbart can come in with its own agenda and present itself as maverick and alternative, when in reality its another version of the Neocon program. They differ from Obama in that they aren't funding the extremist Wahhabi rebel fundamentalists in Syria, but they still have the overall drive against Muslim societies. Hence Breitbart regularly pumps out information attacking Muslims wholesale and trading in stereotypes. With an American public reinvigorated with anti-Muslim venom, the war hawks can move on to conflicts with Iran. One of Obama's best points was patching up relations with Iran a bit, something Netanyahu hated. Now with Obama gone and Netanyahu's supporters like Breitbart having a key power role, the NeoCons can switch to conflict with Iran. They can use Breitbart, a seemingly "alternative" news source to pump up their "anti-Mooslim" audience into a renewed fever. It's much easier to get an audience pumped up with anti-Muslim stereotypes to call for conflict with Muslims.
One of his websites is called Big Jerusalem, along with "Big Peace" and "Big Education":
Quote:Big Jerusalem:

“If you think it’s bad to be a conservative in the mainstream media or Hollywood, think what it must be like to be a small democracy in the Middle East and challenge the postcolonial approach. Israel is the ultimate victim of Marxism, which is ironic, since its economy was initially founded on Marxist principles. A nation that preaches and practices tolerance is treated worse by the world media than they treat radical Islamists who practice violent jihad.”
https://www.mediaite.com/online/andrew-b...w-sites/2/
"and a "mob" in Germany burning down a church, which didn't happen."

Lol.

Is this what you people are doing in the face of mass rape and murder that even mainstream news outlets are being forced to acknowledge? Clinging to one off tabloid stories from how long ago?

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-europ...SKBN1ES16J

You clearly hate white people and have a creepy sympathy for our enemies, but I would presume you claim to care about refugee children, right?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/...94976.html

Except you don't, the policies you support and the apologist garbage you peddle doesn't just facilitate and enable the mass rape of European women and children, but Syrian/Levantine women and children.
How many people - how many children, have been horrifically raped in refugee camps and city streets across Europe in the past two years because of "men" like Rako? Lol.
(01-11-2018 10:03 AM)Shahanshah Wrote: [ -> ]How many people - how many children, have been horrifically raped in refugee camps and city streets across Europe in the past two years because of "men" like Rako? Lol.
I think the EU should be more careful and strict in its immigration and monitoring the refugees.

Breitbart's stereotypes, rhetoric, and exaggerations are hurtful to improved security because they make immigration concerns look like they are based on ignorance, idiocy, and bigotry.

If you have a guy on a bullhorn patrolling Berlin saying "Muslims are burning down Germany's churches every month" or "Most Muslims marry their cousins, keep out this slime", the normal reaction of educated moderate citizens is to think that the man on the bullhorn is off base and they will take a more skeptical, derisive view of what he says.

A great example of how this works is if you have a dude in a Hitler 'stache and armbands stomping down main street with a poster, average citizens are going to take a less welcoming view of whatever he is promoting.
Reference URL's