There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

ShaggySnacks ,

They offer no substantial business to the U.S.

Israel does offer substantial business to the US and that is surveillance technology.

From Surveillance Policies, Practices and Technologies in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories: Assessing the Security State

A discussion of surveillance within Israel would be incomplete without a confrontation with political economy and the development of security technologies. Neve Gordon (2009) argues that the ‘Israeli experience’, in its various manifestations, has played a pivotal role in the formation of Israel’s homeland security industry and its subsequent transformation into a global success story. The innovations in security and military technologies developed in Israeli laboratories have also facilitated the increased ‘virtual occupation’ of Gaza since the ‘Disengagement Plan’ (Sperotto 2010). Israel’s ‘separation barrier’, widely cited as a violation of Palestinian human rights, is premised on an array of sniper towers, electric fences, trenches, cameras, sensors, patrol roads, ditches, and military patrols (International Court of Justice 2004; B’Tselem 2006; International Federation for Human Rights 2004) – a blend of technological devises and various surveillance techniques developed in Israel.

What these political-economic perspectives on surveillance offer is a ‘made in Israel’ approach to the development of security strategies and methodologies, as well as the construction of a surveillance apparatus that is deployed in Israel, the OPT, and abroad by purchasers of this know-how. The IDF’s recent upgrades to the Gaza fence is noteworthy, considering the interface between the military through the newly-upgraded Combat Collection Corps, the network of intelligence agents working within Gaza, surveillance technologies, and national security policies determined to enforce iron clad borders (Katz 2010). This provides a testing ground of sorts for military strategy, technology, and border policies that could effectively be adapted for use outside of Israel. In 2006, Elbit Systems was awarded a contract, along with Boeing, to build the security wall on the U.S.-Mexican border (World War 4 Report 2006). Because of the international public acclaim that accompanies Israel’s defence industry, Israeli-based firms, as well as foreign companies that contribute to the country’s security apparatus, such as Motorola, Elbit, Boeing and others, have become targets of the transnational boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) campaign (Macdonald 2010; New York Campaign for the Boycott of Israel n.d.; The Council on Ethics 2009; Cattatori 2009; Campaign Against U.S. Terror Weapons n.d.), which constitute the central internationalist non-violent movement against Israel’s illegal military occupation of Palestinian territory and continuous defiance of international law (see Bakan and Abu-Laban 2009).

Israel tests it’s surveillance technology on Palestine, then exports that technology to other countries.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • [email protected]
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines