I do believe the sheer volume of bullsh*t is their strategy. The report is 300 pages of repetitive nonsense. I think they know few people will actually read it.
More important than ever that the search for justice continues! The work that the Hind Rajab Foundation is doing to track down and bring Israeli criminals to justice is one that is vital in the effort to hold Israel accountable. Let us hope they will also turn their sights on the criminal leaders of the countries of the west who are co-perpetrators of these crimes.
I'd really like to hear your thoughts on this new idea of mine. I think we are dealing with considerable levels of deception. What if we clarified exactly what we are dealing with. Zionism began among Christian groups in 16th century England. In the mid-18th century it was turned into a political project by a group who were primarily secular, and colonialist. By taking on the cloak and nomenclature of the pre-existing term, ‘Zionism,’ it allowed them to ally with Christian Zionists, while holding none of their beliefs.
Let’s not let them get away with this any more. The people who originated the political Zionist project were Ashkenazi nationalists. If we were to look at this using that lens, perhaps it might lead to a clearer perspective. It might even act as a wedge between them and the Christian Zionists. After all, if these are usurpers then they are not the ones supposed to be returning to Zion, and the Messiah will not be pleased, much less coming. That ought to undermine the entire project.
I am considering advocating using the term ‘Ashkenazi nationalism/nationalist’ in place of Zionism/zionist whenever possible. What do you think?
I think that would backfire. "Zionist" is a political ideology. Many of its founders were secular, or even atheist. I use "Zionist" because it specifically identifies the people I am against — those who think there should be a Jewish Supremacist state in historic Palestine.
Zionists try to pretend their politics are religious, or some sort of ancient Muslim vs. Jews blood feud. It's not. I worry involving religious or ethnic terms could help them.
I think using Ashkenazi would remove the religious aspect of what was going on at the start. Later on it has become more religious, but it actually was organized by those who were secular.
Joe, thank you for what looks like a prodigious effort to thoroughly address this topic. I have read one other pretty thorough debunking of the conveniently timed report, but you look to have gone much deeper.
I’m not a fan of your insistent/persistent use of the term hasbara and hasbarist instead of equally accurate terms like “propaganda”, “mouthpiece”, “apologist”, etc. It feels Orientalizing (or at least something adjacent).
The author displays remarkable patience in sorting through the never ending Zionist lies.
I do believe the sheer volume of bullsh*t is their strategy. The report is 300 pages of repetitive nonsense. I think they know few people will actually read it.
More important than ever that the search for justice continues! The work that the Hind Rajab Foundation is doing to track down and bring Israeli criminals to justice is one that is vital in the effort to hold Israel accountable. Let us hope they will also turn their sights on the criminal leaders of the countries of the west who are co-perpetrators of these crimes.
Find out what they’re doing here:
https://www.hindrajabfoundation.org
The least we can do is donate to help them:
Support the Hind Rajab Foundation
https://donate.stripe.com/cN228hbY5g7jaM84gg
Thank you for sharing!!
Excellent reporting. Thank you for this.
Thanks for reading.
Hi Joe,
I'd really like to hear your thoughts on this new idea of mine. I think we are dealing with considerable levels of deception. What if we clarified exactly what we are dealing with. Zionism began among Christian groups in 16th century England. In the mid-18th century it was turned into a political project by a group who were primarily secular, and colonialist. By taking on the cloak and nomenclature of the pre-existing term, ‘Zionism,’ it allowed them to ally with Christian Zionists, while holding none of their beliefs.
Let’s not let them get away with this any more. The people who originated the political Zionist project were Ashkenazi nationalists. If we were to look at this using that lens, perhaps it might lead to a clearer perspective. It might even act as a wedge between them and the Christian Zionists. After all, if these are usurpers then they are not the ones supposed to be returning to Zion, and the Messiah will not be pleased, much less coming. That ought to undermine the entire project.
I am considering advocating using the term ‘Ashkenazi nationalism/nationalist’ in place of Zionism/zionist whenever possible. What do you think?
I think that would backfire. "Zionist" is a political ideology. Many of its founders were secular, or even atheist. I use "Zionist" because it specifically identifies the people I am against — those who think there should be a Jewish Supremacist state in historic Palestine.
Zionists try to pretend their politics are religious, or some sort of ancient Muslim vs. Jews blood feud. It's not. I worry involving religious or ethnic terms could help them.
I think using Ashkenazi would remove the religious aspect of what was going on at the start. Later on it has become more religious, but it actually was organized by those who were secular.
Also wanted to share this piece
https://clenchner.substack.com/p/a-brief-history-of-israeli-denialism?r=1h6pik&utm_campaign=post-expanded-share&utm_medium=web
🙏
Joe, thank you for what looks like a prodigious effort to thoroughly address this topic. I have read one other pretty thorough debunking of the conveniently timed report, but you look to have gone much deeper.
I'm glad you appreciated it! Just trying to help, however I can.
If you’ll forgive me for nitpicking:
I’m not a fan of your insistent/persistent use of the term hasbara and hasbarist instead of equally accurate terms like “propaganda”, “mouthpiece”, “apologist”, etc. It feels Orientalizing (or at least something adjacent).
Kristoff is one of the most reputable investigative journalists in the world, so if he wrote this happened, it happened. End of.