One of the biggest propaganda victories in modern history was convincing millions of people that Palestine was basically a frozen civilization: an ancient Arab population sitting in the same villages for a thousand years until, one day, foreign Jews suddenly showed up from Europe.
It’s an astonishingly dishonest version of history.
Palestine was part of the Ottoman Empire. Its population was never frozen in time. People, including Jews, Arabs, and others, migrated throughout the region, settled, moved, intermarried, and crossed boundaries that were nothing like today’s national borders. Arabs came into Palestine from Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, and elsewhere, just as people moved out of Palestine and throughout the wider region.
Yes, Arabs lived in Palestine before modern Zionism. So did Jews. And yes, much of the later Arab population boom came from natural increase.
But somehow Palestinian ancestry gets treated as if it comes with a 1,000-year certificate of authenticity, while a Jew whose people originated in that exact land is automatically branded a “foreign settler.”
And the irony is incredible: an Arab can immigrate to America or Europe and immediately call himself American, British, French, or German. Yet a Jew can return to the land where the Jewish people originated, where Jewish civilization was born, and where Jews have maintained a continuous presence for thousands of years, buy land, build a house, and somehow he is still the “foreign settler.”
It’s a political mythology built around one ridiculous rule:
Every Arab is presumed indigenous, no matter where he immigrates to.
Every Jew is presumed foreign.
He wakes up and reaches for his phone, checking where the next protest against Israel will be.
He opens Waze, born in Israel, to find the fastest route. On the road, a Mobileye safety system developed in Jerusalem may warn him of a pedestrian, a collision, or a dangerous lane departure. A few seconds of warning can be the difference between getting home and not getting home.
At work, he connects through networks protected by Israeli cybersecurity pioneers such as Check Point. He sends files using a USB flash drive, a technology developed by Israel’s M-Systems. The computers and servers around him rely on generations of Intel chips designed in major part in Israel.
But the most striking part is what happens when life becomes fragile.
If a doctor needs to detect internal bleeding or intestinal disease without invasive surgery, they may turn to PillCam, the tiny camera capsule invented in Israel.
If someone who is blind needs to read a menu, recognize a loved one, or navigate the street independently, OrCam, developed in Israel, can give them back a piece of their freedom.
If a person living with paralysis wants to stand and walk again, ReWalk, created in Israel, was built for that moment.
If they depend on affordable medication, there is a real chance it was made by Teva, one of the world’s largest generic-drug companies.
If they eat food grown in a dry region, Israeli drip irrigation may be part of the reason that food exists at all.
Then, at the end of the day, they pick up that same phone, share another slogan, and march to demand that Israel be erased.
That is the tragedy of it.
Israel is not an abstract headline. It is present in the tools that protect lives, restore independence, feed communities, connect people, and help the world heal. You can chant against Israel in the street, but it is much harder to escape what Israel has given the world.
Here's the biggest plot hole in the "genocide" narrative: we're expected to believe that the most technologically advanced military in the region, using the most powerful weapons in existence, dropped the equivalent of 8.6 nuclear bombs' worth of conventional explosives on one of the most densely populated neighborhoods that's roughly the size of Manhattan in an attempt to exterminate a population with no access to bomb shelters, and yet after roughly a thousand days of war the result was the deaths of about 3.8% of the population, half of them armed terrorists, butchers and kidnappers and the rest human shields and risk-takers who refused to adhere to evacuation orders. And this is supposed to be the worst genocide ever? You have to be very ignorant and very Jew-hating to fall for this goyslop.
Yet another example of why so many people have lost faith in legacy media and its rapidly disappearing journalism standards.
In the last couple of days I've reported on a NYT editor admitting the paper's own news section wouldn't have run Nicholas Kristof's inflammatory, unsourced column on rape allegations against Israel. I've reported on the Washington Post altering direct quotations to recast what Trump actually said as anti-Israel. And now this.
Three hours.
That's how long that ABC (Australia) knew a claim was false before it put it on air anyway.
In May 2025, UN Under-Secretary-General Tom Fletcher told BBC Radio 4's "Today" programme, on air, in his own words: "There are 14,000 babies that will die in the next 48 hours unless we can reach them."
That was false.
The actual UN data behind it was an IPC report projecting the possibility of 14,100 severe malnutrition cases over an 11-month period, not a 48-hour death toll. Even the longer prediction model turned out to be wrong.
Fletcher later said he "really regretted" the claim and denied it was deliberate.
The BBC and ABC both ran with it. ABC aired it on News Breakfast at 6am on May 21.
Under questioning at the Bondi royal commission this week, editorial director Gavin Fang admitted it had already been publicly known for three hours before the show even started that the figure was wrong.
The correction didn't air for ten hours until 4pm, on a different program.
A general written correction wasn't posted for a week.
ABC's own ombudsman, Fiona Cameron, later found it breached the broadcaster's accuracy standards — and told the commission plainly, "at times the ABC is slow to correct and clarify."
This wasn't a wire-copy typo on page six. It landed at the most inflammatory point of an already inflamed war, on one of the country's most trusted public broadcasters.
Antisemitism envoy Jillian Segal told the commission that ABC is "marking their own homework," pointing out its ombudsman is appointed by and answers to the same board she's supposed to be checking. Segal insisted on an independent regulator, but ABC refused.
Here's what makes the three-hour gap harder to wave away: just months before this aired, the director of ASIO (Australian Security Intelligence Organisation — its domestic spy agency, roughly the equivalent of the FBI's counterintelligence/counterterrorism division) told an Australian Senate committee that antisemitism had become the agency's number one domestic threat priority for the first time in history — and he specifically warned Australians to avoid "inflamed language" around the Middle East.
ABC had that warning. It had three hours' notice the number was wrong. It aired it anyway.
I am not claiming a direct causation from the ABC broadcast to the murders at a Bondi Beach Hanukkah gathering seven months later. But when your own national security agency is telling you the country is primed to combust over exactly this kind of claim, three hours of advance warning that the claim is false stops being a footnote. It becomes the whole story. Against that backdrop, it's not a coincidence worth ignoring that violent antisemitic incidents hit a record over the last year in Australia.
An admission dragged out under subpoena, a year later, isn't accountability. It's what accountability looks like when you've run out of ways to avoid it. And it is another prime example of why so many people are disgusted with the mainstream press.
I was digging around a site called Newspaper Finder (wow did I come across a mountain of info). But...I found a pamphlet from January 1946 called "Truth About Palestine." It was written by the Christian Council on Palestine, a group of nearly three thousand mostly Protestant clergy, with a number of Catholics too. Reinhold Niebuhr was the treasurer. Paul Tillich signed it. So did Norman Vincent Peale.
It's a direct, point-by-point rebuttal to three anti-Zionist church statements that had circulated the year before. Some of what's in it lines up almost exactly with arguments still being made today. Here's what stood out:
The Hussein-McMahon correspondence, the letters people cite to claim Britain "twice promised" Palestine to both Arabs and Jews, never mentions Palestine by name. McMahon himself said so on the record in 1922 and again in 1937.
Emir Feisal, who led the Arab delegation at the Paris Peace Conference, signed an agreement with Chaim Weizmann in 1919 recognizing the Balfour Declaration and agreeing to encourage large-scale Jewish immigration. He only backed away from it after the extremist wing of Arab nationalism gained ground.
Lloyd George, who was prime minister when the Balfour Declaration was issued, said flatly that the Cabinet always understood it to mean an eventual Jewish state, not just a cultural or spiritual center. Churchill said the same thing about his own 1922 White Paper.
The Arab population of Palestine doubled between the 1920s and 1945, going from about 600,000 to 1.2 million, largely because Jewish development lowered the death rate and raised wages. That's a strange result if the story is supposed to be Arab displacement.
Out of thousands of Arab families who claimed to have been made landless by Jewish land purchases, British investigators validated 664 total. Land reclamation by Jewish settlers added farmable acreage to the country, it didn't shrink it.
The Mufti of Jerusalem, the most powerful Arab political leader in Palestine at the time, fled the country and helped organize a pro-Nazi coup in Iraq. He later worked directly with Hitler. The church documents being rebutted don't mention this.
A 1945 poll by Elmo Roper found about 80 percent of American Jews supported a Jewish state. The idea that American Jewry was deeply split on Zionism was already a manufactured talking point by 1946.
The official Jewish Commonwealth proposal on the table at the time included full legal equality for non-Jews, universal suffrage, and local control of Muslim and Christian holy sites by their own communities. That's the opposite of the "theocratic, racial state" critics claimed it would be.
Worth reading as a primary source, whichever side of the current argument you're on. It shows how old these exact talking points are, and how they were being argued over inside the Christian church itself, not just between governments.
Archive link: https://t.co/klGUcbBaMs
We aren't witnessing a new debate. We’re watching a rerun of a script written decades ago, only updated for social media. When modern institutions claim to be "unbiased," they’re usually just digging up the same tired myths and convenient silences that were being dismantled before the state of Israel even existed. The fact that the same arguments survive eighty years later proves they aren't meant to shed light—they’re meant to lock us in the dark. - Melissa Steinberg Brodsky
Read it here: https://t.co/VmBDGsYFjv
Why did Israel's arrest of Gaza flotilla activists spark international outrage, while activists beaten by police in Spain—and jailed for weeks in Libya—barely made the news?
Claude P. Muller exposes the double standard: https://t.co/y8GXJ15qbV
@goodfoodgal Let Labor keep talking g this way. In fact I really hope they do. Because the more they talk down ON supporters, the more they will become ON voters and the more people will join them.
@karlstefanovic Totally with you @karlstefanovic . The hypocrisy of Nine and the powers that be there is staggering! They are very happy to showcase bigots like Cathy Wilcox and extremely biased editors and journalists like Bevan Shields…You are a legend! Stand strong, stand tall!
@dai_le He is a despicable prime minister with a glass jaw and it appears quite a bit to hide. Otherwise he would have answered that question and not belittled you. Any decent journalist would be looking into this but sadly not many of those left.
@HilzFuld Let @JDVance keep talking this way. He has tied himself to this dog of a deal while @marcorubio watches from the sidelines. He has just blown his chance of being the next President. Thank goodness. He would be a disaster. Rubio is much smarter!