"The Elders" condemned US and Israeli airstrikes on Iran. Here are the propaganda techniques in their statement. ~ Elder Of Ziyon

Thursday, July 17, 2025

"The Elders" condemned US and Israeli airstrikes on Iran. Here are the propaganda techniques in their statement.

Remember "The Elders?"

That was the group that was founded in 2007 by Nelson Mandela, Jimmy Carter, Desmond Tutu, Mary Robinson and others to be a supposedly moral voice for the world.

They are apparently still around, and still bashing Israel. Four of the six "Elders Statements" from 2025 have vilified Israel. Priorities!

When the US struck Iran's nuclear facilities, the Elders were right there with a statement. Not against Iran's nuclear program but against the US and Israel.

The US and Israeli military strikes on Iran over the past two weeks are illegal, and have sent a dangerous message about the normalisation of military might overriding the rule of law. They cannot be justified as legitimate self-defence under Article 51 of the UN Charter, and no credible evidence of an imminent attack by Iran has been put forward.

These acts have undermined nuclear diplomacy and risk fuelling a new wave of proliferation of nuclear weapons in the Middle East and globally. The ceasefire announced overnight must be respected in full to restore stability and space for diplomacy.

We are extremely concerned about the loss of oversight over Iran’s stockpiles of enriched uranium in light of the US strikes. We reaffirm the critical role of the International Atomic Energy Agency, and that nuclear facilities should never be targeted under any circumstances.

This week I have been building an AI based system to detect propaganda in what are supposed to be objective articles and statements. Now renamed TAMAR (Tool for Analyzing Manipulative Argument Rhetoric) but not yet publicly accessible, it is supposed to find propaganda techniques independent of any political agenda - it would flag Zionist propaganda as well as anti-Zionist propaganda.

Here's what it said for this Elders statement:

1. Framing Distortions

Selective Framing: The Elders highlight the strikes as “illegal” and presenting “no credible evidence of an imminent attack,” permanently framing US/Israeli actions as aggression rather than potential defense There’s a risk here of simplification—ignoring imposed nuclear threats perceived by Israel and the US.

Hijacked Causality: They assert a direct causal link—strikes will “intensify global nuclear proliferation risks”—without acknowledging how Iran’s enrichment to 60% uranium and non‑compliance findings may have driven pressure toward military action

2. Epistemic Subversions

Premise Smuggling: The statement implies the community accepts that no imminent Iranian threat existed, yet doesn't mention IAEA reports showing Iran amassed 409 kg of 60% uranium—subtle premise slippage

Undisclosed Substitution: The term “intensified global nuclear proliferation risks” replaces specific metrics. It’s vague: do they refer to derailed diplomacy, a cascade response from other non‑nuclear states, or Iran’s potential break‑out capability?

3. Rhetorical Weaponry

Terminology Abuse: Describing the strikes as illegal and law‑defying uses strong normative language to shape reader judgment, rather than fostering analytical nuance

Normative Hijack: They invoke “rule of law” and the UN Charter (Article 51) to underscore legitimacy, sidestepping complex debates about the bounds of self‑defence and intelligence uncertainty.

4. Moral Frame Inversions

Unquestionable Authority Claims: As a respected civic group, The Elders are positioned as moral arbitrators. There’s no engagement with alternate legal interpretations or Israel/US rationale—this projects moral authority without challenge.

5. Contextual & Enforcement Heuristics

Medium-Based Scrutiny: Published in a normative NGO context, the statement leans advocacy. It lacks broader diplomatic analysis; there’s no reference to IAEA findings or regional security dynamics—this is methodological filtering.

6. Layered Case Mode

Selective Moral Judgments: The statement insists the strikes violated law, yet omits recognition of Iran’s rapidly advancing nuclear enrichment, which sparked IAEA non‑compliance alerts and concerns that “Iran could produce weapons‑grade material in roughly one week”

This is a sophisticated analysis, based on AskHillel's "ethoskeletal" principles as well as on training from my articles that examine anti-Israel propaganda. And I am still adding more features as I think of them.

There are some sites that tag news sites as to their ideological leanings, but I cannot find a tool that does what TAMAR does. This is the sort of thing that news organizations, corporations and sites like Wikipedia should use routinely in their workflow to make their arguments logic based and avoid bias. The fact that it is non-ideological should make any organization want to use this sort of analysis.

That is, if they care about fairness and fighting bias.

I'm dreaming of using TAMAR to create an unbiased scorecard of news sites that everyone can access. . Journalistic ethics fall very short compared to the methods reporters use to inject bias, and TAMAR helps uncover many of them. A tool like TAMAR could help decrease bias in media and make the world a much better place.